Well our tastes are obviously so different that I'm not going to try and convince you why I laughed out loud at the thought of The Hurt Locker being the best war movie ever made. Point about Jaws was, it doesn't best Jaws as an action movie and it doesn't best Das Boot as a war film. It's not more technically impressive than Apocalypse Now and it's not as beautiful as Thin Red Line. It's certainly an intelligent film, competently made, much better than average. It's just not as good on all counts. For the record, I think there are plenty of great recent films, and that a select few are true masterpieces. There are just a whole lot less starting from the turn of the century on.
My personal favorite remake no one knows isn't the original is Scarface. You can make the same arguments for books to movies too, most people I know aren't aware that Fight Club was a book first and more surprisingly, did anyone else know that I Hope They Server Beer in Hell was based off of a book? I'd also like to throw Mongol in for consideration as a 2007 masterpiece, or at the very least great film, watch it if you haven't seen it, I think it's still streaming on Netflix. And to the guys knocking Crank 2... really? That movie was fucking awesome, go watch it again, NOTHING like the original and superior in almost every regard, mainly for reasons KI already listed. I'd say it has the best ending to a movie I've seen in a LONG time. As to the focus, I'm going to have to agree with KI, besides Inception (which I still haven't seen) there hasn't been a single movie people have told me I need to see and not a single movie I was even remotely excited to see (Jackass is exempt from this debate). Despite all the shit being pumped in in the 2000's there have been at least a couple movies per year I was willing to go to the theaters to see, 2010? Not so much.
It has been a drab year for films. It's like they're not trying anymore, a mimic of the music industry. Inception was the single greatest entertainment. There were no truly hysterical comedies (I haven't seen Cyrus, but I don't know who has) The action films mostly faltered and there were too many forgettable dramedies. Toy Story 3 was a hoot as expected and How to Train Your Dragon was decent (As usual, Pixar sleeps on the top bunk) but it really has been a forgettable year. I would like to see 127 hours. Franco has one of the most sure-fire sure things as a star in this industry.
I had a whole thing going but my computer decided to reboot itself so I am just going to sum up what I was writing. I agree that 2010 will be a forgettable year for movies but honestly the past couple years have been that way for me. I get to the point now when I see a remake preview or even hear about them considering to remake a movie I get pissed. I dont really want to see a remake of Karate Kid, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Bad News Bears, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Poseidon, War of The Worlds, The Girl with the Dragon tattoo. I could go on but I wont. I wish some movies had a set time before you could remake them say 40 or 50 years not whenever they feel like. Movies of 2010 I liked were not surprisingly the same as everyone else Inception, Toy Story 3, The Social Network and The Town. Those are movies that will probably stand the test of time and I have 3 others coming out soon that I hope will do the same The Fighter, 127 hours and True Grit. Even though True Grit is a remake (1969) I think the trailer looks awesome and 127 hours is getting outstanding ratings already but it hasn't hit my theatre yet. Oh and in regards to the whole Crank 2 debate. I think Crank 2 is a 5/10 in my opinion. If I had to pick an over the top comedy as you suggest Crank 2 is I would pick something like Shoot em up, Now that was just plain ridiculous but I loved it. Does anyone think that one of the best movies of the year is a Science Fiction Thriller (Inception)?
I think we kind of slipped of focus here, I see all kinds of mention about Godfather, Apocalypse Now, The Departed, ect... these movies are all time classics, very tough to compare too. ( I won't even discuss why Crank 2 has been mentioned in at least four posts) The point is was 2010 a lousy year for Films. I have to say yes, simply by taking the best movies of this year and comparing them to the films of the past. Let's resist using the best of the best and use the above average films. I loved The Town, I don't even mind the sappy ending or the predictability but I don't think this movie was better than The Hurt Locker, Michael Clayton, Munich, ect... the big gun to come out of this year was without a doubt Inception. I thought this movie was fantastic, unique, well acted an a visual orgasm of special affects. However I wouldn't put it higher than a movie like Mystic River or not even close to The Departed. (Opinion of course) I think you can almost make a point that movies have slid the last two years; case in point take 2004. Almost every best film nominee was a good movie Ray, Million Dollar Baby, The Aviator, Finding Neverland, Sideways, honestly everyone of these movies is not only better but WAY better than The Blind Side? So while last year gave us The Hurt Locker, Inglorious Bastards (good but not great) and the story-less Avatar, I would not say it was one of our better film years. I will say that is was 100% better than this year!! A big issue which we have all mentioned and discussed thoroughly are the Harry Potter, Twilight, comic book films. Studio's have stumbled on a couple gold mines where they do not have to make a good movie to make tons of money and have box office success. Clearly some films have defied the rule, (Dark Knight, all Three Lord of the Rings films) but mostly they are average to below average movies. Knowing this the studio's don't even have to worry about making quality pictures if they can just make Harry Potter 7. Film's generally go in cycles and now we are in a down cycle. I don't think this is an end to excellent movies but I do think we are in a bit of a downturn, I'm sure in the next couple of years we will have a breakout in blockbusters and quality movies.
