2009 in film. A disappointment?

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by ryan69969

I was offended at just how ineffective Button was on the whole...especially after all the hype it got. I liked Milk a lot, but I only wished that it would drawn out Brolin's character a little more, given how important his actions are in the story.

agree on all points

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by ryan69969

I have to side with jhiggy. I found the "theme" of doubt to be completely artificial.

[Show spoiler]Streep's character, throughout the film, was absolutely convinced as to the priest's behavior. The only 'doubt' to be had was on the part of the audience because the movie affirmatively avoided the issue at hand and only showed the sides of the characters it wanted us to see. So, Streep is totally convinced this priest is an abuser, but after he corners himself...then she has doubt? I just didn't get it. Was Streep's character shifting into the audience's place just at the end so she could cry over all the 'doubt' we were supposed to have? Did she mean 'doubt' in a more abstract sense as to life in general?

The movie was very contrived in structure, but enjoyable for what it was...that is, until the nonsense ending dragged it below the bar.

I see it different. She ALWAYS had doubt, but once she started the ball rolling she would not let anything derail her mission. Her ego, her pride were too strong. Thats why (for me) the ending was powerfull. Because I always suspected it, so the reveal was satisfying. Maybe it satisfied my ego because I got to believe that I was right all along.

[Sponge-worthy]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I see it different. She ALWAYS had doubt, but once she started the ball rolling she would not let anything derail her mission. Her ego, her pride were too strong. Thats why (for me) the ending was powerfull. Because I always suspected it, so the reveal was satisfying. Maybe it satisfied my ego because I got to believe that I was right all along.

Then, wouldn't the events of the film merely serve to satisfy Streep's ego

[Show spoiler](as they satisfied yours) because she was, in fact, right all along?

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

That gritty/cheap look is intentional, it adds to the mood/setting of the movie and I think that's a good thing. The movie as a whole is very moving and depressing but worth seeing at least once. I may see it again soon myself, who knows?

Yea I dont know man. If i do watch I will have to catch it on TV which Im sure I will again. Well see! I do like Tomei though. Got Em!!

[flipsyde2000]

I think one thing that is important to point out in this thread, is that it was predicted that 2009 would not be a great year for movies due to the writers strike in '08. Scripts simply were not written with the depth that they had been in previous years, this is due to the writers rushing the scripts or simply not taking the time to do so. We must keep in mind that film was catching up with that strike over this past year, and as such we should look forward to the films coming out in the coming year (2010).

[MarkJ801]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Where the Wild Things Are? Horrible.

!!!

You can't be serious?

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by ryan69969

Then, wouldn't the events of the film merely serve to satisfy Streep's ego

[Show spoiler](as they satisfied yours) because she was, in fact, right all along?

But was she? Do we know? Is it ever certain? I saw it as no. He bailed because of politics IMO, not an admission of guilt.

When I say I always suspected "it", I am referring to her hidden doubts.

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by flipsyde2000

I think one thing that is important to point out in this thread, is that it was predicted that 2009 would not be a great year for movies due to the writers strike in '08. Scripts simply were not written with the depth that they had been in previous years, this is due to the writers rushing the scripts or simply not taking the time to do so. We must keep in mind that film was catching up with that strike over this past year, and as such we should look forward to the films coming out in the coming year (2010).

Nice post and you are completely right.

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

But was she? Do we know? Is it ever certain? I saw it as no. He bailed because of politics IMO, not an admission of guilt.

Agreed.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by ryan69969

I have to side with jhiggy. I found the "theme" of doubt to be completely artificial.

[Show spoiler]Streep's character, throughout the film, was absolutely convinced as to the priest's behavior. The only 'doubt' to be had was on the part of the audience because the movie affirmatively avoided the issue at hand and only showed the sides of the characters it wanted us to see. So, Streep is totally convinced this priest is an abuser, but after he corners himself...then she has doubt? I just didn't get it. Was Streep's character shifting into the audience's place just at the end so she could cry over all the 'doubt' we were supposed to have? Did she mean 'doubt' in a more abstract sense as to life in general?

The movie was very contrived in structure, but enjoyable for what it was...that is, until the nonsense ending dragged it below the bar.

good post. i just think this is a very subjective film, so our opinion tells more about us than the film itself. before i watched this film, i brought various perceptions, etc, to the table that no doubt would affect the outcome of my opinion of it.

with streep, she defintely had lots of doubt

[Show spoiler] regarding the priest, but most importantly regarding herself, as she lied to get him removed. this went back to an original passage about how when we commit wrongdoing, we separate ourselves from god. so perhaps she saw herself as separated from god, and thus had her doubts about god? or perhaps she just had her doubts about the priests guilt, as she lied to convince herself of them? either way, loved the ending

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

But was she? Do we know? Is it ever certain? I saw it as no. He bailed because of politics IMO, not an admission of guilt.

When I say I always suspected "it", I am referring to her hidden doubts.

yes.

all we know, is what we know.

we see her actions, and hear her voice, but how do you ever know what someone thinks/feels with certainty? you don't.

