28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Spun Lepton]

Edit 2: Oh, man. I'm bumping Boarding House to June and moving Things up to May. Poor Boarding House has been stuck in scheduling limbo since I started the channel. It's one of the first DVDs I bought to review and I still haven't watched it.

Eh, I'll stick with Boarding House for May and move Things up to June. Just because I want to get Boarding House done. I think it's the longest-waiting DVD on my list right now.

[megladon8]

Any thoughts on Destroyer?

[Yxklyx]

Were we doing Trilogies at one point? After a re-watch of Rolf de Heer's film - watch in this order:

1. Dogtooth
2. Being There
3. Bad Boy Bubby

Warning about #3. I love cats, they've been my friends for over 30 years but there are disturbing scenes here (primarily in the first 23 minutes), you need to stomach them and in my case the movie was in the end rewarding. P.S. There are more disturbing scenes with human beings as well...

[Idioteque Stalker]

That's one bad but good time at the movies. Bad Boy Bubby is definitely my favorite of the three. Dogtooth also has disturbing cat stuff.

[Yxklyx]

That's one bad but good time at the movies. Bad Boy Bubby is definitely my favorite of the three. Dogtooth also has disturbing cat stuff.

I don't recall the disturbing cat scenes from Dogtooth - maybe I blacked them out. I couldn't think of another similar movie so put in Being There, it's a bit too refined compared to the other two but has some similar themes. I have to say, I think Lanthimos must have seen BBB prior to making his film. As for movies with disturbing cat scenes, I believe Sátántangó should be listed though it's not as bad as BBB as I recall.

[Idioteque Stalker]

As for movies with disturbing cat scenes, I believe Sátántangó should be listed though it's not as bad as BBB as I recall.

As if I needed another reason to put off Satantango. A very disturbing cat scene I saw recently was in Space Dogs.

[Yxklyx]

As if I needed another reason to put off Satantango. A very disturbing cat scene I saw recently was in Space Dogs.

I don't think it's as bad as BBB BUT it goes on for what feels like 10 minutes. The absolute worst scene I've seen was in the french film Leolo. Have not seen Space Dogs.

[baby doll]

the french film Leolo

Tomorrow you're going to wake up to find your car's been pelted with poutine.

[Peng]

The Hobbit (2015) (Dustin Lee's cut of the Peter Jackson trilogy into one 4.5-hour film)

Somehow been on a Tolkien kick lately; I'd finished re-reading The Hobbit last week (not read since a Thai-translated edition more than a decade ago) so wanted to try out this cut I've heard floating around.

It is definitely better than any of the three-part films by pacing and flow alone (even with a few patches of probably unavoidable sloppiness and rushes from recutting), but also has me realized how flawed the trilogy is conceived from the beginning, which is also evident in this cut as well. I'm now 75% into reading The Fellowship of the Ring, and the two trilogies' very different approaches to their source materials (mostly by sheer practicality of each one's density) means that while LotR's method is to condense and/or find alternative for the book's passages, this one's is to beef up a light-on-its-foot single book into the former trilogy's equal proportion. And Jackson and cos are just better at the former than the latter, so much that the gravitas they add (and add and add) when filming The Hobbit trilogy feels misplaced, even when pared down into this form here.

Still, Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins is among the best casting of these Middle-earth films, give or take Ian McKellen's Gandalf, and this cut is worth it alone for having him restored as the central focus, and his arc coming off more clearly. 7.5/10

[Idioteque Stalker]

Tomorrow you're going to wake up to find your car's been pelted with poutine.

You or meg would be the obvious suspects.

[megladon8]

Apparently Henry Gale is in Canada too. Ontario, no less.

Are we the only two Canucks?

[StuSmallz]

Forrest Gump Won the Battle, but Pulp Fiction Won the War

[Dukefrukem]

Samuel L Jackson should have won the Oscar too.

[Irish]

How do you guys order your top 100?

I made a list of personal favorites for a side project. Originally had it in alpha order as ranking them seemed impossible. Then I skimmed the list and bumped up anything (using letterboxd) that caught my eye. So now, to my surprise, my top 10 looks like this:

1. Cleo from 5 to 7
2. 42nd Street
3. Singin' in the Rain
4. A Touch of Zen
5. The Searchers
6. The Red Shoes
7. The Quiet Man
8. Casablanca
9. Memories of Murder
10. Duck Soup

So my problem is: anything in slots 3-9 could legit just as easily be #2 ... but I can't bring myself to knock "42nd Street" down a slot. "Adventures of Robin Hood" sits in the mid-20s now and I think that's a terrific film, and should probably be higher. I've seen "Blade Runner" more times than anything else in my life and I don't know where to slot it, either.

Any tips from the pro rankers out there?

[Mr. McGibblets]

The last time I made a top 100 list, I had ten groups of 10 (1-10, 11-20, etc.) without ordering within the lists. It's closer to what I want even though I moved things every time I looked back at it.

[Idioteque Stalker]

I think about it similarly to how I think about MC Madness. Which movie would I save from a fire? I try not to overthink it, but of course I always do.

Cool top 10. Some movies there I haven't seen.

[Dukefrukem]

How do you guys order your top 100?

