Our top 10's of 2000 - Time to throw down - Page 9

Sorry to hear that Rob.


John, it's fine to watch Dancer, just have The Jerk on standby to throw in right afterward and don't do any drinking or take cough syrup before watching it. Otherwise it might be suicide prevention hotline for you.

Seriously, this will most likely leave you feeling pretty somber and in need of some Nick at Nite, but I thought it was really good and worth the effort.


OK, when I get home tonight I will do a tally of our lists, and then I will do one more on Sunday before the big show, just for everyone's interest.

Remember, this is just for fun...no wagering - Letterman

PS - Ric
Exactly. I mean we are listing our current thoughts on film. The only reason I thought it best to let it go on so long is that lists made by people who only got to see 40% of the main films seems a bit dumb. The edit as you go thing was so that we would start getting our thoughts organized without feeling as though it was some sort of final list before everything had been seen.

This thread is what we thought about 2000 films in a reasonable timeframe to see them. Once the Decembers start streeting I would consider it mostly a reasonable timeframe, except for non-US people who got later releases.

No, In the Mood For Love is a 2001 February release in NY/LA, a bit later for the wide US release. If I understand things correctly then a BEST PICTURE contender must play in NY/LA by the end of the year for 1 week straight. I'm not using the BEST PICTURE rules for some films and then using the BEST FOREIGN PICTURE rules for others, if they are indeed different criteria.

I don't think it's fair to have a BEST PICTURE top 10 list where all the entries don't have to meet the SAME standards.

I can only see 3 reasonable choices for such standards (but I'm willing to hear all concepts). Those are:

1) Academy best picture - NY/LA for 1 week by end of year.

2) Wide release US - 1 week of wide release before end of year

3) Wide release any country - 1 week of wide release in any country


The problem with #2 is that who defines "wide release", see CTHD for that problem, or Blair Witch, etc etc.

The problem with #3 is that many of the members of HTF simply won't be able to see a lot of the "years" films based on the criteria.


Remember, the point of the lists is for discussion/comparision of HTF members to review the "year in film that was" for the majority of members.

I don't think it fits with the spirit of the thread to try and find some film to put at #1 that most members won't get to see at a theater for several months into the next year. Something like Shadow of a Vampire barely slipped in, for example. It met the AA requirements and then hit theaters within a month wide (as wide as it got at least).

In the Mood for Love should be considered a 2001 film by this threads standards, and is more than welcome to top the 2001 lists based on what I've heard.

BTW, as great as IMDb is please keep in mind that they don't even list Pulp Fiction's release at Cannes where it won the top prize. So they don't have every release date for every film, but they do show either the NY/LA date or US wide date.

I just watched Jesus' Son which is very good, although I just didn't take all the symbolism in for sure. I will have to watch it again several times to start making sense of the underlying concepts (which must be the main theme). On the surface it's very scattered and has little direction, which is perfect for the main character, but plays terrible as a straight narritive piece (which I'm certain it's not, it feels clearly abstract/interpretive).

Crudup is super-strong here, possibly better as an actor. The part required much less mainstream behavior, so I felt like it was more challenging to maintain the quirkiness (reminded me of Ruffalo in Count on Me). And speaking of that, I think the director (Maclean) did a terrific job of making each character quirky in a similar way, so there was the consistency of characters throughout the film. Very interesting and some great cameo-style performances from Hopper, Leary, Holly Hunter, and Jack Black (as good as in High Fidelity I think).


Anyway, sorry about the full review, it just blew-up on me. I have no idea where to put this film yet cause it just takes time to sink in and appreciate, but it could make the list I think.

Also, sorry about no totals, I watch JS last night and Heat with the girlfriend - her request, so I wasn't going to say no to that I'm trying to train her, so rewards for good behavior (ie film choice) are critical

Tonight, I promise.

Nick, I'm just counting up our lists and I saw 2 date choices that don't fit the methodology I'm using here.

By NY/LA 1 week release - Jesus' Son is 2000, not 1999 and Chopper is a 2001 release, not 2000. Hopefully you will see this and modify accordingly.

Pascal - option #1 is NOT a wide release, it represents the limited release that films often get in NY/LA simply to meet Academy standards.

I'm sorry to try and be logical about this folks, but I am simply picking a set cut-off date that will benefit the highest percentage of members. If we were all in Paris then we could agree to go by the day it first played Cannes or something.

Now, I admit that if there are some small films who simply will never get the chance to play in the US in either NY/LA then that's a tough spot. I also agree that it appears at least 1 film played in NY in 2000 but IMDb doesn't list it as having done as such. I'm not sure what to do about that.

But for something like In the Mood for Love for a thread like this, it will go to the top of the list in the 2001 version as far as I'm concerned. But one thing is going to REALLY bug me, and that is when ItMfL shows up here AND there. I just ask that you understand the reasoning I'm using.

Jason, the one problem that I've already seen with your method is that then a shitload of members will be complaining about not getting to see many films till 1+ years after your official release date.

The reason we want to be consistent is that I'm sure Al would not like to find out that half of the HTF left Dancer in the Dark off the list just because they decided it was a 2001 film. We want to compare what the rest of the membership thinks about the SAME group of films. Picking some (any) consistent criteria for deciding which films are in which group is the key.

