FRwL

It featured some patterns others didn't:

-scary/date/epic/____ movie
Started off by Scary Movie (2000) i believe.

-WWII/war movies
Saving Private Ryan blew the lid off of it all in 98 and with Band of Brothers 01 you had a zillion styled rapid tracer fire and dirt-splosion shakey cam things.

-Horror
The 90s was the worst era for horror (really the Army of Darkness being the best and it was half a comedy) so ipso facto it could only go up and they ramped it up for the 00s with many a Saw, Final Destination.

-The Frat Pack
Begun who knows when but its peak came with Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004), featured a lot of the actors Ferrell, Stiller, Vaughn, Wilson, Wilson, and any other motherfuckers there was.

-Superhero movies
Begun by X-Men (2000) (no one gives two shits about Blade), and then probably the only genre that is still successfully ongoing. Truly a rarity and as a whole this subgenre never truly existed on a long span like this, maybe something like the European 60s superhero cum spy movies came close but they were morphed version of the Bond knockoffs. However everyone has to check out 1978's Doctor Strange which is LEGIT.

Drexl

LOTR and Harry Potter started a trend of fantasy movies.

Musicals made a comeback, starting with Moulin Rouge. ML didn't do too well at the box office, but it found an audience on video and paved the way for Chicago and others.

FRwL

I was just about to put the fantasy ones after doing the poll. The apex of it was BloodRayne (2004) i think.

bluetoast

Did The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle start a trend with Garfield, Yogi Bear, Alvin and the Chipmunks? Either way, it was bad.

Drexl

If you had to point to one film, it was probably the 1999 Stuart Little, which was a hit at $300 million worldwide. But, I think part of it was just the natural development of CG effects that made it feasible to do more "realistic" characters against live action. Jurassic Park could have been just as responsible for inspiring it, along with Babe.

PopcornTreeCt

Was it a good movie time? Not particularly. Usually it skips a decade... 70's great, 80's shitty, 90's back to great, 2000's meh.

Supermallet

There are plenty of great and shitty films in each decade. I could rattle off a ton of excellent 80's and 00's movies.

Abob Teff

I ... don't ... understand ... why are you quoting a 1980s movie to talk about 2000s movies?

PopcornTreeCt

Of course, I'm talking in generalities and above all, my opinion.

FRwL

It's from a 2000s movie ffs.

Charlie Goose

"I want to play a game." = 2000s

"Shall we play a game?" = 1980s

Mordred

Are you using apex to mean "the genre's peak" or "the time any piece of shit could get made?"

FRwL

Apex

Solid Snake

Apex? You son of a bitch, I'll kill you!!

dhmac

What you call the apex I would call the nadir.

JesseCuster

To me, the '00's were the years when fantasy and super hero films came into their own. This was, of course, coupled with the refinement of CGI, which made it possible. If you look at the best picture nominees from the '90's and compare them to the '00's, there really isn't a comparison. There have been a lot of good films in the '00's, but few great films IMO.

Hokeyboy

Mulholland Dr. came out in 2001. That automagically makes the 2000s a superior decade for film.

So did Pan's Labyrinth, Synecdoche New York, Once, The Darjeeling Ltd, Coraline, A Serious Man, Munich, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Hable Con Ella, There Will Be Blood, Children of Men, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, Persepolis, The Incredibles, Up In The Air, The Lives of Others, Oldboy, Match Point, Zodiac, Let The Right One In, Rescue Dawn, Amores Perros... and that's off the top of my head. What a horrid decade!

JesseCuster

It's finally a matter of perspective. Of of that list I would consider Munich, There Will Be Blood and Zodiac to be great. The others range from good to crappy (Match Point). The '00's were not a horrible decade. My argument was that there were more great films in the '90's than in the '00's. But also, more good films happened in the '00's than in the '90's IMO. The '90's happened to coincide with the emergence of Tarantino, PT Anderson and Darabont. All three made masterworks in that period. It was like a small '70's movement.

Hokeyboy

You think Match Point is crappy? This conversation is beyond over.

FRwL

Yeah it was an exquisite platter of vampiric ancient bungshitdom.

starman9000

The emergence of Darabont?

WeylandYutani

Seriously. Darabont fucking blows.

Drexl

It was a short-lived emergence.

But thinking about those guys and some others that emerged in the 90s, it seems like there were relatively few new good filmmakers in the 00s. The 90s had Anderson (Paul Thomas AND Wes), Quentin Tarantino, David Fincher, Darren Aronofsky, Richard Linklater, Spike Jonze, Sam Mendes, Brad Bird, Christopher Nolan, Alexander Payne, Alfonso Cuaron, Ang Lee, even Nicolas Winding-Refn's first film was in the 90s. Surely I'm still leaving out a bunch here.

It must be partly because some guys haven't made enough films yet, but I'm not seeing too many that debuted in the 00s. Todd Field? Jason Reitman? Tom Hooper? Edgar Wright? Ben Affleck? Who else?

Solid Snake

All I got is:
Joe Wright
Duncan Jones
Neil Blomkamp
Steve McQueen
Matthew Vaughn
Rian Johnson
Michel Gondry
Tommy Lee Jones
George Clooney

Was going to put Nolan in but..he started in 1998 w/ Following, still haven't finished seeing that one. I really didn't know Park Chan-wook started in '92 either. Some guys didn't become famous till the 2000s like Tomas Alfredson,

starman9000

Sure, but what does debuting have to do with being a better decade. Many of those people produced better films in the 00s than their debuts in the 90s.