The worst films of the millennium

Mason O’Neil

The Minnesota DailyâÄôs Dec. 3 A&E article âÄúThe best films of the millennium (so far)âÄù couldâÄôve been âÄúThe worst-put-together list of the millennium (so far).âÄù Not only was the language of the entire article completely informal, but your choices had little to no backbone. Though the article is in the opinion section of the Daily, is it necessary to give no factual or significant data to back your argument? The language used in this article is so informal that it is almost more annoying than your top 10 selections. Using low-grade phrases such as âÄúmind blowingly awesomeâÄù and âÄúpretty ballsyâÄù to describe movies that you claim to be the best of a decade is almost disrespectful. I would expect language like that to be heard at the local fraternity party, but to be published in a credited newspaper? If I wanted to hear how âÄútotally awesomeâÄù or how âÄúfreaking sweetâÄù something was, I would just ask my 15-year-old cousin. Not only was the language used that of a 15-year-old, but the arguments for the films had no significant meanings. A list of the top 10 films of a century should include films that were influential to the filmmaking industry or that garnered significant awards. The arguments made for your selections had little to no factual or influential data. Why should I care about the film âÄúThe DepartedâÄù? According to your statement, I should care because you think the ending was good. The film âÄúGangs of New YorkâÄù had 10 Academy Award nominations and many best acting awards, while the âÄúThe DepartedâÄù had five. Your article would have been great if I wanted to read about what a writerâÄôs top 10 favorites were. Next time you write a top 10 list, try to consider other arguments besides your own personal opinion. Or is that too âÄúballsy?âÄù