100 Best Movies of All Time

[Malone Brown]

Found this (http://www.time.com/time/2005/100movies/the_complete_list.html) interesting. Some interesting picks...very surprised to see City of God there.
Malone

[thatpfunk]

A few interesting picks.

Lists like this always piss me off though. There is no way these can be considred the 100 Best movies. I think influential would be a much better description.

For these to be the "best", there is entirely way too much credit placed on older movies that simply can not stand up to movies made within the last 25 years.

[youtalkfunny]

One of the critics who helped compile the list said in an interview, "We felt we had to have a film that represented the Silent Era, and the new Digital Animation Era needed to be represented..."

NO THEY DON'T!!!

[JTG51]

I'm just happy 2001: A Space Odyssey isn't on there. That's the most overrated movie ever.

[Macdaddy Warsaw]

There are indeed some amazing movies missing from this list, although it's one of those subjective kinds of things I guess.

I realize there's at least 2 Kurosawa films, but I think Seven Samurai is better than Ikiru (haven't seen Yojimbo).

Also, I only looked for Grand Illusion and Rules of the Game, but one of these should have been here (or some Renoir film, but I'm not familiar with his whole catalog of works)

Also, Godard's Breathless...Awesome film, not on the list.

[slickpoppa]

The Fly? WTF?

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
A few interesting picks.

Lists like this always piss me off though. There is no way these can be considred the 100 Best movies. I think influential would be a much better description.

For these to be the "best", there is entirely way too much credit placed on older movies that simply can not stand up to movies made within the last 25 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

....surely you jest??!!

[tbach24]

I've only seen 4 of those. Finding Nemo, LOTR, Star Wars and Schindler's List. I have to say, Monsters Inc. > Finding Nemo and there are probably some other animated movies better.

Seen Talk to Her as well, not that good.

[WillMagic]

Of the listed movies I have seen, only Finding Nemo, Talk To Her, and Blade Runner jump out at me as movies that simply don't belong.

I was glad to see that Kurosawa was mentioned twice...and though I find Ikiru's inclusion (and Seven Samurai's exclusion) surprising, it is worthwhile to note that Ebert thinks Ikiru was Kurosawa's best film. However, it's not even in my top five...Yojimbo, Seven Samurai, Ran, High and Low, and Throne of Blood are all better imo...

One unacceptable exclusion was The Third Man. I have quibbles with other selections...but this one was the most ludicrous.

If I'm taking a Coen Brothers film I'm taking Fargo and not Miller's Crossing.

I think Jean-Pierre Melville got a bit of the shaft here...Bob Le Flambeur and Le Samourai both deserve to be on this list.

Being There and Lone Star should also be on this list, but then again, those two movies seem to always be overlooked.

And finally...two selections I thought were very cool.

City of God is probably the best movie made in the last five years.

And Invasion of the Body Snatchers is just...so fun. Great pick.

Will

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]

I was glad to see that Kurosawa was mentioned twice...and though I find Ikiru's inclusion (and Seven Samurai's exclusion) surprising, it is worthwhile to note that Ebert thinks Ikiru was Kurosawa's best film. However, it's not even in my top five...Yojimbo, Seven Samurai, Ran, High and Low, and Throne of Blood are all better imo...

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

.....agreed.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[CallMeIshmael]

2001
A Clockwork Orange (how do they pick BL over these?)
Annie Hall
Apoc Now

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]


....surely you jest??!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. Read my post, I am quite clear.

If it is your opinion that a Chapman silent movie is "better" than a comedy like Big Lebowski or Dumb and Dumber, okay, that is your opinion. I conceded that his was obviously more influential, and perhaps therefore more important, but I think saying it is a better movie is comprable to calling an old green screened Macintosh a better computer than my Compaq...

[MoreWineII]

[ QUOTE ]
very surprised to see City of God there.
Malone

[/ QUOTE ]

why?

