Greatest Films of All Time (Mid-Revision) - Movies & TV

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

Facetious wrote:

I see

What I was referring to, by the way, were your generally lower ratings of films as compared to other artforms.

I can understand the view. My ratings are uniform across all art forms (a 7.5 film is as amazing as a 7.5 Classical work, and so on), so yes, it is true that I don't feel film has produced as many amazing works as Classical or Rock or Jazz. And I think this is quite accurate as well. Also, having a stricter ratings system can lead to conclusions from others that I don't think very highly of those rated 7.3-7.7/10 (let alone 6.8-7.2) though this is not actually the case (see my most updated criteria page for ratings explanations: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/v...hp?t=15503 ... ... the descriptions should clarify if there is any misunderstanding). People are used to seeing Beyonce or Taylor Swift or Adele albums (and the like) get 4.0-4.5+ stars out of 5 from practically every major magazine "because they're catchy and dance-able" (or something). So when they see, say, Kurosawa's Rashomon on my film list getting a "mere" 7.5 from me (or, in their mind, the "equivalent of 3.5-4 stars") they could conclude that I am underrating it. The difference is relative though. My 10/10 is Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or (close) Beethoven's 9th/Mahler's 9th. So when I give a 7.5, it is in relation to truly deserving and representative 10s and 9.5s -- the most substantial works of art in the history of mankind -- not the idea that every passable album/film is a masterpiece. When a music magazine is giving Beyonce's latest 4 or 4.5 stars they are comparing it to a flawed ratings scale (imo), to hundreds of previous pop/R & B/hip hop albums that they've (imo) mistakenly given 4.5-5 stars just because they remain listenable all the way through (and probably because they're getting paid by the label too). But, it seems quite unlikely that they've ever considered its emotional/conceptual significance, and thus rating, in relation to the masterpieces of music/film/art history (if they're even very familiar with them in the first place). No informed music/art critic/historian in their right mind would likely declare that a Beyonce, or a Taylor Swift album is as incredible as Beethoven's 9th Symphony or Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or other all time masterpieces -- yet, there they are, getting the same or approaching their highest possible ratings. If a Beyonce album is 4.5/5 (or 9/10), does that make Beethoven's 9th a "200 out of 10"? ... Anyway, the same thing applies to film. People can gush all they want about, say, The Shawshank Redemption, which is a perfectly fine and touching film (though pretty standard Hollywood-esque drama), but there are hundreds of films that are more powerful than it, and surely it doesn't hold a candle to even a work of cinematic art like, say, Schindler's List or The Sweet Hereafter (both 7.5/10), let alone the most incredible works of art/film/music of all time. People can claim Pulp Fiction is the greatest film of all time (and I myself rate/rank it very highly), but surely it doesn't hold a candle to, say, The Velvet Underground and Nico or, for film, the much wilder merging of genres/action and themes (and at least as culturally perceptive) masterpiece that is Gilliam's Brazil. People can claim Passion of Joan of Arc is the most moving film of all time (and I might agree with them, and also rate/rank it very highly) but before saying it's a 10/10, have they assimilated Schubert's Winterreise or Van Morrison's Astral Weeks or Nico's Desertshore or Wyatt's Rock Bottom, or Bach's Mass in B Minor and Verdi's Requiem -- each of which are at least as moving but also extend their art more creatively and to considerably greater depths/extent? (Note: Winterreise is currently 8.4 on my list, but is likely going to be upgraded in rating to 8.8+). Anyway, the same applies to all these 7.3-7.7 films. They are all "minor" masterpieces, but when one becomes very familiar with the all time masterpieces of film/art/music (8.8+), the gap becomes much easier to observe. Some of those 7.3-7.7 films might get upgrades to 7.8 or 7.9 or something like that -- as it's very challenging to feel perfectly accurate about so much even within my own criteria -- but I highly doubt any of them are all time masterpieces if we're comparing them to ... true all time masterpieces. For any one of them, one can compare its emotional/conceptual impact/significance (consistency and peaks) to a comparable work I've rated 8.8+ (or thereabouts) and the difference should be a bit more clear providing each have been assimilated (for instance 2001 might seem like it should be much higher -- and maybe it should be 7.8 or possibly 7.9 -- but definitely not 8.8+, particularly if one realizes that it has a ways to go before it's as incredible as, say, Irrlicht by Klaus Schulze ... Etc).
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

