Natasha Richardson reading.There are movies I haven't seen yet, but of the more than 65 movies I saw at a theater, these are my favorites. No real surprises I'm sure. No special order. 2009 was a pretty good year for films if you look beyond the US IMHO. How about you?
Let the Right One In
Summer Hours
Jerichow
An Education
The Maid
Up in the Air
Gomorrah
District Nine
Lorna's Silence
35 Shots of Rum
The Hurt Locker
Precious
Coraline
21 comments:
I saw half of the films on your list. I'll have to catch the other half on DVD. What, no AVATAR?
Haven't seen it yet. This always happens but if I wait until I get to them all, it's February.
You saw MORE THAN SIXTY-FIVE movies in the theater last year?
...
I know. It is sinful. We go at least once a week.
Wow. 65 films. I've seen maybe 1 in the theater last year. I do eventually get around to seeing most of them on DVD. Patti, you ever think of writing a film column?
I've been doing some reviews for Crimespree Cinema. So finally I have a semi-excuse for seeing so many movies.
Star Trek
Sherlock Holmes
Harry Potter #6
District 9
Up
There are more but those come to mind...
Your number one and five would have been the next two on my list. Still haven't seen Sherlock or Harry.
One of my goals for this year is to see at least 2 Films a month in the Theater-- mostly because I missed out on so many that I wanted to see this year. I have managed to see both Up in the Air and The Fantastic Mr. Fox in the past week. I haven't seen Moon or Hurt Locker yet-- and don't feel that I have enough information to make a best of the year list. Also I watch so much stuff on DVD that it is hard to keep track of what is recent and what is a year of three old.
Welcome Back!
I saw none of these, but then I saw just 2 films in the theater in 2009, UP and STAR TREK both of which I enjoyed.
I truly have to see movies at the theater. I just need the whole experience to enjoy a film. At home, it's just TV. Thanks, Rick.
I used to go to the movies 2-3 times a month. In 2009, I went twice the entire year, partly over disgust at what is coming out and also the prices. I hope to see more in 2010.
These are the ones I really enjoy in '09:
Avatar, Up in the Air, Invictus, Public Enemies, The Proposal, The International, Up, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Coraline, Inglourious Basterds, Watchmen, Star Trek, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Trick 'r Treat, Good Hair, Taken, The Blind Side, The Hangover, The Hurt Locker, The Princess and the Frog, 2012, Zombieland, Drag Me to Hell, Julie & Julia, Let The Right One In, Sherlock Holmes (and Toy Story 1 & 2 re-done for 3D)
Thanks, Patti.
Hey, I have some competition for keeping the industry afloat! Thank you!
I certainly haven't been keeping my end up...CORALINE, which was mostly pleasant (I don't like dancing plants at a visceral level), was the only one on your list I saw in a theater, though I've also seen LET THE RIGHT ONE IN.
Best films this year that were new/newish: MARTYRS, PAPER COVERS ROCK...the only others I saw in theaters include the pleasant, unchallenging WHIP IT and the pretty bad MOON. Among those I intend to catch are ZOMBIELAND, DISTRICT NINE, A SERIOUS MAN, IN THE LOOP, and not a few others...but haven't yet...
Well, as someone who saw no movies at the theater in 09, I didn't see any of these either, even on PPV. The movie I liked best taht I watched on PPV this year was Star Trek.
I'm not going to make a list yet because there are too many essentials I haven't seen yet. So just a couple of comments: I loved "Let the Right One In", but am pretty sure it came out in 2008. I seem to be the only person on earth who thought "District 9" was just a crushing bore, so I'll say no more about it. The movie I haven't seen yet that I'm most looking forward to is Michael Haneke's "The White Ribbon". Seeing "Cache'" caused me to elevate Haneke onto a level with Hitchcock and Hawks. Looking at your list makes me think you'd love him.
Loved Cache and am looking forward to White Ribbons, which opens here soon. The previews look great.
Star Trek was very good, limited only by its need to adhere somewhat to its origins and its willingness to consign women to subordinate roles.
I'll add one thing. It costs $10 to get in the door, and if I want popcorn or a soda that adds at least $5 more. When the wife and I go, that's $30 for a couple of hours of (usually) earsplitting entertainment.
Netflix is $15 a month, unlimited movies, two at a time. No, we do't have a big screen, or even a flat screen HD, just a regular old 32 inch. Still, I have a pause button, a volume control, and the kitchen is steps away. What's not to like? unless I have to see a film on a huge screen, why go to the theater?
For me, it's worth it to get out of the house. We usually go with friends and have dessert at someone's house afterward. We talk about that movie and all the movies we've seen. It's Saturday night at the movies.
We don't buy a lot of snacks and often go for $7 a piece.
At home, it's no different than watching THE CLOSER and often less enjoyable. I get up, check my email, read a book while I watch, talk, thumb through a magazine. It's just TV. I am never engrossed and we often turn it off. Different strokes, I guess.
Very strange to me, Patti, that you have such different levels of engagement with tv and theatrical projection. I suspect you're not alone in this. But it shortchanges the better tv work.
I don't think I'll soon forgive Haneke for FUNNY GAMES, which explicitly states that anyone who likes suspense films, and by extention any sort of suspense drama or narrative art, is a sadist, and then gives them the finger. No matter how good CACHE or his other work might be, the massive arrogance and wrongheadedness of that blatant act of hatred, conveniently in two forms now, leaves me rather unable to take him as anything but a well-financed troll. Rather as I see Verhoeven after SPETTERS.
Post a Comment