The Movie Forums Top 100 of All-Time Refresh: Countdown

→ in
Tools    





Having run two of them ('70s and Westerns), it is a MASSIVE time suck. It is also rewarding and an accomplishment, but be ready to have a big chunk of your life taken over for a couple/few months.
__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra



Iro's mission, should he choose to accept it...

This message will probably not self destruct in 5 seconds because it's a forum post, not a weird gadget on a movie.



As far back as I can remember... I’ve always loved GoodFellas

I remember being quite blown away the first time I saw this film. The extremely graphic opening also makes it dead certain that you will pay full attention if you by any chance didn’t when pressing play. I had seen The Godfather before this and while many “compare them” or at least occasionally mention them in the same sentence, they are very different films. Very, very different.

We will get to the more elegant Italian mafia film, but until then let’s talk about this gritty American mob flick. It’s a lot messier in a way, but that’s meant as a positive. It really captures the spirit of the time and place of the story. The very loose and sometimes even rambling-like voice-over also gives it this personal touch where you really feel like you are in this criminal underworld yourself.

It hasn’t been too long since I revisited the film and it still impresses. Scorsese was most definitely the right director to take on this story. He presents it all with passion, heart, soul and a good amount of edge. He keeps the story going, the characters interesting and the gaps between time periods are surprisingly smooth and well handled.

I didn’t have it on my own list and while I don’t know about it being a top three film of all time it’s without a doubt a classic crime drama that deserves a trunk load of praise thrown its way.

As for the other crime film in question? It was my number one

The Godfather
is like the godfather of films and I can’t praise it enough. It’s on a different level the way I see it. When I watch this film, I feel like I’m watching the highest possible level that cinema can achieve. The control that Coppola has directing this, the way he establishes situations, stages scenes and how he directs actors and moves his camera. The way the film is edited, both visuals and sound. It’s like a mafia in and on itself. Dresses prestigiously, acts slick, speaks thoroughly and precise, weights important things heavily, treats lightly and can take your breathe away in an instant.

I keep wanting to just say the word ‘elegant’ for some reason. It’s just what comes to mind. The final and famous intercutting scene between life and death is of course utterly brilliant. But the whole movie is like that in a way. Like a beautifully planned and orchestrated piece of work that has the weight of death and the spirit of life. So passionately presented and told that I can still be taking aback by its brilliance. And I feel transported every time. To that time period. In that family. And those conflicts. And that life. They did a helluva job all the way around. No corners were cut. No half measures here. This is full blown cinema to me.

There might be more artistic and abstract pieces of cinema out there that can challenge this film in their own way, but seeing this humongous story and these amazing characters unfold and evolve on screen is simply pin point perfection. In a way, it’s also an accomplishment to make a film that is - to this day - held as a masterpiece among huge film buffs and cinephiles but also just people who enjoy a good movie once in a while.

Just as the mafia world it depicts, it has a deep respect about it and you don’t want to call this one “horsesh*t”.. or else that word might come back to hunt you when you go to sleep at night...



You ready? You look ready.
Re Sunshine: I saw that movie 4 times in theaters and dragged every single one of my friends to it. They all complained that it looked stupid but when the lights came up at the end their face told me everything I needed to know: it did not miss.

Not a single one of those guys complained about the final act and even now I honestly don’t see anything wrong with it. I mean, if you’re OK with the idea of a bomb restarting the Sun () I don’t get why it would suddenly fall apart for you at the end.

And man, that soundtrack was one of the most epic things to come out of that year.



Regarding Sunshine, it always seems like people only ever talk about how a certain end-of-second-act plot development supposedly undermines the tone and by extension the entire film - if that's the main thing people mention about the movie, it's not surprising that it kind of slid into obscurity over the years even though it came from a director who a) won an Oscar the following year and b) made one of the best horrors of the 21st century. What really gets me is that Interstellar used the same development and nobody complained.
I honestly don't remember much about Sunshine. I've seen it once when it was released on DVD. I have this impression that my issue with the third act wasn't about plot development per se but the genre shift that felt (at least back then) unfitting. It's one of those films that I'd need to rewatch at some point, though.
__________________



Re Sunshine: I saw that movie 4 times in theaters and dragged every single one of my friends to it. They all complained that it looked stupid but when the lights came up at the end their face told me everything I needed to know: it did not miss.

