# NY Times Readers' 100 Top Movies of the 21st Century **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Tags:** movies\ **Created:** [July 3, 2025, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441 "2025-07-03T12:46:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/61 "2025-07-04T13:53:06Z")
I don’t think it’s notable at all. Popular doesn’t mean best. It’s not like there are 10 MCU movies on the list. Or Harry Potter, Transformers, Jurassic World, or Star Wars. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/62 "2025-07-04T14:00:07Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Popular doesn’t mean best. On any list compiled by humans, it kind of does. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/63 "2025-07-04T14:00:30Z")
> [@Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](#): > > Sorry, is RRR an abbreviation? It is an Indian movie (specifically, Telugu). The title “RRR” stands for “_ **Roudram Ranam Rudhiram** _” which roughly translates as “Fierce Death Blood” or, to follow the original title’s alliteration, “Rise, Roar, Revolt”. It was inspired by _Inglourious Basterds_ and is about as historically accurate (which is to say, not remotely). In short, it is a story of two men fighting in their own way for independence of India against some British people so comically evil they make the real atrocities committed by the British in India look tame. If you want full-on, extreme action with no consideration for history or basic reality, this is the film for you. Also, there is a SPECTACULAR dance-off sequence in it. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/64 "2025-07-04T14:41:55Z")
> [@Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](#): > > Sorry, is RRR an abbreviation? Google just leads me to a seemingly average Indian movie Seemingly, but not actually average. It’s pretty incredible. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/65 "2025-07-04T14:43:11Z")
You know what? I actually don’t hate this list. I normally hate lists like this, and while there are things I don’t agree with, as a whole it’s not terrible. Overrated: Interstellar – this has actually been growing on me and I watched a couple of those film analysis youtube videos that sold me on some of the merits of this film, but certainly not at #5. The Dark Knight is the best of the superhero movies but superhero movies just… aren’t very good. It’s a good movie, but #6? I’d be ok with like #50 Mad Max: Fury Road. I actually like this one quite a bit, but top 10 is way too high. It has good stunts and it’s cool how much they did practically, but there’s no way that deserves #7. Get Out – good, but #17 good? No. Oppenheimer – it’s okay. Never quite got the hype for this one. If it wasn’t a Christopher Nolan film would anyone even care? It’s a biopic that tried to make a congressional hearing about an ultimately unimportant nominee for secretary of commerce or whatever seem like a thriller. Shouldn’t be on this list. The Departed – I hate mobster movies so I guess this may be lost on me but I found the whole thing really boring. I wonder if this partially got on here because people couldn’t put casino or goodfellas on. Top Gun Maverick – I have no idea how this one was such a sensation, it was kind of dumb and unremarkable except being a 35 year old sequel with the same star. But on its merits totally forgettable. And I’m in the demographic for cool ass navy/aerial shit. Avengers: Endgame. None of the Marvel movies deserve to be on here, and that one in particular isn’t especially good, but I feel like it’s almost a participation award standing in for all of the Marvel movies. Underrated: Blade Runner 2049 - some of the best worldbuilding of any film, amazing artistry in the actual creation of the film in terms of cinematography, sets, etc. Her – I’m having a hard time making an objective case as to why this should be higher, but it was a very different examination of AI than pretty much all the other AI films and I really like it. The Prestige – The movies with a twist where you go back and watch the movie and see it in a totally different light – this is the best of the bunch. I really appreciate the plotting of this one, the themes, and all the twists and turns, and the hidden/double meaning of dialogue and scenes. Should have been included: Ex Machina - I often feel like people don’t quite “get” this one, though it’s not very complicated, based on how I see people discussing the end of the film. It’s a very interesting movie that sort of fools the audience without fooling the audience. I suspect that doesn’t generally apply to the people here though. Annihilation - personal favorite, I like the cosmic horror mysterious sci-fi aspects and some of the subtextual themes are interesting. John Wick – sort of revived/redefined action movies for the 2010s and a very “pure” movie that does what it sets out to do very well. It’s one of the iconic films of the century. It’s simple but perfectly executed. The Raid 2 maybe? The plot is