As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The Best Films of 2009...

24567

Posts

  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Nova_C wrote: »
    I've never read the Watchmen comic, but I thought the movie was amazing until the end. The end was so out of place. I mean, the whole movie was about the characters and their personal struggles and then the ending was suddenly about saving the world. I was like, "Wait, what?"

    Oh man you should absolutely read the comic because the ending is different.

    deadonthestreet on
  • VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    RandomEngy wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    but it is still very basic, simple, takes no chances what so ever... it's one thing to like it and have fun with it, I don't see how it deserve being considered best of the year.

    At the end of a day, how good I consider a film to be is going to be how much it entertains or moves me. Anything else just seems dishonest to me.

    okay, I'm looking for more than that, sorry if I appear dishonest.

    also fighting with like 200 guys doesn't particularly move me, personally. entertains to a point, sure.

    Variable on
    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Star Trek should be on the list, as well. It's a decent movie that would have been MUCH better if the bad guys were scarier.

    Slider on
  • retrovmretrovm Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    i agree with the watchmen liking being due to the book as well. i do feel as if the movie ran a little too long, though.

    i also hated bruno. like, HATED. it was just too crass and didn't really do anything for me.

    retrovm on
    Blackjack wrote: »
    It's like putting an entire bottle of wine inside your five hour energy.
  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    @Nova: I don't think the end was about saving the world...so much as the lengths heroes will go to do so. And in a sense what it means to be a hero.

    Well, yeah, but no where in the film does that really come in until the end. We already know what lengths characters like Rorschach will go to, to do what they think is right, but the heart of the film seemed to be more the heroes struggling with reconciling with each other's idea of what is right.

    The end was more like "OMG, guys, he's so right, let's do what he wants because the world is better off." It made the rest of what they all went through no longer matter.

    Nova_C on
  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Here's a list.

    Slider on
  • DragkoniasDragkonias Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Problem I had with Bruno was the same problem I had with Borat. It was basically social commentary for the sake of being social commentary.

    It didn't seem like it was trying to achieve anything, not to mention the crude humor that was used to mask some of the more biting stuff...I give it a meh.

    Dragkonias on
  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Slider wrote: »
    Star Trek should be on the list, as well. It's a decent movie that would have been MUCH better if the bad guys were scarier.

    Hm. I think Eric Bana's character was a very well done villain, if only because the performance was so very good. My only beef with it, and it's a small one, is:
    In the film, he says "James T. Kirk was a great man. He went on to captain the Enterprise. But that was another life. One which I'm going to deprive you of."

    The trailer had "James T. Kirk was a great man. But that was another life."

    The shortened trailer version is, I think, way more menacing and dramatic.

    Nova_C on
  • VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    @Nova: I don't think the end was about saving the world...so much as the lengths heroes will go to do so. And in a sense what it means to be a hero.

    Well, yeah, but no where in the film does that really come in until the end. We already know what lengths characters like Rorschach will go to, to do what they think is right, but the heart of the film seemed to be more the heroes struggling with reconciling with each other's idea of what is right.

    The end was more like "OMG, guys, he's so right, let's do what he wants because the world is better off." It made the rest of what they all went through no longer matter.

    that's not what happened at the end

    Variable on
    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • SageinaRageSageinaRage Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Nova_C wrote: »
    I've never read the Watchmen comic, but I thought the movie was amazing until the end. The end was so out of place. I mean, the whole movie was about the characters and their personal struggles and then the ending was suddenly about saving the world. I was like, "Wait, what?"

    You have to realize that the movie cut out about half of the content of the comic, mostly the fleshing out of the characters, the world around them, just lots of context basically.


    I really want to see Moon as well, a friend of mine saw it and really talked it up to me. Other than that, I saw Inglorious Basterds, Up, Zombieland, Star Trek, and just today, Sherlock Holmes. And probably some other stuff I don't remember.

    SageinaRage on
    sig.gif
  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Can we put District 9 on the list, too?