<a class="postlink" href="http://blog.moviefone.com/2010/12/23/2010-the-year-in-movies/?icid=maing|aim|dl2|sec1_lnk3|33466" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://blog.moviefone.com/2010/12/23/20 ... lnk3|33466</a>
Really, that article just talks about movies from the standpoint of revenue and finances (and not very in-depth or informative at that), not about which ones were actually good or not. And most of their comments about 2010 were every bit as true about 2009...which was a decent, if not good year for films. So while they seem to be superficially agreeing with me, our arguments and subjects are very different. In fact, theirs is too much of an attention-grabbing headline for my taste. (I don't think 2010 is even close to the worst year in film, just a historically bad one. It's still way better than any year between 1890-1929 inclusive, and certain years in the 1930s, among others)
How do you justify saying that Crank 2 is a masterpiece, while silent films are unquestionably inferior to talkies? If you're judging a movie's merits based on what it attempts to achieve and how well it succeeds on that scale, then there are surely quite a few masterpieces of silent film (not that I have ever seen a silent film, but that's not the point). Based on your criteria, you can't judge them on modern standards of cinematography, acting, or directing. It's like comparing Babe Ruth to Barry Bonds.
I have probably written dozens upon dozens of posts about this already. In very short terms, Crank 2 was a comedy masterpiece, a hyper-violent, sexualized parody of Los Angeles. The most purely entertaining film I have ever seen, with a huge influence from films like Mel Gibson's "Payback" or Miike's "Ichi the Killer". As for why silent films aren't as good, I have watched a few dozen of the "classics", and the most I can say for any of them is that they're "okay, enjoyable". Most are awful. I'm not counting how revolutionary or influential the picture is, only the quality based on modern standards. And no, none of them accomplish their objective for a modern audience. I don't care if a 1920s audience was mesmerized by the mere fact that pictures were moving. And none of them even remotely compare to a good talkie film from the 1930s, movies that are still good to this day. So why the fuck are you arguing with me, then? Your point is that some silent films are masterpieces, but you haven't even seen any of them? What a lazy, argumentative idiot. You don't know a thing about the subject being discussed, but goddamn, let's argue about it, anyways!
I have no problem with you saying Crank 2 is a masterpiece. I'm just baffled at how someone can take the time to think from a critical perspective and create an argument which is as subjective and far from the mainstream as yours is, and yet still not be able to see that comparing the quality of two related but fundamentally different things like silent and modern films is an utterly futile exercise. Do you think that 19th century physicists were historically stupid? They didn't know shit about quantum mechanics!
That's an awful comparison. 19th century physicists were only marginally less well-educated than the physicists of today. The work of guys like Carnot, Joule, Kelvin, Boltzmann, Maxwell, etc. on thermodynamics and electricity and magnetism is still masterful, brilliant, and useful today. I've actually read their work, and believe me, it compares well to the physics work of today, even though it's not as advanced mathematically or experimentally. A much better comparison would be to compare modern physics to "philosopher-physicists" in ancient Greek times, like Aristotle, who believed that an object would fall to the ground faster based on the "desire" it had, or that the amount of water that could be stored inside an empty cylinder is the same as the amount of water that could be stored in a cylinder filled with ashes. That's much closer to the total difference in the very nature of the science/entertainment medium we see comparing silent films to talking pictures. If you had gotten off your lazy rear and actually watched a few silent films to make up your own mind on the matter, you would know this. But it's easier to pointlessly argue than spending even 10 minutes to educate yourself by watching something like Edwin Porter's The Great Train Robbery, right? (One of the better silent films I have seen, by the way)
No shit. That was my point; they were fucking good at physics, but if you look at something tangible, like their experimental results, and compare it to modern standards, those guys would look like retarded 4th graders. Because the basis of the comparison is idiotic. I don't need to see even one silent film in it's entirety to be qualified to say that comparing it to a film from 2010 is ridiculous. I have no desire to see any silent films because I'm reasonably certain I would not be entertained by them; at the same time I am nowhere near arrogant enough to label a film a masterpiece purely based on how much I am entertained by it.
