your faves of the decade 2000-2009
sirblob2
decade's been, ive prolly munched 9000 of them, so either this that or
then the list would change daily or time consumate me when i have
other preferences at the present impungency, but here goes then,
albeit ratarsed and fastarsed
royal tenenbaums
- decadent hotel bums and gwyneth paltrow on ny skyline emotionally
lurky, incestuous or not, and great music, and then whatever, its a
bit like kramer vs kramer
the company
-great opportunity to jerk off, for the upteenth time, with neve
campbell, as seen throu altman's eyes, the same eyes we use with
swedish porn
bad santa
- grumpy chap the culminating highpoint and orgasmic whereiwithal
that's involved, somehow, in the final shot and twatface zwigoff's
career
go go tales
- my kind of comedy, i mean please, its like all the pleasures of a
cineloon combined, all from altman to cassavetes, a true orgy of
cheekiness irony nihilism and the opposites of these, being
cineloonimania the kingdom of opposites, as deleuze doberboots and ilk
are knowing of.
weeds
- well obviously its gotta go in cuz the decade winded up pretty
stoned, even thou it began really crap with arseshine like american
beauty or almost famous, it winded far better with stuff like weeds or
w., it winded like it started with that lovely secret of joe gould
branca de neve
- rather or not, being as it was, pinching one's bum in the dark, or
the other's bum, that which may couldnt be denied, being as it was the
epitome of sexual emancipatory slavery and all its hallucinatory
comeuppances, ramming it up your loved one's arse in the dark is,
without the slightest doubt, the climactic point of the enlightenment
as we should know it, and not, might i add, as we know it.
sauvage innocence
- admittedly so, much ado bout nothing's a la friday's child was
something i wasnt in the mood to deny,as such with a first half very
much in love with it and a second of more rhizomatic rheumas and yet
rather inconsiderably precious
looking for comedy in the muslim world
- brooks managed with a few shots after his lesson at the indian
theatre to envisage a world that is based upon his teachings, an
example to all humanity, whereas inside the theater the greatness of
his achievements stood not far behind. of repetitive screenings of
worth, while one does household work preferably, or surfs the
internet, sticking it as background, or whatnot, compare it to pussy
crap like entourage, this pic is pedagogy at its highest for true men
apocalypto
- contrary to arsecrap like the christ pic, this one had stunning
stuff, thou i saw it not at the cinema, the combo hitchcock goes to
the jungle was too much for me to stomach, and great cinema is all
about being diarrhoeaiac.
chaotic ana
- if only we could say this for the shit scene, of sexual terrorist
connotations as it was, if only we could repeat it to ourselves like a
prayer to the virgin mary. moronic, therefore beautiful, therefore
intelligent and perceptive.
David Oberman
<sirb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>great cinema is all about being diarrhoeaiac.
There's a sig here for someone. Use it or lose it.
Death From Above
I saw
Royal Tenenbaums. I prefer Rushmore.
Apocalypto. Suprisingly gripping and exciting. But inaccurate as
history.
nick
> cant be pissed to be definite and thorough moreover impressive as the
> decade's been, ive prolly munched 9000 of them, so either this that or
> then the list would change daily or time consumate me when i have
> other preferences at the present impungency, but here goes then,
> albeit ratarsed and fastarsed
>
which wasn't a movie but gave me the most viewing enjoyment of the
decade.
In no order and subject to change:
Elephant
24 Hour Party People
Mulholland Dr.
Grizzly Man/The White Diamond
Inglourious Basterds
Mysterious Skin
I'm Not There/Far From Heaven
George Romero's Land of the Dead/Diary of the Dead
25th Hour
Royal Tenenbaums
Femme Fatale
There Will Be Blood
Dogville
Munich/The Baader Meinhoff Complex
Movie I liked but no one else did: The Wicker Man
Filmmaker of the decade: Michael Moore
calvin
There must be some others.
calvin
> PRIMER (2004)
>
> There must be some others.
DOWNFALL (2004)
nick
One I forgot to list: Marie Antoinette.
moviePig
If I were to focus honestly on 'most viewing enjoyment' (maybe
including a bias toward recency), I might have to include something
like 2012.
(And then, no one would read the rest of my list...)
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
calvin
> If I were to focus honestly on 'most viewing enjoyment' (maybe
> including a bias toward recency), I might have to include something
> like 2012.
>
> (And then, no one would read the rest of my list...)
Critic.
David Oberman
<nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>One I forgot to list: Marie Antoinette.
Nick, I thought that was truly lame. What a conceit: Marie Antoinette
& the entire court at Versailles were just a bunch of "Melrose Place"
teens.
Did the use of pumping, grinding club-beat music in the film mean
anything more than "Kids, you'll love this movie because these
characters are no different from you"?
Alls Quiet
The Others
Michael Clayton
One Hour Photo
The Bourne Identity
Flightplan
Revenge of the Sith
The Pledge
Shrek
Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada
The Illusionist
moviePig
Cryptic.
nick
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 10:35:14 -0800 (PST), nick
>
> >One I forgot to list: Marie Antoinette.
>
> Nick, I thought that was truly lame. What a conceit: Marie Antoinette
> & the entire court at Versailles were just a bunch of "Melrose Place"
> teens.
>
> Did the use of pumping, grinding club-beat music in the film mean
> anything more than "Kids, you'll love this movie because these
> characters are no different from you"?
Those kids and that damn noise they call music, it started the French
Revolution. You have to admit, in a decade of bad trailers, Marie
Antoinette had a good one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zpi3Qi0EjS0
What was your favorite film of the decade?
moviePig
>
> >One I forgot to list: Marie Antoinette.
>
> Nick, I thought that was truly lame. What a conceit: Marie Antoinette
> & the entire court at Versailles were just a bunch of "Melrose Place"
> teens.
>
> Did the use of pumping, grinding club-beat music in the film mean
> anything more than "Kids, you'll love this movie because these
> characters are no different from you"?
It meant, "Historians, see how Versailles was no different from a malt
shoppe for the rich and famous." (I liked it. 200 gallons of
buttercream frosting can't be wrong...)
sirblob2
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 10:35:14 -0800 (PST), nick
>
> >One I forgot to list: Marie Antoinette.
>
> Nick, I thought that was truly lame. What a conceit: Marie Antoinette
> & the entire court at Versailles were just a bunch of "Melrose Place"
> teens.
>
> Did the use of pumping, grinding club-beat music in the film mean
> anything more than "Kids, you'll love this movie because these
> characters are no different from you"?
oh, ffs, it was beautiful jean renoir ''just like honey''
Michael O'Connor
The Prestige
The Dark Knight
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
SW Revenge of the Sith
Spiderman 2
Borat
A Beautiful Mind
No Country for Old Men
Children of Men
V for Vendetta
sirblob2
only one i like there is illusionist
Jim Beaver
(500) Days of Summer
Across the Universe
An Inconvenient Truth
Bloody Sunday
Cassandra's Dream
Crash
Dark and Stormy Night
Downfall
Pan's Labyrinth
Enchanted
Frost/Nixon
In Bruges
Letters from Iwo Jima
Memento
Million Dollar Baby
Mimsy
No Direction Home: Bob Dylan
Reminder
The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford
The Departed
The Rough South of Larry Brown
The Tragic Story of Nling
There Will Be Blood
United 93
Adaptation.
