World of KJ
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/

The 2004 Film of the Year
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2489		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Box [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:30 pm ]
Post subject:  The 2004 Film of the Year
THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST


Image


Why? If I need to tell you why, finding that out ain't your biggest problem. Nothing has gotten the attention this has, and whether you liked it or hated it, it ultimately doesn't matter: this is the film of 2004.



Others worth mentioning


Shrek 2 and Spider-Man 2 for their remarkable box office success. Spidey also for being stunning entertainment.


Fahrenheit 9/11, for more or less the same reason as The Passion. Though, keep in mind: It made less than 1/3rd of the money, and it failed- Bush won.

The other indepedent films, aside from The Passion: Garden State, Napoleon Dynamite, and Sideways, among others.


Worst/Least Necessary


The 'big' epics. Alexander, King Arthur, Troy,The Alamo, and other such disappointments.


The 'teenage queen' films; really, someone should ban Duff and her clones from making any further films...Mean Girls was a huge exception, but it's not enough to save an awful sub-genre. May it die a horrible death.

Your picks? Btw, this takes into consideration everything; box office, news/controversy, quality, etc.
Author:  Joker's Thug #3 [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
Theres still a few movies coming out ( Aviator, Million Dollar Baby ) they could change your mind.
Author:  jb007 [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
How can it be the movie of the year?

For all its controversy and fanatical support by evangelicals, a movie about Jesus Christ was beaten by an Ogre and a man bit by a Spider.

Most Controversial Movie of the year Yes

Movie of the Year NO
Author:  A. G. [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
I wouldn't count F911 or Passion since they were popular more for the subject matter than the actual movies.
Author:  Box [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
jb007 wrote:
How can it be the movie of the year?

For all its controversy and fanatical support by evangelicals, a movie about Jesus Christ was beaten by an Ogre and a man bit by a Spider.

Most Controversial Movie of the year Yes

Movie of the Year NO


Box office is only one aspect. How many articles were written on Shrek 2?


Both Shrek 2 and Sm2 were utterly forgettable. Variety even had an article on how little impact they had on culture in 2004 despite their massive grosses.


Note

I think this should be moved to the MOVIE Section. People are mistaking its intentions.
Author:  Eagle [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
I liked troy :oops:

KJ
Author:  Joker's Thug #3 [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
box_2005 wrote:
jb007 wrote:
How can it be the movie of the year?

For all its controversy and fanatical support by evangelicals, a movie about Jesus Christ was beaten by an Ogre and a man bit by a Spider.

Most Controversial Movie of the year Yes

Movie of the Year NO


Box office is only one aspect. How many articles were written on Shrek 2?


Both Shrek 2 and Sm2 were utterly forgettable. Variety even had an article on how little impact they had on culture in 2004 despite their massive grosses.


Note

I think this should be moved to the MOVIE Section. People are mistaking its intentions.

JB makes no sense, its basically like saying Finding Nemo is a better movie then Godfather because more people saw it, even though most of the people who saw Finding Nemo were in diapers.
Author:  Box [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
Eagle wrote:
I liked troy :oops:

KJ



Oh, nothing wrong with that. But the 'epic' itself this year has been terrible.


If you think about the source material, and the $180m+ budget, could Troy have been better? Is it a disappointment in relation to its potential? I would say, yes. The same goes for the others. I mean, Alexander as a concept is astonishing. It has the right forumal for being one of the greatest films of all time, and Stone had the talent and money (well, $200m...) to pull it off.
Author:  Eagle [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
I actually loved troy.

All movies could be slightly better, there is no such thing as a perfect movie. Bana and Pitt did a wonderful job, and regardless of its huge budget, and domestic dissapointment, it will turn a large profit, and in the end be a sucessful film.

KJ
Author:  Libs [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
I dunno, I'd consider Fahrenheit 9/11 to be the "film of the year."

I'd say it was probably more controversial than The Passion.
Author:  lovemerox [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
Libs wrote:
I dunno, I'd consider Fahrenheit 9/11 to be the "film of the year."

I'd say it was probably more controversial than The Passion.


I disagree. Although I thought Passion was overrated as a movie itself, there was no film that was more controversial. "Jew-bashing" among every other aspect of the movie was scrutinized.
Author:  jb007 [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
Killuminati510 wrote:
box_2005 wrote:
jb007 wrote:
How can it be the movie of the year?

For all its controversy and fanatical support by evangelicals, a movie about Jesus Christ was beaten by an Ogre and a man bit by a Spider.

Most Controversial Movie of the year Yes

Movie of the Year NO


Box office is only one aspect. How many articles were written on Shrek 2?


Both Shrek 2 and Sm2 were utterly forgettable. Variety even had an article on how little impact they had on culture in 2004 despite their massive grosses.


Note

I think this should be moved to the MOVIE Section. People are mistaking its intentions.

JB makes no sense, its basically like saying Finding Nemo is a better movie then Godfather because more people saw it, even though most of the people who saw Finding Nemo were in diapers.


Go check the reviews for POTC. Shrek 2 and SM 2 was better reviewed. More people watched Shrek 2 and SM2. They were better critically and financially. Neither critics nor the people picked POTC as the movie of the year. DVD sales, Shrek 2 beat it easily.

In what other way can Shrek 2 and SM 2 need to show their dominance over POTC?
Author:  Box [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
Eagle wrote:
I actually loved troy.

All movies could be slightly better, there is no such thing as a perfect movie. Bana and Pitt did a wonderful job, and regardless of its huge budget, and domestic dissapointment, it will turn a large profit, and in the end be a sucessful film.

