|
return
to homepage return
to updates
My 100
Favorite FILMS

by
Miles Mathis
2009,
updated heavily 2022
[In
re-editing this list in 2022, I realized something: I really
don't like Hollywood. Which I guess is why my list will seem so
odd to most people. There are no Tarantino movies here, no
Scorsese movies, and only one Coppola movie. No Eastwood movies,
no John Wayne movies, no Brando movies, no westerns, no mob
movies. I scratched Sophie's Choice from my original list
because is it Holocaust propaganda, but reinserted it near the
end strictly for Streep's performance, which is worth seeing. I
deleted many others for the same reason, including Lawrence of
Arabia. I also deleted some that I realized I had included
because they were famous, rather than because I actually liked
them. I believe I only added two that came out after my original
list: Jane Eyre and The Hangover. I also added RED,
but that was from 2008. I tried to fill in all the new open
spots, but couldn't do it. There are some additions however: a
few I forgot the first time, such as The Secret of Roan Inish.
The comments below now don't
make full sense, since I have moved things around, but I leave
them up as a nod to history.]
This
list was much easier to compile than the songs list. Honestly, it
was difficult for me to get the list to 100. My first list only
went to about 75, and I had to search to round out the list. I
suppose this is because it is much more difficult to make a great
movie than it is to make a great song. A popular song is under 3
minutes, normally, and you just need one good hook and a nice
voice. Of course there is a lot of competition, since many people
have nice voices and many can find a melody, but a good song
isn't that rare. A great song, yes, but as I said, there are
thousands of good songs. With films, though, we are in a
different world. Films can fail for so many reasons, and they
usually do. Like most contemporary people I am a real fan of
cinema, but I am also very finicky. I am annoyed easily and
impressed with difficulty. Actors and directors tend to annoy me
by their very nature, so I do not suspend disbelief as quickly as
most. In addition, I think we are in a peculiar place with film,
historically: the medium was really in its infancy until a few
decades ago, then after a short period of relative comfort we
entered a stage of experimentation and novelty. Growth was very
fast—I would say too fast—and we went straight from gothic to
rococo, skipping a classical period almost entirely. The golden
age, if we can call it that, lasted less than two decades, and by
the 80s film was already becoming mannered and corrupt,
self-referential and self-deconstructing. What it took painting
and sculpture and poetry and literature five centuries to
accomplish, film accomplished in about five decades. For this
reason, I suspect film may enter a second round, and we may see a
second golden age in the near future, once the phonies tire of
novelty, misdirection, and CGI.
We can see this clearly
with the Star Wars series. The first two Star Wars
make my list, and this is because they were made in the late 70s,
toward the end of a period I am calling the first golden age of
cinema. This period started in the early 60s, when color was
fully realized, when acting began to be more natural, and when
all the lessons from decades of failures and partial successes
had more or less been absorbed. By the end of this period,
special effects had also been mastered: they were convincing
without being intrusive. The Empire Strikes Back and Alien
are both right on the cusp, being examples of effects just right
but not too much. After that, it was always too much, and the
effects began to outstrip the scripts and the dialog. The
Return of the Jedi was already a lazy script with lazy
acting, and it is because the director knew the effects were
carrying the ball. By the time we reached The Phantom Menace,
CGI had gotten into everybody's heads (George Lucas' first of
all) and planted a vermin egg. Scripts, casting, acting, and
directing all took a nosedive, and they are still diving. The
LOTR trilogy, the Batman series, the Terminator series, the
Spiderman series, the Ironman series, and all the rest are just a
continuation and extension of George Lucas' bad re-prioritizing
of cinema, and we are all slogging through this cultural
nightmare, caused by a bad meal before bed. That meal is a meal
of false technology. The Revenge of the Sith was the worst
of the six installments, despite having the most advanced
effects, and it is because the directors and producers and
writers dropped the ball on everything but the effects. Hayden
Christiansen and Natalie Portman are even worse actors than Ewan
McGregor (if that is possible), and the rest of the film is
forced to devolve to their level. Even Yoda has lost all his
charm. By the time we reached The Phantom Menace, Yoda had
gone from being a cute little Muppet with a sense of humor to a
CGI asshole with scary eyes and a fake gravity. In that film,
both Yoda and Samuel L. Jackson are directed to manufacture the
appearance of wisdom by being sour, quarrelsome and insulting.
