100

[Vic Sage]

metirish wrote: Vic Sage wrote: what? No "Fargo." yes, no "Fargo". Actually, "Fargo" was one of the movies i was specifically thinking of in my earlier post, when i was discussing movies that were "flavors of the month" and were too new to judge critically, and so didn't belong on the list. Its no surprise to me at all that, upon later reflection, the judges reconsidered that one. As they may well do with "forrest gump", "shawshank redemption" and "titanic" amongst others, at some point down the road. Which is why i think any movies within that last 20 years should just be disqualified from consideration, until they've stood the test of time. Can you explain that further ,why would a judge/critic or whoever it is that helps compile such lists think that a movie they thought was "classic" in 1995 upon further review didn't think of it as classic say in 2007. What would be so different about the movie 10 or 20 years later that would make that person think differently about it. You mentioned Fargo,I watched it a few years ago and thought it was annoying,thought it was great when it first came out.

In his day, Salieri was one of the most successful and celebrated composers. Mozart was a brilliant piano player who wrote these very strange shows. I think if you asked the same critics of that period to make an assessment later, they might have had the distance to render more objective opinions about their relative qualities.

First of all, some films are of their time, some are ahead of their times, expressing a vision that the society is not yet ready for. Critics and judges are people, not machines. They are swayed by various subjective forces at play in the culture at the time a movie comes out. Their assessments may have been appropriate in the context of a film's particular time period, but in another era, the movie may not hold up. I think "Fargo" is one of those movies. I think there are movies on the list now that may fall into that category as well.

And i think there are movies that later come to seem precient, though perhaps unappreciated in their own time.

If you had made this list in the mid 1980s, it is unlikely that BLADERUNNER would have appeared on it. But inasmuch as the first list came out 16 years after the movie's first release, it had enough time for people to see it on video/dvd and a reassessment emerged, recognizing not just its own greatness, but its influence on filmmaking thereafter.

Thats why a moratorium should be imposed on films within the last 15-20 years when creating such lists. Perhaps FORREST GUMP or TOY STORY wouldn't push its way onto such a list in 10 years time, and perhaps MOULIN ROUGE would.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I agree with that.

A work that is acclaimed in its time is certainly a credit to the artist who created it, but it has to stand the test of time to be considered a "classic."

Toy Story is a great example. I think it's a terrific movie, and I think it will hold up over time. But in 1995 its cutting edge computer animation was part of what dazzled the viewers.

Watching it twelve years later, we're no so longer impressed or distracted by the technology, and we can see the great characters and story-telling.

[Edgy MD]

Citizen Kane and It's A Wonderful Life both opened to mixed reviews and weak box office. It took a lot of reconsideration to ensure their places on this list.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The Gettysburg Address was considered a dud right after Lincoln delivered it.

[metirish]

Thanks Vic for taking to time to answer ,I'm viewing movies in a different way of course,for entertainment and not looking at what impact a Bladerunner would have on the movie making industry and I suppose the likes of Pixar today.

[nymr83]

i don't really care what impact a movie had on future movies, i care what impact it had on me, the viewer, when i saw it.

[Edgy MD]

How about if had a different impact on your sister? And then you saw it three years later, and the impact on you was more profound in a different way?

Birth of a Nation had the impact of helping to revive the long-dormant Ku Klux Klan. Now the impact is... different.

[Edgy MD]

It seems they have the typical problem of whether to think of serials as multiple films or one. Godfather Part II is an exception.

[Willets Point]

I don't agree with the moratorium simply because the list itself is a product of its time in of itself and there will be new lists that reconsider things down the road. I like that a list from 2007 will include and exclude things that future generations will scratch their heads about.

[MFS62]

There are several silent movies on the list.
But it puzzles me why some of the greatest silents ever made have fallen off this list;
Potemkin - Sergei Eizenstein
Napoleon - Abel Gance (a 7 hour masterpiece with its own great orchestral score)
Thunder Over Mexico - also by Eizenstein - possibly the most cinematically beautiful movies ever - each frame can stand alone as a classic piece of art.

And what about The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari - the first great horror film?

I can't believe how anyone who has seen them could have replaced them with movies such as Easy Rider, Tootsie and some others on this list.

Later

[Edgy MD]

It's the American Film Institute.

The list is composed of American films.

[MFS62]

Oh,

Thanks. I thought I had seen Napoleon on a prior list. Must have been a different list.

Later

[Guest sharpie]

How did British films like Lawrence of Arabia and Bridge On the River Kwai make it on there? Maybe they were American-financed.

[Edgy MD]

Wikipedia says about Kwai:

The film was an international co-production between companies in the UK and the USA. It is set in Burma, but was filmed mostly near Kitulgala, Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), with a few scenes shot in England.

[Vic Sage]

I thought Murnau's SUNRISE was German, but it turns out it was a Fox studio production.