Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Ten Films For The 2000's


92 replies to this topic

#31 The Ghost Who Walks

The Ghost Who Walks

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 843 posts

Posted 24 November 2009 - 09:14 PM

Top 10 is a little difficult, I make it a top 30, in alphabetical order, nice thread!

- Alexander


Aaaaargh, my eyes!!! B)

Seriously, Alexander might be the most boring movie of all time in the humble opinion of the Ghost Who Walks.

We are not calling into question people's reasons here on this thread. OHMSS might love ALEXANDER for all the reasons you don't. This is not about prize winners. This is about what people connected with, enjoyed and remembered.


I was stating my opinion on a movie listed here, not unlike what others have done before or after me.

Nice to see some love for The Fountain and History of Violence as well. But as a massive fan of the Watchmen comic, way before the film came out, I can honestly say that the film is one of the worst pieces of I have ever scene. Hated it. One of the worst pictures of the... forever. It did start out well, I'll give it that, but set a new record for going down hill in the shortest ammount of time. I'm honestly getting so mad about it, just typing this! Everybody said it was un-filmable. They were right.


It always amuses me how much people's taste can differ. :tdown: I thought the Director's Cut edition of Watchmen was THE movie of 2009. I have seen it three times in total, which is very unusual for me for such a short period of time.

I'm not claiming the Director's Cut will solve all the problems you have with the film, but it makes it feel like a complete movie, which the theatrical cut kind of doesn't (though one might not realize how compromized it is before seeing the DC edition). It flows much, much better, and is somehow a lot more entertaining IMO, despite being some thirty minutes longer.

#32 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 24 November 2009 - 09:22 PM

I'm not able to come up with a list of ten; would be more likely to be twenty or so. But what I feel would have a place amongst the top ten would be Donnie Darko.

Thanks Trident.

It doesn't have to be ten. I must admit my ten could have been a twenty, though it was interesting cutting them down on whatever criteria I used.

Pop up your twenty if you want to. In the New Year I might look at the lists and compile a top five or so of the titles that keep being cited here.



You asked for it... B)



Ok, so be it. I won't bother to rank them, so order is mostly by chance:

Quantum of Solace - For no other reason than the producers being bold and brave enough to follow up their own masterstroke with a very experimental yet for me still satisfying entry.

The Last King of Scotland - For showing a rare close-up of a mass murderer. A stunning Whitaker.

Hotel Rwanda - For showing how common mass murder really is when it get's its chance. And for showing how ordinary courage can be, if it just get's the same chance. Cheadle impressed me just as much as Whitaker in TLKOS.

Match Point - Because I simply love Scarlett Johansson's character in this one, as well as the plot's amoral conclusion.

Gosford Park - Chiefly for the labyrinthine plot, a modern version of 'Upstairs - Downstairs' meets a classic Agatha Christie manor house mystery. Splendid are (in no particular order) Fry, Mirren, Gambon and several others.

No Country for Old Men - I'm not sure about the label 'masterwork', but to me it's truly impressing and has considerable impact.

Notes on a Scandal - Almost prefer Blanchett over Dench in this one. Almost. As it is, it's a draw for me. Fine film!

Der Baader Meinhof Komplex - Probably not very interesting for most here, but quite an important film in my homecountry. I remember most of the incidents from my own childhood, was even stopped frequently in road blocks in the 80's.

The Lives of Others - Only twenty years ago, a third of my homecountry lay behind the iron curtain. If you want to get an idea what it was like living under the constant scrutiny of a KGB-like secret police and security service, this is the film to watch. Brilliant Ulrich Mühe, went before his time.

Ratatouille - Wonderfully absurd idea. And I cannot help but love Remy.

28 Days Later - For having the good luck of hitting at just the right moment, reviving the 'classic' zombie genre at the time of the *SARS scare. (* for younger members: SARS was the fashionable thing to get the vapours before H1N1 gave us a new and even scarier hysteria)

Infernal Affairs and The Departed - Basically the same ingenious plot, realised in two quite distinctive ways. American version is not a mindless remake, but a clever interpretation with a 'moralistic' end. In a way. For a given value of moral. I like both versions a lot. Also interesting is the prequel 'Infernal Affairs II'. I've yet to see the third part.

30 Days of Night - Initially, I didn't really like it. But the idea of vampires using the polar night has some appeal. Also the eerie atmosphere of the landscape. Lots of splatter of course, comes with the genre, as the romantic teenie vampire flicks were still to be discovered.

