Thomas T's favorite/best movies by years 1928-2019 (1 Viewer)

[TravisR]

I guess I thought the sarcasm would be obvious.

If I wasn't a dope, it would have been.

 

[Thomas T]

If I wasn't a dope, it would have been.

 

[Walter Kittel]

I was idly thinking about this thread and film makers in general and one of the biggest omissions from my list is Hayao Miyazaki. Just about any feature from this gifted artist would be in the running for that year's best/favorite film. Particularly Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, Princess Mononoke, and Spirited Away.

Another title that readily comes to mind, from Isao Takahata is 1988's Grave of the FIreflies. I stated previously that The Sweet Hereafter is one of the most elegiac films I've ever seen; well this film would vie for that sort of recognition. It is a difficult film to watch, so it is one of those features which might belong in another category; but not favorites.

- Walter.

 

[Bryan^H]

There were more than a few times when that "snob factor" threatened to derail my list. I then resolved myself, took the thread title to heart, and made mine my *favorite* films from each year.

Favorite films of mine are the ones that were most impactful. Films that resonated with me.
Of course I enjoyed them greatly, otherwise they wouldn't have taken the top spot for the year.

 

[BobO'Link]

I was going to put Schindler's List on my list but excellent movie that it is, it's not exactly one that I'm frequently watching since it's extraordinarily depressing so Dazed And Confused got my 1993 spot.

For 1991, I probably should have put Terminator 2: Judgment Day on instead of The Silence Of The Lambs. As good as Silence is, I enjoy T2 far more.

I had much the same decision process with Schindler's List. I like the film and consider it to be one of the best films Spielberg's ever made, but, due to the subject matter, I can't say I enjoy the film. It was a quite odd experience when it came down to, essentially, those two. I'd also considered Cool Runnings for that year, removing it from consideration at the last second. Spielberg's Jurassic Park was never in the running as, for me, it's all CGI spectacle (very good CGI spectacle but...) with a rehashed story (Michael Creighton's minor reworking of his Westworld story - one I didn't care for in that incarnation either) that, for me, just doesn't resonate (my son loves it - but he was 11yo, exactly the right age for it when it came out). It's the typical and somewhat cliche' Spielberg "tentpole" setup and pacing he's used many times - hits all the same notes at roughly the same point in the movie.

I can't say that I've ever seen Silence of the Lambs as it's not in a genre I particularly like and usually avoid. Sometimes I'll force myself to watch those "critically acclaimed" films in genres I normally don't care for because I often feel you *should* make that effort. The thing is, over the years I've found few of those that I ever want to see again, much less own a copy, so now rarely make the effort. Unlike in my younger years, the internet makes it much easier to fully research films before deciding so those I dismissed when younger can get better evaluated before deciding. Based on what I've read I truly feel Silence of the Lambs would fall squarely in my "never want to see again" category.

For me, 1991 came down to The Addams Family (which I picked), The Doors, and Star Trek IV: The Undiscovered Country. I really like all three, as well as your pick of Terminator 2: Judgement Day, but went for the total enjoyment factor. I could easily put any of those four on a future list and not think twice about the decision.

 

[BobO'Link]

I avoided the silent era simply because I truly do not own many silents with most years having only one or two choices. There are a few I greatly enjoy but they rarely get viewed because I absolutely have to be in the right frame of mind for a silent movie. My hands down favorite version of The Phantom of the Opera is the 1925 silent with Lon Chaney, one of only two movies I own from that year with the other being The Lost World. I'd likely pick "Phantom" but would that be truly fair?

I skipped 1928 simply because I own and, to the best of my knowledge, have seen only two movies from that year: In Old Arizona, a talkie which *barely* landed in 1928 (a Christmas release with wide in January 1930), and The Man Who Laughs, a silent. Even starting with 1929 was somewhat of a cheat as I only own three features from that year - but lots of shorts (Keaton, Laurel & Hardy, Little Rascals). And, honestly, 1930 doesn't fare much better in my collection, boasting just over twice as many movies as 1929 with 1931 almost doubling 1930. 1932 is the year my collection truly "takes off."

 

[Thomas T]

I had much the same decision process with Schindler's List. I like the film and consider it to be one of the best films Spielberg's ever made, but, due to the subject matter, I can't say I enjoy the film. It was a quite odd experience when it came down to, essentially, those two. I'd also considered Cool Runnings for that year, removing it from consideration at the last second. Spielberg's Jurassic Park was never in the running as, for me, it's all CGI spectacle (very good CGI spectacle but...) with a rehashed story (Michael Creighton's minor reworking of his Westworld story - one I didn't care for in that incarnation either) that, for me, just doesn't resonate (my son loves it - but he was 11yo, exactly the right age for it when it came out). It's the typical and somewhat cliche' Spielberg "tentpole" setup and pacing he's used many times - hits all the same notes at roughly the same point in the movie.