[TimTimSalabim]

When I saw Finding Nemo on there, it was hard to take the rest of the list seriously.

[cockandbull]

Beat me to it...some good choices, but hey FINDING NEMO /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Blarg]

Reading the responses on what movies were excluded and included made me totally uninterested in reading the list.

On a side note, I do think City of God is preposterously overrated.

[WillMagic]

Because most critics won't consider a film for their top whatever lists until it's been out for more than 5 years.

Not that City of God isn't deserving - it most definitely is. It's just rare to see a film critic acknowledge it so soon after its release.

Will

[WillMagic]

[ QUOTE ]
Reading the responses on what movies were excluded and included made me totally uninterested in reading the list.

On a side note, I do think City of God is preposterously overrated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Name a better movie made over the past five years.

I loved Million Dollar Baby. Loved it. But it's not as good as City of God.

Will

[GuyOnTilt]

Of the first 10 films I looked for on that list, I found only 3. Seven Samurai, Rosemary's Baby, Touch of Evil, Rashomon, Underground (debateable; least surprising), Bringing up Baby, and The Third Man (least debatebale; W...T...F) all weren't there. Not that I think those are all top ten; they were just the first ten that I went looking for, along with Chinatown, Citizen Kane, and Godfather pt II. So yeah, the fact that Finding Nemo makes the list and The Third freaking Man doesn't kind of puts my off from caring much about this list.

GoT

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


....surely you jest??!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. Read my post, I am quite clear.

If it is your opinion that a Chapman silent movie is "better" than a comedy like Big Lebowski or Dumb and Dumber, okay, that is your opinion. I conceded that his was obviously more influential, and perhaps therefore more important, but I think saying it is a better movie is comprable to calling an old green screened Macintosh a better computer than my Compaq...

[/ QUOTE ]

....I stand partially corrected.....read your post too quickly and responded to last part only.....

I agree with 1st part....

Still disagree with last part (Mac/Compac)....It almost sounds as if you're judging by technical qualities?

[WillMagic]

I wish I wasn't in France. Otherwise I'd go rent Rosemary's Baby, like, right now.

And I forgot about Rashomon in my list of Kurosawa's films, too. What the hell. I did my high school final project on Kurosawa. There's just no way I should miss stuff like that.

And I totally agree with you that there is no way Touch of Evil should be missing from that list.

"He was some kind of a man. What does it matter what you say about people."

Will

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]

Still disagree with last part (Mac/Compac)....It almost sounds as if you're judging by technical qualities?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly. Many of the films they name (those made pre 50's) were made when film/movies were a new art form. Direction, cinematography, acting, etc have made such huge leaps and bounds since the era that many critics seem to idolize. I don't think it is really fair to compare.

I think a good example is "Road to Perdition." Had this movie been released pre-1980 I think it would be remembered as one of the top 20 greatest films of all time. As it was, it was not even nominated for best picture.

[WillMagic]

Very true.

Star Wars is a better example. When I saw it for the first time, I thought, hey the special effects are cool but nothing to write home about. But then my Dad told me that when he saw it in '77 they were unlike anything his anyone had ever seen before...

Will

[CallMeIshmael]

Citizen Kane's special effects are probably lost on people my age as well.

(though I do think its a very enjoyable/well written movie)

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
Of the listed movies I have seen, only Finding Nemo, Talk To Her, and Blade Runner jump out at me as movies that simply don't belong.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think Blade Runner kicks ass and is very deserving, but overall this new list seemed pretty random.

[WillMagic]

Some of them, but not all of them...I just watched it recently, and the scene where Kane gives his almost-victory speech in front of the campaign poster is just an amazing piece of camerawork, even today.

Will

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
"He was some kind of a man. What does it matter what you say about people."

[/ QUOTE ]

I really wanna go rent this now to have on while I'm cleaning today. I just noticed Nashville didn't make the list either. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

GoT

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Still disagree with last part (Mac/Compac)....It almost sounds as if you're judging by technical qualities?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly. Many of the films they name (those made pre 50's) were made when film/movies were a new art form. Direction, cinematography, acting, etc have made such huge leaps and bounds since the era that many critics seem to idolize. I don't think it is really fair to compare.

