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

→ in
Tools    





Is there any chance of a surprise at this point? Are Casablanca and Citizen Kane absolute certs?
Can you guess more popular movies than those that didn't show up in the list yet? Taxi Driver would be one I would guess was certainly top 10. Maybe those serious recent Batman movies that are super popular in the IMDB, who tend to be younger than users here.



The Adventure Starts Here!
Well, the LOTR books were published separately, so in that sense they were identical to the films: conceived as a whole story but broken up for logistical and financial reasons. For philosophical classifications I think that's the same as Lucas not knowing if he could finance all his stories the way he wanted upfront, particularly since that, too, was conceived as one story from the beginning.

I'm not sure how viable it is to introduce any of those outside/financial considerations into how we classify things artistically. The Matrix Reloaded ends on an outright cliffhanger and was made concurrently with The Matrix Revolutions, but do we regard that as one film? Ditto for the second and third Back to the Future films (and the first one there even ends right where the second narrative begins!). In the end it seems like it's going to be a "feel" thing more than something where we can draw a clean line that doesn't have some big exceptions on either side.

Anyway, to each their own, I just think it's interesting to flesh out. I think insofar as there's a real answer to any of this it's that countdowns like this are imposing classifications that just don't cleanly fit reality.
I tend to think that, if you had to buy a ticket for each movie, then they're separate movies. Trying to use the it's-just-one-story line at the ticket booth probably wouldn't have worked, either.



As a person who doesn't really like the Rings trilogy all that much, I'm still trying to wrap my head around why it matters that they all showed up separately on a favorite movie list. If enough people liked them enough to use them for three places on their list of 25, then those three spots on the top 100 are more than earned.



#whatevs



Both directors move up from the twos to the threes. While we can expect more Kubrick in the top ten, Jackson's had his run.

IV
  • Alfred Hitchcock: North By Northwest (57), Rear Window (40), Psycho (27), Vertigo (19)
III
  • James Cameron: Terminator 2: Judgment Day (71), The Terminator (56), Aliens (37)
  • Peter Jackson: The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (42), The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (28), The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Rings (11)
  • Stanley Kubrick: A Clockwork Orange (32), The Shining (21), Dr. Strangelove (12)
  • Steven Spielberg: E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (89), Saving Private Ryan (83), Schindler's List (41)
II
  • Akira Kurosawa: Ikiru (95), Seven Samurai (26)
  • Andrej Tarkovsky: Andrej Rublev (67), Stalker (25)
  • Billy Wilder: The Apartment (84), Sunset Boulevard (53)
  • Coen Brothers: No Country for Old Men (51), The Big Lebowski (18)
  • David Fincher: Fight Club (52), Se7en (49)
  • John Carpenter: Halloween (44), The Thing (20)
  • Martin Scorsese: Raging Bull (49), Taxi Driver (14)
  • Milos Forman: Amadeus (50), One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (33)
  • Paul Thomas Anderson: Magnolia (74), There Will Be Blood (60)
  • Robert Zemeckis: Forrest Gump (65), Back to the Future (34)
  • Roman Polanski: Rosemary's Baby (91), Chinatown (17)
  • Sergio Leone: Once Upon a Time in the West (31), The Good, the Bad & the Ugly (23)
  • Victor Fleming: Gone with the Wind (55), The Wizard of Oz (36)

Dr. Strangelove feels alittke dated and slow at the beginning, but there are awesome performances by Sellers throughout. Now, the original LOTR 1 cut was a little too quick-paced for character development, but the extended cut actually made my number 3.




Your hint reminds me of the time I was challenged to write a sentence including the titles of all the albums in the RYM top 50 and I succeeded.



Makes sense to post this just before we head into the home stretch:

Fun Facts

Two films made the top 10 without ANY first place votes.

One film made the top 10 despite not placing higher than third on any list...but it was placed third three times (and fourth two times, fifth once, and sixth three more times).



Makes sense to post this just before we head into the home stretch:

Fun Facts

Two films made the top 10 without ANY first place votes.

One film made the top 10 despite not placing higher than third on any list...but it was placed third three times (and fourth two times, fifth once, and sixth three more times).
Are we allowed to theorize and comment on it based on these?



rbrayer's Avatar
Registered User
Well, the LOTR books were published separately, so in that sense they were identical to the films: conceived as a whole story but broken up for logistical and financial reasons. For philosophical classifications I think that's the same as Lucas not knowing if he could finance all his stories the way he wanted upfront, particularly since that, too, was conceived as one story from the beginning.

I'm not sure how viable it is to introduce any of those outside/financial considerations into how we classify things artistically. The Matrix Reloaded ends on an outright cliffhanger and was made concurrently with The Matrix Revolutions, but do we regard that as one film? Ditto for the second and third Back to the Future films (and the first one there even ends right where the second narrative begins!). In the end it seems like it's going to be a "feel" thing more than something where we can draw a clean line that doesn't have some big exceptions on either side.