@Facetious

Btw, most of my reply was directed towards "the thread in general" as opposed to you particularly. From our many discussions previously on listology.com, I know you're pretty aware of my standards/ratings system and so forth.
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

Updated ... Thanks to BEA user Mercury, I re-added Pather Panchali (don't know why it wasn't there to begin with) ... Also, fwiw, the list is now numbered
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

bobbyb5

Gender: Male
Location: New York

That list is overwhelming. Of all the films that are usually considered the great films, I've only seen a fraction. But out of those that you always see on greatest lists these are the ones that I love. This is about the extent of my Great Films knowledge. Wish it was bigger. Ive seen more greatest films than this, but these are ones i actually LIKED.

Chinatown
Rosemary's Baby
The Conversation
The Conformist
Spider's Strategem
Last Emperor
Straw Dogs
The Wild Bunch
Don't Look Now
Picnic at Hanging Rock
Cries and Whispers
Shame
Persona
Exterminating Angel
Belle Du Jour
Bicycle Thief
Garden of the Finzi Continis
Lacombe, Lucien
Weekend
L' Argent
Accident
Passion of Anna
Earrings of Madame De
Pixote
Lola Montes
The Blue Angel
Greed
Bonnie and Clyde
Nashville
3 Women
The Long Goodbye
McCabe and Mrs. Miller
Midnight Cowboy
Sunday, Bloody Sunday
2001
Barry Lyndon
The Shining
Deliverance
Gospel According to St. Matthew
Oedipus Rex
Medea
Vera Drake
The Krays
This Sporting Life
Vagabond
Ali Fear Eats the Soul
La Femme Infidel
Godfather 1&2
Citizen Kane
All About Eve
Wizard of Oz
The Whisperers
Streetcar Named Desire
Repulsion
Story of Adele H
Blow Out
Vertigo
Psycho
The Birds

Last edited by bobbyb5 on 07/10/2017 01:14; edited 1 time in total

bobbyb5

Gender: Male
Location: New York

AfterHours wrote:

Facetious wrote:

I see

What I was referring to, by the way, were your generally lower ratings of films as compared to other artforms.

