What? So what if the movie was bleak? This is probably the last time that the best movie winner went to the best movie and not the highest grossing popular movie. The academy got that one right.
I’ll second The Iron Giant, if only because it’s a great movie you can take the entire family out to see.
Though Toy Story 2 certainly comes close. Love the musical number at the end.
Lock Stock & Two Smoking Barrels
In no particular order, I’m sure I’m leaving some out.
Sling Blade-last and only other time I cried at the movies(ET)
Fargo-True filmmaking
LA Confidential-Great film noir
Goodfellas-Scorsese’s Best (damn you Dancing with Wolves)
Copland-(great cast of characters, not a forced pace)
Reservoir Dogs-(Pulp Fiction without the slick)
Usual Suspects-(Screenwriting at it’s best)
Saving Private Ryan-(Great direction)
American Beauty-(Ditto Usual Suspects)
The Apostle-(I think it’s the best acting performance since De Niro’s Jake La Motta)
- Schindler’s List (93)
- Unforgiven (92)
- Goodfellas (90)
- Hoop Dreams (94)
- Pulp Fiction (94)
- Fargo (96)
- Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (00)
- Three Colors: Red (94)
- Shawshank Redemption (94)
- Memento (01)
- Requiem for a Dream (00)
- Happiness (98)
- Dead Man Walking (95)
- Being John Malkovich (99)
- The Ice Storm (97)
adam, I was poking fun at the stuffy Academy, not their choice. Normally, the Academy wouldn’t touch a movie with a true downer ending with a ten-foot pole.
Yes, I see what you are saying. I disagree with it. Titanic proved that the Academy is willing to whore itself out but I think, at least I used to think, that they looked at the merits of how the film was made. It is, after all, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, not the Academy of Fluff Movies for Sheeple.
La Belle Noiseuse
Dead Man
The Double Life of Veronique
In the Mood for Love
Lone Star
A Moment of Innocence
Simple Men
The Straight Story
Underground
The Wrong Trousers
Shawshank Redemption is not too long. The guy spends 30 years in prison and you want it to last 80 minutes? It’s barely over 2 hours fercrissakes. You listed Pulp Fiction and Goodfellas in your post. Guess what, they are both longer than Shawshank. Funny, that you didn’t use length against those two movies. Their time in prison is supposed to drag and seem to go very slow, that’s the point! Time moves very slow in prison. This is a very subtle film. Did you notice that we never see any bright colors at all until the very end when we see the bright blue pacific ocean? The score is amazing. The sweeping external shots of the prison are just breathtaking. I have actually paused the DVD during these scenes just to look at the cinematography. The scene where Waren Norton gives Andy back his bible and tells him that “salvation lies within” not knowing that Andy’s rock hammer is hidden inside it gives me goosebumps.
You are entitled to your opinion, no question, but I don’t know how anyone cannot love this movie. The main complaint I always hear about this film is its length. However, it isn’t even that long (2 hours is not too long for a movie, unless you have ADD). I think that the pace of the film is actually what they have a problem with.
Not alone. I liked it, thought it was good, but nothing amazing or outstanding for me.
**
Don’t get me started. I love Saving Private Ryan in general as entertaining, but from a screenwriting point of veiw, it sucked. The bookends with the old man are useless, as is the scenes of people after the big invasion where they are writing letters. When they find Ryan he refuses an order from a superior officer. WTF?! None of the Rangers should have been there for the battle at the end. Ryan was given an order from a Captain, they could have legally tied him up and dragged him home. They could have easily shaved about 20 minutes from this movie.
**
Aside from having Keanu in it, I really don’t get the big deal about this movie. It had cool effects. Big deal, so did Independence Day, so did Jurassic Park. I was not impressed with the Matrix at all.
**
Ok, in all seriousness, what the hell was so good about American Beauty? I’m really missing something here. I thought it was a bundled load of crappy cliches all slammed together in one film. I saw nothing original in this film. A well-acted piece of crap is still a piece of crap.
I can’t believe I left Goodfellas and The Usual Suspects off my list though.
Everyone has mentioned all the movies I would have put up. You all have said it, and I’ll say it again,
The Shawshank Redemption is hands-down the best movie of the 90’s.
That said, no one has mentioned Forrest Gump or Philadelphia(unless I missed something). I think Tom Hanks cemented a place in history with his films in the 90’s, however similar his characters were.