    Slider on
  • JoolanderJoolander Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Borat was social commentary, and pretty entertaining

    Bruno was somethiung that was shocking, and while I don't feel I wasted my money, I won't see it again



    I agree that Watchmen was not that close to being top movie this year, but it deserves mention


    I'm trying to watch the "ultimate" edition, but my computer is having trouble with mkv files, so I don't really have an opinion of that 4hr long thing yet

    Joolander on
  • SageinaRageSageinaRage Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Variable wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    @Nova: I don't think the end was about saving the world...so much as the lengths heroes will go to do so. And in a sense what it means to be a hero.

    Well, yeah, but no where in the film does that really come in until the end. We already know what lengths characters like Rorschach will go to, to do what they think is right, but the heart of the film seemed to be more the heroes struggling with reconciling with each other's idea of what is right.

    The end was more like "OMG, guys, he's so right, let's do what he wants because the world is better off." It made the rest of what they all went through no longer matter.

    that's not what happened at the end

    The other thing about Watchmen is that you really need to let the plot, and the decisions people make, sink in. You really have to see it from their perspective to get why they do the things they do, and take your time to think about it, which frankly, the movie doesn't really let you. There's just not time.

    SageinaRage on
    sig.gif
  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Slider wrote: »
    Star Trek should be on the list, as well. It's a decent movie that would have been MUCH better if the bad guys were scarier.

    Hm. I think Eric Bana's character was a very well done villain, if only because the performance was so very good. My only beef with it, and it's a small one, is:
    In the film, he says "James T. Kirk was a great man. He went on to captain the Enterprise. But that was another life. One which I'm going to deprive you of."

    The trailer had "James T. Kirk was a great man. But that was another life."

    The shortened trailer version is, I think, way more menacing and dramatic.

    They also changed the "Space: the final frontier" quote. Instead of, "where no man has gone before" it was changed to "where no one has gone before."

    Slider on
  • JoolanderJoolander Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    i think that was more of a PC thing

    Joolander on
  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Variable wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    @Nova: I don't think the end was about saving the world...so much as the lengths heroes will go to do so. And in a sense what it means to be a hero.

    Well, yeah, but no where in the film does that really come in until the end. We already know what lengths characters like Rorschach will go to, to do what they think is right, but the heart of the film seemed to be more the heroes struggling with reconciling with each other's idea of what is right.

    The end was more like "OMG, guys, he's so right, let's do what he wants because the world is better off." It made the rest of what they all went through no longer matter.

    that's not what happened at the end

    It seemed like it, although I guess I've only watched it the one time.
    So the villainous good guy causes a disaster destroying a city and makes it look like Dr. Manhattan did it. Dr. Manhattan agrees that leaving things as are is the best course of action and kills Rorschach because Rorschach would rather die than perpetuate the lie. Everyone else just obeys Dr. Manhattan, either out of fear or belief in his judgment. Considering the lengths all the characters went through to prevent this disaster, suddenly sitting back and going "Oh, yeah, I guess it's cool." just didn't sit well with me.

    Nova_C on
  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Joolander wrote: »
    i think that was more of a PC thing

    Yep. Bastards...

    Slider on
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Variable wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    @Nova: I don't think the end was about saving the world...so much as the lengths heroes will go to do so. And in a sense what it means to be a hero.

    Well, yeah, but no where in the film does that really come in until the end. We already know what lengths characters like Rorschach will go to, to do what they think is right, but the heart of the film seemed to be more the heroes struggling with reconciling with each other's idea of what is right.

    The end was more like "OMG, guys, he's so right, let's do what he wants because the world is better off." It made the rest of what they all went through no longer matter.

    that's not what happened at the end

    The other thing about Watchmen is that you really need to let the plot, and the decisions people make, sink in. You really have to see it from their perspective to get why they do the things they do, and take your time to think about it, which frankly, the movie doesn't really let you. There's just not time.