I can understand the view. My ratings are uniform across all art forms (a 7.5 film is as amazing as a 7.5 Classical work, and so on), so yes, it is true that I don't feel film has produced as many amazing works as Classical or Rock or Jazz. And I think this is quite accurate as well. Also, having a stricter ratings system can lead to conclusions from others that I don't think very highly of those rated 7.3-7.7/10 (let alone 6.8-7.2) though this is not actually the case (see my most updated criteria page for ratings explanations: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/v...hp?t=15503 ... ... the descriptions should clarify if there is any misunderstanding). People are used to seeing Beyonce or Taylor Swift or Adele albums (and the like) get 4.0-4.5+ stars out of 5 from practically every major magazine "because they're catchy and dance-able" (or something). So when they see, say, Kurosawa's Rashomon on my film list getting a "mere" 7.5 from me (or, in their mind, the "equivalent of 3.5-4 stars") they could conclude that I am underrating it. The difference is relative though. My 10/10 is Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or (close) Beethoven's 9th/Mahler's 9th. So when I give a 7.5, it is in relation to truly deserving and representative 10s and 9.5s -- the most substantial works of art in the history of mankind -- not the idea that every passable album/film is a masterpiece. When a music magazine is giving Beyonce's latest 4 or 4.5 stars they are comparing it to a flawed ratings scale (imo), to hundreds of previous pop/R & B/hip hop albums that they've (imo) mistakenly given 4.5-5 stars just because they remain listenable all the way through (and probably because they're getting paid by the label too). But, it seems quite unlikely that they've ever considered its emotional/conceptual significance, and thus rating, in relation to the masterpieces of music/film/art history (if they're even very familiar with them in the first place). No informed music/art critic/historian in their right mind would likely declare that a Beyonce, or a Taylor Swift album is as incredible as Beethoven's 9th Symphony or Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or other all time masterpieces -- yet, there they are, getting the same or approaching their highest possible ratings. If a Beyonce album is 4.5/5 (or 9/10), does that make Beethoven's 9th a "200 out of 10"? ... Anyway, the same thing applies to film. People can gush all they want about, say, The Shawshank Redemption, which is a perfectly fine and touching film (though pretty standard Hollywood-esque drama), but there are hundreds of films that are more powerful than it, and surely it doesn't hold a candle to even a work of cinematic art like, say, Schindler's List or The Sweet Hereafter (both 7.5/10), let alone the most incredible works of art/film/music of all time. People can claim Pulp Fiction is the greatest film of all time (and I myself rate/rank it very highly), but surely it doesn't hold a candle to, say, The Velvet Underground and Nico or, for film, the much wilder merging of genres/action and themes (and at least as culturally perceptive) masterpiece that is Gilliam's Brazil. People can claim Passion of Joan of Arc is the most moving film of all time (and I might agree with them, and also rate/rank it very highly) but before saying it's a 10/10, have they assimilated Schubert's Winterreise or Van Morrison's Astral Weeks or Nico's Desertshore or Wyatt's Rock Bottom, or Bach's Mass in B Minor and Verdi's Requiem -- each of which are at least as moving but also extend their art more creatively and to considerably greater depths/extent? (Note: Winterreise is currently 8.4 on my list, but is likely going to be upgraded in rating to 8.8+). Anyway, the same applies to all these 7.3-7.7 films. They are all "minor" masterpieces, but when one becomes very familiar with the all time masterpieces of film/art/music (8.8+), the gap becomes much easier to observe. Some of those 7.3-7.7 films might get upgrades to 7.8 or 7.9 or something like that -- as it's very challenging to feel perfectly accurate about so much even within my own criteria -- but I highly doubt any of them are all time masterpieces if we're comparing them to ... true all time masterpieces. For any one of them, one can compare its emotional/conceptual impact/significance (consistency and peaks) to a comparable work I've rated 8.8+ (or thereabouts) and the difference should be a bit more clear providing each have been assimilated (for instance 2001 might seem like it should be much higher -- and maybe it should be 7.8 or possibly 7.9 -- but definitely not 8.8+, particularly if one realizes that it has a ways to go before it's as incredible as, say, Irrlicht by Klaus Schulze ... Etc).

I have a theory of why the albums you mentioned by Beyonce, Taylor Swift Etc get high ratings from critics. I don't believe these critics really think they're any good, but they're in the business of writing about music, and that requires them to say that SOMETHING is great. They couldn't very well keep their job by saying that today's popular music is a bunch of crap. Something simply HAS to be great or else there's nothing to write about. That's the only possible explanation I can come up with.

bobbyb5

Gender: Male
Location: New York

It seems like youve seen something by everybody who is always considered a great director. I mean the ones you always read about in books about The Greatest Movies Ever. But are there any supposedly greatest directors that you just totally dont get what all the fuss is about? That you.dont find great AT ALL, but ridiculous? Or even awful? A couple that leave me dumfounded are Federico Fellini, David Lynch, Stephen Spielberg. Do u have any Iike that?

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

bobbyb5 wrote:

That list is overwhelming. Of all the films that are usually considered the great films, I've only seen a fraction. But out of those that you always see on greatest lists these are the ones that I love. This is about the extent of my Great Films knowledge. Wish it was bigger. Ive seen more greatest films than this, but these are ones i actually LIKED.

Chinatown
Rosemary's Baby
The Conversation
The Conformist
Spider's Strategem
Last Emperor
Straw Dogs
The Wild Bunch
Don't Look Now
Picnic at Hanging Rock
Cries and Whispers
Shame
Persona
Exterminating Angel
Belle Du Jour
Bicycle Thief
Garden of the Finzi Continis
Lacombe, Lucien
Weekend
L' Argent
Accident
Passion of Anna
Earrings of Madame De
Pixote
Lola Montes
The Blue Angel
Greed
Bonnie and Clyde
Nashville
3 Women
The Long Goodbye
McCabe and Mrs. Miller
Midnight Cowboy
Sunday, Bloody Sunday
2001
Barry Lyndon
The Shining
Deliverance
Gospel According to St. Matthew
Oedipus Rex
Medea
Vera Drake
The Krays
This Sporting Life
Vagabond
Ali Fear Eats the Soul
La Femme Infidel
Godfather 1&2
Citizen Kane
All About Eve
Wizard of Oz
The Whisperers
Streetcar Named Desire
Repulsion
Story of Adele H
Blow Out
Vertigo
Psycho
The Birds