Not a single one of those guys complained about the final act and even now I honestly don’t see anything wrong with it. I mean, if you’re OK with the idea of a bomb restarting the Sun () I don’t get why it would suddenly fall apart for you at the end.

And man, that soundtrack was one of the most epic things to come out of that year.
Talking about the Boyle movie right?

Underrated.
You should watch it with the commentary on.
Prof. Brian Cox was the scientific advisor on the movie, and he did a commentary on the DVD as well.
Cox is basically the Attenborough of Physics these days.

I think I appreciate Sunshine due to the scientific accuracy in the movie more than anything else tbh.

Review #237, Movie #308




Year Of Release
2007

Director/s
Danny Boyle

Producer/s
Andrew MacDonald

Writer/s
Alex Garland

Cast
Cillian Murphy, Chris Evans, Hiroyuki Sanada, Rose Byrne, Cliff Curtis, Troy Garity, Benedict Wong, Michelle Yeoh and Mark Strong

Notes And Trivia
Alex Garland and Danny Boyle had worked together before on The Beach and 28 Days Later… Boyle at the time was interested in making a different film though but was taken aback by Garland’s script and got Andrew MacDonald involved.

20th Century Fox however were dubious as the script was, in their minds, similar to the Solaris remake. The Solaris remake bombed at the Box Office too, which put more doubt in the minds of the Fox big-knobs.
Garland and Boyle then spent an entire year rewriting the script and eventually got backing from Fox Searchlight Pictures… bit the backing was totally based on the past working relationship between Garland and Boyle. FSP then gave total creative control to Garland and Boyle, trusting them with $40m.

With the movie being based in 50 years’ time, Boyle’s casting choices were purposeful. He believed that in the future, China and America will be the leading Nations in space travel, so he cast Asian and American actors, or British actors who can do American accents.

Sunshine’s basis in reality (not just with casting but also) with science, was supervised by none other than Professor Brian Cox. Brian is famous in Britain as a television presenter of a number of Physics programs and general scientific shows.

In broader terms, Dr Cox been labelled as the new Sir Patrick Moore, and even as the Attenborough of Physics.

Cox overlooked every aspect of the science involved in the film, even doing a commentary track for the DVD explaining how some of the far-out things seen are actually scientifically accurate.
Dr Cox’s input was fundamental in keeping the movie as realistic as possible.

Dr Cox was also a key role in how the actors behaved.
Cillian Murphy especially, spent time with him in Geneva at the Large Hadron Collider, studying what Dr Cox does and how he does it, even sitting in the corner of the room while incredibly boring Physics meetings were being held.

Murphy even studied the mannerisms of the various Physicists (without them knowing at the time), including Dr Cox’s, and incorporated them into his character.

It was only once the film was released that Cox and his colleagues noticed Cillian was doing their little ticks, movements and mannerisms.

If you look closely too, the Fox Searchlight logo at the start of the movie, is actually playing backwards.




Synopsis:

The Sun is dying. A mission called Icarus-I is sent to save the Sun, and us, by delivering an incredibly powerful bomb, and it has failed. Icarus 1 disappeared without a trace.

Icarus-II, has now been sent with a similar bomb to complete the failed mission…

But on approaching Mercury, they pick up a distress signal.

Review:

I didn’t like this movie on first watch. I get the impression a lot of people are in the same boat.
However, Sunshine is simply not a science-fiction thrash’em up full of aliens and explosions and far-out fantasy.
It’s a sombre and pretty downbeat sci-fi-sci-fact movie that, although at times is kinda boring, has great payoffs from scene to scene and a couple fantastic twists throughout the running time.
One good thing though, is the quieter scenes, or more boring stuff, doesn’t last for too long. It kinda comes in little hits before something new happens to keep the story going and keep the viewer interested.

It’s been summed up in the DVD commentary as well, that the film can be interpreted in numerous ways.
It’s not deep exactly, but there are a few ways this movie can be, well, “seen”. Is it a psychological movie or a drama? Is it sci-fi or sci-fact?

Well, it’s all of these things.

The cleverest part of this movie is also its downfall though. The reality and fact based sciences.
This film is truly one of a kind yet this can alienate some of the viewers, especially those in a mindset of wanting a sci-fi extravaganza, or maybe something like the movie called The Core.
Sunshine is a very grown up, serious, adult sci-fact movie, laced with the occasional hit of artistic licence so that the simple yet effective and affective story can keep going.