It's just a line in the sand saying "past here you shall not cross," with apologies to Walter.

ok, here comes the updated stats (which is why I get to make the rules ...its a bitch totalling this stuff and I got Onimusha waiting to be played.

I swear, if one of you SOBs adds a film or list before SUN night, I will KILL you. Actually go ahead, but please make a note that you did so here. Makes it easier to quickly go back and adjust things.

OK - Heres the top 25 in points (#1=10 to #10=1) with a few lists of 10 without order being all given 5's. Plus a few 2001,1999 films not considered.

328 - TRAFFIC
306 - Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
269 - Almost Famous
256 - Requiem for a Dream
172 - High Fidelity

150 - Gladiator
142 - You Can Count on Me
120 - Dancer in the Dark
114 - Wonder Boys
113 - Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?

95 - Erin Brockovich
54 - Best in Show
52 - Unbreakable
47 - American Psycho
45 - Croupier

45 - The Virgin Suicides
42 - The Contender
39 - Quills
38 - Way of the Gun
35 - Cast Away

34 - Fantasia 2000
34 - Chicken Run
33 - 13 Days
33 - Nurse Betty
30 - Shadow of the Vampire


Most appearences on top 10 lists

Traffic - 43
CTHD - 41
Almost Famous - 41
High Fidelity - 36
Requiem - 32

Gladiator - 26
Oh Brother - 23
Count on Me - 20
Wonder Boys - 19
Dancer - 17

Erin B - 17
Best in Show - 11
Am. Psycho - 10
Vir. Suicides - 10
Chicken Run - 10


Best Average Rank (4 appearences at least, sorry Yi Yi and Sunshine with only 3 but good rankings)

8.0 - Requiem
7.6 - Traffic
7.6 - Way of the Gun
7.5 - CTHD
7.1 - Count on Me

7.1 - Dancer in the Dark
6.6 - Almost Famous
6.5 - Unbreakable
6.0 - Wonder Boys
5.8 - Gladiator

5.8 - Billy Elliot
5.6 - Erin B
5.6 - Croupier
5.4 - The Cell
5.3 - The Contender


Each stat has it's own merit and meaning, but it's probably just as important to look at how each list breaks down to get a handle on what we think.

Basically I would call that 25 highest scoring list as a "25 Films that HTF recommends You See".

Did anyone notice the extreme lack of Chocolat anywhere? Come on Academy, if you are giving us a "small" film, we've got plenty of more deserving flicks right here.

See I don't mind Gladiator because it's still well received by many of us, if not really a #1. I can take it winning (mostly ) because at least it still makes people's lists. But that's my personal beef I guess.

Enjoy and abuse these stats to make whatever point you feel you need to make.

------------------
"We keep you alive to serve this ship. So row well, and live."

"This is the new cut. Y'all be bad. Woo, woo, woo.

Here's my biggest complaint about the bitching on any year standards I'm trying to impose.

Traffic 2001 then? No, because it was shown to the public in 2000 but not at a festival (Jason's standard)

Fantasia 2000 then becomes a 1999 film.


Yet somehow Fantasia 2000 is on Jason's list. I'm sorry to be a bit upset, but for the ragging I'm hearing I would except complete consistency. Fantasia got several public displays that weren't for festivals starting with its NYC premiere Dec 17, 1999.

And, of course, Pascal has Gohatto on his list which appears to have first been shown to the public in Japan on Dec 18th of 1999 (according to IMDb). It is not listed as a festival date, so I assume it was open to the public at that point. Perhaps it is a known festival that I am unaware of. If so, then I apologize.

And Gary, you are saying you support these standards, yet you have Ghost Dog listed as a 2000 film which isn't even close. It had plenty of public showings throughout 1999 in Europe and it's global release schedule looks an awful lot like In the Mood except a full year before. It is 2000 only by MY standards.


I can see many people's concerns over what standard we use, but before you guys get all put off by what I laid out and the unjust inconsistences of Academy standards, etc, would you please at least present lists that meet the same standards you are screaming bloody murder for us to follow.

I also have nothing else to say on the matter since it has gone on far too long as a thread distraction. I do think it's important that members have some criteria to follow so that we don't have L.A. Confidential put 2nd on a list behind Shakespeare in Love or Saving Private Ryan.


Pascal, I concede that you have a very good point that very small foreign films might get left out if they don't play NY/LA ever and would say that such films should follow the "public showing" standard.

In fact, I can go along with the "public showing" standard as long as no one minds taking Fantasia 2000, Sunshine, & Ghost Dog out of 2000 (and Croupier goes to 1998 then), which would then make In the Mood a 2000 film. But I guess I would defer to everyone else to choose a standard.

Perhaps listing the standard at the top of your list would help. That way, when another member looks at your list he/she has an idea of the films that you considered for the list.

Again, more than enough said by me on a tangent topic that only affects a few films. I just don't think anyone should feel offended by my attempts to bring a standard to the list choices.

BTW, my new additional standard is that you may only list films that I liked. Not so fast Gladiator...

(obviously kidding. And I thought Glad was ok, just not great, despite the misconception that I hated it)