KJ



It already is; the film made a profit from its WW box-office. The DVD sales themselves are more or less pure profit.


Maybe it's that I'm a lit. student and have great respect for Homie? I think Troy was an admirable effort, in a way, but I don't think that excuses the less than stellar quality of the final product.


BUT

that's just my opinion, as is everything else in this thread. This is purely subjective, and I respect everyone else's opinion.
Author:  Algren [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
Best film of 2004 was The Passion of the Christ, Shade and Collateral, ive given them all the same grade - A+.

They are truely remarkable films, never has a year gone by when ive graded THREE :shock: films top marks, this year has been quite shocking!!!!!

I agree with box, whilst i also agree with others, as Collateral, to me, is the best film this year, probably just because its the most recent ive seen out of the 3 mentioned, therefore i remember it more clearly, but Passion affected me in a way that no other film has ever, it was ground breaking stuff.
Author:  Box [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
jb007 wrote:

Go check the reviews for POTC. Shrek 2 and SM 2 was better reviewed. More people watched Shrek 2 and SM2. They were better critically and financially. Neither critics nor the people picked POTC as the movie of the year. DVD sales, Shrek 2 beat it easily.

In what other way can Shrek 2 and SM 2 need to show their dominance over POTC?



We disagree, that's fine. You consider Shrek 2 2004's film, and I consider The Passion to be of greater significance. Perfectly ok, there's no harm in disgareeing.
Author:  lovemerox [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
Algren, correct me if I'm wrong box, but "the movie" dosent mean "best" or "favorite movie" does it?

IF that were the case man on fire would be atop of my list...with others :oops:
Author:  Eagle [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
But yeh,

More to the point an more on topic ..

You can not give the best of 2004 to Shrek 2. The film itself was cliche and garbage iconic jokes, mixed with hollywood and a green ogre. It didn't work for me and I was truely dissapointed that it did as well as it did. Props to dreamworks for release and advertising.

Passion deffinatly deserves consideration. It was so controversial, had a disgutingly profitable release, and was generally well recieved. All in all though I would not give it to Passion because the movie was over hyped, and did not move me in the way intended.

Harry Potter 3 deserves consideration as well. This movie totally redid the harry potter franchise. Taking kids movies and evolving them into movies that teenagers, kids, and adults alike can all enjoy. In the end however, it will likly e HP4 that reaps the benifits that HP3 sowed.

In the end my pick for best of 2004 would not be the movie that i personally thought was the best. For in that regard I think Sideways, Garden State, Closer, The Aviator all could would be better choices. That is not to say that this movie wasn't great, it was.

To be the best of a year, I feel you need to touch all ages. This movie does that. It was entertaining, carried an origional message, looked bloddy good on screen, and was the best movie experience of the year.

The Incredibles.

KJ
Author:  jb007 [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
box_2005 wrote:
We disagree, that's fine. You consider Shrek 2 2004's film, and I consider The Passion to be of greater significance. Perfectly ok, there's no harm in disgareeing.


Amen to that :)
Author:  Box [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
jb007 wrote:
box_2005 wrote:
We disagree, that's fine. You consider Shrek 2 2004's film, and I consider The Passion to be of greater significance. Perfectly ok, there's no harm in disgareeing.


Amen to that :)



I mispelled disagreeing :rofl:




Btw, is there anyone here who does not consider ROTK to be 2003's Film of the Year, all things considered? I honestly don't remember any other as a contender :?
Author:  lovemerox [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
jb007 wrote:
box_2005 wrote:
We disagree, that's fine. You consider Shrek 2 2004's film, and I consider The Passion to be of greater significance. Perfectly ok, there's no harm in disgareeing.


Amen to that :)


Unless of course you tell him Dante is an embarrasment to fiction writing
Author:  Box [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
lovemerox wrote:

Unless of course you tell him Dante is an embarrasment to fiction writing



You die now! You die now and go to hell!...And come back, so that I can send you back there again! :x






















:wink:
Author:  Eagle [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
I thought all the LotR movies were overrated with exception of FOTR.

They were still amazing and the best trilogy ever, better than Star Wars or Indiana Jones.

Personally ... Somethings Gotta Give.

KJ
Author:  lovemerox [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
box_2005 wrote:
lovemerox wrote:

Unless of course you tell him Dante is an embarrasment to fiction writing



You die now! You die now and go to hell!...And come back, so that I can send you back there again! :x






















:wink:




:lol: Calm box calm! I was just joking...he is pretty damn good. Close to Nora Roberts....close. :wink:
Author:  jb007 [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
box_2005 wrote:
jb007 wrote:
box_2005 wrote:
We disagree, that's fine. You consider Shrek 2 2004's film, and I consider The Passion to be of greater significance. Perfectly ok, there's no harm in disgareeing.


Amen to that :)



I mispelled disagreeing :rofl:




Btw, is there anyone here who does not consider ROTK to be 2003's Film of the Year, all things considered? I honestly don't remember any other as a contender :?


:lol:

Yes. For me it was Mystic River due to some fantastic performances.
Author:  lovemerox [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
jb007 wrote:
box_2005 wrote:
jb007 wrote:
box_2005 wrote:
We disagree, that's fine. You consider Shrek 2 2004's film, and I consider The Passion to be of greater significance. Perfectly ok, there's no harm in disgareeing.


Amen to that :)



I mispelled disagreeing :rofl:




Btw, is there anyone here who does not consider ROTK to be 2003's Film of the Year, all things considered? I honestly don't remember any other as a contender :?


:lol:

Yes. For me it was Mystic River due to some fantastic performances.


I concur. Honestly I thought ROTK is one of the most overrated movies of the past 5 years.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/