Compare that to Alec Guinness' demeanor in Star Wars or
Yoda's demeanor in Empire. When and why did Lucas decide
that wisdom was humorless and self-aggrandizing? Did CGI
literally suck all the humanity out of him, like mynox sucking on
a power cable?
But enough of that. Beyond my aversion for
CGI, this list is very different than most you have seen or will
see. I give no credit for historical significance. This is a
straight list of what I consider to be the best movies, and the
old movies have to compete on equal footing with new movies.
Another way to look at it is to judge from a great distance in
time, as if you are looking back hundreds of years. From a
distance, no one will care which director was first to use some
trick, or which actor was famous at the time. Most film lists are
made by critics, and critics want to prove how smart they are to
you and to eachother. They would not think to leave off the
required old movies, for this reason. I have quite a few old
movies on my list, but it is because I really like them, not
because they are famous with critics or intellectuals.
By
the same token, I feel free to leave off newer movies that I
don't really like, such as Pulp Fiction. I bury The
Godfather down at #65 because the subject matter doesn't
impress me as much as it does most people; the acting doesn't
impress me either, apart from its use to the movie. If I am not
impressed by the movie as a whole, I consider the acting to be in
vain. For the same reason I left doctors' shows and lawyers'
shows off my TV list (I cannot suspend disbelief far enough to
believe that doctors or lawyers are fascinating people), I also
leave mob movies off or well down my list. I don't find anything
even potentially poignant, sexy, or thrilling about the mob. You
might as well try to convince me that I can gain insights about
life or be entertained by watching cockroaches suck on
eachother's brains.
Beyond that, I think this list is
heavily influenced by an artist's eye, and I have made no effort
to apologize for it or tone it down. I judge by the only criteria
I can judge by: my own. I admit this gives the list a peculiar
look, at first glance. It doesn't read like a committee list or a
critic list, but it also doesn't read like a man's list or a
woman's list. It doesn't have nearly enough action flicks to be
mistaken for a GQ list, or enough romances to be mistaken
for an Oprah list. The heavy population of period pieces
at the beginning would lead some to question my testosterone
levels, but then they will remind themselves that I am a realist
artist (an odd beast in today's menagerie), and it will all begin
to make sense again.
As you see, Woody Allen dominates
the list, appearing five times, including number 1. I have little
doubt that Woody will be seen as the greatest screenwriter and
director of our time, and that this will become clearer as the
years pass. He is battling two things right now that will not
last: 1) His age. It is hard to watch people get old, especially
on screen. 2) His scandalous remarriage. Future decades and
centuries will not care nearly as much as we do what he did in
bed. Once he is as dead as Bogart and Orson Welles and the rest,
the critics can start judging his movies on an even footing with
Citizen Kane and Casablanca and so on. He will do
just fine.
Merchant/Ivory will also do just fine, since
they have created some of the greatest masterpieces of the last
half-century. I give them four places on my list, including three
in the top 20. If they hadn't become enamored of Nick Nolte in
the mid-90s, they might have done even better.
Roman
Polanski also takes four places on my list, with the highest
going to The Pianist. I purposely put The Pianist
above Schindler's List, since it better avoids propaganda
and sensationalism. And I put it above Chinatown because
it is a more important film. Polanski's only problem in getting
more people to agree with me on both these points is timing. If
he had come out with The Pianist ten or twenty years
earlier, people would have judged Schindler's List by it,
instead of the reverse. As it is, they have judged The Pianist
against the reputation of Schindler's List, instead of
against the film itself. And as with Woody Allen, everything
Polanski has done has been tainted by his own personal story.
Although I include Scorsese on my list for Taxi
Driver, I consider Polanski to be a much better director.