[Sponge-worthy]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

good post. i just think this is a very subjective film, so our opinion tells more about us than the film itself. before i watched this film, i brought various perceptions, etc, to the table that no doubt would affect the outcome of my opinion of it.

with streep, she defintely had lots of doubt

[Show spoiler] regarding the priest, but most importantly regarding herself, as she lied to get him removed. this went back to an original passage about how when we commit wrongdoing, we separate ourselves from god. so perhaps she saw herself as separated from god, and thus had her doubts about god? or perhaps she just had her doubts about the priests guilt, as she lied to convince herself of them? either way, loved the ending

Fair enough. From what I recall of the film,

[Show spoiler]I thought she had simply cornered him on the facts and on his record (admittedly via somewhat nefarious tactics) so that he was forced to all but admit guilt.

And I suppose the ambiguity of it all could be compelling for some, but I actually laughed out loud--having had an "Are you kidding me?" reaction to it.

[toef]

There are still a good number of movies I want to see this year, but so far it does kind of seem like it was a step down from 2008.

Last year's Pixar movie (Wall-E) was better than this year's (Up).

Last year's big blockbuster (The Dark Knight) was better than this year's (Transformers 2).

Last year's underrated/overshadowed action movie (Iron Man) was better than this year's (Star Trek).

Last year's year-end Oscar bait movies (The Wrestler, Doubt, Mlik) seem better than this year's (Nine, Precious, Up in the Air).

Last year's Clint Eastwood/"based on a true story" movie (Changeling) seems better than this year's (Invictus).

[toef]

Originally Posted by flipsyde2000

I think one thing that is important to point out in this thread, is that it was predicted that 2009 would not be a great year for movies due to the writers strike in '08. Scripts simply were not written with the depth that they had been in previous years, this is due to the writers rushing the scripts or simply not taking the time to do so. We must keep in mind that film was catching up with that strike over this past year, and as such we should look forward to the films coming out in the coming year (2010).

I'm not sure I buy that theory, because there is no shortage of quality scripts floating around Hollywood.

Add to that the strike was only 3 months long, and most people probably were secretly writing/re-writing anyway, to have stuff ready for when the strike ended. I can certainly see it having an effect on the fast-paced TV world, but can't imagine it having much of an impact on movies, given how long they're in development, from the first draft onward.

[tiger roach]

It was a good year for me. Maybe not for quantity of movies I liked, but the ones I did like, I really liked.

All have been mentioned already of course:

Inglourious Basterds (one of my favorites in years)
Star Trek
District 9
Zombieland
Potter - Half-Blood Prince

I liked every movie on that list a lot.

I also expect to be adding Moon to the list, when I finally see it (when the blu comes out).

[repete66211]

I hear where you're coming from, but I can't say I agree. Some of the 2008 movies you list (IMO) weren't that great. Slumdog, while sugary when the film's rolling, rings very hollow. I hadn't even got to my car before my pleasure faded to a feeling of having just been ripped off. (Reminded me of my first visit to a strip joint in that respect.) And I don't know if we saw the same movie, but I didn't think In Bruges was funny or entertaining. It made me want to visit Bruges, but that's about it. Ben Button was cute, but I think it will age about as well as Forest Gump.

I saw An Education last night. I'm glad to see it made your list. The ending was a bit pat, but it's refreshing to see intelligent movies aren't dead (yet). I would place it above 7 of the 9 movies I've seen on your 2008 list.

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

I find it amusing and it actually makes me a bit glad since the Academy's decision to expand best picture to 10 films is an utter travesty.

An insider told me they expanded to 10 nominees to save the trade papers. They're really sucking air for revenue and need all the advertising they can get.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

i couldn't imagine a different ending. it perfectly reinforced

[Show spoiler] the underyling theme of doubt with regard to the priests guilt that was the main focus of the entire film. not a popular ending perhaps as its open-ended, but as is life and our self-doubt (ie. in 99.999% of cases, we never find out if our actions were correct or not)

. i'd also take doubt, wrestler and gran torino over Revolutionary Road. for whatever reason, the relationship dynamics (gender-wise) in Revoluationary Road were not realisitic for the 1950's, so i couldn't take the movie very seriously.

Agreed 100% with Doubt. I'll admit that the first time I watched it didn't do much for me, and it wasn't until I started to think and reflect on the film that I truly began to appreciate it. The ending was the icing on the cake for me.

As for Gran Torino, I thought the movie was just average. I think it was ruined a little bit by the dialogue of Clint's character, although that was a aspect that many people liked.

I have yet to Revolutionary Road, but it's been on my list for quite some time now.

[Romulus]

I also must be one of the few that enjoyed The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. It seems like nobody felt a personal connection to story, yet for some reason I found myself extremely attached. I guess it's different strokes for different folks.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by flipsyde2000

I think one thing that is important to point out in this thread, is that it was predicted that 2009 would not be a great year for movies due to the writers strike in '08. Scripts simply were not written with the depth that they had been in previous years, this is due to the writers rushing the scripts or simply not taking the time to do so. We must keep in mind that film was catching up with that strike over this past year, and as such we should look forward to the films coming out in the coming year (2010).

That's actually an interesting point. Never really did think it from that perspective. It does look like 2010 is shaping up to be a good year.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by MarkJ801

!!!

You can't be serious?

Sorry.

Don't get me wrong, I had high hopes for the movie even though it wasn't getting stellar reviews. I just found the kid to ruin it, among other things.