Babel
Before the Devil Knows You're Dead
Edges of the Lord
JCVD
Jim Beaver
David Oberman
<nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>Those kids and that damn noise they call music, it started the French
>Revolution. You have to admit, in a decade of bad trailers, Marie
>Antoinette had a good one:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zpi3Qi0EjS0
Pretty good trailer. I just have an aversion to Kirsten Dunst & Sofia
Coppola. They both strike me as physically, morally, & aesthetically
ugly.
>What was your favorite film of the decade?
I'm not sure. I guess it was either HANA & ALICE (2004), DODGEBALL
(2004), or GOOD MORNING, NIGHT (2003).
Honorable mention to DAME EDNA: BACK TO MY ROOTS & OTHER SUCKERS
(2003), BAMBOOZLED (2000), & NOBODY KNOWS (2004).
sirblob2
some real turn ons there, 24 hr party ppl, tenenbaums, basterds femme
fatale, romero and white diamond, turn offs are there will be blood,
grizzly, dogville elephant, the rest is a grey area of hmm okays like
baader, mullholland.. and actual likes, like im not there.. im not
sure if i saw mysterious skin
moviePig
(Somehow, I thought we had to limit it to ten. Hell...)
Highest enthusiasm, sampled soon after end-credits:
ABOUT SCHMIDT
BEFORE SUNSET
BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
CHILDREN OF MEN
CINDERELLA MAN
DOGVILLE
FATELESS
FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS
GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK
IGBY GOES DOWN
IN AMERICA
IN THE BEDROOM
ITALIAN FOR BEGINNERS
LOST IN TRANSLATION
MASTER AND COMMANDER
MILK
MINORITY REPORT
RAISING VICTOR VARGAS
SHATTERED GLASS
SIDEWAYS
SIGNS
SPARTAN
SUNSHINE STATE
THE HUNTED
THE ITALIAN JOB
THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING
THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS
THE MAGDALENE SISTERS
THE NEW WORLD
THE PIANIST
THE QUEEN
THE RING
THERE WILL BE BLOOD
THIRTEEN DAYS
TOUCHING THE VOID
WAR OF THE WORLDS
Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN
YI YI
YOU CAN COUNT ON ME
nick
Damn. Yi Yi. I didn't put it on my list because I erroneously
thought it was a late '90s release.
moviePig
> thought it was a late '90s release.
Another one I've gifted more than once... (usually with a sell-job to
convince the recipient to watch a "Jap flick"...)
nick
I passed on In Bruges for the longest time. I can't stand this modern
breed of ultra-violent nihilistic dark comic crime thriller, ie Lucky
Number Slevin, Smokin' Aces, Shoot 'em Up, and I thought In Bruges was
going to be like that, but I ended up loving every minute of it. The
screenplay is so quoteable they might as well go ahead and reprint the
whole thing in the IMDb memorable quotes section for In Bruges.
moviePig
MIMSY? REMINDER? And when can we see DARK AND STORMY NIGHT?
S D
sirblob2
> (Somehow, I thought we had to limit it to ten. Hell...)
>
> Highest enthusiasm, sampled soon after end-credits:
>
treasure island
> TOUCHING THE VOID
> WAR OF THE WORLDS
> Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN
> YI YI
> ITALIAN FOR BEGINNERS
> LOST IN TRANSLATION
> MASTER AND COMMANDER
mm okays
> BEFORE SUNSET
> BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
> MINORITY REPORT
> SIGNS
> SUNSHINE STATE
> THE NEW WORLD
> THIRTEEN DAYS
> THE PIANIST
prolly saws but cant remember shit
> YOU CAN COUNT ON ME
> IN AMERICA
> THE HUNTED
> THE RING
didnt see
> THE MAGDALENE SISTERS
> RAISING VICTOR VARGAS
> SHATTERED GLASS
> IGBY GOES DOWN
> FATELESS
> FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS
utter crap
> SIDEWAYS
> IN THE BEDROOM
> GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK
> MILK
> SPARTAN
> ABOUT SCHMIDT
> CHILDREN OF MEN
> CINDERELLA MAN
> DOGVILLE
> THE ITALIAN JOB
> THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING
> THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS
> THE QUEEN
> THERE WILL BE BLOOD
sirblob2
> the "decade" ends 12/31/10, count to ten
yeah, so the 90s started after 1990 ended, makes plenty of sense
calvin
> the "decade" ends 12/31/10, count to ten
The decade of the 90s ended 12/31/99.
The decade of the 00s will end 12/31/09.
Decades are not like centuries with respect
to when they end. Surely you don't think
1970 was in the 60s?
S D
S D
duration
Endymion9
news:21cabd86-c6f5-4267...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> cant be pissed to be definite and thorough moreover impressive as the
> decade's been, ive prolly munched 9000 of them, so either this that or
> then the list would change daily or time consumate me when i have
> other preferences at the present impungency, but here goes then,
> albeit ratarsed and fastarsed
>
> - decadent hotel bums and gwyneth paltrow on ny skyline emotionally
> lurky, incestuous or not, and great music, and then whatever, its a
> bit like kramer vs kramer
>
> the company
> -great opportunity to jerk off, for the upteenth time, with neve
> campbell, as seen throu altman's eyes, the same eyes we use with
> swedish porn
>
> bad santa
> - grumpy chap the culminating highpoint and orgasmic whereiwithal
> that's involved, somehow, in the final shot and twatface zwigoff's
> career
>
> go go tales
> - my kind of comedy, i mean please, its like all the pleasures of a
> cineloon combined, all from altman to cassavetes, a true orgy of
> cheekiness irony nihilism and the opposites of these, being
> cineloonimania the kingdom of opposites, as deleuze doberboots and ilk
> are knowing of.
>
> weeds
> - well obviously its gotta go in cuz the decade winded up pretty
> stoned, even thou it began really crap with arseshine like american
> beauty or almost famous, it winded far better with stuff like weeds or
> w., it winded like it started with that lovely secret of joe gould
>
> branca de neve
> - rather or not, being as it was, pinching one's bum in the dark, or
> the other's bum, that which may couldnt be denied, being as it was the
> epitome of sexual emancipatory slavery and all its hallucinatory
> comeuppances, ramming it up your loved one's arse in the dark is,
> without the slightest doubt, the climactic point of the enlightenment
> as we should know it, and not, might i add, as we know it.
>
> sauvage innocence
> - admittedly so, much ado bout nothing's a la friday's child was
> something i wasnt in the mood to deny,as such with a first half very
> much in love with it and a second of more rhizomatic rheumas and yet
> rather inconsiderably precious
>
> looking for comedy in the muslim world
> - brooks managed with a few shots after his lesson at the indian
> theatre to envisage a world that is based upon his teachings, an
> example to all humanity, whereas inside the theater the greatness of
> his achievements stood not far behind. of repetitive screenings of
> worth, while one does household work preferably, or surfs the
> internet, sticking it as background, or whatnot, compare it to pussy
> crap like entourage, this pic is pedagogy at its highest for true men
>
> apocalypto
> - contrary to arsecrap like the christ pic, this one had stunning
> stuff, thou i saw it not at the cinema, the combo hitchcock goes to
> the jungle was too much for me to stomach, and great cinema is all
> about being diarrhoeaiac.
