I wanted to do a movie review.\u00a0 I\u2019ve recorded Barry Lyndon and was going to watch it.\u00a0 But I got home late from work and the movie is three hours long and I thought I might fall asleep before I could write a review of it.\u00a0 So, I\u2019ll wait for a better opportunity.<\/p>\n
But it got me thinking about all those lists of the top twenty, fifty, one hundred or two hundred movies of all time.\u00a0 So, I looked at a bunch of lists.\u00a0 Some by leading directors, some by professional critics and some by just regular people.<\/p>\n
I was horrified.<\/p>\n
So many movies that I know are truly awful get on these lists.\u00a0 It makes you wonder if there can truly be a list of the top twenty movies of all time, never mind the top one hundred.\u00a0 One list from IMDB had, \u201cThe Shawshank Redemption\u201d as the second-best movie of all time.\u00a0 It had, \u201cRaging Bull\u201d as the fourth-best.\u00a0 I find both of these rankings impossible.\u00a0 There are literally dozens of movies better than either one of these (in my opinion).\u00a0 By the same token, the list made up by famous directors also had movies listed that I\u2019ve seen that were awful.\u00a0 Any top 100 list that includes, \u201cEraserhead\u201d needs to be scrutinized very carefully to see if the judges have been using LSD at the time of the survey.<\/p>\n
Okay, maybe there is no such thing as an objective list of the best films.\u00a0 But surely there must be a way to write an algorithm that incorporates several criteria to eliminate the worst excesses of either hyper-artistic avant-gardism and knuckle-dragging philistinism and provide a solid dependable list of very good films to look at.\u00a0 I think it can be done.<\/p>\n
One thing though.\u00a0 I think it is necessary to divide the list into categories.\u00a0 Comedies, dramas, action-adventure and other genre movies need to be judged separately.\u00a0 It\u2019s too difficult comparing films in different categories against each other.\u00a0 And in a way it\u2019s unhelpful.\u00a0 Someone who hates comedies isn\u2019t going to agree that any comedy can be better than the films he likes.\u00a0 And vice versa.<\/p>\n
But for today\u2019s post I\u2019m going to ask the audience to take an active role.\u00a0 Pick one movie that you think has been neglected by critics that deserves to be elevated to a loftier status.\u00a0 And then pick a movie that is hailed by critics or the public as outstanding that in your opinion stinks.\u00a0 If you can only do one or the other, please feel free to provide that.\u00a0 I\u2019m always looking for good movies to watch and I think it will be interesting to hear what movie you think doesn\u2019t deserve the acclaim it currently enjoys.<\/p>\n
I\u2019ll start the ball rolling.\u00a0 Hitchcock\u2019s, \u201cVertigo\u201d always ends up in the top twenty movies according to high-brow critics and top flight directors.\u00a0 I\u2019ve seen it and think it\u2019s terrible.\u00a0 I\u2019m not sure what exactly all the hype is about but it must be the \u201ccinematography.\u201d\u00a0 Something about camera angles.\u00a0 Well, they can keep it.<\/p>\n
A movie I think has been overlooked is an earlier Coen Brothers movie, \u201cMiller\u2019s Crossing.\u201d\u00a0 Gabriel Byrne is the protagonist; a gangster named Tom Reagan who works for Leo O’Bannon played enthusiastically by Albert Finney.\u00a0 John Turturro and Steve Buscemi are also part of the cast.\u00a0 True to the Coen Brothers style, there is over the top violence and emotional havoc in all directions but the effect is powerful and very interesting.\u00a0 If you like gangster movies this one is worth a watch.<\/p>\n
So, what has everyone else got for the pot?<\/p>\n