Best Picture of 2008

[bruce_pullen]

Read Above:

My five were:

The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Lakeview Terrace
Rambo
Wanted

Rambo is magnificent. Its brilliance relies on its own craft, not past Rambo films.

See I wish, X-Files 2 would have followed Stallone's playbook. That was my beef.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by spolcyc

Yes.

IWTB will be considered similar to The Phantom Menace. Not in box office numbers of cult following, but as a setup to bigger and better movies.

"Bigger and better movies." Attack of the Clones???

Attack of the Clones? I.... don't know about that one.

Revenge of the Sith, yes. Clones, no.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

Responding is one thing, but deviating the thread from it's intended purpose is another.



Allow them to post their opinions as the op wished.

Fair enough, but I will respond in kind. If my logic, is questioned.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

But you didn't answer my question?

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by bruce_pullen

But you didn't answer my question?

Art, which film can be and sometimes is, has the ability to express in it's audience emotions, and ideas. Many times books or movies look at one possible future and the mistakes/decisions that result in it's grim/optomistic outlook. For example, 1984 delved into the conundrum of privacy and federal oversight. 2001: ASO, as well as many other movies, looked at the potential pitfalls of artificial intelligence. Jurassic Park questioned what would happen when you reintroduce a cloned being from a past millenia into our modern world.

Similarly Wall-E asks what if we continue or accelerate our overconsumption and are unable to solve the many problems that causes. We could be faced with a planet that can no longer sustain us and be forced to find sustenance elsewhere or perish. Whether or not this is accurate or not is irrelevant as it comes down to a morality tale of whether or not we have a responsibility to the planet we inhabit.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

Art, which film can be and sometimes is, has the ability to express in it's audience emotions, and ideas. Many times books or movies look at one possible future and the mistakes/decisions that result in it's grim/optomistic outlook. For example, 1984 delved into the conundrum of privacy and federal oversight. 2001: ASO, as well as many other movies, looked at the potential pitfalls of artificial intelligence. Jurassic Park questioned what would happen when you reintroduce a cloned being from a past millenia into our modern world.

"Art, which film can be and sometimes is, has the ability to express in it's audience emotions, and ideas."

The problem is those ideas, are those of Andrew Stanton, George Orwell, and Stanley Kubrick respectively, not their audiences.

Have you heard of auteur theory? Do you know what it is? Auteur Theory, "holds that a director's films reflect that director's personal creative vision, as if he or she were the primary "Auteur" (the French word for "author"). In law, the Auteur is the creator of a film, as a work of art, and is the original copyright holder.

This is according to Wikipedia.

Hitchcockian, Lynchian, and so on, this is Auteur Theory. So where do audiences fit in, exactly?

Note: Speaking of Micheal Crichton, do you think State of Fear, will be made into a movie?

State of Fear:

"Various assertions appear in the book, for example:

The science that supports or does not support the theory behind global warming is so incomplete that no reasonable conclusions can be drawn on how to solve the "problem" (or if the "problem" even exists).

Elites in various fields use either real or artificial crises to maintain the existing social order, misusing the "science" behind global warming.

As a result of potential conflicts of interest, the scientists conducting research on topics related to global warming may subtly change their findings to bring them in line with their funding sources."

Now this is, the opposite of Wall*E. It's written by Crichton. I share it's "emotions and ideas". Yet, it still isn't made. Am I not thinking hard enough?

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

Similarly Wall-E asks what if we continue or accelerate our overconsumption and are unable to solve the many problems that causes. We could be faced with a planet that can no longer sustain us and be forced to find sustenance elsewhere or perish. Whether or not this is accurate or not is irrelevant as it comes down to a morality tale of whether or not we have a responsibility to the planet we inhabit.

"Wall-E asks what if we continue or accelerate our overconsumption and are unable to solve the many problems that causes."

What is overconsumption? Is it happening? And why should a cartoon preach to me? Is environmentalism morality? Each person should decide, not Pixar, not Al Gore. Is Wall*E "a morality tale"?

Here's morality.

Ten Commandments:

1. Do not have any other gods before me.

2. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

3. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.

4. Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.

5. Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.

6. You shall not kill

7. You shall not commit adultery.

8. You shall not steal.

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

This has been the basis, of American Law and Civilization, since Jamestown.

Where's the Wall*E clause in there? Did you see it? Am I'm blind?

Originally Posted by kpkelley

Whether or not this is accurate or not is irrelevant as it comes down to a morality tale of whether or not we have a responsibility to the planet we inhabit.

Responsibility to the planet, what does that mean? It almost sounds like faith. If DeMille made movies today, he'd be boycotted. Yet, Wall*E's "faith" gets by unscathed, why is that?

Why is it loved, by critics and politicians? Is it the quality or the "faith" that's lauded. That's my problem with Wall*E. It's too loaded, to be a serious movie. Too obvious, to be art; too forward to be cinema, it's propaganda not film. And it's sad, it's being loved like this. Oh well.