I can't say that I've ever seen Silence of the Lambs as it's not in a genre I particularly like and usually avoid. Sometimes I'll force myself to watch those "critically acclaimed" films in genres I normally don't care for because I often feel you *should* make that effort. The thing is, over the years I've found few of those that I ever want to see again, much less own a copy, so now rarely make the effort. Unlike in my younger years, the internet makes it much easier to fully research films before deciding so those I dismissed when younger can get better evaluated before deciding. Based on what I've read I truly feel Silence of the Lambs would fall squarely in my "never want to see again" category.

For me, 1991 came down to The Addams Family (which I picked), The Doors, and Star Trek IV: The Undiscovered Country. I really like all three, as well as your pick of Terminator 2: Judgement Day, but went for the total enjoyment factor. I could easily put any of those four on a future list and not think twice about the decision.

Several people have mentioned Schindler's List as a great film that one would never want to sit through again and I feel the same way. It's beautifully done (if slightly manipulative) but it's too painful an experience for me ever to want to go through again. Could I call a movie I never want to see again a favorite? Another similar film for me is 12 Years A Slave, a powerful film that justifiably won the best picture Oscar. But again, a painful film to watch and why put my self through it?

And for the record, I think Silence Of The Lambs is a fantastic film that moves beyond its genre. The acting alone makes it worthwhile. Not trying to sell you on it, just my two cents.

 

[BobO'Link]

I've purchased 3 copies of Schindler's List - the "Plain Jane" DVD which was my first viewing, an upgrade SE DVD version, and the 20th Anniversary LE BR edition. I've never watched the upgrade SE DVD, purchased ~8 years ago, or the BR, purchased almost exactly 3 years ago, simply because of how hard it is to sit through the movie. I've picked each up many times, thinking "Today..." and then put it back. I now have grandkids I feel are old enough and *need* to see it.

My oldest grandson, age 17, started asking about WWII and the concentration camps a few years back but, outside Band of Brothers, I've not made the time to sit and watch any of the many documentaries (I own a copy of the excellent BBC series The World at War - one I'd call definitive) and other films I have on the subject with him. I need to correct that. His oldest sister is about to turn 14 so I'd try to include her as it's time they see what happened. The trick will be to get them to sit still long enough. I know that at that age I wasn't that interested and only started to watch WWII documentaries when I hit my early 30s. I'd watched tons of war movies, just not documentaries, and found many of those war movies were designed more as propaganda/entertainments and not necessarily historically accurate.

Yeah... they *need* to watch Schindler's List with me.

 

[JohnRice]

I make a point of watching Schindler's List and The Deer Hunter at least every ten years. They put my mind back in perspective.

 

[TravisR]

I make a point of watching Schindler's List and The Deer Hunter at least every ten years. They put my mind back in perspective.

I only see Schindler's List whenever it comes out on a new format. And I did see it on Its theatrical re-release when the UHD came out and I was the only person in a really big theater.

 

[sleroi]

I started trying to compile a list, but it was a much tougher task than I thought it would be.

Some years were easy, like 1940. Go West is my favorite Marx Bros film and I hadnt seen many other films from that year. But then 1941: Sullivan's Travels or the Maltese Falcon? I love them both, im not sure I favor one over the other.

And then theres 1984. A bounty of great films. And yet Broadway Danny Rose is far and away my favorite. It changed the way I saw movies.

The unique, at least to 14 y.o. me, storytelling method of the group of comics telling the story in the past then seeing Woody live it out, only to catch up with the present. The wonderful homage to Italian cinema with the close ups of faces at the mob party, and then the deadpan parody of those shots by having Howard Cosell meet Milton Berle at the club. The perspective shot of tiny humans in the warehouse with giant floats. The way the rain shimmered live silver shards. And that ending with the tracking shot of Woody desperately running through the snow without a coat!

I went into this film expecting a nice little comedy and instead got so much more. It introduced me to the language of film and it is because of this movie that I can love and appreciate such a wide variety of movies.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I make a point of watching Schindler's List and The Deer Hunter at least every ten years. They put my mind back in perspective.

Both films are like "Saving Ryan" to me in which the frequency I watch them is similar to yours.

 

[TravisR]

But then 1941: Sullivan's Travels or the Maltese Falcon? I love them both, im not sure I favor one over the other.

For me, 1941 was a pretty tough year to choose from too. There was Citizen Kane, The Maltese Falcon, Sullivan's Travels and The Wolfman. I enjoy all of them pretty equally but I gave the nod to The Wolfman since it's my favorite Universal monster movie.

"Even a man who is pure in heart and says his prayers by night may become a wolf when the wolfbane blooms and the autumn moon is bright."

