My Studios

Just so I can clear up my opinion of your list, how old are you?

No offense, but there is an awful lot of movies made after 2000. Just an observation.

I'm 20 banks. Maybe that will help

geezer9687 wrote:

I'm 20 banks. Maybe that will help

Should have figured the 87 was a birth year.. Looks so obvious now.

Hello birth-year buddy!

Chienfantome wrote:

Oh, and Six... I'm sure most people are a bit tired by all those lists by now...so maybe I won't put one online right away...

Tired of lists? Never! The whole movie journalism industry would crumble to its knees if people got tired of reading lists. What would journalists do then.... write real articles?!?

numbersix_99 wrote:

Tired of lists? Never! The whole movie journalism industry would crumble to its knees if people got tired of reading lists. What would journalists do then.... write real articles?!?

I know man, I know lol
I love lists, I just thought everybody did not love them as much as I do

Just a bump for anyone who wants to read the least (and the discussion, as it was really great) and didn't want to go through 16 pages to find it. It needs to be adjusted (hell, it needs to have a new Number 1) but I'll do that at the end of the year. Enjoy guys

I haven't seen this list until now but due to the contrasting tastes of The Geez and I, I decided to take a look and show my opinions.

Disagree With:

97. Mission: Impossible II
Never liked the Mission: Impossible films. They were just high-gloss trash to me.

93. U-571
Passable but could have been better. Way better.

91. Wayne’s World 2
A weak follow-up to the first. I actually prefer The Love Guru to this one.

85. A Knight's Tale
Did not like this film. Had it featured better actors and been more accurate with history (example: no 1970's rock anthems), it could have been great.

78. Armageddon
This is a basically a two and a half hour trailer with one of the stupidest plotlines known to man. I remember that people ate it up in theatres and I got the VHS when it came out. I was bored out of my eight-year-old mind. And there's a director's cut! Why God?! Why Criterion?! Why Disney?!

70. Cloverfield
Stupid attempt at trying to do a US Godzilla-esque film. Had J.J. Abrams' name not been attached, this would have gone straight-to-video. Hollywood needs less films that rely on gimmicks and poor acting, directing and story and more films with good stories and ballsy filmmaking. This film proved nothing but people ate it up.

66. The Bourne Ultimatum
62. The Bourne Identity
I liked these two (even with Liman's hack direction on the first) but Supremacy was so much better. Without the direction that Supremacy went, there would be no Ultimatum.

60. Cinderella Man
Never understood why people liked this one so much. It's one of Howard's weakest films and it just falls too short to satisfy (especially since the Depression scenes add nothing). I would have probably liked a long opening sequence showing us Braddock's past fighting experience before he retired, something like in Rocky where we see him as a palooka before he fought Creed.

56. The Mummy
I saw this when I was nine and found it one stupid film. Only redeeming value was that The Mummy Returns and The Scorpion King made up for this one.

54. Lucky Number Slevin
I remember that this was a poorly acted, poorly directed, poorly written and poorly edited disaster. The film basically rips off other and much-better mysteries and the actors only seemed to be there for the money. Also, did we need Hartnett and Liu spending twenty minutes talking about Bond films. Too bad they don't have fast-forward buttons in theatres.

46. Gone in 60 Seconds
The original had a great forty-minute car crash. The remake is basically a generic studio car movie. H.B. Halicki should have come back from the grave to get revenge on Bruckheimer and Company.

45. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
A boring middle to the Lord of the Rings series. Other than a great Christopher Lee performance and the infamous "Po-Ta-Toes!" scene, it felt like three hours of padding.

42. The Prestige
The Illusionist was better. WAY BETTER.

39. The Matrix Reloaded
The Wachowski Brothers fucked up big time with this one. They took one of the most innovative of the 20th century and followed it up with this nonsensical mess of a film. This is where studio interference makes sense.

33. Saw
Saw II was better.

24. Black Hawk Down
Josh Hartnett was awful in this. Could have been great had McGregor played the lead and someone else played that character.

11. Training Day
I can't believe that Washington won the Academy Award for this. He fucking sleepwalks through the whole film and the screenplay was piss-poor. And why does this seem the last thing I remember Scott Glenn being in?! He was awesome in the eighties but he's never in anything anymore.

4. Transformers
The cartoon was great. The first movie was good. This...was just typical Bay. An overlong and overblown disasterpiece that doesn't bother to respect the original's greatness. Do your self a favor and watch "More Than Meets The Eye". THAT should have been your movie.

2. V For Vendetta
Good but Portman was miscast and shouldn't have been the main character. There are way better fantasy films than this one.

And I'm finished with the nitpicking.

I found out today, doing some background research for a review, that Scarlett Johannsen was asked to play Evie in V for Vendetta. I liked it the way it was, but that would have been interesting nonetheless.

Thought Transformers was good until the old, badass Camaro did the whole "commercial in a movie" thing when it changed...then they killed the one "black" transformer (who's named Jazz?!)...Hollywood gets racist even with robots...

I hate it when Americans are asked to play foreign women, especially when it's Portman, Johansson or Anne Hathaway. Why can't we have a young foreign-born actress come from nowhere to breakout for once in a while?

