Kara: sorry to say but I like my Trek and I thought Abrams Star Trek was damn good and exactly what the franchise needed. And knowing Abrams craft and drawing people into a series and then fully going sci-fi on things, I am confident he will tilt the scales a bit more towards a 'Trekker' storyline in the next moview now that hes got a new audience for Trek. Still would have to be one of my top 3 Trek Movies along with Khan and First Contact.

As for my top 10 (in no particular order):

Aavatar (Another $18 Million on Wednesday, up 12 % from the previous week!)

Iron Man

Both Bat Movies

Incredibles (Why no sequel yet pixar!)

Pirates of the Caribbean

LOTR

Star Trek (sorry, best Trek in a while)

300

Casino Royale (love my bond and this was a great return to form)

Finding Neverland (jerks a tear out of me everytime :P)

I must admit there are a few movies that probably deserve to be on here more than some of these, but these are movies I really enjoyed and can freely watch again anytime and still enjoy

Kwsupes, I have stated my hatred for the new ST film on every article about the movie on mania.  Go back and check.

Shadowprime, the ST movie was fun, but it was not clever, smart or respectful of the franchise.  On the contrary, it was stupid, illogical and substituted flashy FX and big explosions for a decent script.  While it's true that some of the previous ST films have been mediocre or just plain bad and some eps of the various TV series have been of questionable quality, that doesn't mean that if Abrams was going to spend millions of dollars to film a movie he couldn't have put a few less of them into big explosions and a few more of them into a good script.  Why did Young Spock put Kirk into a life pod and fire him at the ice moon?  Because Abrams needed to get Kirk together with Old Spock.  Did this action make any sense on Young Spock's part?  No.  It was a rash and stupid and illogical thing for him to do.  He might not have liked Kirk, but there is no way any version of Spock should have endangered his life that way when he could have just thrown him in the brig.

Everybody has complained about GI Joe and Transformers 2, about how the scripts were bad and they were nothing but an excuse to string a bunch of action scenes together and show off impresive FX.  Star Trek had better actors, but other than that it's exactly the same as the other two.  C'mon, there must be a  better film than this to choose as one of the 10 best films of the decade.

Kara S

Invisage, Abrams has been quoted as saying that he never "got" Star Trek and wanted to remake the franchise in the Star Wars image.  Having seen the finished product I agree.  He really didn't understand Trek or what it stood for.  That his next film would be more Trekish is... unlikley.

I'm pretty sure Abrams didn't say that. I have read a few articles including the one in Empire where he said, he didn't certain aspects of Star Trek and that he wanted to merge the great stuff from the show and earlier movies with the action pinache of Star Wars.

I for one agree with him. Star Trek was a good show, but it lacked a lot of forward motion. I'm not sure if it should be in the top 10 but definitely an honorable mention.  I an assuming this list is strictly genre films because there were a boatload of other  movies that could be on this list.

Avatar definitely should be up there.

Rob Worley I salute you and the rest of the Mania staff if they had a say on this list because Children of Men is f%ckin masterful!  Alfonso Cuaron is beastly behind the camera and the long single long take in the film are great with the best being the extremely complicated 6:00 min shot take towards the end of the film that tracks Clive Owen as Bexhill is being attacked by the Fishes. 

Let the Right One In is a great movie(sucks it's being remade Hollywood style) but if I had to go with  a foreign film I would've gone with  El Laberinto del Fauno (Pan's Labyrinth), easily Del Toro's best.

I'm confused as to why people think that the pre Abrams ST lacked action?  There were space battles and fist fights and phaser battles with people crouched behind rocks.  There were wars between interstellar empires and invasions from the other side of the galaxy.   There were supernovas and black holes and nebulas.

How much more action do people want?

There was also thought and technical achievement and morality and trying to be a better person and  trying to find a solution to a problem that didn't involve blowing things up.  Why is that so hard to do?

BTW, Avatar was a good film.  But I hesitate to include a movie which premiered in December of the final year in any list of the best of the decade.  We don't have any perspective, it's too new.  It may well deserve to be included due to it's achievements in motion capture and 3D.  In 5 years or so we'll be able to look back and know.

Kara S

I would have every movie on this list with the exception of The Incredibles and Iron Man.  I can't really diss Let the Right One In because I haven't seen it, or heard of it for that matter.  The Incredibles was alright, but it was nowhere near the monster (no pun intended) that Shrek was, and I feel that two animated films is a bit much, without even factoring in Wall-E, which was actually nominated for a ton of Academy Awards.  And Star Trek was good, but there were much better movies released than that...With those 4 taken out I would add Donnie Darko, Saw, 300 for it's special effects and cinematography and Transformers, which was a box-office machine (again, no pun intended)

Lord of the Rings, The Dark Knight, Children of Men, Avatar, District 9, El Laberinto del Fauno, The Incredibles, PIrates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl, Spider-Man & Iron Man would be my list, not in that order except for the first two. 

Can Memento somehow be considered genre? If it can then it's in the top 10 no questions asked.

I like Wiseguy's list better.  Wise for president!