Empire - The 500 Greatest Movies of All Time

[DC 536]

Good features in it too particularly the one on 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit' and on 'The Searchers.' Always interesting reading about John Wayne being a right wing racist old basta*d at times. I lifted the first one that came to hand in the newsagents without even realising and got the Jailhouse bloody Rock cover though. Oh well.

The features are fantastic. The work that was put in to even get 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit' to the screen is unbelievable, while some of the quotes from John Wayne (especially his "white supremacy" one) were jaw-dropping.

The Dark Knight, despite being good, wouldn't have been as high if the voting didn't coincide with the fact it was in Cinema's at the time.

Surely though, if that was the case, a lot of other films that are in cinemas at the moment would also be in the list.

"Experts"...please. What makes somebody an expert on a friggin film?! Do they see something the rest of us dont? Its personal taste, again. You cant be an expert on whats good and what isnt when it comes to movies.

Can this also be attributed to other aspects of entertainment? Say, professional-wrestling; where you have, on more than one occassion, criticised people for liking something you don't (which, if I'm not mistaken, is down to personal taste)?

 

If someone said *insert match/show/wrestler here* was the best wrestling match/show/wrestler they have ever seen, and you said that it sucked balls (or some other description) and, for liking it, you have no taste (which you have done before - Wrestlemania XXIV I believe), aren't you going against the personal taste comment you used above?

And I consider them stupid because they put things in an order so matter-of-factly, like if you disagree you are wrong because "EMPIRE SAID SO DAMNIT!!!"

Empire didn't say though; they simply reported the results. It was the readers of said magazine as well as people within the industry who said it... but I get your point. Edited September 30, 2008 by DC

[Guest Al Stevens]

I can actually see both sides of the argument. For one I can understand there is experts out there which say "this film is great" or "this film is down right trash" some times there are times you agree with them (for example it doesn't take a BA honors in film studies to know that Gigli was the biggest turd in the history of film making) however there is other times where people will disagree with the critics.

 

For example Beltmark hated the dark knight and fair play to him thats his choice and option. For another example I was sitting in a lecture and was told that Citizen Kane was the greatest movie ever, after watching the movie I thought that it was one of the biggest pieces of crap ever written and directed.

 

The key thing is everyone is riding Belty for having an option about a film which for many could and can be classed a classic. Surely by telling someone there option is wrong can be classed as being dictatorship.

 

PS this isn't a dig at anyone in any way it's just a point of view on things here

[Guest The Beltster]

Can this also be attributed to other aspects of entertainment? Say, professional-wrestling; where you have, on more than one occassion, criticised people for liking something you don't (which, if I'm not mistaken, is down to personal taste)?

 

If someone said *insert match/show/wrestler here* was the best wrestling match/show/wrestler they have ever seen, and you said that it sucked balls (or some other description) and, for liking it, you have no taste (which you have done before - Wrestlemania XXIV I believe), aren't you going against the personal taste comment you used above?

It can be attributed to anything, and you use examples of me saying I've criticised people for liking something, as if they are wrong, thats not true at all. I've disagreed with peoples opinions on what is and isnt enjoyable and my posting style has been classed as 'aggressive' which makes some people believe I'm trying to put my opinion over as fact which is never the case unless I specifically say its a fact, but I've never said (unless I'm specifically trying to be condesending if I feel somebody is being that way with me) that they are flat out wrong that something they like is infact crap.

 

This is the problem with alot of people on this forum in recent times, it seems to have to put "IMO" in every post you make, to make it clear you are only giving your opinion and views...thing is, who elses opinion would I or anybody else be giving?!

 

If somebody thinks that WMXXIV was the greatest ever, good for them. I question their taste as many people here question mine, isnt that my right as a free thinking human being on a forum specifcally here for debating differing opinions and viewpoints?

 

I believe it is.

 

Empire (and the "experts") believe Godfather is the best film ever, I disagree, I think its a pile or crap. Am I wrong? Are they? If 2 million people like a movie and 1 person doesnt, is that 1 person wrong for not liking it?

 

No, I dont believe so.

 

Empire didn't say though; they simply reported the results. It was the readers of said magazine as well as people within the industry who said it... but I get your point.

My point is, if somebody were to slate Godfather, some would use this Empire survey and say "Well Empire says its the best movie ever." Thats what I'm trying to say.

 

Its no different that other people using Power Slam as an oracle of knowledge. Just because movies are Empire's field of expertise doesnt mean their opinion is fact or what they write will be relevant to everybody.

 

For the record, I know Godfather is a popular movie and I know alot of people love it, personally I have no idea why as I hate it and see zero redeeming qualities in it, but people find it hard to accept when somebody says something negative about a generally popular and well recieved movie to the point where they almost demand you explain your reasoning as to why you dont like it.