Anyway, to each their own, I just think it's interesting to flesh out. I think insofar as there's a real answer to any of this it's that countdowns like this are imposing classifications that just don't cleanly fit reality.
There is at least one serious distinction between LOTR and the examples you gave. Whatever Lucas was thinking about, LOTR was an existing property when the trilogy was made - a complete story. Films being connected is not the issue. The issue I'm raising is whether films can stand on their own even if they do link to a later film. I haven't seen LOTR so I don't know the answer. I didn't even know the books were separate! Maybe they are complete stories and I'm way off. I'm shutting up now.



rbrayer's Avatar
Registered User
As a person who doesn't really like the Rings trilogy all that much, I'm still trying to wrap my head around why it matters that they all showed up separately on a favorite movie list. If enough people liked them enough to use them for three places on their list of 25, then those three spots on the top 100 are more than earned.



#whatevs
Fair point.



I'd rather not tie things into collections. One part can be WAY better that the other parts. Example: Kill Bill 2 is way better than 1.



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
Makes sense to post this just before we head into the home stretch:

Fun Facts

Two films made the top 10 without ANY first place votes.

One film made the top 10 despite not placing higher than third on any list...but it was placed third three times (and fourth two times, fifth once, and sixth three more times).
So my question would be what other two members had Homeward Bound at number 3 with me? Great job guys



I think the fact that people are debating whether Lord of the Rings should be a single entry or not is a testament to the quality/consistency of the job Peter Jackson did with the films. If any of the three was significantly weaker than the others (by general consensus), people would be having less of a debate about listing the singular entries. Obviously, people have their personal preferences but I think it's pretty widely accepted that the filmmaking quality itself is consistent across the three films, which is an achievement in itself and not something the films should potentially be punished/penalised for.

My top 10 predictions:

1. The Godfather
2. Pulp Fiction
3. GoodFellas
4. 2001: A Space Odyssey
5. Jaws
6. Casablanca
7. Apocalypse Now
8. Blade Runner
9. Citizen Kane
10. Raiders of the Lost Ark
__________________



This comment reminded me of the time I stood next to Viggo Mortensen in a bathroom. NYC movie theater bathrooms are small, y'all.
Good moment to tell him "Hey, you were great on Eastern Promises!"


EDIT: Seems like I got late to the EP jokes, ha!
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!



Just to put my two cents on the LOTR thing.

In doing these countdowns, we've run into issues as to what classifies as what. The most notable one being the Horror Countdown. So the decision (in my opinion) was a logical one that made the most sense. What is the easiest way to classify these movies? If it was released separately, it is its own entry. This is clear cut and dry to me. No arguments as to if Kill Bill should be split, if Endgame and Infinity War should be split, what do we do about the Three Colors movies? Everything is split. If we combine LOTR but not certain other ones, where do we draw the line?

I didn't want to have to chase people down because some put the whole trilogy down while others split it up. No confusions, just simple one film entries. Would it be fair to compare all three LOTR movies against one Godfather? I don't think so. Are you upset all three movies made it? Sure, would you be upset if Return of the Jedi made it because two other Star Wars movies made it? Who knows.

If people want to put all three movies on their lists, that's their business. If people want to pick one film out of the three, that is their business. We didn't take 'artistic merit' into account at all because that opens up too many cans of worms.

These are the opinions of me and me alone, even though the discussion was brought up between Chris and I, I don't want to speak for anyone else but myself.


I await for the next 4 Avatar movies to make the next list and have everyone argue about it.


*like that will ever happen.
I knew it!



Wait until we do the top 100 2000's countdown list if we decide to do it, LOTR will take up 3 spots again
__________________
Moviefan1988's Favorite Movies
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...?t=67103<br />

Welcome to the Dance: My Favorite 20 High School Movies
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...02#post2413502



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
I already made a top 5 prediction which was wrong so here's my last crack at a guess:

1. The Godfather
2. Goodfellas
3. Pulp Fiction
4. 2001
5. Raiders of the Lost Ark
6. Jaws
7. Casablanca
8. Apocalypse Now
9. Blade Runner
10. Citizen Kane (I'm utterly shocked it made it this far but have no issue with it)



rbrayer's Avatar
Registered User



Admittedly, I'm still too busy wrapping my head around the fact that you've never heard of The Thing


At least I think it was you that said that crazy crazy thing.
No, I said I'd never heard of the Thing, not that crazy crazy thing.



No, truthfully the name vaguely rings a bell but its so vague it may as well not.



Are we allowed to theorize and comment on it based on these?
Absolutely! Guesses are encouraged at all points, but especially for the Top 10, since it's at least semi-plausible someone might get them all in order. I'm not sure they have with any list so far, though.

There is at least one serious distinction between LOTR and the examples you gave. Whatever Lucas was thinking about, LOTR was an existing property when the trilogy was made - a complete story. Films being connected is not the issue. The issue I'm raising is whether films can stand on their own even if they do link to a later film. I haven't seen LOTR so I don't know the answer. I didn't even know the books were separate! Maybe they are complete stories and I'm way off. I'm shutting up now.
If I'm being honest and putting the best argument forward on your behalf, they only kinda do. They would not be satisfying on their own. I'll leave it to each person to decide how much they care about the distinction between the story being entirely written before publication (which I guess was the case with LOTR? I don't know offhand), or just in the filmmaker's head. Anyway, I find the whole thing interesting to unpack, I will shut up as well (even if you wanna make one more point).

I think the fact that people are debating whether Lord of the Rings should be a single entry or not is a testament to the quality/consistency of the job Peter Jackson did with the films.
This is a good point.