The other thing is Boyle’s use of colour. Inside, everything is grey and green, white, black and so on. It’s only outside the ship that yellows and reds are used so that the Sun and any scenes with fire are more of a shock to the viewer’s system.


The acting is, with the lower tones and scenes in the film, on a top tier when it comes to movies of this kind.
Cillian Murphy as our lead hero, is bang on form. The work he put into the character I mentioned shines (ahem) through at all times. He’s also incredibly naturalistic with it too and has a few moments of peril to get through. Cillian’s acting though, makes all the hits of action much more powerful and believeable. Cillian nails this role.

Chris Evans also makes a decent hero. He’s like the polar opposite of Murphy. The two even come to loggerheads a few times. Evans though plays it naturally as well, and comes across as a likeable and intelligent rogue on the ship. Certainly one of Evans’ best acting roles, as most people know him as the action hero these days.

Cliff Curtis also makes a memorable character within the group. He’s the Doctor and Psychologist keeping the crew sane during their trip. The introduction of his character and some of his lines of dialogue during the running time though throws the viewer. You’re never really sure exactly what going on in his mind. Is he dangerous? Or is he just a little weird? Brilliantly played by Curtis.

Hiroyuki Sanada, Rose Byrne, Troy Garity, Benedict Wong, Michelle Yeoh play more background and supporting roles though. I wanted to see a little more of these guys but they’re just sort of, there.
Benedict Wong plays a more pivotal role though at one point and plays it extremely well, he steals the scene when certain things go bad for the crew.
Mark Strong also makes a showing in two separate parts of the film as Pinbacker. His second show in the movie though, he’s unrecognisable.



The action and FX though are on top form. The CGI throughout is incredibly simple and very well rendered. In particular the scene with Mercury going across the face of the Sun is beautiful.

The action and more highly charged cinema is held in reality too. The odd hit of artistic licence as I mentioned keeps things looking very stylised and exciting but holding most of the movie in reality and keeping the action stakes in the ballpark of “when needed” instead of just for the sake of it, makes Sunshine stand out from the crowd.

Toward the end, there’s also a sequence of highly claustrophobic action when Murphy is stuck inside one of the space suits and the choreography is brilliantly underplayed.



All in all, not what I was expecting when I first saw it, but it has grown on me over the years.

Full of intrigue and some fantastically realistic writing. The hits of peril and more fictional action and science makes it a little easier to get into, but it can be difficult to immerse yourself when the movie is so different from any other of its genre.

Worth a go if you’re after a well written space drama crossed with some genuine nerdy stuff.

My Rating: 92%






As for the number one...

I revisited in Raul and Sean’s amazing thread when we did the Kubrick dissection and I remember hurting my brain quite a bit watching it and then hurting it ten times over trying to write something about it afterwards. Took me a couple of days to finally crack the shell and spill something onto the keyboard.

This is what came out:

Director's Dissection

2001 the first year of the third millennium and the first year of the 21st century
…a year of the future.

Odyssey a long wandering or voyage, either intellectual or spiritual,
which may have many changes of fortune along the way
…a term of the past.

_____________________



2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY



Stanley Kubrick's ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ calls for an epic clash between a compilation of contradicting contrasts and a quest of imposing and intimidating questions, where the grand space of the universe is the only place wide enough for unfolding these elements properly. It is a journey of evolution and revolution where the very solution is up to us…


Opening to the sounds of carefully constructed musical compositions, giving us a callback to the classical era of music, set to the images of the unparalleled natural happenings of space, we are clearly in the world of Kubrick here. When entering the ‘Dawn of Man’ sequence, we once again feel the loving frustration of a Kubrick film; drawing in the audience with a sensual bombardment, securing our attention, before drawing out the plot, seeking our appreciation. Once again, I sense this weird perversion in Kubrick’s work, bewildering our perception by butchering our expectation of what we are about to experience. I’m aware that the film is based on a novel, but there is also a reason why Kubrick wanted to adapt it. After launching his audience into space during the opening credits, he leaves them almost levitating in a meditative state of mind, lingering on earth and the dawn of man. There is also a reason why the ancient term “odyssey” is used in relation to space and the future – while the movie comes in sci-fi packaging, it is essentially the all-embracing odyssey of mankind more than anything.