[coralfangs]

my top5

wall*e
the fall (the screening at 2006 TFF doesnt count)
ben button
son of rainbow
vicky cristina barcelona

[MAPdead]

Originally Posted by Grimshaw23

This fighthefutureofhd guy is as bias as they come. I mean, look at his screen name. Wow, What a surprise that he thinks The X-files deserves a best picture nod. When it comes down to it, X-files: I Want to Believe is a terrible movie. And It doesn't even feels like the X-files movie.

I completely agree with you I had high hopes when I heard they were making a new X-files movie I didn't get a chance to see it in theaters I got the 2 pack blu ray and I just watched I Want To Believe a few days ago and WOW I was let down big time. The Script sucked , The acting was bad , the chemistry between Mulder and Scully wasn't there they are living together? lol I mean come on its not like they had just anyone directing the movie Chris Carter was making it and its like they had some no one director who had no idea about the X-Files writing/directing the movie. Crash and burn was I Want To Believe unless I am a hugh X-Files fine but I think its time the do the series some justice and stay dead.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by MAPdead

I completely agree with you I had high hopes when I heard they were making a new X-files movie I didn't get a chance to see it in theaters I got the 2 pack blu ray and I just watched I Want To Believe a few days ago and WOW I was let down big time. The Script sucked , The acting was bad , the chemistry between Mulder and Scully wasn't there they are living together? lol I mean come on its not like they had just anyone directing the movie Chris Carter was making it and its like they had some no one director who had no idea about the X-Files writing/directing the movie. Crash and burn was I Want To Believe unless I am a hugh X-Files fine but I think its time the do the series some justice and stay dead.

Agreed. The film is Razzie worthy. I can't believe, the number of people defending it. The word, fan does derive from the word fanatic, after all.

I Want To Believe, is a travesty of time and money. The longer time passes, the more apparent, that is.

[fighthefutureofhd]

well i'm not a fanatic. in fact before i went to see i want to believe i hadn't seen an x-files episode in years. and i occasionally would watch fight the future. but that was rare. in fact i've never seen the entire series when it was on tv. i wasn't a fanatic. yes, my screen name does tend to lend me some bias towards the x-files. but so? there are plenty of people on here with screen names or avatars in reference to batman that think the dark knight is the best movie of the year and oscar worthy. no one says anything to them though.

Originally Posted by bruce_pullen

Read Above:

My five were:

The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Lakeview Terrace
Rambo
Wanted

Rambo is magnificent. Its brilliance relies on its own craft, not past Rambo films.

See I wish, X-Files 2 would have followed Stallone's playbook. That was my beef.

the x-files: i want to believe is the worst movie of the year and the clear razzie winner yet you think lakeview terrace and rambo deserve oscars for best pictures. interesting.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by bruce_pullen

Read Above:

My five were:

The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Lakeview Terrace
Rambo
Wanted

Rambo is magnificent. Its brilliance relies on its own craft, not past Rambo films.

See I wish, X-Files 2 would have followed Stallone's playbook. That was my beef.

Note I said, my five were.... My five were. Did you find my original post. My explanation for each.

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

the x-files: i want to believe is the worst movie of the year and the clear razzie winner yet you think lakeview terrace and rambo deserve oscars for best pictures. interesting.

Guess not.

Originally Posted by bruce_pullen

As for, what I think will be nominated, here’s my list.

2008 Academy Award Nominees: Best Picture (What Will Get It)

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Dark Knight
Frost/Nixon
Milk
Slumdog Millionaire

Reasons:

1. Button, because of guilt, of past Burton neglect.
2. The Dark Knight, because of the accolades and Heath Ledger.
3. Frost/Nixon, because of Ron Howard. And Richard Nixon, Oscar loves “true” stories.
4. And biopics, Milk is Brokeback II.
5. And every year, there’s that cheery flick.

The Winner: The Dark Knight.

It is the one picture, that appeals to the Academy (as a whole).


My choice: 2008 Best Picture Nominees

(Based on what I’ve seen)

The Dark Knight
Iron Man
Lakeview Terrace
Rambo
Wanted

1. It is a masterpiece. Endlessly watchable, poignant and crushing. It is simply, one for the ages. The Dark Knight, is a seminal watershed.

2. Populist popcorn, at it’s most daring. Screwball comedy, structured drama, all unveiling with pin-point accuracy. It is a slam-dunk. (Iron Man)

3. Small moments, moving drama, it’s refreshing to see a minority baddie. Jackson, does commendable work, in top notch pot-boiler. The film speaks to many things. (Lakeview Terrace)

4. The film shines with seismic force. It builds and builds. Some would balk, I know better. Rambo is real. Despite, what critics say. (Rambo)

5. Amazing picture, the film moves. Performances shimmer, Wanted rewards, multiple viewings. Ask yourself, is this amusing? Then ask, did I try, to be amused?