 

[BobO'Link]

Yeah, 1941 was tough. My choice of Buck Privates won out over The Wolf Man by the slimmest of margins, and like many other choices could easily flip the next time I make such a list. I, too, like The Wolf Man best of all the Universal Monster flicks and chose Abbott & Costello over it simply knowing I had lots of SF/Horror titles I'd be selecting in future years and wanted one of their movies represented.

There are many films from 1941 I love - Ball of Fire, Caught in the Draft, Here Comes Mr. Jordan, Hold That Ghost, In the Navy, The Maltese Falcon, Meet John Doe, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Never Give a Sucker an Even Break, Nothing But the Truth, Penny Serenade, Road to Zanzibar, Shadow of the Thin Man, Tarzan's Secret Adventure, They Died With Their Boots On, Whistling in the Dark, and others.

However, I do not like Citizen Kane at all. When I was in college I took a class called "Motion Picture Appreciation" as I love movies and looked for it to be an "easy A" class. Life events caused me to miss the night they screened Citizen Kane. The teacher was obsessed with the movie and we had tests over it for the next 4 weeks! Of course I bombed those as I'd missed the film and in those days there was no way to fix that (pre-VHS and she wasn't about to do a special screening for people who missed class, no matter what your reason).

I finally saw it about 5 years ago when I purchased a copy on DVD. Watching the movie I was puzzled at why people think it is so great. The lighting, set design, and cinematography is quite good but the rest is just average at best. The script is often tedious (what's with all the time wasting bad opera singing in the 3rd act!?). I thought Wells was horrible in the role with some of the least convincing makeup I've ever seen (looks like stage, not movie, makeup). The story just failed to connect with characters who gave me no reason to like or care about them. The ending falls flat. I can see the technical side of it being highly influential but, IMHO, it's not a "great" movie. It's yet another in a long list of highly acclaimed movies that I'll never watch again.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Damn Bob, tell us how you really feel about Citizen Kane.

 

[Bartman]

So do I- It was a far superior film

I've seen both Dunkirks and neither did the story justice. I thought I was alone in not appreciating the latest Dunkirk.

I had two uncles (now deceased) who were there and I wish I'd asked them questions but as children we were taught not to pry into war time experiences.

 

[PMF]

Would it be cheating to say that my list of favorite films are those I want to purchase next? As it is, I can cite at least one from every year.

 

[Thomas T]

However, I do not like Citizen Kane at all. When I was in college I took a class called "Motion Picture Appreciation" as I love movies and looked for it to be an "easy A" class. Life events caused me to miss the night they screened Citizen Kane. The teacher was obsessed with the movie and we had tests over it for the next 4 weeks! Of course I bombed those as I'd missed the film and in those days there was no way to fix that (pre-VHS and she wasn't about to do a special screening for people who missed class, no matter what your reason).

I finally saw it about 5 years ago when I purchased a copy on DVD. Watching the movie I was puzzled at why people think it is so great. The lighting, set design, and cinematography is quite good but the rest is just average at best. The script is often tedious (what's with all the time wasting bad opera singing in the 3rd act!?). I thought Wells was horrible in the role with some of the least convincing makeup I've ever seen (looks like stage, not movie, makeup). The story just failed to connect with characters who gave me no reason to like or care about them. The ending falls flat. I can see the technical side of it being highly influential but, IMHO, it's not a "great" movie. It's yet another in a long list of highly acclaimed movies that I'll never watch again.

I have a long list of acclaimed and beloved "classics" that I dislike intensely (It's A Wonderful Life, The Grapes Of Wrath, Shadow Of A Doubt, All Quiet On The Western Front, Dr. Strangelove to name just a handful) so I'm simpatico although I think Citizen Kane is a terrific film. Curiously, the film I get the most flak about from other movie buffs is Lawrence Of Arabia. I don't dislike it at all (actually, I'm indifferent to it if anything) and can see the artistry contained in the movie and I see what others see in it but the movie just leaves me cold. Yet I'm continually admonished for not falling on my knees and calling it a masterpiece.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I have a long list of acclaimed and beloved "classics" that I dislike intensely (It's A Wonderful Life, The Grapes Of Wrath, Shadow Of A Doubt, All Quiet On The Western Front, Dr. Strangelove to name just a handful) so I'm simpatico although I think Citizen Kane is a terrific film. Curiously, the film I get the most flak about from other movie buffs is Lawrence Of Arabia. I don't dislike it at all (actually, I'm indifferent to it if anything) and can see the artistry contained in the movie and I see what others see in it but the movie just leaves me cold. Yet I'm continually admonished for not falling on my knees and calling it a masterpiece.

By whom? You're entitled to your own opinion.

 

[PMF]

[...]Curiously, the film I get the most flak about from other movie buffs is Lawrence Of Arabia. I don't dislike it at all (actually, I'm indifferent to it if anything) and can see the artistry contained in the movie and I see what others see in it but the movie just leaves me cold.[...]

How can a film that basks in the Al-Nafud possibly leave you cold?