TIME Magazine Top 100 movies list

Drolgin Steingrinder · Post by **Drolgin Steingrinder** » May 27, 2005, 2:11 pm

Did I remove Pulp Fiction? If I did, that was a woops! from me. And yeah Miir, I saw Requiem for a Dream. I just didn't like it all that much, and certainly not enough for it to be on my personal, biased list. But I'm glad you feel you know me well enough to make such a statement

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » May 27, 2005, 2:35 pm

Why would you say that A New Hope isnt quality? This movie came out in 1977 and when it did there was nothing like it that has ever been released. You saying it isnt quality when its stacked up to movies of present day? The special effects were god like at the time and the story was very in depth. The acting wasnt the greatest thing in the world but it was good enough to get the point across and enhance the storyline. This is easily the greatest storyline that hollywood has ever seen.

Well, you pointed out one thing yourself: The acting. The acting in the movie (and really the whole star wars series) is absolutely horrific. Alec Guinness does OK, and Harrison Ford is borderline tolerable, and that's it. Everyone else is total crap.

The special effects were good, but that's not really a particularly important category as far as I'm concerned.

The fight choreography was terrible. People were making some ass-kicking kung-fu movies back in those days, there's no reason why the fighting had to be so stiff.

The storyline is decent, but "easily the greatest storyline hollywood has ever seen" is a hell of a stretch. A number of better scifi/fantasy worlds have been created, such as Dune and Lord of the Rings. Sure, they weren't created especially for cinema, but that doesn't negate their quality.

I also don't see any justification for claiming that the Star Wars storyline is better than those of movies in other genres. I would prefer the storylines of The Usual Suspects and American Beauty and A Clockwork Orange and The Boys from Brazil and so on.

Star Wars best features are the music and Darth Vader. The magic in that movie exists solely because of John Williams and Darth Vader's voice. If they hadn't been there, it would have sunk into obscurity.

I'm happy that it did succeed, because I like it when people get a chance to really flesh out a world they've created, and that only comes through financial success. But the fact that the movies are beloved and successful doesn't really make them good, as far as I'm concerned.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 27, 2005, 3:21 pm

The problem with today's generation viewing a movie like Citizen Kane is that it doesn't seem all that fresh and new to an audience used to fancy special effects and CGI. They just see some black and white movie about some dead guy and his last words.

However, even if you don't like the movie there's no denying that it's been very influential on filmmaking simply based on how many filmmakers cite it as one of the best movies of all time. As that's their craft I tend to take their word for it even though to me, having viewed it in my time, I didn't see it as all that special.

Momopi · Post by **Momopi** » May 27, 2005, 3:38 pm

Aslanna wrote:The problem with today's generation viewing a movie like Citizen Kane is that it doesn't seem all that fresh and new to an audience used to fancy special effects and CGI. They just see some black and white movie about some dead guy and his last words.

However, even if you don't like the movie there's no denying that it's been very influential on filmmaking simply based on how many filmmakers cite it as one of the best movies of all time. As that's their craft I tend to take their word for it even though to me, having viewed it in my time, I didn't see it as all that special.

I enjoyed a lot of movies of that era such as the early Brando movies and some of the Bogart ones. So for me personally, i just thought the story itself for Citizen Kane was really bland.

Momopi · Post by **Momopi** » May 27, 2005, 4:08 pm

The special effects were good, but that's not really a particularly important category as far as I'm concerned.

It makes no sense that you claim that Star Wars isnt quality then discount the special effects as unimportant to you. This is one of the main things that does in fact, make it a quality movie. Its really hard to explain it if you weren't there in the theater watching this when it came out.

The storyline is decent, but "easily the greatest storyline hollywood has ever seen" is a hell of a stretch. A number of better scifi/fantasy worlds have been created, such as Dune and Lord of the Rings. Sure, they weren't created especially for cinema, but that doesn't negate their quality.

Its not a hell of a stretch at all. Why compare books like Dune and LoTR to Star Wars? Like you said, those werent made for cinema. I'm talking about a storyline that was made just for the movies. Why do you suppose Star Wars was so successful?

I also don't see any justification for claiming that the Star Wars storyline is better than those of movies in other genres. I would prefer the storylines of The Usual Suspects and American Beauty and A Clockwork Orange and The Boys from Brazil and so on.

Because none of those stories in those above movies have captivated people's imagination worldwide like star wars did over the last 20+ years and will continue to do so for a long time to come. thats justification enough. Time will tell I guess.

Star Wars best features are the music and Darth Vader. The magic in that movie exists solely because of John Williams and Darth Vader's voice. If they hadn't been there, it would have sunk into obscurity.

I dont understand how you can say something like that when you know its more than someones voice and a musical score that propelled this movie. And yes you are correct that just cause a movie is popular doesnt mean its good, but in the case of Staw Wars its much bigger than mere popularity as the key to its success.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » May 27, 2005, 4:19 pm

Momopi wrote:Why do you suppose Star Wars was so successful?

Uh... Nerds?

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » May 27, 2005, 4:29 pm

Its not a hell of a stretch at all. Why compare books like Dune and LoTR to Star Wars? Like you said, those werent made for cinema. I'm talking about a storyline that was made just for the movies. Why do you suppose Star Wars was so successful?

Why? I don't know. Maybe because they were made into movies?

Because none of those stories in those above movies have captivated people's imagination worldwide like star wars did over the last 20+ years and will continue to do so for a long time to come. thats justification enough. Time will tell I guess.