    I thought the end of the movie was better then people give it credit for.
    Dr Manhattan being framed for the attack on New York was a good replacement for the Squid. The Movie presented him as completly indifferent to humans in the begining, only changing that after the conversation on Mars. Since nobody but the Heroes knows about his change of heart, the rest of the world thinks he blew up New York as a "demonstration". It fits with whats in the movie.

    The squid would have been nice, but you would need an hour to explain what it was and why it worked. Blame Manhattan for it, is a good way to replace it. No need for two Deus ex Machinas when you already got one.

    Kipling217 on
    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    @Nova: I don't think the end was about saving the world...so much as the lengths heroes will go to do so. And in a sense what it means to be a hero.

    Well, yeah, but no where in the film does that really come in until the end. We already know what lengths characters like Rorschach will go to, to do what they think is right, but the heart of the film seemed to be more the heroes struggling with reconciling with each other's idea of what is right.

    The end was more like "OMG, guys, he's so right, let's do what he wants because the world is better off." It made the rest of what they all went through no longer matter.

    that's not what happened at the end

    It seemed like it, although I guess I've only watched it the one time.
    So the villainous good guy causes a disaster destroying a city and makes it look like Dr. Manhattan did it. Dr. Manhattan agrees that leaving things as are is the best course of action and kills Rorschach because Rorschach would rather die than perpetuate the lie. Everyone else just obeys Dr. Manhattan, either out of fear or belief in his judgment. Considering the lengths all the characters went through to prevent this disaster, suddenly sitting back and going "Oh, yeah, I guess it's cool." just didn't sit well with me.

    well it had
    already happened
    so I don't see what could be done besides that.

    more importantly I thought you mean they had a chance to stop it and instead agreed with the guy. my mistake.

    Variable on
    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    @Nova: I don't think the end was about saving the world...so much as the lengths heroes will go to do so. And in a sense what it means to be a hero.

    Well, yeah, but no where in the film does that really come in until the end. We already know what lengths characters like Rorschach will go to, to do what they think is right, but the heart of the film seemed to be more the heroes struggling with reconciling with each other's idea of what is right.

    The end was more like "OMG, guys, he's so right, let's do what he wants because the world is better off." It made the rest of what they all went through no longer matter.

    that's not what happened at the end

    The other thing about Watchmen is that you really need to let the plot, and the decisions people make, sink in. You really have to see it from their perspective to get why they do the things they do, and take your time to think about it, which frankly, the movie doesn't really let you. There's just not time.

    I thought the end of the movie was better then people give it credit for.
    Dr Manhattan being framed for the attack on New York was a good replacement for the Squid. The Movie presented him as completly indifferent to humans in the begining, only changing that after the conversation on Mars. Since nobody but the Heroes knows about his change of heart, the rest of the world thinks he blew up New York as a "demonstration". It fits with whats in the movie.

    The squid would have been nice, but you would need an hour to explain what it was and why it worked. Blame Manhattan for it, is a good way to replace it. No need for two Deus ex Machinas when you already got one.

    an absolutely logical change.


    just as "where no one has gone before" is an entirely logical change.

    Variable on
    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Variable wrote: »
    well it had
    already happened
    so I don't see what could be done besides that.

    more importantly I thought you mean they had a chance to stop it and instead agreed with the guy. my mistake.

    More like
    I thought it was strange Rorschach was the only one not willing to let it slide.

    Nova_C on
  • JoolanderJoolander Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    well then your issue is with the book

    Joolander on
  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Joolander wrote: »
    well then your issue is with the book

    All right, that's cool.

    After spending a bunch of money on Frank Miller, I'm good with just seeing the film versions anyway.

    Nova_C on
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Joolander wrote: »
    well then your issue is with the book

    All right, that's cool.

    After spending a bunch of money on Frank Miller, I'm good with just seeing the film versions anyway.

    Just buy the book. There is a reason why the book is always in the 1 spot in top 10 countdowns of greatest comic books.

    Kipling217 on
    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2010
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Joolander wrote: »
    well then your issue is with the book

    All right, that's cool.

    After spending a bunch of money on Frank Miller, I'm good with just seeing the film versions anyway.