I think a good example is "Road to Perdition." Had this movie been released pre-1980 I think it would be remembered as one of the top 20 greatest films of all time. As it was, it was not even nominated for best picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

good, discussable points......

Direction - Don't think so.......

Cinematography - Probably....

Acting - Totally disagree........

I still think that 'the story's the thing'. That being said, methinks more great stories from the glory days of the late '30's,'40's and early '50's than any other era.

Don't misunderstand.....MANY great flicks since then...(some of my favorites, actually)...

Perhaps it's like trying to compare different era's in sports.......

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it's like trying to compare different era's in sports.......

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is similar. Too much has changed to make comparisons fair for either era.

[WillMagic]

GoT, try and rent Le Samourai...if you have a VCR, that is.

I mean, Touch of Evil is great, but so is this movie, and you haven't seen it (I assume)

Will

[Malone Brown]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
very surprised to see City of God there.
Malone

[/ QUOTE ]

why?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's one of my favorite movies, I just didn't expect it to be this highly praised by critics.

[GuyOnTilt]

I have no way to play a VHS. I should probably get one anyway though, so I'll look for it.

GoT

[Malone Brown]

[ QUOTE ]

Not that City of God isn't deserving - it most definitely is. It's just rare to see a film critic acknowledge it so soon after its release.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I meant, not that I didn't think it deserved to be there.
Malone

[Blarg]

Just watched Lost in Translation last night, and it was 20x the movie City of God is.

Besides, I thought the list was supposed to be of all time, not the last five years.

Even for the last five years, I don't rate City of God that highly. I don't think it was all that successful on its own, much less in relation to other movies.

Everyone has an opinion, I guess. You rate it extremely highly, and I think you're fixated on it out of all proportion to its real worth. To each their own.

[pshreck]

Some things that stood out...

Goodfellas... clearly a yes. This was a great movie, and stands out with the first two Godfathers as the greatest crime movies of all time, and deserves to be there.

Miller's Crossing... clearly not top 100. A pretty good movie, maybe very good in some people's eyes, but it doesn't really come close to Goodfellas or Godfather movies. There is a reason we aren't all buying and talking about Miller's crossing 15 years later, but we all do for the other films I mentioned. It is simply not amazing, doesn't have great rewatch value (I have maybe watched it two times in my life). Its a good story and well acted, but who has ever thought this movie was somethign really special... if you are one, then what about it? Other than maybe the famous pleading scene, nothing stands out to me. Anyways, it bothered me that this movie was here.

[WillMagic]

Damn. The thing is I love Lost in Translation and if there is any movie that is close to City of God that would be it. There are days when I would rank Lost in Translation higher. I do love that film.

But anyway...odds are, if a movie is the best film made over a 5-year span, it is most likely one of the best 100 films made over a 100 year span. And, based on the general opinion of this forum, I don't think I'm alone in thinking that City of God is just that good.

Will

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Still disagree with last part (Mac/Compac)....It almost sounds as if you're judging by technical qualities?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly. Many of the films they name (those made pre 50's) were made when film/movies were a new art form. Direction, cinematography, acting, etc have made such huge leaps and bounds since the era that many critics seem to idolize. I don't think it is really fair to compare.

I think a good example is "Road to Perdition." Had this movie been released pre-1980 I think it would be remembered as one of the top 20 greatest films of all time. As it was, it was not even nominated for best picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

good, discussable points......

Direction - Don't think so.......

Cinematography - Probably....

Acting - Totally disagree........

I still think that 'the story's the thing'. That being said, methinks more great stories from the glory days of the late '30's,'40's and early '50's than any other era.

Don't misunderstand.....MANY great flicks since then...(some of my favorites, actually)...

