I'm pretty sure 2009 was the worst year in the history of movies
 

What a year to pick to start doing that ten movies for best picture thing at the Oscars.

The only reason they are picking ten movies now is so that five extra movies can have "Best Picture Nominee" on their DVD case. There is no year that more than five movies should realistically be up for this.

I disagree, DrA

I do not disagree with damdest

Gran Torino
Taken

I am unable to honestly think of more then that.

Both are 2008

There is really but one truly remarkable film of 2009. The Hurt Locker.

Sure I guess I should have said technically 08 for Taken, It was released through out Europe and Australia in 2008, in France it came out Feb 27 2008

Meh fair enough. Gran Torino is still 08 though.

Though quite frankly this speaks volumes for the movie quality of 09 when 2 08 films are seen as the best lol.

I usually go to the theater a lot, but in 2009, I didn't go too often. Only two movies I'd say were the best I saw were "Brothers" and "Paranormal Activity"......and I did not see that one in the theater. And looking back, I'm glad. Audiences can be highly annoying sometimes, and that's one movie I would not want to have to deal with morons. Plus, I think it was much more scary watching it alone in my apartment, all dark, really late at night.

Anyhow, I looked over the movies coming out in 2010, and the Nightmare on Elm Street remake is the only movie I am interested in as of right now. I just hope it is not a let down, and does not suck as much as the Friday the 13th remake......course, it has been a while since I last saw it. So maybe I will change my mind about it one day, but for right now, I am not a fan. I didn't think it was that special when I saw it in the theater, and I was so bored when watching it on blu-ray (which I did not even rent until months after it had been out) that I did not even finish it.

Star Trek

I like Jackie Earl Hayley, but I was worried at first if he could pull it off since no one does it like Englund, but then when I saw Jackie in "Little Children", I now think he may be the best actor to play Freddy. I always liked him in The Bad News Bears movie, and Loosin' It. He went away for a long time, but made quite the comeback in recent years. Good for him. :y:

Well I thought this year was better than last imho the only reason there doing it is so more movies that aren't blockbusters or we simply haven't heard of get recognized.

In past years, there have been so many great movies. More than usual. This year was pretty weak, but really no worse than most of the 90s or the earlier years this decade.

I agree that they added the ten movie nomination system to sell more dvds, but it was also to try and fit in some of those great movies that weren't getting recognized. Mainly, it was influenced by Dark Knight getting snubbed last year and pissing off a lot of people.
Plus there were other movies like The Wrestler, Gran Torino, and more I can't think of that were never even nominated.

Now, this year they have to fill 10 and I have no idea how they're going to do it. Hurt Locker, Avatar, Inglorious Bastards, and Precious will all get nominations.
Aside from that, I'm not even sure. They'll nominate Invictus just because of who made it, but from what I hear it's not very great.
Lovely Bones was a long time hyped and considered a shoe-in for oscar nods, and then it came out and from what I hear it's pretty bad. I know the critics have buried it.

I guess it depends on how they value the nominating process. In the end, only one movie is going to win. Realistically that movie probably would never be a Dark Knight or a Wrestler. Does it really mean anything just to be nominated? If the answer is yes, then they should have kept a five film minimum and allowed, but not required, a max of ten.

Yeah, this year has been absolutely awful.

Fucking Hurt Locker is on everyone's best of list. The most overrated movie I have ever seen in my entire life, bar none. What a piece of fucking shit movie. Makes me sick how everyone acts like they love it so much.

I don't think robert englund would work for the style they are going for. His freddy is a little too comical for the role.

This was a much better year for TV than movies. Pretty f'd up to say that.

THANKYOU. fucking hell. i thought it was me or something. i saw it, and it was fine. like a 7/10 i guess. can't believe it's up for all this stuff though.

I haven't seen it yet. I'm not really in a rush tbh

Either way, even if I was wrong just goes to show 2009 had nothing in movies.

Zombieland. Although it's not Oscar material.

You're crazy. Hurt Locker is fucking awesome. Great acting, great cinematography, great story, exciting scenes, good drama. Fucking BOMBS going off in slow motion. Come on. Hurt Locker was the shit.

What was the story? There was no story. It was all just random bullshit scenes meant to be "suspenseful" but was not even suspenseful at all. You knew what was going to happen and also didn't give a shit about any of the characters at all. So unlikeable, every single character. No discernible plot and was not a good "character study" at all either. Just showed some dickhead you knew nothing about going around being all crazy and getting a "rush" out of disarming bombs. Wanted to walk out like 8 times.

The fact that you guys are even discussing Taken shows how awful this year has been.

There have been some decent films here and there but very few seem "Oscar Worthy". By that I mean the usual Oscar winning fare, non-blockbuster, serious, indy-style fims.

I agree with the fact that they shouldn't have expanded the category, makes getting nominated far less prestigeous.