    Just buy the book. There is a reason why the book is always in the 1 spot in top 10 countdowns of greatest comic books.

    Chicks who love blue dong?

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • ZegunaZeguna Registered User
    edited January 2010
    THE ROAD

    Zeguna on
  • MonkeyfeetMonkeyfeet Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    You guys went three pages without mentioning Up in the Air

    Monkeyfeet on
    sig1.jpg
  • retrovmretrovm Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Monkeyfeet wrote: »
    You guys went three pages without mentioning Up in the Air

    i mentioned up in the air!

    retrovm on
    Blackjack wrote: »
    It's like putting an entire bottle of wine inside your five hour energy.
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I didn't like Up In The Air. Predictable and pointless.

    Inglorious Bastards, while having excellent performances and wonderful individual scenes, had shit for a plot. It was basically who separate stories with the same ending. The elimination of one (the theater or the Bastards) would not have affected the conclusion of the other's story. It was very weak.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I liked having two stories barreling (maybe not the right word considering the length:D) towards each other with the inevitable conclusion of Nazi death and destruction

    Variable on
    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • AtomikaAtomika She hungers. Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    My list for 2009:

    Where the Wild Things Are
    Drag Me To Hell
    Bad Lieutenant: POCNO
    Moon
    District 9
    Fantastic Mr. Fox
    Hurt Locker
    Inglourious Basterds

    Best overall film: A Serious Man


    Though I still have yet to see:
    Precious
    A Single Man
    Crazy Heart (seeing it tomorrow)
    An Education

    Atomika on
  • Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Slider wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Slider wrote: »
    Star Trek should be on the list, as well. It's a decent movie that would have been MUCH better if the bad guys were scarier.

    Hm. I think Eric Bana's character was a very well done villain, if only because the performance was so very good. My only beef with it, and it's a small one, is:
    In the film, he says "James T. Kirk was a great man. He went on to captain the Enterprise. But that was another life. One which I'm going to deprive you of."

    The trailer had "James T. Kirk was a great man. But that was another life."

    The shortened trailer version is, I think, way more menacing and dramatic.

    They also changed the "Space: the final frontier" quote. Instead of, "where no man has gone before" it was changed to "where no one has gone before."

    That was changed back when Next Generation first debuted.

    What kind of Trekker are you?

    Centipede Damascus on
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Variable wrote: »
    I liked having two stories barreling (maybe not the right word considering the length:D) towards each other with the inevitable conclusion of Nazi death and destruction

    I didn't like how they just didn't have anything to do with each other. It felt like something was missing, and it felt very disjointed. The fact that they were wholly independent of each other just kind of left me wondering what the point was at the end. With movies like Pulp Fiction or Love, Actually or Magnolia, stories with different stories have overlapping elements to demonstrate things like the elements that make up the character or background on the situation or whatever. In this movie it didn't really serve any purpose at all.

    Loren Michael on
    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • AtomikaAtomika She hungers. Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Variable wrote: »
    I liked having two stories barreling (maybe not the right word considering the length:D) towards each other with the inevitable conclusion of Nazi death and destruction

    I didn't like how they just didn't have anything to do with each other. It felt like something was missing, and it felt very disjointed. The fact that they were wholly independent of each other just kind of left me wondering what the point was at the end. With movies like Pulp Fiction or Love, Actually or Magnolia, stories with different stories have overlapping elements to demonstrate things like the elements that make up the character or background on the situation or whatever. In this movie it didn't really serve any purpose at all.

    During times of war, parties in conflict don't tend to spend a great deal of time around each other.

    This is true for just about every war movie, ever. It's just that generally we only see the view from the heroes' side of the tale.

    Atomika on
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Moon was excellent, but it had a plot hole that was so large it almost ruined the movie for me.
    there is no reason that creating an army of clones would be in any way more efficient or cost effective than just hiring people. especially if you can afford what are apparently highly trained strike teams who do coverups.