pretty silly and I’m not even really a martial arts movie fan but what this film does is pretty bonkers. > [@Dropo](#): > > _No Country for Old Men_ was premised on an act of stupidity So? Does that somehow invalidate the movie? A lot of things in the real world are premised on an act of stupidity. It’s a completely believable premise and consistent with the characters and I have no idea how this could be a criticism of the film. Can we only have films about perfect-acting geniuses? > [@Chronos](#): > > but I just want to make sure you’re not getting it mixed up with The Fountain, which was horrible and is deservedly not on the list I’m not sure if this is the thread to debate specific movies, but The Fountain is one of my favorites. It has an incredible performance by Hugh Jackman and it’s an ambitious film that tries to tackle the whole fear and philosophy of handling death in a pretty credible way. I could see why it wouldn’t connect with some people but not why it’s bad. I’ve only seen about 2/3 of the films on this list. By reputation I feel like some of these probably don’t belong here but I’m not gonna say that about a film I’ve never seen. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/66 "2025-07-04T14:45:24Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Wasn’t most of Spielberg’s work 20th century? He’s made 16 movies in the 21st Century, and while nobody would argue that as a whole, they’re better than his earlier works, some of them are very good. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/67 "2025-07-04T14:47:36Z")
Empirically, it doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/68 "2025-07-04T15:26:14Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Her – I’m having a hard time making an objective case as to why this should be higher, but it was a very different examination of AI than pretty much all the other AI films and I really like it. I was really hoping it would land exactly next to Lost in Translation on the list. ---
**Author:** ![dorvann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df705f/32.png) [@dorvann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dorvann)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/69 "2025-07-04T15:53:18Z")
Personally I would have put _Logan_ on the list. It is probably one of the best superhero movies–better than _The Dark Knight_ and _Avengers: End Game_. ---
**Author:** ![dorvann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df705f/32.png) [@dorvann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dorvann)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/70 "2025-07-04T15:55:33Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > It’s a shame that none of the _Star Wars_ movies are on there. Not because they deserve to be on there, which they don’t. But they did deserve to be have been made better, so that they could have been on there in some alternate universe where better versions were made. Of all the recent Star Wars film— I would say _Rogue One: A Star Wars Story_ probably was the best. ---
**Author:** ![Dropo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ce7236/32.png) [@Dropo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dropo)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/71 "2025-07-04T17:35:57Z")
Re: _No Country for Old Men_ > [@SenorBeef](#): > > So? Does that somehow invalidate the movie? A lot of things in the real world are premised on an act of stupidity. It’s a completely believable premise and consistent with the characters and I have no idea how this could be a criticism of the film. Can we only have films about perfect-acting geniuses? It’s not a “completely believable premise” that Thanos would go back to the scene of a drug deal to give water to a dying narco. It’s an idiot movie conceit enabling the story to go forward (because he is spotted). Given that the story hinges on it, I would say it does tend to “invalidate the movie.” If that’s too harsh, then I would simply say it’s enough to keep the movie off a “Top 100” list of 21st century films. If Thanos had been spotted the first time he visited the site or if he went back for money he didn’t take the first time, those would have been more compelling premises. And I didn’t even mention the non-ending which I felt demeaned viewers. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/72 "2025-07-04T17:57:22Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I’m not sure if this is the thread to debate specific movies, but The Fountain is one of my favorites. It has an incredible performance by Hugh Jackman and it’s an ambitious film that tries to tackle the whole fear and philosophy of handling death in a pretty credible way. I could see why it wouldn’t connect with some people but not why it’s bad. My personal opinion is that it’s a beautiful film and a great performance by Jackman but it really _doesn’t_ “tackle the whole fear and philosophy of handling death in a pretty credible way”. My takeaway was that the whole thing was a visually stunning but extremely shallow way to say “It’s okay that people die” and that’s it, something that could have been summed up on a cross-stitched couch cushion. But if you liked it, that’s cool too. ---