Great list. You've gone much further than most of the world! Just being familiar with, say, Bergman's Persona, puts you in pretty select company. And I have not seen Spider's Strategem. What did you think? Any good?
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

bobbyb5 wrote:

AfterHours wrote:

Facetious wrote:

I see

What I was referring to, by the way, were your generally lower ratings of films as compared to other artforms.

I can understand the view. My ratings are uniform across all art forms (a 7.5 film is as amazing as a 7.5 Classical work, and so on), so yes, it is true that I don't feel film has produced as many amazing works as Classical or Rock or Jazz. And I think this is quite accurate as well. Also, having a stricter ratings system can lead to conclusions from others that I don't think very highly of those rated 7.3-7.7/10 (let alone 6.8-7.2) though this is not actually the case (see my most updated criteria page for ratings explanations: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/v...hp?t=15503 ... ... the descriptions should clarify if there is any misunderstanding). People are used to seeing Beyonce or Taylor Swift or Adele albums (and the like) get 4.0-4.5+ stars out of 5 from practically every major magazine "because they're catchy and dance-able" (or something). So when they see, say, Kurosawa's Rashomon on my film list getting a "mere" 7.5 from me (or, in their mind, the "equivalent of 3.5-4 stars") they could conclude that I am underrating it. The difference is relative though. My 10/10 is Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or (close) Beethoven's 9th/Mahler's 9th. So when I give a 7.5, it is in relation to truly deserving and representative 10s and 9.5s -- the most substantial works of art in the history of mankind -- not the idea that every passable album/film is a masterpiece. When a music magazine is giving Beyonce's latest 4 or 4.5 stars they are comparing it to a flawed ratings scale (imo), to hundreds of previous pop/R & B/hip hop albums that they've (imo) mistakenly given 4.5-5 stars just because they remain listenable all the way through (and probably because they're getting paid by the label too). But, it seems quite unlikely that they've ever considered its emotional/conceptual significance, and thus rating, in relation to the masterpieces of music/film/art history (if they're even very familiar with them in the first place). No informed music/art critic/historian in their right mind would likely declare that a Beyonce, or a Taylor Swift album is as incredible as Beethoven's 9th Symphony or Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or other all time masterpieces -- yet, there they are, getting the same or approaching their highest possible ratings. If a Beyonce album is 4.5/5 (or 9/10), does that make Beethoven's 9th a "200 out of 10"? ... Anyway, the same thing applies to film. People can gush all they want about, say, The Shawshank Redemption, which is a perfectly fine and touching film (though pretty standard Hollywood-esque drama), but there are hundreds of films that are more powerful than it, and surely it doesn't hold a candle to even a work of cinematic art like, say, Schindler's List or The Sweet Hereafter (both 7.5/10), let alone the most incredible works of art/film/music of all time. People can claim Pulp Fiction is the greatest film of all time (and I myself rate/rank it very highly), but surely it doesn't hold a candle to, say, The Velvet Underground and Nico or, for film, the much wilder merging of genres/action and themes (and at least as culturally perceptive) masterpiece that is Gilliam's Brazil. People can claim Passion of Joan of Arc is the most moving film of all time (and I might agree with them, and also rate/rank it very highly) but before saying it's a 10/10, have they assimilated Schubert's Winterreise or Van Morrison's Astral Weeks or Nico's Desertshore or Wyatt's Rock Bottom, or Bach's Mass in B Minor and Verdi's Requiem -- each of which are at least as moving but also extend their art more creatively and to considerably greater depths/extent? (Note: Winterreise is currently 8.4 on my list, but is likely going to be upgraded in rating to 8.8+). Anyway, the same applies to all these 7.3-7.7 films. They are all "minor" masterpieces, but when one becomes very familiar with the all time masterpieces of film/art/music (8.8+), the gap becomes much easier to observe. Some of those 7.3-7.7 films might get upgrades to 7.8 or 7.9 or something like that -- as it's very challenging to feel perfectly accurate about so much even within my own criteria -- but I highly doubt any of them are all time masterpieces if we're comparing them to ... true all time masterpieces. For any one of them, one can compare its emotional/conceptual impact/significance (consistency and peaks) to a comparable work I've rated 8.8+ (or thereabouts) and the difference should be a bit more clear providing each have been assimilated (for instance 2001 might seem like it should be much higher -- and maybe it should be 7.8 or possibly 7.9 -- but definitely not 8.8+, particularly if one realizes that it has a ways to go before it's as incredible as, say, Irrlicht by Klaus Schulze ... Etc).

