80s versus 90s versus 2000s: Battle of the Blockbusters (1 Viewer)

What do you guys think? Which decade had the best "blockbusters". I'm probably missing some so let me know ...

1980s: The Spielberg/Lucas feel-good decade

E.T.
Empire Strikes Back
Indiana Jones Trilogy (Raiders)
Ghostbusters
Back To The Future
The Karate Kid
Aliens
Batman
Leathal Weapon
Rain Man
Crocodile Dundee
Top Gun
Superman II
Rocky III/IV
Terminator
Die Hard
Twins
Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
Big
Beverly Hills Cop
Star Trek II
Star Trek IV

90s: The Birth of CGI, Hail King Cameron and Hanks

Jurassic Park
Terminator 2
Titanic
The Matrix
Forrest Gump
Independence Day
Home Alone
The Lion King
Speed
Toy Story
Pretty Woman
Aladdin
Beauty & The Beast
Braveheart
The Sixth Sense
Men In Black
Armageddon
Star Wars: Episode I
Star Trek: First Contact
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves
Batman Returns
Die Hard 2/3
GoldenEye

2000s: Forget A Sequel, We Want A Franchise. Marvel Comics Explodes.

Gladiator
Lord of the Rings Trilogy
Shrek Trilogy
Pirates of the Caribbean Trilogy
Spider-Man Trilogy
The Dark Knight
Iron Man
X-Men Trilogy
Transformers
Harry Potter Saga
Star Wars Episode II/III
The Incredibles
Finding Nemo
Casino Royale
My Big Fat Greek Wedding
Star Trek
The Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions

You forget The Phantom Menace on the 1990's list.

My thoughts are that it's very close.

The 80s had the best humor and got the writing of the "fun popcorn movie" down pat. The most personality I think. I can't believe things like Ghostbusters and Back to the Future and Raiders of the Lost Ark just jump off the screen not because of the special effects (now quite dated) but through the writing.

The 90s had the most inventive introduction of special effects (Jurassic Park, T2, The Matrix) and perhaps the most "heart" (Forrest Gump, Braveheart, Titanic, etc.). Disney animation is reborn.

The 2000s has the loudest blockbusters, but studios started taking the "kids movies" a little more seriously ... especially the comic book stuff (Spider-Man, The Dark Knight, X-Men 2) a genre that was badly mishandled by the studios in the 90s. CGI animation becomes all the rage.

Since I grew up in the 1980's, I have the fondest memories of those movies so I'd go with that decade. That being said, there's blockbusters that I love and hate from all three decades.

I'd say the 90's were more about Disney than anything else. As others have said, I have films I love from each of the decades. Even some of the less popular films. The 90's had a lot of crap in the summers, but had some real gems as well (like Contact, which doesn't qualify, probably).

The early 90s were huge for Disney, but it kinda had started to fizzle out already the late 90s.

The 90s had some memorable stinkers too ... Batman & Robin and Godzilla, though actually I don't think Godzilla is *that* terrible, it was just very ... average.

The Lost World was OK until the T-Rex got to San Diego, then that took a nose dive too. And then there was .... Jar-Jar, lol.

The 90s probably had the highest highs, but the lowest lows as well.

The worst decade is the present. The 80s has a lot of classics and the early 90s has the best in terms of popcorn fare.

80's all the way.

Lots of 80s blockbusters missed.

1981: On Golden Pond $118M (double that now)
1982: Tootsie $177M(!)
1983 was a HUGE year: Gremlins $154 (along with Ghostbusters, etc. that you got)
(you got some in the middle)
1987's biggest hit was "3 Men and a Baby" $169M
1988: Rain Man & Coming to America
1989: Look Who's Talking $141M, Honey I Shrunk the Kids $130M.. and the dawn of the Disney Animation Era that would nail the 90s, as Little Mermaid kicks it off with $109M

Return of the Jedi

The Abyss (1989)

Batman Begins (2005)

The Bourne Trilogy (2000s)

Hard for me to pick. I still watch movies from all three decades...

This was the summer of '84.

I probably prefer the 80s films of the ones listed. While some of the current crop of blockbusters are very good, too many suffer from the "thrill ride" problem, wherein story and character are sacrificed for spectacle and nonstop action. Leave the roller coasters to the amusement parks; make a *movie*.

hit the nail on the head.

you really don't see that type of writing on the screen anymore. alot of opportunities are wasted because the story takes a backseat to the action or special effects. (most recently, terminator salvation)

i remember when the indiana jones dvd set came out a few years ago. i pulled out one of them to show a friend a short clip. we ended up watching all of them that day. i was thinking to myself that they don't make movies like this anymore.

good writing trumps stunts and effects any day. i will be happy when somone finally gets superb writing and superb sfx in the same movie at the same time.

Hopfully James Cameron will be able to do that again, with Avatar.
But I agree with you. They probably don't even make too much of an effort anymore these days, because they know it sells anyway. Nevertheless, some of the biggest blockbusters were the ones that had superb writing. The Dark Knight, or the Lord of the Rings trilogy, for example. But they do become much rarer.

Forgot Return of the Jedi(1983).