You know as much about physics as you do about silent films. (Nothing) No, you fucking moron, the theoretical AND experimental work of 19th century physicists remains outstanding and accurate to the modern day, which is what I wrote (bolded above), and you were too goddamn stupid to comprehend. If you're going to compare the most primitive, pioneering, brand new days of film to today, then do the same for physics, which would mean comparing it to the Greek "physicist-philosophers", a point which you conveniently ignored. So what you're saying is that discussing or even watching a film is a waste of time because it doesn't matter how much anyone likes it....only its historical relevance counts, right? Fine then...so why the fuck are you arguing with me in a forum whose entire purpose is to discuss and compare music, books, and movies? Idiot.
I think you are mistaken- the entire purpose of this forum is to state your opinion as incontrovertible truth, and then to engage in ad hominem attacks on anyone who disagrees with you. But, po-tay-to, po-tah-to.
And if that's the way you feel, why get into an argument at all, especially about something you admit having never seen? Just to be a shit-starting troll? Re-Focus- Might as well get this back on track...with the year essentially over, name your favorite films of 2010.
Sorry dude, your entire argument is invalidated because of this. That's like saying "I only listen to music on the radio now because I know I won't enjoy music made in the 60's". Silent films can be just as entertaining as any other movie, and the fact that you believe the opposite doesn't grant you much of an authority to prescribe worth to any other movie.
Re-Focus 1. Inception. This will be in everyones favorites as it should be, it was the best movie of the year. Story, visuals, sound, even characters weren't terrible (although the weakest point). 2. The Town 3. Social Network 4. (Tie) Shutter Island / Red 5. Expendables EDIT: I have not yet seen True Grit, but hopefully will while it's in theaters.
Is anyone else reminded of the guy that claims to be a huge classical music fan, but can't name anything not by Beethoven but will defend to the death the superiority of the genre over today's music? I think I may have to add that to the smug thread. Re-focus: I haven't seen any movies this year, but I am reasonably certain the only ones I will love are Jackass 3D and Inception.
My top 5 of 2010 1. Inception- Hands down the best movie of the year in my opinion. It's not a movie that leaves you pondering the meaning of life or leaves you walking away rethinking the way you see the world but it's a well paced, well acted sci-fi action thriller. The fact that it left all of us behind the bar arguing with customers about the ending for two hours at a time makes it worthwhile in its own right. 2. Toy Story 3- Pixar magic. Enough said. 3. Restrepo A National Geographic documentary about one platoon in Afghanistan (one of the deadliest locations as well if I remember correctly). It's deep, moving and it makes you question what we're putting our soldiers through over there. This was the first time I honestly second guessed the war. The members of that camera crew collectively have fucking elephant nuts. 4. True Grit John Wayne, you are my god and savior... BUT... This was awesome. It seems like a lot of you haven't seen this movie and I don't want to give anything away, but the little girl alone made this movie. 5. (tie) Tron Legacy and Despicable Me I'm not a nerdy fanboy or gaming addict by any means but I loved Tron. While the dialogue left much to be desired, the visuals and the story kept me going. It's cliche "race to the finish, save you father" but I felt like it was pulled off well. I don't think I took my eyes off the screen once and to me, that says something about the visual appeal if nothing else. Despicable Me was fucking hilarious. The little minions made this movie work. The mix of suburban neighborhood/ cookie selling little girls meets cavernous evil lair and fantasy imagination (stealing the moon, hopping across heat seeking missiles, etc.) cracked me up. It's not as deep as Pixar's work, but damnit it was a fun movie. I also want one of those little yellow minions.