There have been many suggestions as to what the monolith really means and trying to direct a vague discussion into more determined and definite areas would probably become pointless the deeper you went, because for one, it isn’t specific in itself nor exclusive to one scene or one moment alone. It gains a somewhat thematic momentum for the story in the way that it is introduced and the way that it ignites something or someone within the story. It evolves to become a key element in the story and the different acts of the movie, building thematically in size and in complete synchronization with its towering complexity. The way that it pops up through time and space and between beast, man and higher power it definitely holds something historical to the story, as well as something holy and sacred in an almost religious way, while also becoming about science, the future and evolution itself.

Some big and broad terms here, but essentially you could boil it down to the effect it has on those who encounter it. It may have a broad significance but that very significance is different to whoever might hold it and from there springs the essential element of it – the monolith always seems to trigger a shift in mindset, awareness, psychical or mental acquirement and overall evolution for mankind – all for the sake of advancing intelligent life in one way or the other. It is supposedly alien-related and does different things to different beings, but always as a handy tool of sorts for what one wants to accomplish. The author himself has called it “the alien Swiss Army Knife” and that is actually absurdly agreeable. I would add that it is almost the alien Swiss Army Knife of the conscious mind and thereby the monolith is representing something in physical form, which otherwise has no form. We all learn from experiences, encounters, affiliations, successes, failures and so forth – all of which is something the monolith attempts to encapsulate or represent. Essentially, the monolith magnifies the meaning behind itself for the audience, by appearing in psychical form as a returning reminder of its themes and plot points, ultimately underlining central parts of the story, trying to make a complex film more apparent, more coherent or at least more creative with its complexity… but it sure is complex.


‘2001’ is definitely Kubrick’s most complex and ambiguous film and after ditching the planned narration for the film, it truly embraces the concept of visual storytelling and relies completely on the sensual experience to elevate the hefty themes of the movie. It really is more of a journey for the audience to embark on, rather than the destination they end up in. Of course, the climax completes the journey, but every act is important to the “odyssey of mankind” and the understanding of the evolution of the themes, which is more important than the evolution of the characters, which conversely, is sometimes one and the same. But it isn’t so much about the characters as human beings, as it is about the characters as themes or tools to that same matter, making the evolution for intelligence and intelligent life more clear.

Evident from its title, there are many references to the Greek epic ‘Homer’s Odyssey’ along the way – an obvious one being that of HAL – the artificial antagonist starring back at you with a singular glowing eye, like the Cyclops that Odysseus encounters in the ancient story. For one, there is something truly interesting in seeing HAL using the three artistic proofs, coined by Greek philosopher Aristotle, using both pathos, ethos and logos throughout the film to manipulate our main characters. HAL is of course also the classic confrontation of man and machine, where the man-made intelligent life ends up out-smarting its own makers. The whole thing about man being the creator and man’s creation being the destruction of man is perversely paradoxical. And again, in relation to “the odyssey of mankind”, it might not just be the destruction of man, but the overall extinction of mankind as well, since the film seems to try and cover mankind in its entirety, from the dawn of man, or the birth of humans, to the progression towards its ultimate potential all the way to its eventual demise, which is presented in the climax of the film.


On the whole discussion of birth, many have seen the journey towards the climax to be an allegory of conception and I could definitely see that. Our main character(s) last journey is almost like the seed being planted to the new life that springs from it in the end; complete with sperm-looking spaceship and the “surreal flashing lights” before the birth of another life form. The whole last section of the movie is a sensual overload and I love the way that Kubrick chose to present this part of the story. How our main character is caught in a time warp of sorts and experience his own demise from the sideline, gradually going through a selection of moments from his life, which is shown to us from a POV-shot, making us part of this crazy paradox. Having our entire life flash before our eyes is another element that is played with here and the climax is almost like the spiritual and the scientific colliding with each other – like the big bang of the future of life’s evolution – ending with the “star child” representing the new beginning. And unlike an actual fetus, it has its eyes wide open, looking down on earth, doing so literally and as the superior primary life as well, until finally turning towards us, the audience, doing the very same, by turning cinema itself into its very own monolith, where Kubrick presents the possibilities of the medium and represents the advancement of the intellect within of which he has gained – and the sheer power it holds – and does so in a way that seems to confront us, encourage us and maybe even mock us.