Compare their period pieces, for a start. The Age of Innocence
is flat and boring compared to Tess or Oliver Twist
or MacBeth. Scorsese is the only director who has managed
to get a bad performance out of Daniel Day Lewis, not once, but
twice. Gangs of New York is one of the worst movies ever
made, and Scorsese pushes Day Lewis too far in trying to save it.
And poor DiCaprio. Next to Daniel Day Lewis, he looks like Kevin
Costner trying to out-act Morgan Freeman in Robin Hood. A
complete disaster, in other words. Polanski is better at modern
movies, too. Chinatown is much superior to Goodfellas
or Cape Fear or Raging Bull. DeNiro saves
Scorsese's ass over and over, and without him the flaws of these
films would be much more obvious. The same can be said of Taxi
Driver, which, without DeNiro, would never work. Yes,
Nicholson is great in Chinatown, but he doesn't need to
act over the top of plot holes like DeNiro does. Who but DeNiro
could make a hero out of Travis Bickle?
Stanley Kubrick
makes the list three times, with Barry Lyndon ranking the
highest. Although he was a great director, I consider him to be
generally overrated. Eyes Wide Shut was a disaster, and
Lolita, although interesting, was also a failure. If
anyone, Kubrick should have had the guts to follow Nabokov and
cast a girl as Lo, instead of a woman. Once you refuse to cast a
young teen as Lo, you have destroyed the entire plot and all the
commentary, and you might as well make a different movie. Which
is basically what he did. Kubrick's long suit was not humor,
either, and Dr. Strangelove is not nearly as funny as most
people seem to think it is. Peter Sellers could make a funeral
funny, and he often has to do that for Kubrick. Even in Barry
Lyndon, Kubrick made mistakes that were nearly fatal. Ryan
O'Neal is way out of his depth, and only Kubrick's direction
saves him from ruining the whole thing (mostly). Yes, Polanski
made a very similar casting mistake with Kinski in Tess,
but Kinski's looks were more astonishing than O'Neal's. O'Neal
was handsome, but Kinski was awe-inspiring. It requires awe to
cause an audience to overlook accent problems like those two both
had. Kinski's eyes could hypnotize you (making you believe that a
girl from Evershot could have a German accent), but O'Neal could
not do the same.
Some will say, "If this is supposed
to be an artist's list, why isn't Tarkovsky or someone like that
at the top? How can Caddyshack rank above Andrei
Rublev?" While that is a good question, I have an
answer. This list isn't just for cinematography or artistic
composition. If it were, then yes, Tarkovsky would be hogging all
the top spots. The only other films that compete with Andrei
Rublev in that regard are other Tarkovsky films, like
Nostalghia, for instance. No one came close to Tarkovsky
in the art film category, not even Kubrick. Barry Lyndon
would have to move way up my list, but it still wouldn't compete
with Tarkovsky. Polanski's Tess would move up, but the
same applies. That said, Tarkovsky was weak on story, to say the
least. His stories were created mostly to give him a way to tie
all his shots together. Tarkovsky was not so much telling a story
as creating a mood. Sometimes that is exactly what I want from a
film, but most times I prefer a story. Good storytelling is not
easy, and the other writers and directors deserve credit for
story even though they usually can't compose scenes like
Tarkovsky. It would be great to see a director that could do
both, but so far that hasn't happened. Kubrick made some effort
to do it with Barry Lyndon, and Merchant/Ivory tried as
well, both with a large degree of success. But nothing on the
level of Tarkovsky, as I think most will admit.
Despite
my love for serious cinema, my list is not one-dimensional. It is
well-seasoned with comedies, science fiction, and animation. You
will not see many lists where Caddyshack breaks the top
50, or where Lady and the Tramp makes the top 80. For that
matter, who else who has been called a snob would dare to put
Pollyanna above The Seven Samurai or Lawrence of
Arabia? As I said, this is my list, and I boldly defend such
eccentricity. I would rather watch Pollyanna a tenth time
than either of those masterpieces, and that fact is a large part
of what this list is about.
