Obviously beginning from 2001 and forth.
Here is my list :
No Country for Old Men 9+/10
The Artist 9/10
The Return of the King 9/10
The Departed 9-/10
A Beautiful Mind 8,5/10
The King's Speech 7/10
Slumdog Millionaire 6/10
Chicago 5/10
Crash 4,5/10
Haven't seen the other 3, obviously.
Vincent: Oh man, I shot Marvin in the face.
sht, did they even make moviez durin 20th century?
i dont think i watch moviez from dat century
I live, I love, I slay, and I'm content
Don't get you. But it's your problem you don't "watch moviez from dat century". I, on the other hand, see films as old as 1912. ;-) You can get to watching them, sometime.
Also, most people haven't seen older Best Picture Winners, so it is quite easier to only list the recent winners.
Vincent: Oh man, I shot Marvin in the face.
OK, I do love listing, so I'll do it:
LOTR: The Return of the King : The LOTR trilogy encompasses my 3 favourite films of all time, so obviously this one goes first. A masterpiece.
No Country for Old Men: Brilliant, the Coen Bros. at their existential best. Javier Bardem is the movie's (wicked) soul.
The Departed: Gritty and entertaining; slickly directed by Scorsese; the whole cast is memorable.
The Artist: Wow, did this movie surprise me. I enjoyed it thoroughly while watching it, but only the day after I realized how much I had loved it.
Chicago: I do love musicals, and this one razzled-dazzled me.
The King's Speech: A conventional story of self-overcoming with a little help from a friend. I truly appreciated Tom Hooper's inspired direction and the leads' performances.
The Hurt Locker: Yes, it's a war movie, and probably there is a statement about war there, but I saw as a very eloquent portrayal of a man so skilled at what he does, he can't conceive of doing anything else. Skilled also is the way K. Bigelow crafted this movie.
Slumdog Millionaire: As with The King's Speech what I enjoyed the most about this one is the direction, dazzling in D. Boyle's case. And also the intense pacing and the cinematography, vibrant in its palette of colors.
Million Dollar Baby: What to say? Clint Eastwood can do no wrong, and here he does very very well.
A Beautiful Mind: I really liked this movie. The way it's done is a little too conventional I believe (Ron Howard, as good as he can sometimes be, is a classical Hollywood director), but R. Crowe and J. Connelly are impressive, and the story gets to the core.
Crash: The cast is fine, and I liked it. I just didn't think it was great. The theme of racism may be displayed with little subtlety, it practically screams in your face: "I deal with racism!!!" OK, we get it!
*beep* funny...people...they all got their own peculiarities, their own way of living.
[deleted]
Because sometimes 2000 are consider inside of the 21st century. It’s just a technical thing, hardly would affect the order of the awards. Besides the ceremony was made in March of 2001, technically the movie won in 2001, which means in 21st century.
share[deleted]
like i said before for people 2000 is part of the 21st century. But anyway even if we take out Gladiator as a movie, the list won’t be so different, if I don’t have to consider gladiator as a movie, my list would be the same just without that one.
But you just have to be pretty rude right?
Because it got the big award in 2001 (= first year of 21st century). Plain and simple.
The production year of the film doesn't matter, Hurt Locker was a 2008 production and won in 2010.
And please stop being rude.
Vincent: Oh man, I shot Marvin in the face.
1. No Country for Old Men
2. Gladiator
3. The Artist
4. A Beautiful Mind
5. The King's Speech
6. The Hurt Locker
7. The Departed
8. LOTR: TROTK
9. Crash
10. Million Dollar Baby
11. Slumdog Millionaire
12. Chicago
I consider 2000 to be part of the 20th century so I'm going to include that year as well. From best to worst...
No Country for Old Men
Million Dollar Baby
Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
The Hurt Locker
The Departed
The Artist
Gladiator
A Beautiful Mind
The King's Speech
Slumdog Millionaire
Crash
Chicago
LOTR TROTK: 9.6
Gladiator 9.3
The Departed 8.6
A Beautiful Mind 8.6
The Artist 8.5
No Country for Old Men 8.3
The King's Speech (NR, but I'd say 8.1)
-
108/Top 250
Reviews: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur26443691/comments
A previous post was correct. Gladiator should not be included. The first year of the new Millenium was 2001. By the way, I'd rate "2001: A Space Odyssey" (10/10) ahead of all these films, but would rate all these films ahead of "2010" (7/10) and "2012" (6/10). The year 1 BC (or BCE) was followed by the year 1 AD (or ACE). There was no "Year Zero".
share[deleted]
kinemo,
This is MINE topic so I make the rules.