>
> chaotic ana
> - if only we could say this for the shit scene, of sexual terrorist
> connotations as it was, if only we could repeat it to ourselves like a
> prayer to the virgin mary. moronic, therefore beautiful, therefore
> intelligent and perceptive.
>
With some of your choices for turds of the decade, it shouldn't surprise me
you'd like something I hated. Royal Tennenbaums. Not one funny line from
Stiller or Hackman. Who would have thought DeNiro/Stiller would be 100
times funnier than Hackman/Stiller?
--
--
Dennis/Endy9
~Some will sink, but we will float. Grab your coat. Let's get out of here.
You're my witness, I'm your Mutineer.~ Warren Zevon
--
sirblob2
> "sirblob2" <sirbl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
meet the fockers is a pain in the arse absolute, are family values
what makes that mooee popular?
Stone me
The Lives of Others(2006)
A Prairie Home Companion(2006)
Collateral(2004)
A Good Woman (2004)
The Cooler(2003)
Gosford Park(2001)
Stone me.
moviePig
Well, I'll give you credit for being indefinable. What these movies
did for *me* I'll call a (transcendent, I hope) version of keeping me
aggressively awake -- by hook or by crook -- for their entire running
times. E.g.: IFC-hd ran THE NEW WORLD tonight, and... has a more
sensuous film ever been made (...all the way up to, but not including,
ironically, the "sex" scenes)?
herbzet
Haven't really gone to the movies much this decade. Haven't seen
most of the movies on other people's lists.
However, three I liked:
La Vie en Rose -- Didn't know a thing about Edith Piaf, just
a French singer; walked out stunned by
(Oscar-winning) performance by Marion Cotillard.
Powers along right up to the final line.
Frida -- film tries to be artistically worthy of its subject;
on the whole, succeeds. Terrific soundtrack. Six
Oscar noms, including best actress nomination for
Salma Hayak; two wins.
The Limits of Control -- Luckily, went in with no expectations that
there would be anything resembling plot,
character, drama, action, or anything else.
Just let it soak in.
About Dogville: Great, wonderful, anti-realistic execution: we don't
need no steenkin' scenery!
Horrible, horrible message or moral or whatever you want to call it.
Suffice it to mention the cliche weakling intellectual, contrasted to,
say, a gangster that would just shoot anyone who gets in his way, the
way "real men" would handle things. Ridiculous Bush-era moral claptrap.
--
hz
Alls Quiet
>
> I passed on In Bruges for the longest time. I can't stand this modern
> breed of ultra-violent nihilistic dark comic crime thriller, ie Lucky
> Number Slevin, Smokin' Aces, Shoot 'em Up, and I thought In Bruges was
> going to be like that, but I ended up loving every minute of it. The
> screenplay is so quoteable they might as well go ahead and reprint the
Agree, agree, agree...it started (in earnest) with Pulp Fiction. But
In Bruges was saved from the genre by the acting and writing (duh).
Fantastic film, which gives me an idea for a new post/category: Most
Unusual Film of the Decade.
Alls Quiet
discipline yourself, MP.
On Dec 12, 8:16 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> (Somehow, I thought we had to limit it to ten. Hell...)
>
> Highest enthusiasm, sampled soon after end-credits:
>
> ABOUT SCHMIDT
Excellent. Was on my top fifteen, but I had to choose one Nicholson
film, and that one was my ne plus ultra (over Chinatown), The Pliedge.
> BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
Also my top fifteen...and not because of its alleged theme. It was a
film about poverty, a brilliant film I don't think will ever be
surpassed in the way it shows how poverty and loneliness go hand in
hand (homosexuality was the unnecessary trope).
> CINDERELLA MAN
Film that ended my Russell Crowe fascination only because I cannot
watch boxing or rape films. Boxing is the male equivalent of rape.
> DOGVILLE
I don't know what to say about this choice. The dude's a sick fuck, as
in Hell-in-a-Basketville.
> GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK
Over-the-top pretention in every way. Most pretentious film of the
decade, perhaps except Closer or Doubt.
> IN AMERICA
YES! I forgot this one. Magnificent.
> IN THE BEDROOM
Pretentious Filme de 2005(?).
> LOST IN TRANSLATION
OOPSS!! Pretentious film of all time, next to its co-winner, Marie
Antoinette.
> MASTER AND COMMANDER
Decent but overhyped.
> MILK
Best biopic of the decade filled with bloated biopics (as in "Ray: the
Poor Black Neverending Story," or "Walk the Line: the Poor White
Neverending Story")
> SIDEWAYS
Payne is quietly misogynist.
> SIGNS
Funny how this one withstands the test of time if watched for its
metaphor. It's maybe the most spiritual film of the decade, especially
considering when it was released.
> THE NEW WORLD
Way overrated.
> THE QUEEN
Are you nuts?
> YOU CAN COUNT ON ME
Overrated piece of crap, as all Laura Linney (and Philip Seymour
Hoffman) films are.
nick
release. Of course, if you want to be a stickler/decade bore, it was
a 90s release . . .
Harkness was a big Topsy-Turvy fan, iirc.
trotsky
Outstanding movie. Did Harkness have better taste in movies than I
remember?
moviePig
Harkness intially surprised me with some of the stuff he was willing
to like. (Not with TOPSY-TURVY though ...as disliking a Mike Leigh
movie usually means merely that a re-watch is needed...)
moviePig
> Yes, we did limit it to ten. So you really should go back and
> discipline yourself, MP.
Jim Beaver listed 429... and I xeroxed his artistic license...
> On Dec 12, 8:16 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
> > (Somehow, I thought we had to limit it to ten. Hell...)
>
> > Highest enthusiasm, sampled soon after end-credits:
>
> > ABOUT SCHMIDT
>
> Excellent. Was on my top fifteen, but I had to choose one Nicholson
> film, and that one was my ne plus ultra (over Chinatown), The Pledge.
SCHMIDT seems to divide the viewer population into two parts,
centering (respectively) on the highly enthusiastic and the
indifferent. I've no idea what either partition represents, but I
know they can't chat with other about this movie...
> > BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
>
> Also my top fifteen...and not because of its alleged theme. It was a
> film about poverty, a brilliant film I don't think will ever be
> surpassed in the way it shows how poverty and loneliness go hand in
> hand (homosexuality was the unnecessary trope).
Not a bad take. Indeed, it wasn't a gay-manual...
> > CINDERELLA MAN
>
> Film that ended my Russell Crowe fascination only because I cannot
> watch boxing or rape films. Boxing is the male equivalent of rape.
Also an interesting take. And, personally, I'd push the button that
ends all boxing, but movie-watching is my trump suit...
> > DOGVILLE
>
> I don't know what to say about this choice. The dude's a sick fuck, as
> in Hell-in-a-Basketville.
He may be sick, but he *never* bores me...
> > GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK
>
> Over-the-top pretention in every way. Most pretentious film of the
> decade, perhaps except Closer or Doubt.
For me, it was the re-creations, rather than Clooney's principles,
that were principal.
> > IN AMERICA
>
> YES! I forgot this one. Magnificent.
Sheridan's a master (...e.g., which makes BROTHERS worth the trip).
> > IN THE BEDROOM
>
> Pretentious Filme de 2005(?).
What can I say? I love Field's technique...
> > LOST IN TRANSLATION
>
> OOPSS!! Pretentious film of all time, next to its co-winner, Marie
> Antoinette.