**Author:** ![tomcar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tomcar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomcar)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/73 "2025-07-04T19:02:13Z")
Burning, I Saw the TV Glow and Your Name were all on my ballot and I think they are worthy. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/74 "2025-07-04T19:12:18Z")
I interpreted it as a way of introducing some eastern philosophy about death, thinking about becoming part of the great renewing system of life. It’s not the deepest message for someone already familiar with that, but I thought it was a genuine and emotionally resonant way of making that connection to some people who may not have thought about it in that way before. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/75 "2025-07-04T20:43:37Z")
> [@tomcar](#): > > Burning, I Saw the TV Glow and Your Name were all on my ballot and I think they are worthy. Of those three, I would say Your Name is probably the best to join the list. I liked most of I Saw the TV Glow, including the ending, but boy do I ever dislike Burning. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/76 "2025-07-04T20:56:46Z")
> [@Dropo](#): > > If Thanos had been spotted the first time he visited the site or if he went back for money he didn’t take the first time, those would have been more compelling premises. > > And I didn’t even mention the non-ending which I felt demeaned viewers. He he gone back for money, that would have better fed the themes of the movie? The ending to “No Country for Old Men”, where Ed Tom dreams of his father; how his father works through hardship in order to build a better future for those that come after, demeaned the viewers? Gave them too much credit, maybe. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/77 "2025-07-04T21:06:20Z")
Movies I think belong absolutely nowhere near this list: **The Departed** - I also found this to be quite dull. **Barbie** - Cute, but not great. **Killers of the Flower Moon** - I mean…it’s OK. Not great stuff, though. **Pride and Prejudice** - presuming this is the Keira Knightley one, it was only OK. Note: I think Silence is the best Martin Scorsese movie I’ve seen and it did not make the list. It might even be top 10 or top 15 worthy. The ones they picked from are…not great. ---
**Author:** ![Dropo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ce7236/32.png) [@Dropo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dropo)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/78 "2025-07-04T21:47:15Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > He he gone back for money, that would have better fed the themes of the movie? Going back to the scene of the drug deal has nothing to do with the themes of the film. It simply motivates the protagonist to flee with the money because he is spotted by people who come after him. If he doesn’t flee - if he doesn’t think anyone is after him - Chigurh finds him at home and the movie ends after about 20 minutes. The point here is that going back for the purpose of giving water to random dying drug dealing scum stands out as not being a credible or compelling motivation. > [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > The ending to “No Country for Old Men”, where Ed Tom dreams of his father; how his father works through hardship in order to build a better future for those that come after, demeaned the viewers? Gave them too much credit, maybe. The Coens bros are in the habit of ending (some of) their films without providing a sense of resolution. While this may reflect reality to a greater degree than the cliché Hollywood “happy ending,” it tends to leave viewers unsatisfied and with a sour aftertaste. In the case of _NCfOM_, Ed Tom tells his story, the end. What he says may be related to the film’s themes, but the movie dies while he just sits there and talks. I would call this “demeaning the viewer” because I (would like to) imagine another ending was possible that more successfully and cinematically wrapped things up, e.g., Chigurh survives the car accident…only to get hit by another car. Other alternatives were certainly possible. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/79 "2025-07-04T21:56:36Z")
How loyal is the movie to Cormac McCarthy’s book? I haven’t read it (The Road was enough for me, thank you very much). Is the ending the same? ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2025, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441/80 "2025-07-04T23:58:16Z")
Chigurh’s story ends the same way, but there is more about Bell before the book ends. Overall, the film is extremely faithful to the novel. Literally word for word, in parts. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ny-times-readers-100-top-movies-of-the-21st-century/1020441.md?page=5)