Like the grand turning point of its numeral title and the adding of the ancient expression, ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ seems to represent both the beginning and the end, the birth and the death, and a key element to evolution and progression, mostly leaping out of the monolith-aspect of the film. In a way, the monolith can also be dubbed “a reflection”. We can see our own reflection in it, we can reflect on it and overall it speaks to our inner natural reflex of survival and our will to evolve… it absorbs and we can project things onto it… with time, the evolution of life changed into the monolith and with that the monolith revolutionized life itself. The monolith is many things to different beings, so if the monolith is cinema to Kubrick, then the monolith is Kubrick to me... because of the determined dedication and intellectual involvement needed, his movies are light years away from being easy to dissect… but when Kubrick himself throws me a bone, however the size and subtlety of that bone might be, I’m eager to pick it up every single time; even when everything’s up in the air. Why? Because it’s my job to dissect it... my duty… my destiny… my very own odyssey.





Amazing film. It was not on my list. Didn’t need my help clearly.



You ready? You look ready.
Talking about the Boyle movie right?

Underrated.
You should watch it with the commentary on.
Prof. Brian Cox was the scientific advisor on the movie, and he did a commentary on the DVD as well.
Cox is basically the Attenborough of Physics these days.

I think I appreciate Sunshine due to the scientific accuracy in the movie more than anything else tbh.
I do as well, but when you go into the movie for the first time and don’t have a PhD in physics it sounds so freaking outlandish that a bomb would restart the sun. Like an average Joe is gonna have to suspend belief for that one so I don’t see why the ending would break that suspension.

And yes, very underrated. It’s on my list for a reason. I’m a sci-fi/space nerd so my list will always be sci-fi heavy. Always.

I will admit my biases: That’s why Space Cowboys is above Unforgiven on my list. It ain’t necessarily better but I been a NASA groupie long before it was cool to be one.



As a contributor, not a host.
If you chose to host the next one, you get my vote. I mean heck you just did a whole lot of hard work, you might as well host and get all those reps! Seriously you'd be rock solid!



I do as well, but when you go into the movie for the first time and don’t have a PhD in physics it sounds so freaking outlandish that a bomb would restart the sun. Like an average Joe is gonna have to suspend belief for that one so I don’t see why the ending would break that suspension.

And yes, very underrated. It’s on my list for a reason. I’m a sci-fi/space nerd so my list will always be sci-fi heavy. Always.

I will admit my biases: That’s why Space Cowboys is above Unforgiven on my list. It ain’t necessarily better but I been a NASA groupie long before it was cool to be one.
Anyone who knows me will know I'm a sci-fi guy.

Yods really put me into a category on the podcast we did, and these are words I'll never forget... "If you ask anyone on MoFo: Who is the biggest fan of fun, schlocky, pulpy, action film the most? There's a pretty good chance they'd name you"

I'm proud of it too

Think JM and I need to get something together at some point.
Like a list or something between us of the best sci-fi movies



You ready? You look ready.
Sorry about all the busted links ^^
Photobucket and all that
Forgive the crappy writing since I was still in HS at the time, but since we are sharing Sunshine reviews:

Sunshine

Sunshine
“If the sun dies, so do we.”

Rank:


Rating: Rated r

Director: Danny Boyle

Release Date: July 20, 2007

Cast: Cliff Curtis, Cillian Murphy, Michelle Yeoh, Hiroyuki Sanada, Rose Byrne, Benedict Wong, Chris Evans, Troy Garity

Every now and then, a film slips into theaters with little regard to charm and delight it's audience; Sunshine is, indeed, one of those films.

In the near future, Earth's closest star and source of energy is dieing. Without this vital organ, the Solar System cannot survive; it is a slowly clotting heart. In hopes of saving themselves, mankind sends a ship, the Icarus I, attached to a stellar bomb to try and create a new star inside of the current one. In the face of tremendous odds, this first mission fails unexplainable. So what does mankind do? They try again with the Icarus II. On a ship with a doomed name, there lies the entire hope of mankind and their last chance at survival. Sunshine picks up here, and tells their story.

Simply put, this movie is stunning. From opening to finish, I found myself repeating the typical "aspirations" that a sci-fi film can induce. The CGI is breath taking and the story delivers tremendously on the deep space travel premise. Sunshine raises several questions throughout the film, most of which they leave for the viewer to decide for themselves. Is it man's place to question their demise? Should logic define all our decisions? Where is the edge of the cliff during deep space travel? These are just some of the questions posed to the audience, and they entirely left up to you to answer/discuss.