Runners’ Up

The Bank Job
The Changeling

Winner:

The Dark Knight

It is the film of the year, and maybe the decade. What else, can I say. It meshes perfectly with past Oscar winners.

No Country For Old Men, The Departed, desperation is in.

Next time do your research.

[bruce_pullen]

Okay, let me add this.

About Lakeview Terrace.

Originally Posted by Roger Ebert's Review of Lakeview Terrace

The effect is only intensified by the performances, especially by Jackson, who for such a nice man can certainly play vicious. Kerry Washington's character, in my mind, takes the moral high ground, although it's a little muddy. Her beauty and vulnerability are called for. Patrick Wilson plays a well-meaning man who is challenged to his core, and never thought that would happen. I think I know who is good and bad or strong and weak in this film. But here's the brilliance of it: I don't know if they do.

I agree with him. He gave it four stars. The film is a masterful. Well crafted and tense. And it's reputation is not founded on Oscar buzz or Hollywood politics. The film is virtually ignored, and has fallen off the map. I feel the film will become known, in time. And yes, (Based on what I've seen) it would be one of my Oscar picks, for the year.

Originally Posted by Andrew Sarris: Noted Film Critic

Still, Mr. LaBute has fashioned a suspenseful film out of the peculiar vagaries of the casting, which makes us fear the worst at every turn of the plot. When, with things on the verge of total disaster, the final secret is revealed, we realize that we have been masterfully manipulated, ostensibly for our own good. In these too often guileless days, even a little trickery can go a long way.

For a supense film, that's high praise. Especially for the man, who first called Psycho (1960) a classic.

..So, I'm not alone.

[bruce_pullen]

As for Rambo,

Originally Posted by A.O. Scott of the New York Times

Stallone is smart enough -- or maybe dumb enough, though I tend to think not -- to present the mythic dimensions of the character without apology or irony. Welcome back.

I agree. The film is mythic. It's pace is solid. The performances subdued. And the action is operatic. But Burma, as place and tragedy, provides glue for those elements, into something bigger.

Rambo becomes human here. His tragedy pronounced, and his journey completed. This is a magnificent picture, so effective in its themes, that many retaliated.

The press balked. But why?

Originally Posted by Rotten Tomatoes Summary

the movie's uneven pacing and excessive violence (even for the franchise) is more nauseating than entertaining.

The film is 90 minutes. A third is setup, the rest is payoff. Watch it and see.

"More nauseating than entertaining," I believe that's the most telling line. Every audience I witnessed, cheered by the end. It was myth. Whether Homer or King Arthur, the essence was the same.

Most critics responded politically. Like Wall*E, Rambo's rep was affected.

So yes, Rambo and Lakeview Terrace are in my Top 5 (of what I've seen) this year.

Feel free to defend X-Files: I Want To Believe. If you can.

[Crim122]

I really hope Slumdog gets a nom for best director and best original screenplay, I will be surprised if it does not get screenplay.

[thedarkangel1975]

Of the movies I saw. The Dark Knight and Wall_E. I really want to see The Wrestler.

[Ray O. Blu]

Saw the "Benjamin Button" movie on CHRISTmas. It has it's merits. Good story. Pretty amazing aging effects. Cate Blanchett was great. Tried it's best to mimic Forrest Gump all throughout the film. All that said, I'm glad I saw it, but it was one of the longest, most incredibly b...o...r...i...n...g movies ever. It made A River Runs Through It seem like an action flick.
So the Academy will probably love it.

[Astalder]

1) The Dark Knight - I do think this deserves rewards. Hollywood has the habit of putting the same thing up for nomination every year, a political movie (Frost/Nixon), a sexual statement movie (Milk), an abstract (Button), etc. There is nothing creative about this stuff, when everyone deviates together it becomes normality. TDK was creative, it was acted on a level equal to or better than The Departed, it captures what terrorism is really about in a way better than any political thriller yet, and it does all this despite being about a movie about a guy in a cape. This is easily the standout of the year, there hasn't been one like this before. The first genre defining film of the year, TDK accomplishes the same leap No Country for Old Men did, leaping from Batman Begins instead of A History of Violence.

2) Iron Man - I don't expect this to win anything as comic book movies usually don't, TDK's only chance is via Nolan's vision. This was my #2 of the year though, it is probably the best definition of a 'fun' movie ever. If TDK is the gold standard of a serious action-thriller, Iron Man is the gold standard of a serious action movie. The second genre defining film of the year.

Nothing else I was interested in (Bond, Wanted, etc) impressed me to the level it should be on that list anyways. I don't expect Iron Man to make it onto the short list, but I do require that TDK does, and I think it should be the runaway winner for both Best Picture and Best Supporting Actor. It took and succeeded on way more risks than anything else this year.