-
“Naked” starring David Thewlis. The screenplay was flawless, the dialouge doing a great job of making the lead character Johnny both brilliant and insane at the same time.
-
“Dancer in the Dark” starring Bjork. This movie, a musical, is so dramatic and harsh and beautiful and sad and raw that I was speechless for an hour. Bjork deserved an Oscar.
-
“pi” Directed By Darren Aronofsky and starring Sean Gullette. A movie that brought out both the beauty of mathematics and the dangers of obsession.
thats abouit it for now,
peace,
JB
American Beauty, easily.
- Pulp Fiction (94)
- Fight Club (99)
- Goodfellas (90)
- American History X (98)
- American Beauty (99)
- Rushmore (98)
- True Romance (93)
- The Sixth Sense (99)
- Fall (97) by Eric Schaeffer
- Trust (90) by Hal Hartley
I have soft spots for the last two…personal reasons.
and the rest of my 90’s films that I’ve given at least a 9 out of 10:
Braveheart(95)
Reservoir Dogs(92)
Saving Private Ryan(98)
The Doors(91)
Gladiator(00)
Beg to differ with you, Crunchy. While the bookends were poorly done, they were necessary in order to place the film in historic context; the scenes with the secretaries were crucial exposition.
As for Ryan refusing an order - he didn’t. He disagreed with an officer, argued with him politely, and finally convinced him to rescind his command. This kind of thing happens all the time in your more enlightened armies. Hell, I’ve done it myself often enough, and I’ve never gotten into much trouble. The fact that a soldier has some lumps of metal on his shoulders doen’t make him God; the whole “Sir Yes Sir” attitue dies out pretty quickly after Basic Training.
Yes, sure, they could have tied Ryan up and brought him home - but they’d have to fight his friends first. Military law doesn’t carry much weight in the field, and soldiers don’t follow combat officers because of the Rules. They foillow because the officer knows what he’s doing (did you notice how Hank’s character knew how to set up a defense?), and is willing to take the responsibility of leadership.
A good officer leads by consent, not force.
One of the neat things about “Saving Private Ryan,” which I think was largely missed, was the performance of Tom Hanks. I think he was nominated for the Oscar bcause he’s Tom Hanks, and I think many people missed the subtle, nuanced brilliance of his performance.
It’s a misconception, supported by movies, that the sort of people who make the best soldier are either ultra-violent psychopaths a la Rambo or cold, calculated killers like Kurt Russell in “Soldier” - violent, testosterone-laden kill-creatures who are deprived of other personal facets or emotions. In fact, the best soldiers are invariably balanced, intelligent individuals who think creatively and pay only the briefest attention to the pomp and circumstance of military bull. Macho men are terrible soldiers, and anyone who’s REALLY into military bull and pageantry is almost certainly an anal-retentive, authoritarian mommy’s boy who will be no more useful on the battlefield than a mannequin.
The Tom Hanks character was the perfect example of a good soldier; a quiet, intelligent, emotionally balanced, quick-thinking man who was willing to listen to his subordinates, think through situations using unusual solutions, who had both physical and moral bravery without being foolhardy, and who cared about the welfare of his men but was willing to economically risk them to accomplish his mission. Rodat wrote a character who comprised the true ideal of a soldier, and by knowing what REALLY makes a good soldier, succeeded in creating a sympathetic and human character. You rarely see such accurate depictions in film, and it was one of the film’s hidden assets.
Now, to Capt. Miller’s decision to stay and fight with Ryan. One of the traits of a genuinely skilled officer, if we are to believe the experts, is the ability to recognize the difference between following direct orders and accomplishing missions. Poor officers will invariably follow orders to the letter, or will decide the orders are impossible, and will take no further action until ordered to do so. Good officers will change the parameters of their orders on the fly without changing the direction of their mission. Good officers will do this because they know that orders given at Time A cannot fully account for changes in the situation that may occur between Time A and Time B. The orders may simply no longer be relevant at a future point in time, and new information may require a different approach. Going back and getting new orders every time new information is received is not possible. An officer must, within the scope of his responsibility, be able to take initiative and make his own decisions, based on whatever the key mission to be accomplished is. That is the situation Miller is in when he gets to Rummele; he has one mission (get Ryan) but now sees another, greater mission (beat Germans) in jeopardy, in the form of the threat of a river crossing. There was no way, when he recieved his orders, that his superiors could have known that he would find Ryan at the very same time and place that his squad could play a decisive role in stopping a key German advance. The order he was given is no longer entirely relevant given the information he now possesses, and there is no time to get new orders. He must make the decision himself, based on his assessment of the relative importance of the missions and where his resources can best be allocated.