Night Watch - Russian fantasy horror flick of 2004. Every bit as creepy and splatter as anything Hollywood comes up with, but with a considerable dose of unconventional Russian settings.

Blueberry - Mainly because of the visual experience. A hero of my youth finally found his way to the big screen. But the film version is entirely different, hardly sharing more than the name. Yet a distinctive streak of Moebius can be found IMO.

Corpse Bride - I can't help it, I have a thing for Burton's films. Also likely to be amongst my favourites is Sweeney Todd.

Waltz with Bashir - Perhaps the most important and most revealing film you're ever going to see about the war in this region. Although the plot deals with the Lebanon of 1982, it's highly topical today.

Layer Cake - I'm unsure how much impact this film really had on the 2000's, apart from Craig who was certainly not hired for Bond solely on this evidence of his ability. Anyway, it's had considerable impact on me, which is all that is necessary to find its way onto this list. A great dirty little gangster flick, ingenious and cunning.

Identity - For a great idea and a terrific execution, keeping the surprises coming nearly every scene.


EDIT:

Oh, and of course

Donnie Darko
- It's not because it's a perfect film. But it offers itself to so many different interpretations and theories that it can mean any number of things for any number of viewers. Conceptionally avoiding the definite explanation, this film and its characters open a whole range of different meanings, always keeping a secret in its tale.

#33 Gabe Vieira

Gabe Vieira

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3873 posts
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa, USA

Posted 25 November 2009 - 04:35 AM

It always amuses me how much people's taste can differ. B) I thought the Director's Cut edition of Watchmen was THE movie of 2009. I have seen it three times in total, which is very unusual for me for such a short period of time.

I'm not claiming the Director's Cut will solve all the problems you have with the film, but it makes it feel like a complete movie, which the theatrical cut kind of doesn't (though one might not realize how compromized it is before seeing the DC edition). It flows much, much better, and is somehow a lot more entertaining IMO, despite being some thirty minutes longer.

Well, I never got the chance to see it in theaters, so my first viewing was the Directors Cut. Like I said, it statred out well, especially with Bob Dylan over the credits showing how real superheroes would affect our culture. I was surprised how much dialouge and shots came right from the novel. Then the second half. My biggest gripe is how Synder DID change Adrian into a "republic serial villan". And, I did understand not having the squid in the movie, than would have been another half hour, plus they'd have to include Black Freighter in the movie. Then they cut out the most important part of Rorschach's origin, when he's watching the house burn down. That speach he gives to Malcolm. Holy Crap. That's my favorite part of the novel. Not in the movie. Then, like, why can't Adrian be having dinner when Dan and Rorschach walk in on him. The little things. Oh, and how Snyder didn't even include the spinning bottle of Nostalgia on Mars; the camera lingers on Blake to long before he kills the woman in Vietnam; the fight scenes were downright terrible, the Matrix-like wire work was so out of place; the movie was very violent, as it should be, but in all the wrong places; The (almost) rape scene wan't brutal enough; the ending was horrible; why couldn't have Jon said to Adrian, "Nothing ever ends." instead of Laurie to Dan; not eough Bubastis; Mathew Goode was horrible, would have loved to see a Blonde Jon Hamm... and that's just off the top of my head.

#34 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 25 November 2009 - 04:47 AM

The (almost) rape scene wan't brutal enough

Wha-?? It's far more brutal than it is in the source material, and I know that its brutality caused a friend of mine to dismiss the film entirely (he walked out immediately following the scene).

Otherwise, your complaints strike me more as nitpicks than anything else, letting little things get in the way of all the big things the film actually got right. If you didn't like the MATRIX-y fight style or the violence or Matthew Goode, that's all very well. But why does it really matter if Adrian is having dinner when Rorschach and Nite Owl show up at Karnak? It doesn't. Does it really make a difference to the thematic integrity of the story if Bubastis isn't in it all that much? No. And while you seem to bemoan some cuts (the "burning house" moment for Rorschach, or the Nostalgia bottle on Mars), these cuts make sense in terms of keeping the running time down, and don't at all harm the thematic or narrative integrity of their specific scenes. They just remove some of the embellishments and boil the scenes down to their core essence. We always knew that Snyder's WATCHMEN would have to be the Cliff's Notes version, and it's impressive that Snyder was able to squeeze in as much detail as he did.

