The Third Man wrote:Anybody who wants a good, snobby top movies list needs this. They use an algorithm that weights rankings from respected critical lists/journals/etc.
I enjoy lists simply because they're fun to argue over and people get really upset over them... but that's actually a great list of movies. I mean, you could argue over the rankings, or the meaninglessness of actually ranking them, but at far a "hey, check out these 25 or 50 or 300 movies" it's hard to go wrong with a list like that. Great mixture of genres, eras, countries. I think it beats the piss out of any list AFI could come up with.
Yeah, it is a good list.
Having said that, Barry Lyndon at 92 seems like a good argument to not listen to critics.
I see The Conformist is on there at 65. I forgot to mention I just saw it and was really disappointed. Part of the problem was the sound mix - the actual Italian didn't even seem to match the lips of the actors. Aside from that, I just found it rather disjointed and dull. I might have to give it another go someday.
The Third Man wrote:Anybody who wants a good, snobby top movies list needs this. They use an algorithm that weights rankings from respected critical lists/journals/etc.
good list to work from. A lot to check out. Of what I am familiar, one that is surprising to make the top 25 is "Touch of Evil". Its a good movie - but top 25?
I'm going to queue this one up
The Night of the Hunter
CHARLES LAUGHTON (43)
1955 | 93m | BW | USA | Crime Thriller, Psychological Thriller
"Agee's screenplay—from Davis Grubb's relatively graphic, forgotten novel—was a fearless evocation of revival-tent axiomism that shouldn't have gotten arrested in Eisenhower-era Hollywood. But Laughton understood Agee's proximity to Grimm vaudeville, and fashioned the most intensely expressionistic movie of its day, outside of Welles... Few "Golden Age" movies are as visually fecund, and few have been so ruthlessly plundered." - Michael Atkinson, The Village Voice, 2001
over the past few years i've used a lot of lists to see some amazing movies..
i did:
afi's top 100 (both lists)
imdb's top 500 - i missed a few because they're unavailable
janus film's top 50 - my favorite by far
a few top 100 foreign film lists
time's top 100 - not done with this one
every oscar best picture winner - almost done here.. i refuse to watch "Chicago"
and now i'm trying to do all of the Criterion Collection films.. i think
i'm maybe close to 300 out of the ever growing 450 or so..
The Third Man wrote:Anybody who wants a good, snobby top movies list needs this. They use an algorithm that weights rankings from respected critical lists/journals/etc.
good list to work from. A lot to check out. Of what I am familiar, one that is surprising to make the top 25 is "Touch of Evil". Its a good movie - but top 25?
I'm going to queue this one up
The Night of the Hunter
CHARLES LAUGHTON (43)
1955 | 93m | BW | USA | Crime Thriller, Psychological Thriller
"Agee's screenplay—from Davis Grubb's relatively graphic, forgotten novel—was a fearless evocation of revival-tent axiomism that shouldn't have gotten arrested in Eisenhower-era Hollywood. But Laughton understood Agee's proximity to Grimm vaudeville, and fashioned the most intensely expressionistic movie of its day, outside of Welles... Few "Golden Age" movies are as visually fecund, and few have been so ruthlessly plundered." - Michael Atkinson, The Village Voice, 2001
oh yeah.. Night of the Hunter is one of the best..
ghostrunner wrote:
Having said that, Barry Lyndon at 92 seems like a good argument to not listen to critics.
How so? I'm thinking you think it's a tad overrated.
It's been a while, but at the time I thought it was one of the worst movies I'd ever seen, and I don't like Ryan O'Neal anyway. How Kubrick made it, I don't understand.
Just now thinking about it, I realize there's an odd paper-scissors-rock relationship to be devised here:
Stanley Kubrick beats Peter Bogdonavich
Peter Bogdonavich beats Ryan O Neal (see Paper Moon)
Ryan O'Neal beats Stanley Kubrick
My only gripes with that list are small. And even then, they aren't indefensible choices. For instance, I would never in a million years put Nashville on a list like that. But I can see how someone would.
ghostrunner wrote:
Having said that, Barry Lyndon at 92 seems like a good argument to not listen to critics.
How so? I'm thinking you think it's a tad overrated.
It's been a while, but at the time I thought it was one of the worst movies I'd ever seen, and I don't like Ryan O'Neal anyway. How Kubrick made it, I don't understand.
Just now thinking about it, I realize there's an odd paper-scissors-rock relationship to be devised here:
Stanley Kubrick beats Peter Bogdonavich
Peter Bogdonavich beats Ryan O Neal (see Paper Moon)
Ryan O'Neal beats Stanley Kubrick
omaha_red wrote:over the past few years i've used a lot of lists to see some amazing movies..
i did:
afi's top 100 (both lists)
imdb's top 500 - i missed a few because they're unavailable
janus film's top 50 - my favorite by far
a few top 100 foreign film lists
time's top 100 - not done with this one
every oscar best picture winner - almost done here.. i refuse to watch "Chicago"
and now i'm trying to do all of the Criterion Collection films.. i think
i'm maybe close to 300 out of the ever growing 450 or so..
i like movies.
I think you should subject yourself to having to watch IMDB's bottom 100.