Examples:

-V For Vendetta, where the Israeli-born but basically American Portman played an Englishwoman.

-Becoming Jane, where the American-born Anne Hathaway played Jane Austen.

-The Other Boelyn Girl, where Americans Portman and Scarlett Johansson played the Boelyn sisters.

-A Mighty Heart, where the American-born Angelina Jolie played Mariane Pearl, a French woman.

-Marie Antoniette, where the American-born Kirsten Dunst played the Austrian Marie Antoniette.

In fact, you could say I hate Hollywood executives first for limiting the acting choices of actress and then preventing breakout success for many unknowns or foreigners by casting the more famous but less qualified in those roles simply to get American profits. No wonder why the female audience for films has been shrinking over the years.

I do agree with you for the most part, Boosch, although Portman, Johanssen, and Hathaway are probably my top three actresses, or at least up there.

I haven't seen Marie, but I would venture from previews alone that the American actress is probably the least of it's problems concerning authenticity.

The last breakout foreign actress off the top of my head is Penelope Cruz...

Yeah, Marie Antoniette was one of those messes that only got made because of the director's last film. All kinds of bad castings there (such as Jason Schwartzman as the King of France or Rip Torn or basically most of the Americans) and there are times when the film enters unintentional comedy. Also hated that the film turns a villain like Marie Antoniette into a likeable character. That's like making Bush or Hitler a hero in a film. She was beheaded for a reason.

Still can't believe it won an Academy Award.

The film could have worked had it been a straight biopic in French being produced by Luc Besson and maybe Claude Lelouch directing. Hell, that could be the greatest thing ever it Besson and Lelouch teamed up.

Now the difference between you and I Buscemi is that when you watch a film, you are looking at all the technical aspects of it, you have a higher sense of "film greatness" and it takes pristine performances, perfect writing and innovation to make something great. You are what I like to call a "movie snob." You, frisky, number 6 all fall into this category, among others. For me, its all about fun. These are the films I have the most fun watching. The films that I can watch over and over again and never get bored with or want to stop watching. That's what I think makes a film great. Not Oscar caliber performances or terrific shots and direction. You may think that Hollywood blockbuster style action movies are stupid. I personally like to see shit blow up and badass fight scenes. You seem to just have different expectations than I do in watching movies. Which is why we have differing opinions. I see a movie to be entertained, not to analyze its merits against all others that came before it. I'm a very laid back person, and that translates to my film watching. I don't try and look for a films flaws. I try and enjoy myself, I'm paying too much to see it to try sit there and look for every little problem. If a comedy makes me laugh a lot, its great. If an action film has great action and a good plot, I'm sold. Films like Cloverfield and Transformers are some of the best theater experiences I have ever had. Because I get so lost in the film world and let my adrenaline flow and feel with the characters. It doesn't take something critically special to do that. I really give every movie I see that chance to suck me in, and I really only see movies that I know appeeal to my taste. Most of the movies that you criticize probably don't even appeal to you, so why see them? Just so you can tell people you didn't like it and why? I think most of the films you like are incredibly boring. That's why I haven't seen a lot of them on your list and the ones I have were'nt all that great to me.

There will never be a best movie of all time, because different things entertain different people. That's the bottom line.

geez you hit the nail right on the head altough me and you agree most of the time i also go to the movies for fun. But i didnt enjoy Cloverfield and Black Hawk Down as much as you thats fine im not going to pull Buscemi or a frisky and call you a fucking idiot and make fun of your tastes. I also agree that Transformers and Training Day are two of the greatest movie of all time and i enjoyed almost every movie on your list with the exception of say proably 5-10 films.

also Buscemi come on man lighten up a bit dude enjoy movies for what they are not overanlyze and critcize films because there not up to your ridciously high standards. Also Denzel Washingtion sleepwalked through his role in Traning Day ok he was proably the only deserving best actor winner of the past decade.[along with Forest Whitaker for Last King of Scotland]

Buscemi you'll be glad to know, as I am, that Scott Glenn will be on the big screen this fall in a motion picture event, Oliver Stone's W.
Great news.

As for American actresses being cast in foreign roles, don't tell me about it. Sometimes, it is acceptable, but most of the time it is a bit ridiculous. Although as was pointed out, most of the time, this casting mistake is the least problem of the film. Like Marie Antoinette or The Other Boleyn Girl (which has to be the most uninteresting historical film ever).

Now as far as comparing Marie Antoinette to Hitler goes, please Buscemi, moderate your thought on the lady (wink). She was beheaded for a reason indeed, nd I am utterly satisfied that we left Monarchy for Republic in France.
But Marie Antoinette was no Hitler. She was just a spoiled and selfish royalty who thought she could spend France's money for her own pleasure. Which clearly pissed the French People off, of course. But does not make her a Hitler either.

And I would never pay to see either Luc Besson or Claude Lelouch make a feature fim out of Marie Antoinette's life, personally (grin). Maybe... someone like Bertrand Tavernier. Yes, that I would go see, Marie Antoinette by Tavernier.

Tavernier's a good choice too. I just thought of Besson for his Joan of Arc film and Lelouch for his versatility.

My Studios

ADVICE & ANALYSIS: