It’s a relative thing. I never said # of Westerns = # of Musicals = # of Gangster films. Every list will vary. But the exclusion of a genre is actually much more elitist–the implication is that one genre is “worthier” than another. Great Art is more likely found in Drama versus Comedy, for example. The exclusion of smaller genre films usually results in this reason, but it feeds back into my original argument: “recognizing that there is not one strict, rigid criteria to what makes a movie Great.” If a Top 100 list has no horror or science fiction films, it’s not because there have never been any made good enough (in 100 years!); it’s simply a product of this mindset.
Needless to say, some genres are still small enough that one might argue the pickings are slimmer than others. The Time list appears to be saying Martial Arts should no longer be relegated to that category.
But history changes and so do cultural values and tastes. Greatness is pretty subjective as it is; to set it in stone only stifles debate, since it rules out the possibility that there are films that are equally great but also relatively obscure. Kurosawa’s more famous than Ozu or Mizoguchi, but his films tend to make more lists because his films are better known and more widely distributed, not necessarily because they’re inherently better. I’d argue that Intruder in the Dust is a better film than To Kill a Mockingbird. Ditto Men in War over The Bridge on the River Kwai. Most people who’ve contested this, I’ve found, haven’t actually seen both–just the famous one. But some films are so enshrined that nobody questions their Greatness, when there is room for honest debate and dissension. In most of these lists, nobody suggests alternatives, when, very often, they are sacred cows that are due for a slaying.
So I’d say, just the opposite is true. Assuming there is a list of Greats that is fixed, and not fluid, is what’s truly elitist, because then that excludes a wide body of filmwork that may be equally worthy but not blessed with the same reputation/success/number of awards/availability.
Does anybody actually like Charade? Really? I love Audrey Hepburn dearly, and so I can tolerate watching any film she’s in, but honestly, I think she chose to make some bloody awful films. And what is all this Finding Nemo business? However, I strongly agree with the choice of Notorious: it’s simply a beautiful film.
But where is Young Frankenstein? And what about a good Katharine Hepburn film or two: The Philadelphia Story, Bringing Up Baby, The Lion in Winter, or possibly one of the 40s-era films in which she is constantly molesting Spencer Tracy?
It’s good to see that the list includes selections from the earlier days of film, but they left out Battleship Potemkin. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0015648/
I am a big fan of horror/sci-fi but the Fly (1986) which I did enjoy, wouldn’t even make my Top 100 list.
Bride of Frankensteininstead of the original ???
The list omits a LOT of comedies (as others have mentioned).
What? They didn’t include “Joe Versus the Volcano”???
Me too! Drunken Master II is awesome. One of my favorite movies - it just manages to beat Chan’s Police Story, and very few movies in the genre have been able to match it. The Once Upon a Time in China series perhaps.
Do you know Fist of Legend, the Jet Li version, though? (interesting movie that has been done by Bruce Lee, Jacky Chan AND Jet Li).
That’s a masterpiece, and I think perhaps the only I rank above Drunken Master II. But perhaps it loses points for originilaty / benchmarking, and Jacky Chan doing his own stunts as well as being mostly responsible for the directing and the whole choreography in Drunken Master II does give him the edge in terms of classic label.
Has anyone actually seen Some Like it Hot? How does it make it so high on these godforsaken film lists? It has dialogue on par with Baywatch, puns up the wazoo, and enough cringes to make Scooby Doo uncomfortable.
There are some decent jokes here and there, but I dare you to sit through the rest of it.
I would make dozens of changes but so would both Schickel and Corliss. They each wrote an original independent list of 100 and only 40 odd were on both lists…they argued out the other 50 odd. So some of the movies you think should be there may have been on one list, although Gone With The Wind was, quite correctly, on neither.
You’re saying nothing interesting if all you’re doing is pointing out individual movies on this list that you don’t like and individual movies that aren’t on the list that you think should be on it. So what? Of course everybody has different tastes. How does that prove anything? Why don’t you show that you’re able to put together a list of your favorite 100 films? That would show that you’re able to put in the same amount of work as Schickel and Corliss have. Random sniping at their tastes proves nothing.
Yup. Top tier: Seven Samurai, Ikiru, High and Low, Ran, Rashomon, Throne of Blood.
I would put Yojimbo with The Hidden Fortress, Kagemusha and Drunken Angel. Not bad by any means–and admittedly a lot of fun–but certainly not the Kurosawa film I would’ve picked for this particular list (especially since 2 Leones are also on the list). Still, there are worse films that made the cut (though I’ll still defend the general quality of the list overall, biases and nit-picks aside)
I’m betting this reviewer is old. Films from the first half of the 20th Century seem suspiciously over-represented.
I would definitely scratch The Fly, Finding Nemo (WTF?), and E.T. from the list. E.T. was heartwarming and all that junk, but top 100? C’mon. And if I was going to put horror films on the list, I wouldn’t exclude The Sixth Sense.
Comedy, on the other hand, seems under-represented. No Monty Python? No Mel Brooks? No Spinal Tap? Maybe that stuff is too “culty” for serious reviewers.
p.s. - I never understood what’s so freaking great about The Godfather.
Bride is a superior film to the original on a technical and thematic level. I enjoy both… Prefer the less light hearted Frankenstein but Whale’s best work was in the sequel.
Where the hell is M?? That is a film which holds up as well today as it did then.
Class me with those who’d put Seven Samurai and/or Rashomon in there in place of Ikiru and Yojimbo.
They don’t have any of my personal top three choices for Best Science Fiction film – 2001, Forbidden Planet and The Day the Earth Stood Still. Any of these is worth ten **E.T.**s.
2001, in particular, was a landmark film in the way it changed the perception of science fiction films, and of space travel. It represented the same quantum leap in special effects technology as King Kong did. And it gave new emphasis to the use of Classical Music in film scores.
A serious omission.
But the list isn’t titled “Our 100 Favorite Films” it’s “The 100 Best Films”. If you say a movie is your favorite, people can wonder why but they can’t argue that another film is actually your favorite. If you claim one film is the best, you’re stating something as objective fact. People then grounds to argue that other films are better.
For Example
Bride Of Frankenstein
I agree that it’s better than the original. Pretorius, besides adding comedy (his only vice), adds detail to doctor Frankenstein by contrast. Frankenstein is motivated by a desire for knowledge and a desire to help the world. He wonders if his work is right or sane. Pretorius is motivated by his desire to become godlike. He cares only whether he’ll succeed and won’t let things like morals stand in his way.
Plus, it’s tough to beat a line like “We belong dead.”