I have a theory of why the albums you mentioned by Beyonce, Taylor Swift Etc get high ratings from critics. I don't believe these critics really think they're any good, but they're in the business of writing about music, and that requires them to say that SOMETHING is great. They couldn't very well keep their job by saying that today's popular music is a bunch of crap. Something simply HAS to be great or else there's nothing to write about. That's the only possible explanation I can come up with.

Very possibly. I'm pretty sure that in many cases, especially major magazines, the critics are paid by the labels to say good things about them. Which is why I could care less what Rolling Stone, or NME or Spin (etc) rates an album. It's mostly about money, just "media culture" BS that is not at all concerned with the work's merits in relation to the art form's history or advancement.
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

bobbyb5 wrote:

It seems like youve seen something by everybody who is always considered a great director. I mean the ones you always read about in books about The Greatest Movies Ever. But are there any supposedly greatest directors that you just totally dont get what all the fuss is about? That you.dont find great AT ALL, but ridiculous? Or even awful? A couple that leave me dumfounded are Federico Fellini, David Lynch, Stephen Spielberg. Do u have any Iike that?

Not really... at least none that come to mind at the moment.

In general, I consider film much more critically accurate than, say, Rock music.

There are various films that I consider blatantly overrated or underrated, but not sure about directors... at least no glaring examples that come to mind right now.
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

bobbyb5

Gender: Male
Location: New York

AfterHours wrote:

bobbyb5 wrote:

That list is overwhelming. Of all the films that are usually considered the great films, I've only seen a fraction. But out of those that you always see on greatest lists these are the ones that I love. This is about the extent of my Great Films knowledge. Wish it was bigger. Ive seen more greatest films than this, but these are ones i actually LIKED.

Chinatown
Rosemary's Baby
The Conversation
The Conformist
Spider's Strategem
Last Emperor
Straw Dogs
The Wild Bunch
Don't Look Now
Picnic at Hanging Rock
Cries and Whispers
Shame
Persona
Exterminating Angel
Belle Du Jour
Bicycle Thief
Garden of the Finzi Continis
Lacombe, Lucien
Weekend
L' Argent
Accident
Passion of Anna
Earrings of Madame De
Pixote
Lola Montes
The Blue Angel
Greed
Bonnie and Clyde
Nashville
3 Women
The Long Goodbye
McCabe and Mrs. Miller
Midnight Cowboy
Sunday, Bloody Sunday
2001
Barry Lyndon
The Shining
Deliverance
Gospel According to St. Matthew
Oedipus Rex
Medea
Vera Drake
The Krays
This Sporting Life
Vagabond
Ali Fear Eats the Soul
La Femme Infidel
Godfather 1&2
Citizen Kane
All About Eve
Wizard of Oz
The Whisperers
Streetcar Named Desire
Repulsion
Story of Adele H
Blow Out
Vertigo
Psycho
The Birds

Great list. You've gone much further than most of the world! Just being familiar with, say, Bergman's Persona, puts you in pretty select company. And I have not seen Spider's Strategem. What did you think? Any good?

So, do you think my list is a good starter-list for someone who's just starting out? Most of those movies ive seen several times just because i love them so much. And yeah, Spider's Strategem is awesome. And it's a mystery movie too. About who was the real killer and stuff. But its different than all the other great classic mystery films that are famous. I mean, it doesn't take place in all dark rooms and dark buildings at night, and all the things associated with mystery movies. lt takes place all outdoors in the beautiful countryside that's all sunny and bright and beautiful and pretty and all that. Its not like any other mystery movie you've ever seen. And it has a really great payoff at the end!!!