Of course, you're allowed not to like the movie, don't get me wrong. But it does seem to me as if your complaints are grounded more in fan expectations and desires for little moments than in an evaluation of the film on its own merits, and thus calling it one of the "worst pictures of the forever" is more than a little undeserved.

#35 Safari Suit

Safari Suit

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5099 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 25 November 2009 - 09:06 AM

Isn't that kind of the inherent problem with making films for purists, as it has sometimes been suggested Watchmen was? It's pretty much impossible to make a film for purists which fully satisfies them*.

*I know this will invite a gaggle of "I'm a purist and it satisfied me!" comments, but I'm talking about really fervent purists who resent any or almost any change

#36 The Ghost Who Walks

The Ghost Who Walks

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 843 posts

Posted 25 November 2009 - 07:24 PM

It always amuses me how much people's taste can differ. B) I thought the Director's Cut edition of Watchmen was THE movie of 2009. I have seen it three times in total, which is very unusual for me for such a short period of time.

I'm not claiming the Director's Cut will solve all the problems you have with the film, but it makes it feel like a complete movie, which the theatrical cut kind of doesn't (though one might not realize how compromized it is before seeing the DC edition). It flows much, much better, and is somehow a lot more entertaining IMO, despite being some thirty minutes longer.

Well, I never got the chance to see it in theaters, so my first viewing was the Directors Cut. Like I said, it statred out well, especially with Bob Dylan over the credits showing how real superheroes would affect our culture. I was surprised how much dialouge and shots came right from the novel. Then the second half. My biggest gripe is how Synder DID change Adrian into a "republic serial villan". And, I did understand not having the squid in the movie, than would have been another half hour, plus they'd have to include Black Freighter in the movie. Then they cut out the most important part of Rorschach's origin, when he's watching the house burn down. That speach he gives to Malcolm. Holy Crap. That's my favorite part of the novel. Not in the movie. Then, like, why can't Adrian be having dinner when Dan and Rorschach walk in on him. The little things. Oh, and how Snyder didn't even include the spinning bottle of Nostalgia on Mars; the camera lingers on Blake to long before he kills the woman in Vietnam; the fight scenes were downright terrible, the Matrix-like wire work was so out of place; the movie was very violent, as it should be, but in all the wrong places; The (almost) rape scene wan't brutal enough; the ending was horrible; why couldn't have Jon said to Adrian, "Nothing ever ends." instead of Laurie to Dan; not eough Bubastis; Mathew Goode was horrible, would have loved to see a Blonde Jon Hamm... and that's just off the top of my head.


I agree that "Nothing ever ends" should have been said by Jon to Adrian, and it would have been nice if they had found a way to have more scenes with Rorschach and his psychiatrist.. Other than that, I don't really agree with you, since much of the criticism you have is mostly based on smaller moments I mostly don't even remember from the book.

As for the likes of the shot of the bottle at Mars, Zack Snyder only had three hours to fit in everything that Alan Moore had, what, 350+ pages? It's a miracle he managed to use as many things from the book as he did.

I truly cannot see how this could be a much better film than it already is. I hope it will be recognized as a masterpiece some day in the future, just as the likes of Blade Runner and Citizen Kane, which were as far as I understand very dividing films when they came out, are.

Edited by The Ghost Who Walks, 25 November 2009 - 07:25 PM.


#37 Gabe Vieira

Gabe Vieira

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3873 posts
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa, USA

Posted 26 November 2009 - 03:07 AM

To me, none of my complaints about the film are small. Why can't Adrian be having dinner instead of watching the TV wall? Because it's in the novel. Nostalgia? Because it's in the novel. If you're making a movie that for 20 years people have been saying could never be a movie, and more importantly, should not be made into a movie, you should be doing everything to prove them wrong, not give them things to complain about. Then again, I'm an obsessive, overly-picky, nostalgic uber-fanboy, and any adaptation of anything I love will never be enough. Now bring on Cowboy Bebop, Hollywood.

#38 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14266 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 26 November 2009 - 07:15 AM

I know this will invite a gaggle of "I'm a purist and it satisfied me!" comments, but I'm talking about really fervent purists who resent any or almost any change


It's a trivial, piffling cartoon and it satisfied me on a trivial, piffling cartoon level. Clungebaggery of the highest order.

Today I done saw Carry on Girls.

