The UK says EP2 is better than Spiderman. So it is. Hurrah!

[ReaperFett]

From a poll off the BBCs film programmes website, from 1-10:


The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
Donnie Darko
Ocean's 11
Minority Report
A Beautiful Mind
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones
Spider-Man
Die Another Day
Mulholland Drive



Im chuffed to see Oceans 11 up there too :)

[Marcus Telcontar]

I'm not true fan of AOTC, but duh. Spiderman is vastly overrated and not that good.

[BUFFJEDI]

Originally posted by Marcus Q'Dunn
I'm not true fan of AOTC, but duh. Spiderman is vastly overrated and not that good. Some of you guy's that live over there near Marcus PLEASE!!!! Beat him up ;)....:grumble How can you NOT like AOTC

[Lilaena De'Ville]

AotC was a good movie. :)

[Jedi Master Carr]

Why do they consider FOTR a 2002 movie??? And Chamber of Secerts 2002 that doesn't make any sense at least to me. I was glad it beat out Spiderman AOTC was way better than Spiderman.

[JonathanLB]

That is idiotic.

I've never seen one poll where Spider-Man led AOTC, anyway. It won at the box office but the polls I've seen had it getting its butt kicked in audience opinions.

It's so stupid to say, "Well it came out HERE in 2002, so therefore it's a 2002 release." No, sorry, that's not the way it works at least here on planet Earth. Here on Earth, if a movie came out in 2001 anywhere, it is a 2001 movie, and if it came out in 2002 everywhere, or anywhere, then it's a 2002 release. It's the first date that a film opened to the public that qualifies its actual year of release.

Frailty is a 2001 film, even though it opened wide in 2002. Same goes with The Other Side of Heaven or any other film like that. Some of this year's biggest awards movies are coming to mainstream theaters in 2003. Does that make them 2003 movies? Of course not. Only a fool would say that! They are 2002 movies and they are up for awards for this year, 2002.

[Shawn]

Well, if it's a British poll, and they didn't get FOTR until 2002, then if they excluded it from the poll, people would be going "Where's FOTR? We just got it this year."

Kind of interesting to see Donnie Darko on the list, since it was a fairly small release. Same goes for Mulholland Dr.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

OMG America isn't the center of the universe! *has crisis of belief and moves to the mountains to be a hermit*

[Diego Van Derveld]

I liked Spiderman, but didn't make a big deal of it. Then again...was never a fan of Spidey comics, cartoons, etc. Hell, my mom knows more about Spidey than I do.

[Oriadin]

FOTR came out in 2001 in the UK. Im sure of it.

[Shawn]

I don't know when it was released in the UK, but the point still stands: If they got it in 2002, then it would be appropriate for them to list it as a 2002 movie. I know that they're not getting TTT in Italy until January, so it'll be a 2003 movie for them.

[JonathanLB]

I don't rate Black Hawk Down in this year's best movies, nor does any other respectable critic, because it is a 2001 release. Yet it only opened wide in January, the 18th if I recall, and it was not open in one single theater in all of Portland or Oregon until 2002, so should it not be a 2002 release then by your method? Yet nobody would classify that film as being from this year.

It doesn't matter when a film opened in your city, it matters when it came out to the world, when it was finished and playing in a theater in its country of origin or any other theater anywhere else. If that date was 2002 and it only played in 2 theaters in New York and Los Angeles for one week, then opened everywhere in 2003, it's STILL a 2002 movie because it qualified for the Academy Awards in 2002 and is therefore a 2002 movie.

Hero received a Foreign Film Golden Globe nomination for 2002, not 2003, even though Miramax releases it here in the states in January or February (they've been screwing around with it and the release date; I hate them).

The point stands there is no way you can argue that a movie's release date is country-specific. It's release year is set when it arrives in *a* theater anywhere and plays for a week. Technically it must play in 2 theaters in LA and 2 in NY if it's a U.S. film wanting to qualify for awards, but theoretically that's not important to establishing a release date, either, as long as it is available for public viewing and not just critical screenings or at a film festival.

[JonathanLB]

And the world may not revolve around the U.S., that is true, but the movie world for the most part DOES revolve around us. Just like the slave labor market revolves around China, for instance, or the supercar market revolves mostly around Europe, or the oil market revolves mostly around the Middle East. :)

[ReaperFett]

Why do they consider FOTR a 2002 movie???
Because the poll is either for what you saw in 2002, or since the 2001 one. We got FOTR at the same time, but MOST would probably see it in 2002. Work it the other way. Noone was able to count TTT in there, as they hadnt seen it. Hence, TTT would never win an award.



And if you remove the comic book feel, Dafoe, Jameson and Bruce Campbell, Spiderman was average. With them, it was fun.

[Darth23]

Originally posted by Lilaena De'Ville
OMG America isn't the center of the universe! *has crisis of belief and moves to the mountains to be a hermit*

It will be once we've wiped everybody else out. :evil