I made a list of personal favorites for a side project. Originally had it in alpha order as ranking them seemed impossible. Then I skimmed the list and bumped up anything (using letterboxd) that caught my eye. So now, to my surprise, my top 10 looks like this:

1. Cleo from 5 to 7
2. 42nd Street
3. Singin' in the Rain
4. A Touch of Zen
5. The Searchers
6. The Red Shoes
7. The Quiet Man
8. Casablanca
9. Memories of Murder
10. Duck Soup

So my problem is: anything in slots 3-9 could legit just as easily be #2 ... but I can't bring myself to knock "42nd Street" down a slot. "Adventures of Robin Hood" sits in the mid-20s now and I think that's a terrific film, and should probably be higher. I've seen "Blade Runner" more times than anything else in my life and I don't know where to slot it, either.

Any tips from the pro rankers out there?

Ahhhh first world problems of how to organize a top 100 list. It's the age old discussion. And one I mess with seemingly every year.

Letterboxd makes it so easily and flexible.

I love seeing Singin' in the Rain on your list. I had just recently watched it for the first time last year with my wife and we were blown away by it. I just... this is.... so good.

[Dukefrukem]

But to answer you question. I'm data driven. So anything that I can simply apply to mathematics, I can formulate into an official ranking.

So as I try to understand cinema more each year, whether it be the technical aspects, the story, the acting, I grow fonder of certain films and others become less significant. I think a perfect example of that would be the Intelligent Sci-Fi discussion we had a couple of years ago. Films that were initially presented to me as BRILLIANT become less so. And thus, I am less likely to appreciate or want to watch them. So I look at my list and I apply that factor with films I would want to watch most. The films I do, stay at the top of the list.

And thus become the ever changing rollercoaster of Duke's Top 100 Film list.

[baby doll]

I've never been able to make a top one hundred, but even if I did, I'm not sure what purpose it would serve to rank the films numerically. Putting aside the problem of comparing apples with oranges, even if one could somehow determine that, for instance, Rio Bravo is a greater or lesser film than Zorns Lemma, at this level of achievement, this distinction isn't very meaningful. Does it matter if Anna Karenina is a greater novel than Middlemarch (or vice-versa)? At the end of the day, both are eminently worth reading.

[Dukefrukem]

I've never been able to make a top one hundred, but even if I did, I'm not sure what purpose it would serve to rank the films numerically. Putting aside the problem of comparing apples with oranges, even if one could somehow determine that, for instance, Rio Bravo is a greater or lesser film than Zorns Lemma, at this level of achievement, this distinction isn't very meaningful. Does it matter if Anna Karenina is a greater novel than Middlemarch (or vice-versa)? At the end of the day, both are eminently worth reading.

Only if "worth" is your unit of measure.

[Irish]

The last time I made a top 100 list, I had ten groups of 10 (1-10, 11-20, etc.) without ordering within the lists. It's closer to what I want even though I moved things every time I looked back at it.

This is a great idea & has been very helpful. Thanks!

But to answer you question. I'm data driven. So anything that I can simply apply to mathematics, I can formulate into an official ranking.

Okay, but how do you quantify your feeling versus their skill? Meaning, if you have a stupid, almost drunken love for Movie A, then do you rank it higher than Movie B, even thought Movie B is more technically accomplished?

I've never been able to make a top one hundred, but even if I did, I'm not sure what purpose it would serve to rank the films numerically. Putting aside the problem of comparing apples with oranges, even if one could somehow determine that, for instance, Rio Bravo is a greater or lesser film than Zorns Lemma, at this level of achievement, this distinction isn't very meaningful. Does it matter if Anna Karenina is a greater novel than Middlemarch (or vice-versa)? At the end of the day, both are eminently worth reading.

I agree with you in theory; it isn't sensical.

But then dumped ~80 titles into letterboxd and started messing around with an order. It's actually kinda fun. I like the way it makes me reconsider movies I love.

[Skitch]

I started with making a list of movies that could make my top 100. I researched IMDB lists, Oscar lists, all sorts of top 100 lists. I narrowed that to 150. I cut all the names out of paper into individual pieces. I did this so I could easily movie the titles around. I peered at the pieces on my desk...and slowly pulled out the worst ten, then ranked those ten. Then I out pulled out the next worst ten, and ranked them. You're right, when you get to a certain point, they're on the same level, rewatchability comes into play...at that point you just have to make a decision.

So yeah, my top 100 came together by starting at the bottom.

[DFA1979]

I made a Top 100 all time best list once but I lost it. I do have a Top 100 Horror movies list on my blog. Favorites would be too hard to do but I may try anyways.

[Dukefrukem]

Okay, but how do you quantify your feeling versus their skill? Meaning, if you have a stupid, almost drunken love for Movie A, then do you rank it higher than Movie B, even thought Movie B is more technically accomplished?

One of the easy ones is # of rewatches. Have I rewatched movie X over movie Y? If movie X wins, it gets a higher rank. (or lower rank... whatever is better).

[Skitch]

One of the easy ones is # of rewatches. Have I rewatched movie X over movie Y? If movie X wins, it gets a higher rank. (or lower rank... whatever is better).

I've started going even further...how many times am I gonna rewatch this in the future?