Perhaps it's like trying to compare different era's in sports.......

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Story and character development have both radically changed for the worse in the last half century, and a lot of today's A movies are no better than a lot of B movies of the old days in those terms -- maybe most.

What today's movies do commonly have is frenetic pacing and near total concentration on main characters and the main plotline to the exclusion of verisimilitude and a real feeling of life in a lived-in world. And many are almost unwatchable compilations of special effects.

Old movies were far from all good, but the ideas that either there has been "progress" made in movies or that whatever flick of the last five minutes is proof of it are pretty poor ones.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it's like trying to compare different era's in sports.......

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Present-day athletes are so physically superior through better training regimens and so on that there's no contest. Today's athletes are better.

~D

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it's like trying to compare different era's in sports.......

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Present-day athletes are so physically superior through better training regimens and so on that there's no contest. Today's athletes are better.

~D

[/ QUOTE ]

era's......not athletes.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it's like trying to compare different era's in sports.......

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Present-day athletes are so physically superior through better training regimens and so on that there's no contest. Today's athletes are better.

~D

[/ QUOTE ]

era's......not athletes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, as in which was best/most fun to watch? Got it.

~D

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it's like trying to compare different era's in sports.......

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Present-day athletes are so physically superior through better training regimens and so on that there's no contest. Today's athletes are better.

~D

[/ QUOTE ]

era's......not athletes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, as in which was best/most fun to watch? Got it.

~D

[/ QUOTE ]

BINGO!!...np

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[tworooks]

dumb and dumber #1 and its not close

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
Damn. The thing is I love Lost in Translation and if there is any movie that is close to City of God that would be it. There are days when I would rank Lost in Translation higher. I do love that film.

But anyway...odds are, if a movie is the best film made over a 5-year span, it is most likely one of the best 100 films made over a 100 year span. And, based on the general opinion of this forum, I don't think I'm alone in thinking that City of God is just that good.

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think your logic holds up. It's not particularly safe to assume that one five year stretch of filmmaking is equal to the next. There have been regular periods of exceptionally high creativity and lower creativity in the movies.

And these forums are comprised of a high percentage of people 25 and under with little life experience and little comprehension of movie history; their tastes in movies and ideas about them inevitably show it. That's not a knock; it's just the way the world works. You're not going to find many 25 year olds, perhaps especially in America, who have much familiarity with films of different times, especially across different cultures.

If you're going to use the taste of the general run of OOT posters to back you up on things that require broad knowledge, you're drawing water from the wrong well. Basing an argument on the tastes of the average mob probably isn't a good idea anyway. The average guy eats garbage, watches garbage, and does all kinds of stupid stuff regularly.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Damn. The thing is I love Lost in Translation and if there is any movie that is close to City of God that would be it. There are days when I would rank Lost in Translation higher. I do love that film.

But anyway...odds are, if a movie is the best film made over a 5-year span, it is most likely one of the best 100 films made over a 100 year span. And, based on the general opinion of this forum, I don't think I'm alone in thinking that City of God is just that good.

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think your logic holds up. It's not particularly safe to assume that one five year stretch of filmmaking is equal to the next. There have been regular periods of exceptionally high creativity and lower creativity in the movies.

And these forums are comprised of a high percentage of people 25 and under with little life experience and little comprehension of movie history; their tastes in movies and ideas about them inevitably show it. That's not a knock; it's just the way the world works. You're not going to find many 25 year olds, perhaps especially in America, who have much familiarity with films of different times, especially across different cultures.

If you're going to use the taste of the general run of OOT posters to back you up on things that require broad knowledge, you're drawing water from the wrong well. Basing an argument on the tastes of the average mob probably isn't a good idea anyway. The average guy eats garbage, watches garbage, and does all kinds of stupid stuff regularly.

[/ QUOTE ]

...it must feel good to have someone push allin when you have the mortal nuts...

NH Sir!

/images/graemlins/grin.gif