 

Its crazy.

[ShaolinHandLock 73]

These lists never seem to go well. :lol

[DC 536]

This is the problem with alot of people on this forum in recent times, it seems to have to put "IMO" in every post you make, to make it clear you are only giving your opinion and views...thing is, who elses opinion would I or anybody else be giving?!

Does that mean Empire (or the readers, critics, etc) should have put an "IMO" disclaimer at the end of the poll as well?

[Guest Jayfunk]

Empire (and the "experts") believe Godfather is the best film ever, I disagree, I think its a pile or crap. Am I wrong? Are they? If 2 million people like a movie and 1 person doesnt, is that 1 person wrong for not liking it?

 

No, I dont believe so.

 

I agree totally with this, in fact its best comment on the thread thus far. As it totally sums up these pointless lists its the same with the PWI list

Edited October 1, 2008 by Jayfunk

[Guest The Beltster]

Does that mean Empire (or the readers, critics, etc) should have put an "IMO" disclaimer at the end of the poll as well?

Are you being an asshole for being an asshole's sake or are you just a genuine asshole who is being himself?

 

I'm sure there is probably a disclaimer in there somewhere saying these are based on the views and opinions of readers and other people and is no way meant to be a factual account, but even if it doesnt, you are still missing my point that if people attempt to argue it there are those who will use it as a factual line up to try and prove you wrong if you disagree with their opinion.

[Guest Jaycey Baby]

"Experts"...please. What makes somebody an expert on a friggin film?! Do they see something the rest of us dont?

 

Well, yes. If someone writes for a film magazine, it's a reasonable assumption that they've got a better understanding of what makes a film good than the average joe. They've probably spent a good chunk of their lives watching and analyzing films so if I want to find out whether a film's worth watching, I'm gonna look to them, and they'll probably have a better argument than "it's a crock of sh*t" or "it's a pile of turd".

 

My point is, if somebody were to slate Godfather, some would use this Empire survey and say "Well Empire says its the best movie ever." Thats what I'm trying to say.

 

Empire's hardly the industry bible. Its list is likely to be populist and predictable.

[Guest The Beltster]

Well, yes. If someone writes for a film magazine, it's a reasonable assumption that they've got a better understanding of what makes a film good than the average joe. They've probably spent a good chunk of their lives watching and analyzing films so if I want to find out whether a film's worth watching, I'm gonna look to them, and they'll probably have a better argument than "it's a crock of sh*t" or "it's a pile of turd".

Sorry but I dont buy into that theory whatsoever. They might be able to look at a movie and pick up on small details like the lighting is great, the camera angles and camera work is high quality and that sort of thing, but they have no better understanding of what is and isnt a good movie than anybody else, because as has been said numerous times its all personal taste.

 

They can spend as many years as they want analyzing films and then tell me the Godfather is good a million times, I'll still tell them I think its crap because I dont enjoy it.

 

And you are being a little bit stupid saying that you would go to them over listening to "Its a pile or shite" as if that would be my review of the movie, what a joke! I could write up a perfectly respectable review of the Godfather telling you all the reasons I think it stinks, so then what would be the difference between my opinion and that of a top movie critic? At the end of the day, its still only one man's opinion of the movie, and what he likes others might not.

 

Your argument is so flawed, do you buy games and watch movies based on the ratings they get, and if so, are you saying you agree with those ratings every time? I doubt it, why? Because what some people like, others will hate.

 

Feel free to let other people tell you and dictate to you what you will and wont enjoy if you want, its no bother to me. I'll happily continue using my own mind to come up with my own conclusions as to whether I like or dislike something. Works for me.

[Fidel Cashflow 130]

Sorry but I dont buy into that theory whatsoever. They might be able to look at a movie and pick up on small details like the lighting is great, the camera angles and camera work is high quality and that sort of thing

 

Well, I think you gave yourself the answer you're so desperately looking for. Those who have an eye for film composition and a knowledge of the classics would be the best to compile what they feel are the "best" movies, the same way publications like Motor Trend are the best to decide what are the "best" cars. I feel you can accept something as well made, properly put together, and well thought out, but not necessarily enjoy.

 

They're rating film quality. Film critics (and to a lesser movie buffs in general), can end up liking a movie just because they can tell just how well made it is. That's what these lists are about. Movies that are well made, whether or not you like them is up to you, but I usually feel these lists are good at giving you some things to check out.

[Guest The Beltster]

But in all honesty, do many people really care how well a film is made over whether they enjoy it or not? I mean, I've seen some huge budget turds and some tiny budget classics. Personally, I dont really care if the lighting or angles are good over, doesnt really matter to me to the point where it will effect my enjoyment of what I consider a great film.