#39 quantumofsolace

quantumofsolace

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1563 posts

Posted 26 November 2009 - 04:32 PM

in bruges
the orphanage
pans labyrinth
london to brighton
let the right one in
24 hour party people
control
eastern promises
[REC]
CR/QOS

#40 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 08 December 2009 - 03:57 PM

Someone else has seen LONDON TO BRIGHTON?!! (yay!)

#41 Judo chop

Judo chop

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7461 posts
  • Location:the bottle to the belly!

Posted 08 December 2009 - 06:23 PM

I don't know where I'm at in total count, but APPALOOSA recently tickled my fancy. It stands a fighting chance next to THE MATADOR, I think.

#42 Ambler

Ambler

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 645 posts

Posted 13 December 2009 - 08:53 PM

2010 Sex and the City 2
2009 Antichrist (von Trier)
2008 In Bruges (McDonagh)
2007 Funny Games (Haneke)
2006 The Page Turner (Dercourt) (Sotty)
2005 Hidden (Caché) (Haneke)
2004 The Bourne Supremacy (Greengrass) (Gilroy)
2003 Bad Santa (Zwigoff) (Coens)
2002 Adaptation (Jonze) (Kaufman)
2001 Mulholland Drive (Lynch)
2000 Memento (Nolan)

Not certain about Sex and the City 2, but I better include it - don’t want Salome or Inspector Clouseau to accuse me of being homophobic and misogynist. As I’ve said before, I’m happy to sleep with either of them.


EDIT: 2003 happened, I just can't remember it.

Edited by Ambler, 13 December 2009 - 10:27 PM.


#43 Major D.Smythe

Major D.Smythe

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 125 posts

Posted 14 December 2009 - 08:30 PM

1. Under The Sand (2000)

2. May (2002)

3. Outpost (2008)

4. A Comedy Of Power (2006)

5. Chocolate (2008)

6. Friday The 13th (2009)

7. The Incredibles (2004)

8. Warrior King (2007)

9. Payback: Straight Up (2005)

10. Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Begining (2006)

Edited by Major D.Smythe, 14 December 2009 - 08:31 PM.


#44 Makeshift Python

Makeshift Python

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 62 posts
  • Location:Aliso Viejo, California, USA

Posted 15 December 2009 - 04:08 AM

Shat. I'll do my best.

2000. Memento
2001. Mulholland Dr. / The Royal Tenenbaums
2002.
2003.
2004.
2005. Munich
2006. Pan's Labyrinth
2007. There Will Be Blood
2008. Burn After Reading
2009. Inglourious Basterds

Those three years aren't really tough to pick a flick, I just don't really find anything that great to be honest. The last four years are probably the most solid this decade has had.

#45 O.H.M.S.S.

O.H.M.S.S.

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1162 posts
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 15 December 2009 - 11:15 PM

Saw some interesting things here on this thread. To The Ghost Who Walks: I liked Alexander very much, I love history and it felt more like those old epics like Ben-Hur or Cleopatra, which had a few action scenes and for the rest a very character driven plot, I like that. Thanks for the thread, Zorin Industries, it's a very interesting one.

#46 Vauxhall

Vauxhall

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10744 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 16 December 2009 - 12:09 AM

Hmm, these are pretty much off the top of my head, and I'm sure I'm missing a few already...

AMELIE
MEMENTO
ZODIAC
THE DARK KNIGHT
HOTEL RWANDA
IN BRUGES
SWEENEY TODD: THE DEMON BARBER OF FLEET STREET
THE PIANIST
WALL-E
MUNICH

Guilty Pleasure: OCEAN'S ELEVEN

Honourable Mention: DISTRICT 9, HIDDEN (CACHE), THE DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY, CASINO ROYALE, INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, THE WRESTLER, THE LIFE OF DAVID GALE, THE LIVES OF OTHERS

#47 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 16 December 2009 - 08:00 PM

Guilty Pleasure: OCEAN'S ELEVEN

OCEAN'S ELEVEN is not a guilty pleasure! It nearly made my top ten. It's a great fun film that is really enjoying itself throughout. Very few films know how to do that at all now.

#48 Ambler

Ambler

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 645 posts

Posted 16 December 2009 - 08:10 PM

Guilty Pleasure: OCEAN'S ELEVEN

It's a great fun film that is really enjoying itself throughout. Very few films know how to do that at all now.

No films know how to do that. Plastic is an inanimate material.

#49 0024

0024

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 194 posts
  • Location:New York

Posted 16 December 2009 - 09:47 PM

9. Payback: Straight Up (2005)


A great neo-noir! Love that film, especially that cut.

