Hey backatcha Lightwizard.
Get this - I could never get through Glengarry Glenross! It is very much like "Save the Tiger" but I just found it too intense. I'm going to have to give it another try.
Jack Lemmon. Man o man. That guy was a master.
They Might Be Giants, is on my top ten list.
Jack Lemmon and the entire cast are dynamite -- it will give you a new insight the next time someone does a phone solicitation trying to sell you property (or anything else). It tears back the Saran Wrap which covers the telemarketing industry and the "sweat shop sales techniques."
Tossup between "Ishtar" and the recent Ben-JLo nasterpiece, the name of which I've already forgotten.
But Slappy may have a valid point in choosing "Maid in Manhattan.' I guess I'll have to watch it again.
Okay, you facetious ones -- this is a best film of all time forum, not the worst film. Unless, perhaps, you working on your third Bombay martini.
Slappy Doo Hoo needs no such help.
Look at this cast for Glengarry Glenn Ross:
Jack Lemmon .... Shelley Levene
Al Pacino .... Ricky Roma
Ed Harris .... Dave Moss
Alan Arkin .... George Aaronow
Kevin Spacey .... John Williamson
Alec Baldwin .... Blake
Jonathan Pryce .... James Lingk
...New to this site and this thread caught my eye. The following are 'greatest ' in my opinion:
The Pianist,
Babette's Feast,
The Truman Show,
Philadelphia,
All About Eve,
Casablanca,
Unforgiven,
The Sixth Sense,
Memento,
Matchstick Men,
A.I.,
Minority Report,
2001: A Space Odyssey,
Annie Hall,
Roxanne,
Mrs Doubtfire,
Some like it Hot,
Dr Strangelove,
The Producers,
Amélie,
Educating Rita,
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,
The Wizard of Oz,
A Christmas Story,
My Fair Lady,
Tales of the City
Welcome to A2K and the Film Forum, gromit. That's a very diverse list although "Tales" is a TV mini-series.
The Godfather
The Deer hunter
Anal Queens Volume 4
I'm with Cavfancier - the topic is too general. Impossible, really.
The answers are really "What's your all-time "favorite movie?"
But, no harm done. And pretty interesting responses.
That's essentially right as if one goes by the opinion of critics, it's "Citizen Kane" hands down. But this is likely not everyone's "best" movie.
Billy Falcon's right. When it comes to art of any sort, the word 'best' represents nothing more than an individual preference, an individual value judgement. But, even so, the subject is way too broad. The reason I was being facetious before is because it's not really possibly (for me, at least) to narrow the field down to just one film. I have terrible difficulty in making a list of 'top ten' faves. You always feel that something you omitted should have been included. But then, of course, the list would become 'top eleven' and you can't bear to drop any of the ones you've listed.
Also, what's my favorite at any given moment might well depend on my mood at that given moment. The list of 10 I come up with tonight might not be the same list I'd post a week -- or even a day -- from now.
Thanks, Merry Andrew.
To repeat an idea in different words. We do not so much judge art, as art judges us. When we express our likes and dislikes, we are pretty much definening what sort of person we are.
I used to ask students who they would listen to about a football game they had missed and whether it was a good game. Would they listen to a guy who had seen hundreds of games, Or, would they listen to a guy who had seen only three games in his life.
Well, they all agreed they would rely on the experienced fan.
So, I'd draw an analogy: Who would you rely on to explain how good/bad a movie is? The man who had seen hundreds of movies or a man who had seen three movies? Their not so surprising response? "It makes no difference. No one can tell me what I like."
Americans tend to know intuitively what the demands are in sports, but lack a clue as to why some movies are so good.
The British playwright Tom Stoppard, was interviewed on the occasion of his 60th birthday and was asked a variety of questions about different countries.
The United States of America?
His reply:
"They don't have an irony button on their machine"
OK, Lightwizard,
You get to state "Citizen Kane" hands down for first place. OK, I grant you that. But it's not fair for you to have second, third, etc.
I state and claim that second place goes to Carol Reed's "The Third Man"
"THE THIRD MAN is a masterpiece of melancholia featuring extraordinary writing, acting, and directing, as well as a classic zither score by Anton Karas. Welles is memorable as the seductive villain, but the true star may be the camera work of Robert Krasker, which transforms Vienna into a coruscating, expressionist nightmare."
"The Third Man" is always on a top twenty five list of polled critics and directors and it's up there often in my top ten (which can change every few months as the judgement is a subjective judgement based on differences in each individual's emotion response as well as intellectual response). This last poll of Sight and Sound was a surprise in that "Singin' In the Rain" replaced "The Searchers" on the critic's top ten.
I feel like Schindlers List is the Best movie I have seen.
That's a film people either love or hate.
I loved Shindler's List but that's not the same as saying that I think it's the best film ever made.
The reason for "Citizen Kane" being at the top of the list of critics as the best film ever made is its innovative camera work (deep field focus), the sociological aspects of the storytelling and Welles in the title role. That man can act, although I liked him even better as the slovenly, evil chief of police in "Touch of Evil.," which he also directed. He even extracted a quite good performance out of Moses, aka El Cid. It's also because Welles got away with a scathing attack on William Randolph Hearst and I'm sure he's still laughing about it from the grave.
Question: What if Welles had played Don Corleone?