Quietly exotic and "lean-forward", even if I wouldn't want a remake...
> > MASTER AND COMMANDER
>
> Decent but overhyped.
By whom?!!!
> > MILK
>
> Best biopic of the decade filled with bloated biopics (as in "Ray: the
> Poor Black Neverending Story," or "Walk the Line: the Poor White
> Neverending Story")
Didn't know the story well, but... if "the movies should move", then I
give highest regard to one that moves *me*...
> > SIDEWAYS
>
> Payne is quietly misogynist.
And Giamatti and Nicholson (SCHMIDT) are his not-so-quiet accomplices.
> > SIGNS
>
> Funny how this one withstands the test of time if watched for its
> metaphor. It's maybe the most spiritual film of the decade, especially
> considering when it was released.
...despite its dreadful and downright insulting denouement.
> > THE NEW WORLD
>
> Way overrated.
...only if you watch it rather than *feel* it. I await the next
Malick like someone returning to have the callouses sanded from his
senses...
> > THE QUEEN
>
> Are you nuts?
More nuts than cheese here, anyway. Frears and Mirren are not to be
dismissed, and this was the only view of the Royal Family that I
recall being able to stomach... (even if I suspect that, for dramatic
purposes, it jacked-up everyone's I.Q....)
> > YOU CAN COUNT ON ME
>
> Overrated piece of crap, as all Laura Linney (and Philip Seymour
> Hoffman) films are.
Went with low expectations, and was drawn in non-stop.
(Hey, this *proves* these were all good movies... because I could
actually remember why I liked each one...)
Michael O'Connor
> > SIGNS
>
> Funny how this one withstands the test of time if watched for its
> metaphor. It's maybe the most spiritual film of the decade, especially
> considering when it was released.
I would put Signs on my ten most underrarted films of the decade
list. What I really liked about it was that it was a homage to the
old horror/sci-fi movies where you don't get to see a whole lot of the
aliens until the very end, where the gimmick was to raise the suspense
throughout, and Shymalan (?sp) is a master of raising the suspense,
and it wasn't full of 84.673 different CGI effects. And it was at
it's core a story about lost faith.
David Oberman
<mut...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Boxing is the male equivalent of rape.
A "bestial blood sport," John Simon called it (boxing).
David Oberman
<nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>Harkness was a big Topsy-Turvy fan, iirc.
I think he was. He also liked SECRETS & LIES. Unfortunately, he also
liked NAKED.
Bill Anderson
> Topsy-Tuvy's another contender I mistakenly remembered as a 90s
> release. Of course, if you want to be a stickler/decade bore, it was
> a 90s release . . .
>
How could a year that doesn't end in 90-something be part of a decade of
years that end in 90-something? Even stickler/decade bores wouldn't
claim that.
--
Bill Anderson
I am the Mighty Favog
calvin
> nick wrote:
> > Topsy-Tuvy's another contender I mistakenly remembered as a 90s
> > release. Of course, if you want to be a stickler/decade bore, it was
> > a 90s release . . .
>
> How could a year that doesn't end in 90-something be part of a decade of
> years that end in 90-something? Even stickler/decade bores wouldn't
> claim that.
And there are fewer than nineteen days left in the
'decade of the aughts'. Now, instead of calling the
years eg. "two thousand five" (I would have preferred
"twenty aught five"), we can refer to the years as
eg. "twenty ten", "twenty eleven", and put that awkward
"two thousand" stuff to rest.
nick
> > Topsy-Tuvy's another contender I mistakenly remembered as a 90s
> > release. Of course, if you want to be a stickler/decade bore, it was
> > a 90s release . . .
>
> How could a year that doesn't end in 90-something be part of a decade of
> years that end in 90-something? Even stickler/decade bores wouldn't
> claim that.
>
then what does that do to a movie made in a "0" year? Back it up to
the previous decade is about all you can do. Don't ask me. Ask the
people who thought this century began in 2001.
All of this reminds me of the Clash's London Calling. Released in the
UK in late '79 but released in the US in early '80, hence English
reference works rate it as one of the best records of the seventies
but American reference works rate is as one of the best records of the
eighties.
Flasherly
>
> meet the fockers is a pain in the arse absolute, are family values
> what makes that mooee popular?
Somewhere along mid-century, along with color, there's a tendency
altogether within acceptable, nigh obligatory shifts, away from
stagged exaggerations for forgoing the reserves of megaphonic
bombasticity, imminent to a capacity for addressing all seated, even
in the recesses of technological wings;- that they should be least
disadvantaged with a respective distance from perspective, or excused
for failing to comprehend even the most minute subtleties in grander
schemes, probably, is no more intended than consequent to forgiving
artifices any performance fails to deliver.
The Russians have been said first to have ushered this wondrous feat,
in modern literature riding upon a tradition character development
expands from literally provocative means, to inculcate the ascription
of thought patterns, into depictions, as a common inference and
conduit to set upon the stage. The conscious deconstruction of
apparency and expectancy from harnessed streams, as it were, much as
once a rudimentary syncopation of shuffling feet, among Neanderthal
pairings around a fire, conceivably lifted a spirit of the gathering
for a harness religion or state more or less assumes.
Perhaps amusing, perhaps not, were values in any sense conclusively
accountable for popularity more lasting than we'll live to see.
--
Johnny: [to Jennifer after she pulls a gun and tells him to take off
his clothes] I don't like women giving me orders.
[last lines]
Jennifer Hills: Suck it, bitch!
-Day of the Woman [AKA: I Spit on Your Grave]
calvin
> On Dec 13, 12:51 pm, Bill Anderson <billanderson...@yahoo.com> wrote:> nick wrote:
> > > Topsy-Tuvy's another contender I mistakenly remembered as a 90s
> > > release. Of course, if you want to be a stickler/decade bore, it was
> > > a 90s release . . .
>
> > How could a year that doesn't end in 90-something be part of a decade of
> > years that end in 90-something? Even stickler/decade bores wouldn't
> > claim that.
>
> But if you believe a decade has to begin with a year with "1" in it,
> then what does that do to a movie made in a "0" year? Back it up to
> the previous decade is about all you can do. Don't ask me. Ask the
> people who thought this century began in 2001.
They're pedants, who think that just because there was
no year 0 AD, every century has to start with a year 1.
But AD doesn't actually commemorate anything, because
Jesus was born several years earlier. Therefore there is
no harm in considering the year 1 BC to also be the year
0 AD. No calendar has to be changed to do that. Now
we can have all centuries (and decades) beginning with
a 0 year, and the year 2000 was indeed the beginning of
the 21st century, and the third millennium.
sirblob2
>
> --
> Johnny: [to Jennifer after she pulls a gun and tells him to take off
> his clothes] I don't like women giving me orders.
>
> [last lines]
> Jennifer Hills: Suck it, bitch!
>
> -Day of the Woman [AKA: I Spit on Your Grave]
the scene where she cuts some guy's balls off in the tub with a quiet
snip and he goes 'ow, that's so sweet its painful'... and then sees
the blood... is hmm
trotsky
I'd rate it as one of the top ten rock albums of all time.
Francis A. Miniter
The Lord of the Rings
Harry Potter
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Casa de Areia ("House of Sand") - This is NOT The House of
Sand and Fog.