The cast is made up of some well known faces, but no one really takes the spotlight and this just enhances the film. The bonds between the characters are tried and tested, putting you through an ocean of emotion and terror. The sheer beauty and brilliance of the CGI is just overwhelming; so powerful, in fact, you can lose yourself in it. The sci-fi/deep space genre has not had a film of this quality for a long while, and I'm glad to see the cinema can still capture our imagination and retinas with films that involve the extreme dangers of space.



You ready? You look ready.
Anyone who knows me will know I'm a sci-fi guy.

Yods really put me into a category on the podcast we did, and these are words I'll never forget... "If you ask anyone on MoFo: Who is the biggest fan of fun, schlocky, pulpy, action film the most? There's a pretty good chance they'd name you"

I'm proud of it too

Think JM and I need to get something together at some point.
Like a list or something between us of the best sci-fi movies
Amen, brother. I’d be all over that in a heartbeat.



The next 15 were:

The Seventh Seal - 68 points
Annie Hall - 67 points
Dredd - 66 points
The Karate Kid - 65 points
Wall-E - 65 points
Inception - 64 points
Elmer Gantry - 64 points
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre - 64 points
The Conversation - 64 points
Mad Max: Fury Road - 64 points
The Departed -63 points
Groundhog Day - 62 points
The Innocents - 61 points
Monty Python & The Holy Grail - 61 points
Inglorious Basterds - 61 points
In there, I see my number 17, The Conversation.

Gene Hackman is superb as Harry Caul, a man who keeps to himself while working his job as a surveillance expert. What follows on this assignment given to him by his client's aide (Harrison Ford) is a mixture of regret for a previous failed mission and obsession as he tries to figure out what a conversation he has recorded truly means. Features a good turn from John Cazale as Caul's assistant and a masterly directorial turn by Francis Ford Coppola as he ramps up the tension to the breaking point. I honestly jumped when I saw a floor buffer in one scene and I've used them before in the past.

Biggest surprise to me is seeing the Terminator 2 getting in. Good film, sure. But in the top 100 of all time? *shrugs* I would have guessed Inception or maybe Holy Grail would have snuck in instead.

And here's the rest of my list with quick thoughts:

5. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance---Jimmy Stewart is perhaps at his best as Stoddard, a Senator who recounts how as a lawyer he stood up to Liberty (Lee Marvin) with the help of rancher Tom Doniphon (John Wayne). Not only does it dive into the differences between legend and fact, but it's also one of the best in the Western genre.

7. Double Indemnity---From the western, we now dive into one of the finest in the film noir genre. As an insurance salesman (Fred McMurray) gets roped into a scheme to help a frustrated housewife (Barbara Stanwyck) off her husband in exchange for the insurance money. The salesman decides to help her pull off the double indemnity clause involving him falling off the train to his death, but claims adjuster Keyes (Edward G. Robinson) suspects there's foul play at work. There's more at play here, but the first rate story and sizzling chemistry between the characters are definitely the highlights.

14. Boyhood---Perhaps one of the best films in the 2010s, this look at a critical period at the life of a young boy (Ellar Coltrane) as he grows up in front of our eyes into a young man taking the lessons he learned from his father (Ethan Hawke) and his mother (Patricia Arquette) is enthralling throughout its runtime. It's one of those films you hold your breath at times hoping that he'll end up OK at the end. Thanks to director Richard Linklater, it grows way beyond a stunt premise into a film that encapsulates life.

15. The Lion King---Using the lush animation, Disney tells the timeless tale of a boy lion's destiny to one day become king and the obstacles presented along the way that alters those plans. The film directed by Roger Allers and Rob Minkoff is able to beautifully blend darker moments with more lighthearted ones involving Timon (Nathan Lane) and Pumbaa (Ernie Sabella). Jeremy Irons has perhaps his finest role as the villainous Scar while James Earl Jones and Robert Guillaume make the most of their roles as the Mufasa and Rafiki. For the most part, the songs sing particularly Circle of Life and Hakuna Matata hold up pretty well now.

16. M---The story of Berlin's chase of a man who murdered children as both the police and the underworld want him caught (but of course, for different reasons). Fritz Lang provides the basis for future crime and thriller films while Peter Lorre goes through the full wringer of emotions throughout the runtime. He manages to make Grieg's In the Hall of the Mountain King eerie through his whistling. And the climax is superb.