And I, THE ORIGINAL POSTER, say The Gladiator is included because it was awarded "Best Picture" in 2001. That is to say, the 21st century.
Also, in MINE country, that is to say the OP's country (which makes the rules of our little game), most Oscar- nominated films come out in the year of the ceremony. For example, for 2012, 4 of the 9 films (The Descendants, Hugo, Extremely Loud, War Horse) were released in 2012. Also, 2 of the best films of the year, which the majority thinks should be in the Best Picture category, (Tinker Tailor, Girl with Dragon Tattoo) were released here in 2012.
In 2011, 5 out of 10 films were released here in 2011. And so on.
So I have been raised with this attitude (from the film distributors) for all my life and in MINE eyes, that is to say, the OP's eyes, these 4 films are 2012 (and not 2011) films. And generally, the Artist won the 2012 Award, not the 2011.
Furthermore, I (and you) do not know when Hurt Locker was shot, but we know when it was released (that is 4 September 2008, at Venice). So it was a 2008 release.
END OF DISCUSSION
Vincent: Oh man, I shot Marvin in the face.
[deleted]
I speak 4 languages fluently enough, "friendo", so it doesn't really matter if I make such minor mistakes writing 5 o'clock in the morning. Also, it is really entertaining, that because of your lack of arguments, you concentrate your post on grammar and syntax mistakes.
"Do you think the Academy cares about when the films are released in your pathetic country? "
You just got reported for that sentence. Just to let you know.
If I, the OP says "The Gladiator" belongs on this list, then IT BELONGS.
12 award ceremonies have taken place, 12 films have been honored.
END OF CONVERSATION
P.S. Can anyone tell me if I can ban this person from commenting on the topics I post? and if yes, how do I do it?
Vincent: Oh man, I shot Marvin in the face.
[deleted]
OMG! you must be the only person who put LOTR in last place!
share[deleted]
I didn't meaning like that, I know that there's a lot of people who don't like LOTR and people who isn't crazy about it (I’m one of them). But you really have to have guts for say something like that (because there are a lot of rude people who treat you bad when you think different)
share[deleted]
[deleted]
"because there are a lot of rude people who treat you bad when you think different"
For example, Kinemo.
Vincent: Oh man, I shot Marvin in the face.
[deleted]
1. Gladiator (I know it doesn't technically count as 21st century, but it's a movie I saw when I was still just a kid and I loved it from the beginning) 10/10
2. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King 9/10
3. Slumdog Millionaire 8/10
4. Million Dollar Baby 8/10
5. The King's Speech 8/10
6. No Country for Old Men 7/10
7. A Beautiful Mind (it's been a while since I saw it)7/10
8. The Artist 7/10
9. Chicago 6/10
10. The Departed 5/10
11. Crash 4/10
Haven't seen The Hurt Locker
[deleted]
[deleted]
FIRSTLY, learn how to leave your comment under the right comment.
SECONDLY, I didn't ask anyone to comment. Although, anyone with a free mind is pleased to paste his lists/opinions/arguments. If YOU don't like the rules of a game, why don't you make your own topic?
THIRDLY, I am NOT your friend. Neither an ignorant, nor a loser. And I don't see on which basis the Academy agrees with you. And even they do, well guess what, I DON'T agree with them.
END OF TIME
Vincent: Oh man, I shot Marvin in the face.
Just saw this post so the response is a bit late - but are you out of your mind. The topic is 21st century WINNERS. Gladiator won in 2001 which is the 21st century. You list A Beautiful Mind as a 2001 winner - yet it is clearly a winner in 2002. I don't know if you were trying to be a troll or just ignorant or just stubborn but you are wrong (can't state that any clearer). Not my opinion that is fact. Why in the world would you consider Chicago the 2002 Best Picture Winner - when A Beautiful Mind is clearly the 2002 Best Picture Winner and so on? There had the 2012 Academy Awards - so who was the 2012 winner.
Gladiator won in 2001. In 2000 it wasn't a best picture winner. In the entire year of 2000 - it did not win the academy best picture winner - so how can you call it the 2000 winner? Yes - it is a 2000 film and the Academy primarily uses films from the prior year - but it won in 2001 and therefore is a 2001 winner.
For example – in hockey the season spans over 2 years. So when they say who won the Stanley Cup in 2012 - they aren’t referring to when the season started – they are referring to when the actual award was given. Can’t make it any simpler than that.
Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!
Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
The Departed
The Hurt Locker
Gladiator
Million Dollar Baby
Crash (sue me)
A Beautiful Mind
Slumdog Millionaire
No Country for Old Men
Chicago
The Artist
The King's Speech
Enjoyed all these films. Lowest rating is probably a B+.
[deleted]