The Illusionist
The Good Shepherd
The Good German
The Libertine
Insomnia
Proof
Primer
When Nietzsche Slept
Memento
Doubt
Gosford Park
Unbreakable
In Bruges
Heavens Fall
I sadly discovered that Eye of the Beholder, The Ninth Gate,
Cradle Will Rock and Buffalo '66 were all just a year or so
too early.
--
Francis A. Miniter
Oscuramente
libros, laminas, llaves
siguen mi suerte.
Jorge Luis Borges, La Cifra Haiku, 6
Francis A. Miniter
> On Dec 12, 8:56�pm, forn...@webtv.net (S D) wrote:
>> the "decade" ends 12/31/10, count to ten
>
> The decade of the 90s ended 12/31/99.
> The decade of the 00s will end 12/31/09.
>
> Decades are not like centuries with respect
> to when they end. Surely you don't think
> 1970 was in the 60s?
According to Douglas Adams in one of the Hitchhiker's Guide
books, "The sixties, which as everyone knows lasted well
into the seventies . . . "
Flasherly
Many of course would have heard at least of an impact from that
movie;- I haven't seen it. However Farinelli, Il Castrato, no sadder
staged castration could contrast by blood horrifically surfacing after
being placed milk-filled bathtub;- truly a regenerative impact of
horrifically haunting beauty of once idealized womanly studmuffins.
--
The Mad Monk (1966): ... I offer him sins worth forgiving!
Alls Quiet
>
> And it was at it's core a story about lost faith.
And how impossible it is to distinguish, at a gut level, "alien
invasions" from death.
moviePig
Think 'dysentery'...
Brad Filippone
> On Dec 12, 8:16 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > (Somehow, I thought we had to limit it to ten. Hell...)
>
> > Highest enthusiasm, sampled soon after end-credits:
>
> > ABOUT SCHMIDT
> > BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
> > CHILDREN OF MEN
> > CINDERELLA MAN
> > DOGVILLE
> > FATELESS
> > FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS
>
> thought it was a late '90s release.
It was released in 2000, which makes it a movie from the last year of
the previous century. Remember, the first decade of THIS century
still has another year to go. But for the decade STARTING in 2000,
you could still technically include it.
Brad
Brad Filippone
> On Dec 12, 8:56 pm, forn...@webtv.net (S D) wrote:
>
> > the "decade" ends 12/31/10, count to ten
>
> The decade of the 90s ended 12/31/99.
> The decade of the 00s will end 12/31/09.
>
> Decades are not like centuries with respect
> to when they end. Surely you don't think
> 1970 was in the 60s?
Depends on how you look at it. A decade technically begins each
nanosecond. The popular conception of a decade begins in years ending
with "0" and ends in years ending in "9." The OFFICIAL decades start
in "1" years" and end in "0" years. So the first decade of the 21st
century still has a year to go.
Brad
Brad Filippone
Tell me something. When you count, do you start with "0" or "1?"
Brad
calvin
Until my first job in computers I started with 1,
but then I learned to start at 0. In any case,
we speak of past decades as the 60s, the 90s,
etc. and they each start with the zero year.
Also, the first year of your life was the zero year.
You became 1 at the end of it.
Michael O'Connor
> Depends on how you look at it. A decade technically begins each
> nanosecond. The popular conception of a decade begins in years ending
> with "0" and ends in years ending in "9." The OFFICIAL decades start
> in "1" years" and end in "0" years. So the first decade of the 21st
> century still has a year to go.
>
You are technically correct; there was no year Zero between 1BC and
1AD, but we went thru this argument ten years ago with the millenium,
people consider the new decade to start when the third digit in the
year number changes, as from 2009 to 2010.
moviePig
...unless, of course, you were held back a year.
Bill Anderson
What's pedantic about simple logic?
Cardinal and ordinal numbers may be different, but their logic is as
simple as 1-2-3.
If there is a row of apples on the shelf and I ask you to bring me the
first ten, you aren't going to bring me nine apples and insist there's
an invisible one. You're going to start with apple number one and end
with apple number 10. That's the logical set of the "first ten apples."
Apples 1-10.
There are ten years in a decade and the logic holds for years just as it
does for apples. The first decade is the first ten years, which means
years 1-10. The first century is years 1-100. The first millennium is
years 1-1000. The second millennium is years 1001-2000, and the third
started in 2001.
That's totally unrelated to talking about "the decade of the 90s."
We're not talking ordinal numbers now; instead we're defining a decade
by its cardinal numeric characters. Our recent decade of "the 90s"
started in 1990 and ended in 1999. The millennium of the 2000s started
in 2000 and will end in 2999.
There's a difference between "the third millennium" and "the millennium
of the 2000s" and it is illogical to conflate the two. There were big
parties all over the world on New Year's Eve 1999 to celebrate the end
of the 1900s and the beginning of the 2000s. But the third millennium
didn't start until a year later.
David Oberman
<billand...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If there is a row of apples on the shelf and I ask you to bring me the
>first ten, you aren't going to bring me nine apples and insist there's
>an invisible one. You're going to start with apple number one and end
>with apple number 10. That's the logical set of the "first ten apples."
> Apples 1-10.
>
>There are ten years in a decade and the logic holds for years just as it
>does for apples. The first decade is the first ten years, which means
>years 1-10. The first century is years 1-100. The first millennium is
>years 1-1000. The second millennium is years 1001-2000, and the third
>started in 2001.
>
>That's totally unrelated to talking about "the decade of the 90s."
>We're not talking ordinal numbers now; instead we're defining a decade
>by its cardinal numeric characters. Our recent decade of "the 90s"
>started in 1990 and ended in 1999. The millennium of the 2000s started
>in 2000 and will end in 2999.
>
>There's a difference between "the third millennium" and "the millennium
>of the 2000s" and it is illogical to conflate the two. There were big
>parties all over the world on New Year's Eve 1999 to celebrate the end
>of the 1900s and the beginning of the 2000s. But the third millennium
>didn't start until a year later.
Makes sense, Bill!
Can we all agree to agree?
TT
Cast Away (2000) 8
Chopper (2000) 8
Finding Forrester (2000) 8
Gladiator (2000) 8
Mal�na (2000) 8
Memento (2000) 8
The Luzhin Defence (2000) 8
Unbreakable (2000) 8
Under Suspicion (2000) 10
What Lies Beneath (2000) 8
Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
A Beautiful Mind (2001) 8
Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001) 8
Birthday Girl (2001) 8
Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
Enemy at the Gates (2001) 8
Heist (2001/I) 8
I Am Sam (2001) 8
Life as a House (2001) 8
Monster's Ball (2001) 8
Samsara (2001) 8
Scenes of the Crime (2001) 8
So weit die F��e tragen (2001) 9
The Others (2001) 8
Vanilla Sky (2001) 8
About a Boy (2002) 8
Bend It Like Beckham (2002) 8
Bowling for Columbine (2002) 8
Catch Me If You Can (2002) 8
Cidade de Deus (2002) 9
Equilibrium (2002) 9
Road to Perdition (2002) 8
Secretary (2002) 8
Signs (2002) 8
The Pianist (2002) 9
White Oleander (2002) 9
Ying xiong (2002) 8
Lost in Translation (2003) 8
The Last Samurai (2003) 8
The Life of David Gale (2003) 8
Crash (2004/I) 8
Der Untergang (2004) 9
Flight of the Phoenix (2004) 8
Hotel Rwanda (2004) 8
Immortel (ad vitam) (2004) 8
Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004) 8
The Chronicles of Riddick (2004) 8
The Terminal (2004) 8
WMD: Weapons of Mass Deception (2004) 8
Brokeback Mountain (2005) 9
Cinderella Man (2005) 8
Memoirs of a Geisha (2005) 8
Walk the Line (2005) 8
Apocalypto (2006) 8
Das Leben der Anderen (2006) 8
El laberinto del fauno (2006) 8
The Last King of Scotland (2006) 8
The Prestige (2006) 8
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006) 8
Chasing Ghosts: Beyond the Arcade (2007) 8
The King of Kong (2007) 8
Mogadischu (2008) (TV) 8
R��peri (2009) 8
Watchmen (2009) 8
So it appears that imo 2000's was not a good decade, movie wise...I've
only rated 10 films as 10 or 9...while the number should be around 20
when looking how I've rated movies before 2000.