18. The Postman Always Rings Twice (1946)---A drifter finds himself falling for the younger wife of his boss which gets him caught up in a scheme involving his murder so they can get together. Naturally, fate draws some different cards for them. Lana Turner is beguiling as the scheming wife (nobody can blame poor John Garfield as the drifter, considering her good looks). The story draws you in much like the drifter getting drawn in and by the time you reach the climax, it's too late to escape.

19. Coco---The story of a kid named Miguel trying to convince his shoe-making family to let him perform, but they refuse because their great-great grandfather left them in the lurch so he can become a music star. Miguel defies his parents to perform at the Day of the Dead and ultimately is able to find out the truth about his great-great grandfather and what really happened. The film is able to use Mexico's Day of the Dead holiday as the backdrop of a fascinating story of dreams and setting the truth straight. It also features one of the ugliest cries that I've had involving a film.

20. Spotlight---The brilliance of this film is how it takes what we know now and manage to turn it into a thriller. A first rate cast including Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo and Rachel McAdams sinks their teeth into a story about the power of the press and starting the arduous process of fixing wrongs decades in the making, even as it starts to cast its toll on the personal lives of the reporters. They managed to make a spreadsheet compelling which I think is due in part of the expert pacing by Tom McCarthy.

21. Memento---In this heady mix of two stories directed by Christopher Nolan, the past and present are blurred in the life of protagonist Leonard (Guy Pearce) who suffers from a form of amnesia where he forgets everything unless it's photographed or written down on his skin. Leonard becomes obsessed with finding out who was behind the fatal attack of his wife. The beauty of this one is that you're not entirely sure who you can trust or whether they're on the level.

22. The Artist---I'm not normally big on the Hollywood congratulating itself genre, but this is a very happy exception. In small part, because it proves to be both a love letter to the art of the silent film as well as a clear subversion of it. As the director and both leads are 100 percent French. But the technology of sound is on the horizon and the film manages to show how the lives of some actors were enhanced by it as well as demonstrating how others were ruined because of it. But this romantic drama also shows the importance of helping other people and its long term ramifications.

23. The Thin Blue Line---Hopefully, people will come back around to this 1988 Errol Morris film about the unjust conviction of an African American for the murder of a Texas cop. It bends the line between documentary and film noir in its use of reenactments and warns us of the dangers of glorifying cops as protectors of society. Ultimately, evidence provided by the film freed him. But its examination of the unfairness of the justice system for African Americans and the proper place for cops in our society are issues we still look at today.

24. 12 Years a Slave---Perhaps serving as a nice counterpoint to Gone with the Wind, this story about a free musician who gets tricked into slavery where he spends a number of years trying to survive and having his story heard by someone who may be able to get him out of his predicament. Chiwetel Ejiofor is able to express so much just using his eyes as you see him getting thrown into a world that he doesn't belong in. Michael Fassbender plays a villainous slaveholder named Epps who is cruel and abusive towards him and a fellow slave named Patsey (Lupita Nyong'o). Although there are brief respites such as Solomon playing a violin at a judge's neighbor's wedding and the scene with Mistress Shaw (Alfre Woodard), the film forces you first hand to learn of the atrocities of slavery and its human costs.

25. High Noon---We end here with another first class western...a story of a sheriff (Gary Cooper) who is recently married to Quaker wife Amy (Grace Kelly) but his attempts to head off to his honeymoon is thwarted by news of Frank Miller (Ian MacDonald) and his gang are planning revenge. The sense of duty versus keeping the peace is something that surrounds the film from the townspeople who refuse to help to Amy who considers leaving him because he won't fulfill his duties as a husband. Perhaps there's also an influence from the Red Scare that was affecting Hollywood at the time...writer Carl Foreman who was listed as an uncooperative witness had to give up his dreams and move to Britain following the film. Lee Van Cleef makes his first, but hardly last, appearance in the genre as one of Miller's cohorts. The song High Noon (Do Not Forsake Me, Oh My Darling) makes for an enthralling soundtrack as the time ticks down closer to a showdown.

John Wayne was almost cast as the lead of this, but due to his political beliefs, turned it down ultimately making Rio Bravo his response to the film.



So... it's over. I don't have anything else to look forward to. Like Galadriel, I will dimish.
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!



So... it's over. I don't have anything else to look forward to. Like Galadriel, I will dimish.
We're talking about what the next countdown should be in another thread. Tentative plan is for me to create a poll this week to decide between a decade list or a genre list (with "genre" being broad enough to really just mean "anything that's not a decade list") should be next.

Also, this is reply #7,000.