 

I can appreciate quality work, dont get me wrong, but I still think the lists are too pushy and was too matter-of-fact for my liking. I dont listen to critics or take into consideration a rating a movie, game, book or anuything else gets, I'll take a look myself either way.

[DC 536]

Are you being an asshole for being an asshole's sake or are you just a genuine asshole who is being himself?

I wasn't trying to be arseholish (it's a word) about it; I was simply wondering why you get annoyed because people don't just take it as your opinion when you don't put "IMO" with your post, yet this poll is doing the exact same thing (listing what, in the opinion of those who voted, is the best movies without putting "IMO" in the article).

[Guest Jaycey Baby]

Sorry but I dont buy into that theory whatsoever. They might be able to look at a movie and pick up on small details like the lighting is great, the camera angles and camera work is high quality and that sort of thing, but they have no better understanding of what is and isnt a good movie than anybody else, because as has been said numerous times its all personal taste.

 

They can spend as many years as they want analyzing films and then tell me the Godfather is good a million times, I'll still tell them I think its crap because I dont enjoy it.

 

Lighting, angles and camerawork aren't 'small details'. You could have the best script in the world but if you don't get the mood and tone right it won't come off properly. Maybe you'd be happier switching the films off and going to the theatre? None of these new-fangled multiple camera angles there.

 

At the end of the day, if you've written it off as shit, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. They're like ********s, after all. It would be a shame if your stubborn-ness meant you missed out on discovering some Proper Art sometime in the future!

 

And you are being a little bit stupid saying that you would go to them over listening to "Its a pile or shite" as if that would be my review of the movie, what a joke! I could write up a perfectly respectable review of the Godfather telling you all the reasons I think it stinks, so then what would be the difference between my opinion and that of a top movie critic? At the end of the day, its still only one man's opinion of the movie, and what he likes others might not.

 

The difference would be, their opinion would carry slightly more weight as a film scholar. I'd love to set up my own surgery dispensing medical advice I feel is right, such as get your kid off Ritalin and give him a slap 'round the lug-hole every now and again. But that would be wrong.

 

Your argument is so flawed, do you buy games and watch movies based on the ratings they get, and if so, are you saying you agree with those ratings every time? I doubt it, why? Because what some people like, others will hate.

 

Feel free to let other people tell you and dictate to you what you will and wont enjoy if you want, its no bother to me. I'll happily continue using my own mind to come up with my own conclusions as to whether I like or dislike something. Works for me.

 

I use reviews mainly because I haven't the time nor money to rent every single new release in Blockbuster every week and painstakingly sift through them for the good ones. If a lot of people say it's good I'll probably check it out, if a lot of people think it's bad I probably won't, and if a lot of people think it's bad but I think it sounds good I odds-on will. It's not like the writers are sat in their office with Nazi uniforms on, typing furiously, thiinking "I vill impose my will on ozer human beings!!". Is it feasible that I just might like to read a review without coming out of it with the exact same opinion as the guy who wrote it?

Edited October 1, 2008 by Jaycey Baby

[ShaolinHandLock 73]

But in all honesty, do many people really care how well a film is made over whether they enjoy it or not? I mean, I've seen some huge budget turds and some tiny budget classics. Personally, I dont really care if the lighting or angles are good over, doesnt really matter to me to the point where it will effect my enjoyment of what I consider a great film.

 

I agree 100%. :xyx

[Guest Jimmy Redman]

The difference would be, their opinion would carry slightly more weight as a film scholar. I'd love to set up my own surgery dispensing medical advice I feel is right, such as get your kid off Ritalin and give him a slap 'round the lug-hole every now and again. But that would be wrong.

 

The flaw there being that medical attention is a whole different idea to movie watching. Medicine deals in biological facts (lets not get into a nit-picking debate, you all know what I mean), enjoying a film doesnt, its a personal opinion. There is no accounting for taste, as the saying goes.

[Guest Jaycey Baby]

The flaw there being that medical attention is a whole different idea to movie watching. Medicine deals in biological facts (lets not get into a nit-picking debate, you all know what I mean), enjoying a film doesnt, its a personal opinion. There is no accounting for taste, as the saying goes.

 

I was just trying to construct a funny analogy really. Yes, art is subjective, you're free to like what you like and not agree with the public consensus, but you're really on a hiding to nothing if you think you've got just as good an idea about what makes a film good than someone who's been studying cinema all their life, especially when you're spouting guff like how well the film is made has no relation to how much you enjoy it, like you could just point a handicam at your mates and magically make a good film. To flat out dismiss the views of someone who really knows what they're talking about is just stubborn and arrogant and just kills the idea of healthy debate.