Here's 10's and 9's sorted from the bunch:
Under Suspicion (2000) 10
Brokeback Mountain (2005) 9
Cidade de Deus (2002) 9
Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
Der Untergang (2004) 9
Equilibrium (2002) 9
So weit die F��e tragen (2001) 9
The Pianist (2002) 9
White Oleander (2002) 9
Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
TT
> PRIMER (2004)
>
That's rubbish. Being an independent movie, and having SUPPOSEDLY cool
plot doesn't make poor acting, directing and incomprehensible plot good.
TT
> On Dec 12, 1:19 pm, calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>> PRIMER (2004)
>>
>> There must be some others.
>
> DOWNFALL (2004)
I list that too in my top 10 of the decade. (Der untergang)
TT
By that logic Jesus would have celebrated his 10th birthday on 1.1.11.
I'd rather think that since we're counting time from his birth he would
have been born in 0 and lived 2000 years 1.1.2000. If you were
celebrating his 2000 year birthday in 1.1.2001 you would have been a
year late...At that date he was celebrating his 2001st birthday.
Bill Anderson
This is Usenet, David.
moviePig
No.. but an honest sci-fi flick that, as part of its plot, takes most
any viewer's intellect as far as it can go could easily be a 'fave'.
moviePig
Afaics, this argument devolves to whether we are slaves to
Christianity or to Numerology. Personally, I feel we should finalize
our capitulation to the Computer Kingdom, and birthmark movies by
their hexades... if only for the wider pickins'...
calvin
I'm aware of all that, and always have been. I'm talking
about something new, a way to have a year 0 AD, and
thus place the century, decade, and millennium
beginnings at the zero years. If Jesus had been born
at the beginning of the year 1 AD, there would be
nothing we could do about it, but since he was born
several years before that time, there is nothing
whatever wrong with us considering the year 0 AD to
be the same as the year 1 BC.
calvin
No, but the acting, directing, and plot were good nevertheless.
TT
> On Dec 14, 7:10 am, TT <n...@email.org> wrote:
>> calvin wrote:
>>> PRIMER (2004)
>> That's rubbish. Being an independent movie, and having SUPPOSEDLY cool
>> plot doesn't make poor acting, directing and incomprehensible plot good.
>
> No.. but an honest sci-fi flick that, as part of its plot, takes most
> any viewer's intellect as far as it can go could easily be a 'fave'.
>
Right. Yes, this was about faves.
TT
We disagree then. Imo the movie was throughout as amateurish as it can
get...
calvin
It was made by amateurs, but my reaction was that the
people were real. It was an impressive achievement. I've
watched it at least five times, and expect to continue
seeing it and increasing my understanding of it.
TT
Perhaps, however I'm an atheist. My logic here is that we should go by
"christianity" in this case since that's what the system is supposed to
be based on!
> Personally, I feel we should finalize
> our capitulation to the Computer Kingdom, and birthmark movies by
> their hexades... if only for the wider pickins'...
yes
TT
That's exactly what I found to be the worst part of it. :)
...Meaning that after watching the movie, despite seeing myself as
adequately intelligent person and a big fan of time travel theme, I had
to go to the imdb forums to read what the heck was supposed to have
happened in the movie. Imo the movie failed big time in storytelling
aspect, it wasn't comprehensible.
It amazed me how many people there "got" it. I guess they're just
smarter than me. Although it took around half an hour - one hour of
forum reading after having a clear picture of what was supposed to have
happened in the movie. Most of it material by writer/director. I say it
was a huge hoax all together. Sort of like Departed getting Oscar with
all it's plot holes and ridiculous ending.
calvin
> There's a difference between "the third millennium" and "the millennium
> of the 2000s" and it is illogical to conflate the two. There were big
> parties all over the world on New Year's Eve 1999 to celebrate the end
> of the 1900s and the beginning of the 2000s. But the third millennium
> didn't start until a year later.
No, those parties were to celebrate the new century and
the new millennium, as far as the people of the world generally
understood them. They didn't care about the fact that there
was no year 0 AD. They were celebrating the odometer
turning over to 2000. (True odometers start at zero, though.)
Actually, the third millennium started at least two
years earlier. The historical Jesus was born possibly
as early as 7 BC or as late as 4 BC. Taking the
latest possible time of his birth to be the end of 4 BC,
means that 2000 years had passed at the end of 1997.
Thus the third millennium really started no later than
that time, and TITANIC was the first movie of the new
century, and new millennium.
Bill Anderson
That seems a very liberal interpretation of the numbers, Calvin.
Francis A. Miniter
I listed it because it was an interesting experiment in film
making. The plot was enjoyable.
--
Francis A. Miniter
Oscuramente
libros, laminas, llaves
siguen mi suerte.
Jorge Luis Borges, La Cifra Haiku, 6
sirblob2
trolosa
me myself and irene
esther kahn
dr t and the women
mission impossible 2
palavra e utopia
joe gould's secret
code inconnu
branca de neve
werckmeister harmonies
2001
tenenbaums
rxmas
wit
breve traversee
sauvage innocence
warm water under a red bridge
y tu mama tambien
bridget jones diary
millenium mambo
nirgwendo in afrika
what time is it there
2002
24 hour party ppl
laurel canyon
wilbur wants to kill himself
spider
panic room
lauberge espagnole
japon
uzak
hollywood ending
the good thief
2003
finding nemo
code 46
belleville oh welcome
bad santa
casa de los babys
histoire de marie et julien
anything else
kal ho naa ho
the cooler
los angeles plays itself
2004
i heart huckabees
white diamond
a dirty shame
closer
day after tomorrow
9 songs
mean girls
saraband
goodbye dragon inn
million dollar baby
2005
in her shoes
miami vice
election
three times
war of the worlds
fearless freaks
new world
13 lakes
l'esquive
l'enfant
2006
marie antoinette
heart of gold
apocalypto
little children
when the levees broke
prairie home companion
astronaut farmer
borat
woman on the beach
find me guilty
2007
king of kong
surf's up
sunshine
im not there
then she found me
juno
lions for lambs
in the land of women
superbad
go go tales
2008
zohan
my best friends girl
sky crawlers
w.
miracle at saint anna
the love guru
nick and norah's infinite playlist
be kind rewind
vicky christina barcelona
darjeeling
2009
up
funny ppl
in the loop
2012
mary and max
infestation
humpday
inglourious basterds
damned united
knowing
Stone me
"TT" <n...@email.org> wrote in message
news:TBqVm.51809$La7....@uutiset.elisa.fi...