Still making my list...

#50 The Shark

The Shark

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4650 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 16 December 2009 - 10:34 PM

Guilty Pleasure: OCEAN'S ELEVEN

It's a great fun film that is really enjoying itself throughout. Very few films know how to do that at all now.

No films know how to do that. Plastic is an inanimate material.


Is this inkhornism week?

#51 KENDO NAGAZAKI

KENDO NAGAZAKI

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 50 posts
  • Location:EAST BERLIN

Posted 17 December 2009 - 07:19 PM

Pretty mediocre decade IMO, perhaps even moreso than the last.

Still, I'll try & think of ten....

AMERICAN PSYCHO
THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES...
MICHAEL CLAYTON
ROCKY BALBOA
INGLORIOUS BASTARDS
THE BOURNE IDENTITY
DOWNFALL
THERE WILL BE BLOOD
MASTER AND COMMANDER
KILL BILL

Damn, that's a pretty miserable list. A bit here and there to appreciate, but shockingly little to truly savour and very little new ground broken. And definitely nothing here to get anywhere near my top 100. The complete and utter death of great music scores this past decade hasn't helped either. Then there's the near-death of two of my most beloved genres in action & sci-fi at the hands of ridiculous CGI overload, not to mention the incessant use of darkness, shakycam and film bleaching. As a huge and lifelong fan, just how on Earth Star Wars, Indiana Jones and James Bond didn't make my top ten in such a mediocre decade says it all. It was the decade everyone we used to worship revealed themselves to be mere fallible mortals after all.

Edited by KENDO NAGAZAKI, 17 December 2009 - 07:20 PM.


#52 Manhunter

Manhunter

    Cadet

  • Crew
  • 16 posts

Posted 17 December 2009 - 07:40 PM

Public Enemies Got a mixed response, but for me it was a film which gave me everything I'd loved about Mann's previous films



Good call. While there is nothing innovative about it (and I do think this is not a requisite feature for a film to be truly good), Public Enemiesis certainly a highly enjoyable film.

As for There Will Be Blood... well, I think it is trying hard to be something special; considering the pretensions it obviously had concerning the portrayal of the American entrepreneurial spirit, and the neat main character Anderson has invented for it, it falls flat on so many levels. The attempts at dark humour fail, the way I see it, and the way the characters and their motives are presented, especially Plainview himself and Eli, is pretty hamfisted. The wanna-be Kubrick ending also leaves me cold, just as the attempts at doing highly emotional scenes do (for example the in my opinion ludicrous revelation of Plainview to his deaf son in the end, to name just one).
Overall, it feels dull because of all this.

#53 Zorin Industries

Zorin Industries

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5634 posts

Posted 17 December 2009 - 07:42 PM

As a huge and lifelong fan, just how on Earth Star Wars, Indiana Jones and James Bond didn't make my top ten in such a mediocre decade says it all. It was the decade everyone we used to worship revealed themselves to be mere fallible mortals after all.

Very good point there.

Although the irony is that films like BOND, INDIANA JONES and STAR WARS were the flagbearers in their day and launched something that may explain why this decade has been - maybe (though I would argue against it myself) - less spectacular at the pictures.....and that is the word franchise.

Of course series and sequels are as old as cinema itself but it did feel that this decade was the one that saw films become series before the audience wanted it. So, in the late 1970's we get ROCKY, it becomes a big success and II and III etc follow on and try and continue the story. Putting what people think of those films aside (THIS IS NOT A THREAD FOR CRITICISM - and I want to keep it that way), they were certainly cash cows towards the end but they had a narrative agenda.

Now we have the likes of nineteen SPIDER MAN films contracted to everyone involved from Tobey Maguire to the catering staff.

The new STAR TREK is a good case in point. It was a great, solid, surprising and rewarding film of its own accord. And maybe a sequel or two will be good too. But I don't think it does cinematic creativity a good service if every new blockbuster feels it is not the last as the franchise has been set in motion already.

I am of the belief a "franchise" is only so when the audience really wants it. Not whether they want it not. It worked and continues to work for Bond.

#54 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 17 December 2009 - 07:52 PM

9. Payback: Straight Up (2005)


A great neo-noir! Love that film, especially that cut.

Still making my list...