I honestly don't believe that no story has captivated the publics imagination like Star Wars. I've seen no evidence that tends to support that statement. I know plenty of people who like it, sure, but I also know an assload of people who are indifferent, have never seen it, or didn't like it. A community like this (being that it's based on a fantasy video game) is predisposed to like Star Wars.

I mean, it's a good story. But claiming that it is clearly the greatest story in movie history strikes me as ludicrous.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » May 27, 2005, 4:30 pm

Lets not get silly here people. The original Star Wars belongs on any top 100 all time list for the same reason Citizen Kane makes these lists. Back in 1977, those special effects were awe inspiring. Before Star Wars, sci fi movies were kind of lame with the space ships on strings and a sparkler shoved up their ass for the engine effects.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 27, 2005, 4:32 pm

Momopi wrote:
The storyline is decent, but "easily the greatest storyline hollywood has ever seen" is a hell of a stretch. A number of better scifi/fantasy worlds have been created, such as Dune and Lord of the Rings. Sure, they weren't created especially for cinema, but that doesn't negate their quality.
Its not a hell of a stretch at all. Why compare books like Dune and LoTR to Star Wars? Like you said, those werent made for cinema. I'm talking about a storyline that was made just for the movies. Why do you suppose Star Wars was so successful?

Perhaps I'm just being a little Midnyte today due to lack of sleep but I'm not sure the particular point you are trying to make with this. You ask why Star Wars was so successful because it was a storyline made just for the movies yet seemingly dismiss a storyline (Lord of the Rings) that was not made for the cinemas that was even more successful.

(Edit to fix typos)

And unrelated to anything you said:

Star Wars has it's rabid fanbase in the same way Star Trek does (albeit more of them and more rabid). That's doesn't necessarily mean those movies can be considered great in the grand scheme of things.

Also Winnow you are using flawed analogy when you compare Citizen Kane to Star Wars. Where's the special effects in Citizen Kane? The camera work in Citizen Kane was revolutionary and some of the shots are copied in movies even today.. But I'm not seeing how that fits into Star Wars' special effects other than they can both be considered 'visual'.

(Even more edits.. wtf! Think I got it now)

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » May 27, 2005, 4:40 pm

That's the biggest problem I have with people calling Star Wars a cultural phenomenon. It isn't one. PS i don't hate Star Wars

Movies like Citizen Kane, while they would be less than groundbreaking if they were released today, were at least fresh and inventive for their time.

SW, on the other hand, wasn't innovative in any way besides in special effects (which is still innovative enough to make it a film history footnote). It didn't create a new genre, or even take an existing one anywhere new. It just rode the popularity of an aleady existing phenomenon.

To put it more plainly: Industrial Light and Magic changed hollywood, and influenced later films. Star Wars itself influenced pretty much nothing signifigant. At best, it re-hashed stuff that some people might not otherwise have been exposed to.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » May 27, 2005, 4:42 pm

Aslanna wrote: Also Winnow you are using flawed analogy when you consider Citizen Kane to Star Wars. Where's the special effect in Citizen Kane? The camera work was revolutionary and some of the shots are copied in movies even today.. But I'm not seeing how that fits into Star Wars' special effects other than they can both be considered 'visual'.

What I was referring to was that both Citizen Kane and Star Wars are recognized for something other than the acting and story.

Kane had the fancy camerawork and Star Wars had the fancy special effects which were copied.

Momopi · Post by **Momopi** » May 27, 2005, 4:55 pm

Aslanna wrote: Perhaps I'm just being a little Midnyte today due to lack of sleep but I'm not sure the particular point you are trying to make with this. You ask why Star Wars was so successful because it was a storyline made just for the movies yet seemingly dismiss a storyline (Lord of the Rings) that was not made for the cinemas that was even more successful.

Its easy to do well like LoTR when you have had a fanbase for the last 40 or 50 someodd years. The fact that the movies turned out amazing certainly helped out! No one knew what in the world Star Wars was when it was released and it grew into what it is today which is my point.

miir · Post by **miir** » May 27, 2005, 5:04 pm

- Lord of the Rings was an incredibly successful (hundreds of millions of readers) book(s).

- LoTR has influenced virtually every work of fantasy fiction in the past 50 years.

- LoTR had several generations of 'fans' ranging in age from 10 to 100.

LoTR had a 50 year head start on building it's franchise.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » May 30, 2005, 9:00 am

movies that belong on that list are rounders and tombstone.

also, i

LA Confidential

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » May 30, 2005, 4:00 pm

The Times list is suprisingly good actually. For old movies it actually picked really good ones, not just classics that the academy awards loves to jizz on.

Though I noticed Seven Samurai isn't on there, and that is absurd. Yojimbo and Ikiru are there, which is right on, but Seven Samurai should be too...It is considered one of the most influential films of all time. How could they put Drunken Master II there...and not fucking Seven Samurai. I know Kurosawa already has the two movies up there, but if you are going to be taken seriously about the BEST movies ever, you don't count one movie out just cause that director is already represented.

Seven Samurai influenced soooo many movies. Think of every movie that has a band of brave men who come to a small town(or already live there) that is ruled by some corrupt bandits or sheriff, and that group of outsiders decides that the right thing to do is to help the town out by kicking some ass and setting things straight. That's Seven Samurai. I can think of atleast 10 movies right off the top of my head that fit that description, and 6 are westerns, one being The Magnificent Seven, which IS The Seven Samurai adapted into a western.
/rant off