> Brad Filippone wrote:
Snipped
>>> Damn. Yi Yi. I didn't put it on my list because I erroneously
>>> thought it was a late '90s release.
>>
>> It was released in 2000, which makes it a movie from the last year of
>> the previous century. Remember, the first decade of THIS century
>> still has another year to go. But for the decade STARTING in 2000,
>> you could still technically include it.
>>
>> Brad
>
>
> By that logic Jesus would have celebrated his 10th birthday on 1.1.11.
>
> I'd rather think that since we're counting time from his birth he would
> have been born in 0 and lived 2000 years 1.1.2000. If you were celebrating
> his 2000 year birthday in 1.1.2001 you would have been a year late...At
> that date he was celebrating his 2001st birthday.
Wiki offers 2 versions. It acknowledges that it is commonly accepted that
decades are accepted as those from 0-9, then goes on to put the "calendar"
version, 1-9.
It is an important misunderstanding, though I wish it were not left just to
the wisdom of pedants and computer backroom boys.
Since it cannot be proven The Jesus lived, let alone which year he was born,
it does the argument little benefit.
Fortunately statistics are not bound by this definition, so it may be some
time
before anything gets changed.
Stone me.
moviePig
wrote:
> calvin wrote:
> > On Dec 14, 7:10 am, TT <n...@email.org> wrote:
> >> calvin wrote:
> >>> PRIMER (2004)
> >> That's rubbish. Being an independent movie, and having SUPPOSEDLY cool
> >> plot doesn't make poor acting, directing and incomprehensible plot good.
>
> > No, but the acting, directing, and plot were good nevertheless.
>
> I listed it because it was an interesting experiment in film
> making. The plot was enjoyable.
Not to mention which... how many movies have ever whacked you with
genuine insight by leaving you befuddled?
Stone me
"Stone me" <sun...@boulevard.hwd> wrote in message
news:5twVm.96823$jv5....@newsfe14.ams2...
>
>
> Wiki offers 2 versions. It acknowledges that it is commonly accepted that
> decades are accepted as those from 0-9, then goes on to put the "calendar"
> version, 1-9.
> It is an important misunderstanding, though I wish it were not left just
> to
> the wisdom of pedants and computer backroom boys.
> Since it cannot be proven The Jesus lived, let alone which year he was
> born,
> it does the argument little benefit.
> Fortunately statistics are not bound by this definition, so it may be some
> time
> before anything gets changed.
> Stone me.
>
then goes on to put the "calendar"
> version, 1-9.
then goes on to put the "calendar"
Stone me.
TT
> 2007
> king of kong
I like this choice. I've met and shaken hands with Billy Mitchell and he
even send me some of his hot sauce for free. So he's not exactly the
supervillain the movie paints him.
For further watching around the subject(classic gaming) I'd recommend
"Chasing Ghosts" from the same year. It's rather different, maybe even
better in many ways.
TT
> calvin wrote:
>> On Dec 14, 7:10�am, TT <n...@email.org> wrote:
>>> calvin wrote:
>>>> PRIMER (2004)
>>> That's rubbish. Being an independent movie, and having SUPPOSEDLY cool
>>> plot doesn't make poor acting, directing and incomprehensible plot good.
>>
>> No, but the acting, directing, and plot were good nevertheless.
>
>
> I listed it because it was an interesting experiment in film making.
That it was.
> The plot was enjoyable.
>
I'd tag it with "goofy".
TT
Not being able to tell a coherent story does not a movie great make.
It's not what the movie doesn't tell you but what it does that makes the
movie great.
If you have to come up with wacky theories afterwards, that usually
tells you that there were plotholes, the storytelling/directing was not
up to par. I thought this was the most glaring example of that.
TT
No comments? Good list, bad? All inclusive?
Anyone else here able to share their imdb ratings?
nick
> TT wrote:
> > Here is my list, wonders of IMDB. Ordered by year:
>
> > Cast Away (2000) 8
> > Chopper (2000) 8
> > Finding Forrester (2000) 8
> > Gladiator (2000) 8
> > Memento (2000) 8
> > The Luzhin Defence (2000) 8
> > Unbreakable (2000) 8
> > Under Suspicion (2000) 10
> > What Lies Beneath (2000) 8
> > Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
>
> > A Beautiful Mind (2001) 8
> > Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001) 8
> > Birthday Girl (2001) 8
> > Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
> > Enemy at the Gates (2001) 8
> > Heist (2001/I) 8
> > I Am Sam (2001) 8
> > Life as a House (2001) 8
> > Monster's Ball (2001) 8
> > Samsara (2001) 8
> > Scenes of the Crime (2001) 8
> > Watchmen (2009) 8
>
> > So it appears that imo 2000's was not a good decade, movie wise...I've
> > only rated 10 films as 10 or 9...while the number should be around 20
> > when looking how I've rated movies before 2000.
>
> > Here's 10's and 9's sorted from the bunch:
>
> > Under Suspicion (2000) 10
> > Brokeback Mountain (2005) 9
> > Cidade de Deus (2002) 9
> > Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
> > Der Untergang (2004) 9
> > Equilibrium (2002) 9
> > The Pianist (2002) 9
> > White Oleander (2002) 9
> > Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
>
> No comments? Good list, bad? All inclusive?
>
> - Show quoted text -
I've hardly made any. I gave Iron Giant a zero once after Harry
Knowles expressed dismay over its mysteriously low IMDb rating. I
thought I'd add to the pile-on. There was a time in Internet history
when Harry Knowles was important enough to annoy.
TT
> On Dec 14, 6:06 pm, TT <n...@email.org> wrote:
>> TT wrote:
>>> Here is my list, wonders of IMDB. Ordered by year:
>>> Cast Away (2000) 8
>>> Chopper (2000) 8
>>> Finding Forrester (2000) 8
>>> Gladiator (2000) 8
>>> Memento (2000) 8
>>> The Luzhin Defence (2000) 8
>>> Unbreakable (2000) 8
>>> Under Suspicion (2000) 10
>>> What Lies Beneath (2000) 8
>>> Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
>>> A Beautiful Mind (2001) 8
>>> Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001) 8
>>> Birthday Girl (2001) 8
>>> Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
>>> Enemy at the Gates (2001) 8
>>> Heist (2001/I) 8
>>> I Am Sam (2001) 8
>>> Life as a House (2001) 8
>>> Monster's Ball (2001) 8
>>> Samsara (2001) 8
>>> Scenes of the Crime (2001) 8
>>> Watchmen (2009) 8
>>> So it appears that imo 2000's was not a good decade, movie wise...I've
>>> only rated 10 films as 10 or 9...while the number should be around 20
>>> when looking how I've rated movies before 2000.
>>> Here's 10's and 9's sorted from the bunch:
>>> Under Suspicion (2000) 10
>>> Brokeback Mountain (2005) 9
>>> Cidade de Deus (2002) 9
>>> Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
>>> Der Untergang (2004) 9
>>> Equilibrium (2002) 9
>>> The Pianist (2002) 9
>>> White Oleander (2002) 9
>>> Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
>> No comments? Good list, bad? All inclusive?
