The Prestigious Sight & Sound Poll (2022) The 100 Greatest Films Of All Time (6 Viewers)

[Tino]

doesn't measure up to "High Noon" as it's clearly a superior movie than "The Searchers".

Whoa there pardner. Them
there’s fighting’ words!

 

[Walter Kittel]

While I think there is a lot to like about High Noon, particularly the morality of the lead; the idea that the entire town would abandon the marshal always felt a bit contrived to me. We are talking about rugged folks living in the West who settled that land; not some glorified city slickers from back east.

I do realize that the film is metaphorical.

- Walter.

 

[EricSchulz]

For those interested, #1 Jeanne Dielman… is available on HBO Max to stream (probably part of the TCM collection).

 

[Robert Crawford]

Whoa there pardner. Them
there’s fighting’ words!

And, I fought that battle for years in favor of The Searchers until about 15-20 years ago.

 

[jayembee]

I really need to watch Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles.

I think it's worthwhile. This is what I wrote about it.

Oh, I know. It's one I've been meaning to watch for a long time. Just never managed to actually do that yet.

 

[jayembee]

I agree - it’s not a great list.

One of the things I’ve come to really dislike about these familiar listings is how backwards looking they are. For the most part, this list suggests that the majority of the best filmmaking happened in the last century, with what, three or four choices from this one? Nearly half of the choices are from 1960 or earlier.

If you ever wonder why the general public at large seems to have moved away from caring about film criticism, look at lists like these, which generally suggest that everything good about cinema has already happened, and which generally suggest that films that are actually enjoyable to watch aren’t worthy of critical respect. This doesn’t seem like a list designed to encourage curiosity; it seems like an attempt at gatekeeping and snobbery.

I don't agree. And that's sort of the point, I think. This list has the same virtues and the same failings that any similar list (whether it be movies, or books, or music, or whatever) has. It's not perfect, it will never be perfect, it'll never be accepted as gospel by anyone ever, and people will endlessly argue about what does and does not belong on the list. Each and every member of HTF can come up with a Top 100 Best Ever List, and no two lists will be the same. I'd be surprised if any two lists would have a considerable majority of titles in common.

It's like the old saying, "Opinions are like assholes: everyone has one, and they all stink."

Me? I look at a list like this, and instead of nitpicking what I think should be left out or added in, I see -- in my case -- 16 movies that I haven't seen and that someone thinks is worthy of being on this list, and become interested in checking them out. There's a good chance I will like some of them and dislike others. But that's what it's all about.

As for "backwards looking", a lot of that has to do with older examples standing the test of time...in some cases, a lot of time. Consider other media. Would you say the same (maybe you would; I don't know) about a modern painter not being given the same consideration in a list of Best Art Masterpieces Ever as DaVinci, Michelangelo, Van Gogh, or Matisse?

Anyway, this is all exactly why, as I get older, I get less and less interested in ranking things. Even as I occasionally succumb to the temptation.

I’ll say it. Terrible list.

ps. I’ve only seen 33.

One might argue that if you haven't seen two-thirds of the movies on the list, you have no basis for knowing whether any of those 67 films belong on the list or not. Which might bring into question your ability to judge whether the list is or isn't "terrible".

Just sayin'...

 

[Angelo Colombus]

Lawrence of Arabia is a shocking omission!

Not a good list if Lawrence of Arabia and Great Expectations were not included. I would have liked to see High Noon & Shane on it.

 

[jayembee]

I guess, what I’m trying to express, is that I think there are lots of flavors of film enthusiasts, but a list like this tells a lifelong film fan that prefers Indiana Jones to Chaplin, or Marvel to David Lynch, that their opinions don’t matter and that the films they like aren’t real films worthy of further consideration. It denies that there is (in my view) a lot of artistry and achievement that goes into making a popular entertainment, and that an entertaining and popular film can be just as great as something made for an art house audience.

See, I think this is creating a conflict that wasn't there to begin with. If you express your opinions on what films are worthy by virtue of a particular sort of parameters, I don't expect you to take my opinions into account when making your list. And vice versa. You do you, and I do me.

