Three categories left, the first one being the small Military/War movie category, comprised of four movies. They are: the US Navy Diver Carl Brashear biography "Men of Honor"; the Mel Gibson Revolutionary War Film "The Patriot"; the contemporary-based Samuel L Jackson film, "Rules of Engagement"; and the fictional WWII submarine drama "U-571". For me to consider it a military movie, a movie should deal with soldiers and military life, not necessarily warfare and combat. Organized militaries, the kind that require a lot of manpower and an extensive infrastructure to properly build, which tends to rule out movies set at or before the Middle Ages. A bunch of knights and infantry do not an army make.

Of the four movies, I rule out "U-571" immediately because of its fictional nature. Not that fictional stories are bad. I just didn't like the American bias of the movie, especially because it was mostly British efforts that got us the Enigma machines. "The Patriot" is also not appropriate for a Best Military Picture. It's too much about guerilla fighting, which although valid, is not my view of military power. So of the two remaining movies, I like "Rules of Engagement" more. It's contemporary and deals with a real-life possibility. It's more accessible to me.

Like the Military category, the Science Fiction category subsumes pictures that may belong more properly to other categories, but because of one aspect they get moved to this category. A good mystery or romance set in space tends to get put into Science Fiction. Just like films such as "The General's Daughter" (mystery) or "The Perfect Furlough" (romantic comedy) get put into Military. It's sort of a "if the movie were not set in that setting (sci fi, mil), would it change significantly in terms of focus and relevance?"

In any case, there were five Science Fiction films in 2000: the breathtaking special effects of "Mission to Mars"; the budget-constrained professional look of "Pitch Black"; the survival thriller "Red Planet"; the Schwarzenegger cloning movie "The 6th Day"; and the supernatural horror in space "Supernova". A good science fiction film just has to be a good movie. There are no special considerations for hard science fiction versus soft or fantasy, although fantasy science fiction would not be in this category. I'd say that the movie with the best story and execution is "Pitch Black", a relatively small budget Australian film.

The final category, and my favorite type of movie, is the Romance/Romantic Comedy category. Nine movies fall under this category: the May-December tragic romance "Autumn in New York"; the Affleck-Paltrow pairing "Bounce"; the UC Berkeley-based "Boys and Girls"; the hilarious three-way romantic comedy "Keeping the Faith"; another college romantic comedy, "Loser", this time with Jason Biggs in the lead role; the funny and sometimes demented "Me, Myself & Irene"; David Duchovny emoting in "Return to Me"; Amanda Peet with a great character role in "The Whole Nine Yards"; and the Brazilian themed "Woman On Top", also set in San Francisco.

I'd easily see half of these movies again. I'll remove "Me, Myself & Irene" because I didn't like the humor; "Woman on Top" because I didn't like the music; "Autumn in New York", "Bounce", and "Return to Me" because they are serious movies and I'm more into romantic comedies (although "Bounce" is quite good). Of the remaining movies, it's clear that "Boys and Girls" is my favorite. Freddie Prinze Jr (he's either loved or hated, I like him), UC Berkeley, the whole Bay Area, what more could you ask for?

And that's it. Next year one of these movies will be Best Movie of 2000. I forgot the mention another reason for waiting a year to name a Best Movie. If I picked it now I'd be more likely to pick a more recent movie since it's still fresh in my mind; so waiting a year helps even that out too. Who knows how I'll feel about these movies a year from now.