I decided to include
miniseries and made-for-TV movies along with the rest. Some might
say that miniseries have an unfair advantage, but if that were
true most lists would be heavy with them. They are said by some
to have an unfair advantage because they have more time to work
with. That argument fails because more time just gives the
director and actors more chances to fail. In fact, most
miniseries do fail on that score, and it is not only because they
normally must make do with lesser actors and directors. The two
miniseries that made my list come in very high, but they are also
very rare. Both are not only one level above most miniseries,
they are two or three levels above them. They have managed to do
what Merchant/Ivory have done, on a much larger scale. For that
reason they are due all praise they have received, and are due
the ranking I give them here.
I
have moved Heaven Can Wait up to the top, as you see. I saw it
again in 2023 and it has not only aged well, it just keeps
getting better. It is difficult for me to understand why it
doesn't rank very high in common weblists. The only thing I can
figure is that Beatty must have pissed some people off after his
peak around the time of Reds, and that they now refuse to promote
him. Everything in life, and especially on the internet, is
rigged, and this is just more proof of it. 1. Heaven Can Wait
(1978) 2. Room with a View 3. Hannah and her Sisters 4.
Sense and Sensibility 5. Pride and Prejudice (BBC 1995) 6.
Casablanca 7. Tous les Matins du Monde
8.
Howard's End 9. Breaking Away 10. Andrei Rublev 11.
Barry Lyndon 12. Wives and Daughters (BBC 1999) 13. The
Black Stallion 14. Poltergeist 15. The Remains of the
Day 16. A Feast of July 17. The Secret Garden (1993) 18.
Romeo and Juliet (1968) 19. Othello (1995) 20. The Empire
Strikes Back 21. Crimes and Misdemeanors 22. Alien 23.
Pollyanna 24. Jane Eyre (2011) 25. Star Wars 26.
Manhattan 27. Ethan Frome 28. Tie: Fright Night (1985),
Fright Night (2011) 29. I, Claudius 30. The Secret of Roan
Inish 31. Fletch 32. The Sound of Music 33. Splendor in
the Grass 34. Annie Hall 35. Groundhog Day 36. Bullets
over Broadway 37. The Mission 38. Fly Away Home 39. Out
of Africa 40. Blade Runner 41. Leon (the Professional) 42.
Raiders of the Lost Ark 43. Anne of the Thousand Days 44.
Diner 45. The Graduate 46. Watership Down 47. Jaws 48.
Monty Python and the Holy Grail 49. Crouching Tiger Hidden
Dragon 50. Caddyshack 51. Something about Mary 52.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) 53. Planet of the Apes
(1967) 54. The Wizard of Oz 55. Rear Window 56.
Ghostbusters 57. I Married a Witch 58. Tess (1980) 59.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind 60. Butch Cassidy and
the Sundance Kid 61. Love and Death 62. Big 63. To Catch
a Thief 64. Little Big Man 65. Ghostbusters II 66. 2001
A Space Odyssey 67. A Man for All Seasons 68. Return of the
Jedi 69. Play it Again, Sam 70. Splash
71.
School of Rock 72. Halloween 73. The Grapes of Wrath 74.
12 Angry Men 75. Lady and the Tramp 76. Be Kind Rewind
77.
The Parent Trap (1960) 78. High Fidelity 79.
Deconstructing Harry 80. The Mayor of Casterbridge 81.
Cyrano de Bergerac (1990) 82. Adaptation 83. Aliens 84.
It's a Wonderful Life 85. Anchorman 2 86. RED 87.
Definitely Maybe 88. Lilith 89. Amadeus 90. North by
Northwest 91. The Hangover 92. The Breakfast Club 93.
Chinatown 94. Ferris Bueller's Day Off 95. Little Women
(1994) 96. Sophie's Choice 97. Brazil 98. Washington
Square 99. American Graffiti 100. The Outsiders
If
this paper was useful to you in any way, please consider donating
a dollar (or more) to the SAVE THE ARTISTS FOUNDATION. This will
allow me to continue writing these "unpublishable"
things. Don't be confused by paying Melisa Smith--that is just
one of my many noms de plume. If you are a Paypal user,
there is no fee; so it might be worth your while to become one.
Otherwise they will rob us 33 cents for each transaction.
|