So, Miller has a direct order (Get Ryan) which on several occasions conflicts with the overarching purpose of the invasion (crush the Germans.) That happens twice; once, when they charge the machine gun nest where they capture Steamboat Willie; and again, when they choose to stay in Rummele with Ryan and the paratroopers. Miller’s decision-making is consistent through both situations; both times, he tries to continue with the mission to save Ryan but takes an action to serve the greater mission. In the first case he destroys an outpost to save other invasion forces; in the second he defends a bridge to impede the German counterattack. In the first case the cost of his decision (losing Wade) may well have been too high - in the second, maybe it wasn’t, but of course we don’t really know what would have happened if he’d acted differently. However, his thinking IS consistent in both cases, and that’s one of the reasons we see them attack the machine gun nest - his decision to defend the bridge is logically consistent with a decision we have already seen him make. In my opinion, his handling of the situation at Rummele was exactly correct; faced with two conflicting missions, he chose to expend the majority of his energies on the one of greater importance, defending the bridge, while protecting the target of his other mission, Ryan, as best he could.
Does he make the RIGHT decision in either case? Hard to say, but that was part of the movie’s theme, anyway - the rather capricious and arbitrary nature of war, where you might get blown away and you might not and you don’t really know.
Was GoodFellas 1990, or was it 1989? I can’t remember, either way, damn good flick. And, datewise, what about Cinema Paradiso? And the Three Colors Trilogy? I can’t remember anything…
Anyways (No Order):
- American Beauty
- Chasing Amy
- Saving Private Ryan
- Usual Suspects
- Arlington Road (this scared the shit out of me)
- Fight Club
- Sixth Sense
- The Writer (Written, Directed, And Starring The SDMB’s Very Own Totoro!
And many many many more.
Hmm, I must say that Fight Club was by far the movie that impressed me the most of the 90’s, followed in second by The Matrix.
I think Keanu can act, and did so very well in that movie.
This thread has got me wanting to watch this LA Confidential which I don’t think I know a thing about.
And really, I liked Titanic and am not afraid to admit it. I cry like a little girl every time I see it… though I look at it more as a disaster flick than a love story.
I did enjoy The Usual Suspects quite a bit, but I don’t know that it would make the best movies of the 90’s. I think pi was a very good choice as well; the filming and the script made a very tight-- and intense-- movie.
True Romance in a solid first place, the rest in no particular order:
Fight Club
The Matrix
pi
Titanic
Pulp Fiction
And what is the deal with Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon? I just didn’t find it to be that great of a movie. Decent, but great? I thought Jet Li’s Fist of Legend was much more intriguing, and had a much better storyline. Though that might not be a 90’s film…
That’s a toughy, movies are my thing.
My top five
- Tombstone - Doc Holliday is my hero.
- 10 Things I Hate About You - Contemporary Shakespeare. I love it.
- Searching for Bobby Fischer - Anyone that can make an interesting movie about chess has got my vote. (even without the chess it’s a good movie, you can sub the chess for anything).
- Meet Joe Black - Anthony Hopkins and Brad Pitt fit so well together. Brad Pitt had an interesting character. Both Innocent and…whats the word… knowledgable I guess (although not the word I was looking for).
- With Honors - Joe Pesci’s character says my favorite line - “Winners don’t know they’re in a race, they just love to run”. The movie is so much more than the one line though. Therea are 4 great characters other than Joe Pesci that are totally enjoyable.
A few thoughts:
First, what a great decade for kid’s movies! *Toy Story 1 & 2, James & The Giant Peach, The Nightmare Before Christmas, Indian In The Cupboard, Chicken Run, Iron Giant, A Bug’s Life, Babe, *etc. Some top-notch kiddie fare, and let’s face it-a lot of us adults liked 'em too. Myself, I rushed out and got the Toy Story DVD box set as soon as it was available for preorder.
But my favorite 90’s movies would have to include:
Pulp Fiction
Ed Wood
Rushmore
Sixth Sense
Fight Club
Crouching Tiger
Trainspotting
Crumb
American Movie
The Madness Of King George
Dark City
Shadow Of The Vampire (was that 2000? I forget)
There’s a ton of others, but that’ll do for now.