Animated
1) Wall-E - The obvious winner for best animated picture this year, I agree it's another manipulative message movie aimed at children. The character of Wall-E is irresistibly cute though, that does much to let it get away with things like people losing bone mass even on a ship with artificial gravity so the movie can remind us how fat we all are.

2) Kung-Fu Panda - This movie never comes close to Wall-E on the cute meter but this is a message-free high quality animated feature that would be a shoe-in any other year. Wall-E is innocent enough that I'll let it slide and beat this one this year though, it wasn't as blatant as Happy Feet.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by Astalder

1) The Dark Knight - I do think this deserves rewards. Hollywood has the habit of putting the same thing up for nomination every year, a political movie (Frost/Nixon), a sexual statement movie (Milk), an abstract (Button), etc. There is nothing creative about this stuff, when everyone deviates together it becomes normality. TDK was creative, it was acted on a level equal to or better than The Departed, it captures what terrorism is really about in a way better than any political thriller yet, and it does all this despite being about a movie about a guy in a cape. This is easily the standout of the year, there hasn't been one like this before. The first genre defining film of the year, TDK accomplishes the same leap No Country for Old Men did, leaping from Batman Begins instead of A History of Violence.

2) Iron Man - I don't expect this to win anything as comic book movies usually don't, TDK's only chance is via Nolan's vision. This was my #2 of the year though, it is probably the best definition of a 'fun' movie ever. If TDK is the gold standard of a serious action-thriller, Iron Man is the gold standard of a serious action movie. The second genre defining film of the year.

Nothing else I was interested in (Bond, Wanted, etc) impressed me to the level it should be on that list anyways. I don't expect Iron Man to make it onto the short list, but I do require that TDK does, and I think it should be the runaway winner for both Best Picture and Best Supporting Actor. It took and succeeded on way more risks than anything else this year.

You know what, I agree with you.

The Dark Knight was, this year's highlight. It simply, is amazing.

I consider it on par with Scorsese's film. Time will tell, which is better.

Iron Man, is my second choice. It delivers everything. Comedy, pathos, intrigue, and f/x. It is an immediate classic, and will have influence. I wonder, if Marvel can top this?

I will ask you, did you watch Wanted, once or twice. There is a difference.

The second time, cemented it, in my view. There is a saying, .."Drama is easy, Comedy is hard." ...The same is true with popcorn. Watch it again, note the structure, subtlety, and solid performances. Unfortunately, the f/x distracts, from the rest of it. Hence, seeing it again. So, in my view, Wanted is third on my list. Sorry.

2008: My List

1. The Dark Knight

2. Iron Man

3. Wanted

4. Lakeview Terrace

5. Rambo

6. The Bank Job

7. The Changeling

[coolmilo]

OK, so we are talking 2008 movies in general and not Blu-ray in particular. In that case, I would pick the following:

1. Dark Knight (never changes from my top 1 list )

2. Iron Man

3. Curious Case of Benjamin Button

4. In Bruges

5. Vicky Christina Barcelona

Note: I have not seen Milk, The Wrestler, or Slumdog Millionaire yet.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by Astalder

Animated
1) Wall-E - The obvious winner for best animated picture this year, I agree it's another manipulative message movie aimed at children. The character of Wall-E is irresistibly cute though, that does much to let it get away with things like people losing bone mass even on a ship with artificial gravity so the movie can remind us how fat we all are.

2) Kung-Fu Panda - This movie never comes close to Wall-E on the cute meter but this is a message-free high quality animated feature that would be a shoe-in any other year. Wall-E is innocent enough that I'll let it slide and beat this one this year though, it wasn't as blatant as Happy Feet.

Hmmm, it is the obvious winner. I agree. Pixar will keep it up.

Originally Posted by Astalder

The character of Wall-E is irresistibly cute though, that does much to let it get away with things like people losing bone mass even on a ship with artificial gravity so the movie can remind us how fat we all are.

I know what you mean, it almost, won me over. At times, I was there. However, everytime, the film came close, it would add: the color green or "it takes a village to raise a child" ending, to make me cringe.

I understand, the EVE/Wall*E story is powerful. ..It made me teary. That's why, I'm so divided. But any film, that treats humans, as an after-thought; ..like that, is just asking for trouble.

The fact, it's effective, is why it's dangerous. "A spoon full of sugar, makes the medicine go down." "In the most delightful way."

Originally Posted by Astalder

Wall-E is innocent enough that I'll let it slide and beat this one this year though, it wasn't as blatant as Happy Feet.

The problem is, with Wall*E's success, there will be more.

..Happy Feet won the Oscar. Now, here's Wall*E. When will you take offense?

The Day The Earth Stood Still (2008), Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (2009), and the many more down the pike, when?