    Evil Multifarious on
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
  • SnorkSnork Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    The only thing I'd have liked Inglourious Basterds to do that it didn't is give a little more characterization to the Basterds. I never really feel like we get to know that many of them, I wish there were more moments like when Donowitz and Omar Doom are in the bathroom towards the end formulating their plan
    okay once i shoot that guy you have three seconds to get to that guy
    i loved that shit

    Snork on
  • RentRent I'm always right Fuckin' deal with itRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    20. Adventureland - A surprisingly heartfelt and compelling movie. The characters and their relationships feel real and believably developed, and while the comedy isn't as constant as Superbad, it definitely highlights the story of maturity quite well. Great pacing too.
    Trailer

    Are you fucking kidding me?

    This movie is too serious to be a good, effective comedy, and too full of lowbrow "humor"- and I write quotes because very little of it is actually funny- to be taken seriously. The movie is overlong, disjointed, and schizophrenic- it never knows what it wants to be and it shows...Very little actually happens, there's very little conflict, and no real sense of character development whatsoever. The main romance is admittedly acted fairly well, and is believable, but it's floating on top of a film that doesn't know what it wants to be and as a result fails at everything. This film is a huge waste of every moviegoer's time, over two hours of it- far too long for a romcom, especially a film as pointless as this. Also, great for having the most obvious and annoying tropes in every romcom ever.

    Goddamn this movie sucks.

    Luckily Jesse Eisenburg starred in one of the best movies this year, so it all balances out.

    Rent on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2010
    Rent wrote: »
    20. Adventureland - A surprisingly heartfelt and compelling movie. The characters and their relationships feel real and believably developed, and while the comedy isn't as constant as Superbad, it definitely highlights the story of maturity quite well. Great pacing too.
    Trailer

    Are you fucking kidding me?

    This movie is too serious to be a good, effective comedy, and too full of lowbrow "humor"- and I write quotes because very little of it is actually funny- to be taken seriously. The movie is overlong, disjointed, and schizophrenic- it never knows what it wants to be and it shows...Very little actually happens, there's very little conflict, and no real sense of character development whatsoever. The main romance is admittedly acted fairly well, and is believable, but it's floating on top of a film that doesn't know what it wants to be and as a result fails at everything. This film is a huge waste of every moviegoer's time, over two hours of it- far too long for a romcom, especially a film as pointless as this. Also, great for having the most obvious and annoying tropes in every romcom ever.

    Goddamn this movie sucks.

    Luckily Jesse Eisenburg starred in one of the best movies this year, so it all balances out.

    So you don't like it because the writer decided not to hamper himself with genre conventions?

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I typically only take time to see movies I feel reasonably confident that I will like, either based on trailers, the concept of the film itself, or from friends' recommendations. Thankfully in 2009 I was not disappointed by anything seen in theaters.

    That said, the only five films I saw in theaters in 2009 were: Watchmen, Star Trek, Sherlock Holmes, Moon, and District 9. Of these, District 9 barely beat out Star Trek in a closely contested race, followed by Watchmen, then Moon, and finally Sherlock. Of course, by my metrics, all five are great movies and on my To Own and Always Recommend lists.

    I still have yet to see a few others, again based on the previous metrics listed:
    A Serious Man, Taken, Up, Zombieland, The Informant!, and Coraline

    Soon, soon...

    SithDrummer on
    It's an easy game to hate
  • RentRent I'm always right Fuckin' deal with itRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Scalfin wrote: »
    So you don't like it because the writer decided not to hamper himself with genre conventions?

    No, because he failed at both spectacularly

    It sucks because I really wanted to like Summerland, a lot...but I could never take the plot seriously enough to care about the characters and every time I was about to WHOOPS here comes a dick joke

    For a point of comparison, consider Juno: had comedy and drama in spades and worked pretty fucking well

    Also, again, practically half the movie has no plot whatsoever. It's just sorta there to be there


    Also also, why was it set in the 80s? It's made quite clear at the start of the movie, then nothing at all is done with it

    Rent on
Sign In or Register to comment.