The Definitive Top 25 Greatest Movies of All-Time (soon to be expanded)

Submitted by eatpork on Sun, 07/29/2007 - 10:07
Tags: 
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Technorati
  1. Citizen Kane (1941)
  2. The Birth of a Nation (1915)
  3. Vertigo (1958)
  4. The Rules of the Game (1939)
  5. 8 1/2 (1963)
  6. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
  7. The Godfather (1972)
  8. Seven Samurai (1954)
  9. Tokyo Story (1953)
  10. The Searchers (1956)
  11. Singin' in the Rain (1952)
  12. The Godfather part II (1974)
  13. Battleship Potemkin (1925)
  14. Rashomon (1950)
  15. Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927)
  16. The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)
  17. Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
  18. Touch of Evil (1958)
  19. Bicycle Thieves (1948)
  20. L'Atalante (1934)
  21. La Dolice Vita (1960)
  22. Raging Bull (1980)
  23. City Lights (1931)
  24. L'Avventura (1960)
  25. The Third Man (1949)
Author Comments: 

Now, I tried to keep my subjectiveness to a minimum while composing this list. All the rankings you see here are based upon popularity, impact, influence on cinematography, directing, acting, all that good shit, and importance to cinema in general.

I've been told that my list looks like I just copied and pasted Sights and Sounds' list. Let me tell you now, those accusations are entirely false *deletes Sights and Sounds from bookmarks just in case someone gets suspicious*.

Also, I'd like to do a quick summary on why each film got their place on the list, but I'm new here and not quite sure how. So if I can gets some help in that department, that'd be great.

eatpork07/30/2007

I'm not sure if I'm suppose to start the conversation if I want posts to be made, so just in case, here you go.

0dysseus08/01/2007

A good conversation starter might be what you mean by "based upon popularity, impact, influence on cinematography, directing, acting, all that good [stuff], and importance to cinema in general" but I'm a little skittish about asking that question. I know you have summaries that might clear up my confusion... at least as it applies to this list. I'm always fascinated by the distinction(s) between "Greatest," "Best" and "Favourite."

I'm also curious as to how Messrs. Welles, Fellini, Coppola père and Kurosawa account for over a third of your list.

I'm sure that there is a reason why none of the films of the past quarter-century has managed to crack the/your top twenty-five. I'm just not sure what that reason might be.

eatpork08/02/2007

Raging Bull is on the list, it was made in 1980, that's the last quarter century.

But the reason why there's not a lot of new movies on the list is simple because not enough time has passed by.

If you think about, not a lot of films in the past 25 years have influenced cinema that much (the most recent influential film would probably be Pulp Fiction).

Raging Bull's really not that influential either, but it's widely critically acclaimed. Many critics call DeNiros' performance the best in film history, they've also said the same about Scorseses' direction. It's also given credit for resurrecting black and white (some would say Schindlers' List, but I disagree). This film turned black and white film into an art statement (which takes care of the impact and mild influence criteria).

Your thing about Welles, Fellini, Coppola, and Kurosawa is coincidental. I didn't pick favorites when I composed this list, they just happen to have made 2 films that each warrant a spot on the list.

And as for the 'Greatest', 'Favorite', and 'Best' thing: Favorites and Bests are pretty much the same thing if you ask me (depends on who's telling the story). It's all subjective, anyone can say "Pulp Fiction is the best movie of all-time" and it's pretty much saying "Pulp Fiction is my favorite movie of all-time". Best can objectively be decided, unless you got everyone in the world to see every movie ever made and rate them all. And even that warrants a problem, cause someone's gonna have an objection to that. When you're talking 'greatness' you gotta take things out of statistics, like what I've tried to do. But there's even a little subjectivity in that, cause someone can block that with even more arguments.

Theoretically the three are all the same, but 'greatness' is more plausible to objectify.

If there's anything else you want to discuss, go ahead and post, I'll be here, it's not like I have friends. And if you have a question of what I just said, feel free to say you can't understand me, I know I'm not good with words. Who do you think I am? Ernest Hemingway?