100 Greatest Movies (according to Time)

[kexodusc]

Good lord, either that is one disgustingly weak Top 100, or I have the absolute worst taste in movies.

You mean to tell me they couldn't think of 100 movies better than Unforgiven?

Finding Nemo beat out Snow White, Toy Story, The Little Mermaid Liong King and the Beast, and Jurassic Park?

Guess we're not even trying with these lists anymore.

This just in...Ashlee Simpson makes top 100 albums of all time...

[Kam]

i always take these with a grain of salt, and given that it is coming from the collective minds of two time magazine critics (both Dick's)..... eh. it's worth its weight. It definitely puts movies on there that are incredibly puzzling without recognizing the originators... like jackie chan without any bruce?... pixar's latest without its first? The Fly without the thing? (either original or remake was better than this) Of all the kurasawa they put Yojimbo and Ikiru?

Definitely not how my 100 would go, but that's what makes 100 "best" films so arbitrary... how do you recognize what's best... either you agree with these guys or don't.. but i definitely know i wont be paying as much attention to Time movie reviews... was reading up on their reviews of what they have on there, and the ones i disagreed with, and eh... not very impressed. most top lists by magazines i rarely agree with 50% of. Entertainment Weekly has had their lists which i really disagreed with.

The AFI lists i liked the most, mainly because they really broke em down, 100 action, 100 horror, 100 comedies, 100 bad guys, 100 good guys, 100 best.

ebert had some lists as well, of the decades, with some good choices, but personally i still agree with scorcese's list of top 10 films of the 90's over any critic's choices. that was a great episode to watch ebert try and cya with scorcese next to him, picking movies ebert gave 2 stars to, hehehe.

[20to20K]

There are so many bizzare inclusions and ommisions on this list I don't know where
to begin. There was a much more comprehensive list published by the American
Film Institute to commemerate 100 years of film making in 1998. I found that list
to be much more reflective of my own taste...well, at least a lot closer than this
crock. The also had the balls to actually put them in order unlike these Time
sissies. Here's the link for it:

http://www.afi.com/tvevents/100years/movies.aspx

As for the time list...here are my main issues:

Top 10 Exclusions:

The Graduate
Clockwork Orange
Color Purple
Shawshank Redemption
La Dolce Vita
Mean Streets
Dr. Zhivago
Petrified Forest
Touch of Evil
39 Steps(or about a half dozen other Hichcock movies over Notorious or Psycho)

What the...?:

Finding Nemo,
The Fly
Charade

And finally...how dare they combine Godfather 1 and Godfather 2 into one selection?
Those were two uniquely different movies IMO. Just a cheap way to add another
movie to their pathetic list. Check out the AFI list and compare...

[shokhead]

Any list without GWTW is not worth reading.

[paul_pci]

The one WTF title that stood out for me was Finding Nemo. My god. And the one title that comes to mind that should be on the list, which I don't think anyone's mentioned yet, is Chaplin's Modern Times. A must see to understand key developments of the 20th century; and plus, it's not as hauntinng as Metropolis.

[RGA]

The problem with all of these lists is that some films are geared to art house lovers, other films to the average Joe movie goer.

I have argued on forums for a while about film art and film entertainment and if there is only one list then how does one break it down.

A Film like La Grande Illusion (1937) to me is vastly superior to Citizen Kane or Casablanca -- the latter two make lists the former -- some. Then there is Raiders of the Lost Ark which is as entertainment cheese as it gets but IMO the best film of its kind ever made -- so invariably with only 100 slots what makes the list. Someone here as already kind of blasted E.T. for making the list -- it would make mine -- it pays homage to several films like Casablanca but better it to me. E.T. is the best boy and his dog story I have seen...why not make the list -- it evens manages to be impressively directed with camera angles often and mostly always from the kids perspective looking up and out at the world -- small touch done very well.

Ebert's approach makes sense - the great movies -- the first 100 and now he has a second 100. To me the Original Dawn of the Dead is one of the great satires, why is Young Frankenstein and The Producers not there -- comedy is often left out or only silent film comedy which is fantastic as "history" but doesn't hold up as well today -- see "I love Lucy and the Honeymooners"

Some lists are about the film makig process "Citizen Kane" and understandably makes many lists. To me though entertainments should be there -- Star Wars always makes the list -- but most everyone I know prefers The Empire Strikes Back -- why not at least be "together" the way the two Godfathers are joined?

Speaking of the Godfatther -- to me Cabaret was a better movie -- and The Conversation was Coppola's true masterpiece.

81/2 I've seen twice -- so freaking what?

[dean_martin]

81/2 I've seen twice -- so freaking what?

I have to disagree with you on 8 1/2. It draws me in like a good AN system does with music! I think it's better than La Dolce Vita. I have the same response with Touch of Evil as compared to Citizen Kane.

Although I agree with the numerous glaring omissions noted by all, I was surprised with 2 Sergio Leone films being listed. Both are westerns and both are extremely deserving, IMO. But most "list-makers" would probably pick one and leave the other off.

I would like to see Tod Browning's "Freaks" get a little more recognition for it's controversial subject matter and its inspiration for many indie film makers of the modern era. I think I can count on one hand the good indie films that DON'T have a character suffering from some kind of physical deformity.

I also think that City of God was a band-wagon or trendy pick. I've seen it twice recently and I agree that it's an excellent film. I also like the realistic film making style. The story was interesting, but a little stereotypical in spots. It's one of the better recent films I've seen, but I just don't think it belongs in a top 100 list.