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.