>> Anyone else here able to share their imdb ratings?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I've hardly made any. I gave Iron Giant a zero once after Harry
> Knowles expressed dismay over its mysteriously low IMDb rating. I
> thought I'd add to the pile-on. There was a time in Internet history
> when Harry Knowles was important enough to annoy.
You can't rate a movie a 0 at imdb... ;-P
moviePig
I haven't made the considerable effort I'd need to chase it all down,
but... I could believe that PRIMER might have the tightest plot in the
history of cinema...
nick
> nick wrote:
> > On Dec 14, 6:06 pm, TT <n...@email.org> wrote:
> >> TT wrote:
> >>> Here is my list, wonders of IMDB. Ordered by year:
> >>> Cast Away (2000) 8
> >>> Chopper (2000) 8
> >>> Finding Forrester (2000) 8
> >>> Gladiator (2000) 8
> >>> Memento (2000) 8
> >>> The Luzhin Defence (2000) 8
> >>> Unbreakable (2000) 8
> >>> Under Suspicion (2000) 10
> >>> What Lies Beneath (2000) 8
> >>> Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
> >>> A Beautiful Mind (2001) 8
> >>> Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001) 8
> >>> Birthday Girl (2001) 8
> >>> Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
> >>> Enemy at the Gates (2001) 8
> >>> Heist (2001/I) 8
> >>> I Am Sam (2001) 8
> >>> Life as a House (2001) 8
> >>> Monster's Ball (2001) 8
> >>> Samsara (2001) 8
> >>> Scenes of the Crime (2001) 8
> >>> Watchmen (2009) 8
> >>> So it appears that imo 2000's was not a good decade, movie wise...I've
> >>> only rated 10 films as 10 or 9...while the number should be around 20
> >>> when looking how I've rated movies before 2000.
> >>> Here's 10's and 9's sorted from the bunch:
> >>> Under Suspicion (2000) 10
> >>> Brokeback Mountain (2005) 9
> >>> Cidade de Deus (2002) 9
> >>> Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
> >>> Der Untergang (2004) 9
> >>> Equilibrium (2002) 9
> >>> The Pianist (2002) 9
> >>> White Oleander (2002) 9
> >>> Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
> >> No comments? Good list, bad? All inclusive?
> >> Anyone else here able to share their imdb ratings?- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > I've hardly made any. I gave Iron Giant a zero once after Harry
> > Knowles expressed dismay over its mysteriously low IMDb rating. I
> > thought I'd add to the pile-on. There was a time in Internet history
> > when Harry Knowles was important enough to annoy.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Whatever the lowest number was, then. And I'm sure my one low rating
for Iron Giant didn't have enough of an effect to ruin Harry's night.
Like I said, I don't rate movies on the IMDb and that was ten years
ago. I don't even rate them on Netflix.
sirblob2
absolut vodkas
> Cast Away (2000) 8
> The King of Kong (2007) 8
> Apocalypto (2006) 8
i likesies
> Unbreakable (2000) 8
> Conspiracy (2001) (TV) 9
> Enemy at the Gates (2001) 8
> Heist (2001/I) 8
> About a Boy (2002) 8
> Bend It Like Beckham (2002) 8
> Bowling for Columbine (2002) 8
> Signs (2002) 8
> The Pianist (2002) 9
> Lost in Translation (2003) 8
> Der Untergang (2004) 9
> Brokeback Mountain (2005) 9
mmokays
> Finding Forrester (2000) 8
> Gladiator (2000) 8
> What Lies Beneath (2000) 8
> Wo hu cang long (2000) 9
> Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001) 8
> I Am Sam (2001) 8
> Vanilla Sky (2001) 8
> The Last Samurai (2003) 8
> Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004) 8
> WMD: Weapons of Mass Deception (2004) 8
> Walk the Line (2005) 8
> Watchmen (2009) 8
watchmen only makes it cuz of hallelujah scene
crapfests
> Memento (2000) 8
> The Luzhin Defence (2000) 8
> A Beautiful Mind (2001) 8
> The Others (2001) 8
> The Life of David Gale (2003) 8
> Catch Me If You Can (2002) 8
> Cidade de Deus (2002) 9
> Road to Perdition (2002) 8
> Ying xiong (2002) 8
> Crash (2004/I) 8
> Flight of the Phoenix (2004) 8
> Hotel Rwanda (2004) 8
> The Chronicles of Riddick (2004) 8
> The Terminal (2004) 8
> Cinderella Man (2005) 8
> Memoirs of a Geisha (2005) 8
> Das Leben der Anderen (2006) 8
> El laberinto del fauno (2006) 8
prolly did watch but cant remember arse
> Under Suspicion (2000) 10
> The Last King of Scotland (2006) 8
> Secretary (2002) 8
secretary im extremely sure i watched it but stil cant remember arse
prolly didnt watch but who knows, mebbe i just cant remember arse
> Malèna (2000) 8
> Monster's Ball (2001) 8
> Samsara (2001) 8
> White Oleander (2002) 9
> Equilibrium (2002) 9
didnt watch
> Chopper (2000) 8
> Chasing Ghosts: Beyond the Arcade (2007) 8
> Life as a House (2001) 8
> Birthday Girl (2001) 8
> Scenes of the Crime (2001) 8
> So weit die Füße tragen (2001) 9
> Immortel (ad vitam) (2004) 8
> The Prestige (2006) 8
> X-Men: The Last Stand (2006) 8
> Mogadischu (2008) (TV) 8
> Rööperi (2009) 8
of these so weit, chasing ghosts and life as a house ill see. the rest
was conscious
sirblob2
> sirblob2 wrote:
> > 2007
> > king of kong
>
> I like this choice. I've met and shaken hands with Billy Mitchell and he
> even send me some of his hot sauce for free. So he's not exactly the
> supervillain the movie paints him.
lol
>
> For further watching around the subject(classic gaming) I'd recommend
> "Chasing Ghosts" from the same year. It's rather different, maybe even
> better in many ways.
ill give it a snoop
trotsky
> On Dec 14, 7:10 am, TT <n...@email.org> wrote:
>> calvin wrote:
>>> PRIMER (2004)
>> That's rubbish. Being an independent movie, and having SUPPOSEDLY cool
>> plot doesn't make poor acting, directing and incomprehensible plot good.
>
> any viewer's intellect as far as it can go could easily be a 'fave'.
Agreed--I didn't like the movie that much because it made my hurt, but I
certainly see it's appeal.
trotsky
> On Dec 14, 12:32 am, Bill Anderson <billanderson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> There's a difference between "the third millennium" and "the millennium
>> of the 2000s" and it is illogical to conflate the two. There were big
>> parties all over the world on New Year's Eve 1999 to celebrate the end
>> of the 1900s and the beginning of the 2000s. But the third millennium
>> didn't start until a year later.
>
> No, those parties were to celebrate the new century and
> the new millennium, as far as the people of the world generally
> understood them. They didn't care about the fact that there
> was no year 0 AD. They were celebrating the odometer
> turning over to 2000. (True odometers start at zero, though.)
The false odometers are the worst.
trotsky
Cue the Procol Harum lyrics:
My Prussian-blue electric clock's
alarm bell rings, it will not stop
and I can see no end in sight
and search in vain by candlelight
for some long road that goes nowhere
for some signpost that is not there
And even my befuddled brain
is shining brightly, quite insane
"Shine On Brightly" p.1968