I love both cuts of that film as well. One of the few times, I would say, where studio interference actually ended up as a good, quality film. Also, the STRAIGHT UP cut of PAYBACK is excellent as well, and I have a difficult time choosing which one of the two that I prefer. I was also very surprised as to how different each cut was, it was almost like they were two entirely different films.


I am of the belief a "franchise" is only so when the audience really wants it. Not whether they want it not. It worked and continues to work for Bond.


I think that this is an excellent point. There have been several summer blockbusters that have been turned into "franchises" when there really wasn't a need for it to be done that way. I know that you didn't want this to turn into a criticism thread on this topic, so I won't delve further into the topic (although it could be interesting discussion for another thread), but I wanted to point out how good of a point this is.

#55 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 17 December 2009 - 08:00 PM

I am of the belief a "franchise" is only so when the audience really wants it. Not whether they want it not. It worked and continues to work for Bond.


I think that this is an excellent point. There have been several summer blockbusters that have been turned into "franchises" when there really wasn't a need for it to be done that way. I know that you didn't want this to turn into a criticism thread on this topic, so I won't delve further into the topic (although it could be interesting discussion for another thread), but I wanted to point out how good of a point this is.



Definitely, agree wholeheartedly. One sometimes feels it's become hard to see a stand-alone film.

#56 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:53 AM

There's a lot of negativity out there for the Aughts, but personally, I think this has been a really rich decade for cinema. The cinema of the Hollywood studio system has been less than stellar (to put it kindly), but when one pushes beyond that, there's been a host of compelling and interesting viewing available. I could list at least thirty films that I found to be of significant artistic merit, and that's not including all the less meritorious but fun films I greatly enjoyed. The truth is that many of these films were independent or foreign, but they're still excellent.

So while everybody else is groaning, I'm content. Even with the long list of films I respect and enjoy, I'm continuing to find new films from this decade worth treasuring.

#57 JackWade

JackWade

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 836 posts
  • Location:The Ohio State University

Posted 18 December 2009 - 05:40 AM

2000: American Psycho
2001: A.I. Artificial Intelligence
2002:
2003:
2004:
2005:
2006: Pan's Labyrinth
2007: No Country for Old Men
2008: WALL-E
2009: District 9

2002-2005 were absolutely dire as far as mainstream cinema goes as far as I'm concerned.

#58 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 18 December 2009 - 06:19 AM

2002-2005 were absolutely dire as far as mainstream cinema goes as far as I'm concerned.

Well, they were certainly dry. Not many true-blue classics came out of Hollywood in those years (though it does depend on how you define "mainstream"). There were still plenty of great films, though. Just to highlight a few:

2002: ADAPTATION, ALL ABOUT LILY CHOU-CHOU, THE PIANIST, PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE, RUSSIAN ARK, THE TWILIGHT SAMURAI
2003: DOGVILLE, MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD, OLDBOY, TOKYO GODFATHERS
2004: 2046, ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND, SIDEWAYS
2005: THE CHILD, THE DEATH OF MR. LAZARESCU, THE NEW WORLD, SYMPATHY FOR LADY VENGEANCE

#59 White Tuxedo

White Tuxedo

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 513 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 18 December 2009 - 06:44 AM

I can only give you my personal favorites. I'm not interested in "best" or "greatest". I just care if I like it. And I'm only putting standouts for me. Some years will be blank. Sorry. B) I admit that I'm not as well versed on this decade of film.

2000: MEMENTO

2001: MULHOLLAND DR. / AMELIE / GOSFORD PARK / THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS

2002: ADAPTATION

2003:

2004: THE LIFE AQUATIC WITH STEVE ZISSOU

2005: PRIDE & PREJUDICE

2006: IDIOCRACY / DISTRICT 13 (popped into my head, fun stuff)

2007: THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD THERE WILL BE BLOOD / ATONEMENT

2008:

2009:

I just haven't watching enough newer films. I'm more interested in "foreign" films from this decade.

#60 White Tuxedo

White Tuxedo

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 513 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 18 December 2009 - 06:53 AM

Off topic, but here's my 90's. Just my faves. To show that I can put together one of these lists. B)

1990: MILLER'S CROSSING
1991: NAKED LUNCH
1992: UNFORGIVEN
1993: TOMBSTONE
1994: ED WOOD
1995: SE7EN
1996: FARGO
1997: L.A. CONFIDENTIAL
1998: DARK CITY (Director's Cut)
1999: FIGHT CLUB

Edited by White Tuxedo, 18 December 2009 - 06:54 AM.