[Guest Jimmy Redman]

I was just trying to construct a funny analogy really. Yes, art is subjective, you're free to like what you like and not agree with the public consensus, but you're really on a hiding to nothing if you think you've got just as good an idea about what makes a film good than someone who's been studying cinema all their life, especially when you're spouting guff like how well the film is made has no relation to how much you enjoy it, like you could just point a handicam at your mates and magically make a good film. To flat out dismiss the views of someone who really knows what they're talking about is just stubborn and arrogant and just kills the idea of healthy debate.

 

But there is a big difference between a film being technically 'good' and it being enjoyable! Art IS subjective, therefore someone will like whatever they want to like no matter how 'well' its made according to film school criteria. Hence Belty is saying that 'good' is only relative to how much someone personally enjoys it, and that therefore no one person (or persons) can really decide that for anyone else, which is a fair point to make. For Belty, I think if you take it a step back and just look at it for what it is: a list of movies that a bunch of people like, then its fine. Its not the be-all-and-end-all, and I think Empire realises that. Its a hyperbolic title, because thats how the media works.

 

In bold: You're being hyperbolic, but ignoring that, believe it or not, people can like films which look, technically, like utter guff. Thats the magic of, again, taste! Same goes for any possible form of art or entertainment. Hence how well its made doesnt need to have anything to do with level of enjoyment.

 

Jesus, lets go for a more obvious analogy. You (plural) can laugh at Maryse trying to wrestle all you want, I still think she's great. If you look on a purely technical angle, she's crapsticks. But I enjoy her. TASTE.

Edited October 2, 2008 by Jimmy Redman

[Guest Fiona]

But in all honesty, do many people really care how well a film is made over whether they enjoy it or not? I mean, I've seen some huge budget turds and some tiny budget classics. Personally, I dont really care if the lighting or angles are good over, doesnt really matter to me to the point where it will effect my enjoyment of what I consider a great film.

 

I can appreciate quality work, dont get me wrong, but I still think the lists are too pushy and was too matter-of-fact for my liking. I dont listen to critics or take into consideration a rating a movie, game, book or anuything else gets, I'll take a look myself either way.

 

No I don't care with how well a film is made. I wouldn't even think of something like that if I'm in a theatre. I go there to be entertained not to analyze the camera angles and lighting. That's too much work.

 

I'm not bothered about the lists that these companies put out either. And I don't listen to film critics. I go see a movie based on the genre and who's in it.

 

You wouldn't catch me dead in a theatre watching a horse opera (western) or a sandal epic (religious film). I go for comedies, horror's, action and certain drama's. I've seen lots of films that I enjoy that were panned by critics. It's an personal choice of what you like and don't like. List be d*mmed.

 

But I did enjoy the Godfather and the Godfather II. Didn't think much of the Godfather III.

[Guest Jaycey Baby]

But there is a big difference between a film being technically 'good' and it being enjoyable! Art IS subjective, therefore someone will like whatever they want to like no matter how 'well' its made according to film school criteria. Hence Belty is saying that 'good' is only relative to how much someone personally enjoys it, and that therefore no one person (or persons) can really decide that for anyone else, which is a fair point to make. For Belty, I think if you take it a step back and just look at it for what it is: a list of movies that a bunch of people like, then its fine. Its not the be-all-and-end-all, and I think Empire realises that. Its a hyperbolic title, because thats how the media works.

 

In bold: You're being hyperbolic, but ignoring that, believe it or not, people can like films which look, technically, like utter guff. Thats the magic of, again, taste! Same goes for any possible form of art or entertainment. Hence how well its made doesnt need to have anything to do with level of enjoyment.

 

Jesus, lets go for a more obvious analogy. You (plural) can laugh at Maryse trying to wrestle all you want, I still think she's great. If you look on a purely technical angle, she's crapsticks. But I enjoy her. TASTE.

 

Maybe a more appropriate analogy would be something like this - occasionally, I'll have some wine. I know what I find and don't find drinkable, but that doesn't mean I can wander into a wine-tasting seminar and expect to be the authority on what makes good wine. It's just one of those situations where I just have to admit to myself, I like wine but I don't know a whole lot about it.

 

I think you'd be wrong to say films are purely art and there's no scientific element that's open to analysis. Lots of people like Star Wars - would they still be able to take it seriously if Vader was shot in soft focus, from a high angle so he looked small and weak, and constantly bathed in bright pink light? There are a lot of things a director can do to highten the mood and tone of a film, and I can't think of a better example than this than what Coppola did with The Godfather. If you try take on an informed critic without an appreciation of these things, your opinion is not going to be particularly credible.

 

And I'm all for holding people accountable for their taste. You can argue that, say, Nickelback aren't a waste of perfectly good organic material, but you'd be wrong :-p

Edited October 2, 2008 by Jaycey Baby

[Guest Sparrow]

Saw and Halloween should be higher in the list, and Dark Knight before Taxi Driver!?! Hmm...