You want to see this list as some sort of gatekeeping project, and it isn't. Sight & Sound asks critics for their opinions on what films are the Best Ever, and the critics respond. There's nothing in the list that says that if you don't agree, you have no taste. If you see that there, that's on you.

It's like all the sturm und drang that happens with the Oscars every year. It's just about a people -- albeit ones who have some connection with the industry -- expressing their opinions. The MPAA isn't handing the results down on stone tablets, but people seem to want to think that that's exactly what they're doing. Same here.

Filmmakers like Tarantino or Scorsese keep saying that things like Marvel and Harry Potter movies are ruining the industry and art form, but I think an argument could be made that such blatant disregard for genuinely transportive experiences shared by worldwide audience does far more damage than any crowd-pleasing film ever could.

Sometimes I feel the same way. But then, like experiencing a bad cold, I get better. I think those folks are wrong, and also short-sighted, for all sorts of reasons. But I also think there's a little truth in there as well, as they might be venting their frustrations with the difficulties they have getting their projects off the ground. And in the end, I just acknowledge that I don't really have to care what they think.

But that’s probably a topic for another thread… thank you for indulging my cranky rant in good faith

Same.

 

[jayembee]

How does "High Noon" not make this list? It's clearly more than a simple western with a distinct societal message that can still be applied today in more contemporary settings.

It might've hypothetically been #101 on the list. We have no way of knowing.

 

[Robert Crawford]

It might've hypothetically been #101 on the list. We have no way of knowing.

I can only discuss what I see and it’s not on the list.

 

[Tino]

One might argue that if you haven't seen two-thirds of the movies on the list, you have no basis for knowing whether any of those 67 films belong on the list or not. Which might bring into question your ability to judge whether the list is or isn't "terrible".

Just sayin'...

I was being semi facetious…hence the smileys. Although I stand by the omission of Jaws and the ranking of Casablanca.

Just sayin’

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

This list is fake, Disney's Jungle Cruise is nowhere to be found on it.

 

[bujaki]

I'd never, ever, make up a list of the (my) greatest 100 films of all time. People constantly ask me: What's your favorite film? I always meet that question with a blank stare. C'mon! There are thousands of films that I've seen that are masterpieces (just as there are thousands of paintings hanging in museums that are bona fide masterpieces); and art and entertainment, which sometimes intersect, are always subjective anyway.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Well, I have not yet seen the greatest film of all time according to this list, so I have that to look forward to. This is a good thing.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

For those interested, #1 Jeanne Dielman… is available on HBO Max to stream (probably part of the TCM collection).

And this is how I will see it as I just bought the $1.99 special for three months of the Max.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

This list has an epic number of ties. Was there no tiebreaking procedure?

 

[Robert Crawford]

This list has an epic number of ties. Was there no tiebreaking procedure?

Yeah, you the individual.

 

[Robert Crawford]

For those interested, #1 Jeanne Dielman… is available on HBO Max to stream (probably part of the TCM collection).

Damn, it takes 201 minutes to tell story about a woman that turns to prostitution to make ends meet. The time duration alone should disqualify it from being the greatest movie ever made.

 

[Thomas T]

I'd never, ever, make up a list of the (my) greatest 100 films of all time. People constantly ask me: What's your favorite film? I always meet that question with a blank stare. C'mon! There are thousands of films that I've seen that are masterpieces (just as there are thousands of paintings hanging in museums that are bona fide masterpieces); and art and entertainment, which sometimes intersect, are always subjective anyway.

Yep! Whenever anyone finds out I'm a total movie geek, I get the standard question, "What's your favorite movie of all time?". And I feel as you do, there are so many great films out there that how could you choose just one? But people hate that response, so I just say L'Avventura because if someone put a gun to my head and forced me to choose a movie, that's what I would pick. They're usually disappointed because they expect something like Jaws or Some Like It Hot

 

[Thomas T]

Damn, it takes 201 minutes to tell story about a woman that turns to prostitution to make ends meet. The time duration alone should disqualify it from being the greatest movie ever made.

I wouldn't bother, Robert. My gut tells me it's just not your kind of movie