I personally like Kane more than Vertigo (Hell, I like Rear Window more than Vertigo), but it's always fascinating to see how the S&S list illustrates our changing tastes. I'm surprised to see Tarkovsky in the Top 10 (he and Ozu are my two biggest cinematic blind spots), and pleased to see Mulholland Dr that high on the list this soon.

Not only is "Vertigo" not the best movie ever made, it's not even the best movie Hitchcock ever made.

Ugh.

Ranking movies is dumb.

Where THE FUCK is The Dark Knight?

List invalid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

Where THE FUCK is The Dark Knight?

 

List invalid.

They were afraid its complete and total orgasmic awesomeness would invalidate the entire list. Also, I love Vertigo, but if I'm going to sit down to watch a Hitchcock movie, first choice is usually either The 39 Steps or Saboteur.

I know ranking movies is silly on some level, but I must admit I love when this list comes out.  I especially like reading the directors personal lists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

Where THE FUCK is The Dark Knight?

 

List invalid.

It's the omission of MIRROR MIRROR that bugs me!

So many of these lists reek of snobbery. There is nothing in the first 30 from the past 30 years. Why even bother making new movies if all the best ones happened 50 years ago and are apparently untouchable?

Ranking movies is silly but if you're going to declare GREATEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME, you better be at least close.  While Vertigo is great, one could name at least 5 movies clearly better than that film.  As said before, it's not even Hitch's best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by felix 

 

It's the omission of MIRROR MIRROR that bugs me!

19. Mirror

Andrei Tarkovsky, 1974 (47 votes)

People must have gotten confused.  Who the fuck is this Andrei Tarkawhatever?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiteboy Jones 

Ranking movies is dumb.

I think if the list is made by a group of the world's pre-eminent filmmakers, film academics and critics, and comes out every 10 years in order to provide a sense of perspective and overall film history, it has a bit more merit than Bloggy Magoo's 50 Hottest Boobies list. Plus, it always encourages me to seek out older classic films that I've missed. Or is it a case where you didn't know anything about the Sight & Sound poll until today so you decided to just drop a lazy snarkbomb?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangy 

I think if the list is made by a group of the world's pre-eminent filmmakers, film academics and critics, and comes out every 10 years in order to provide a sense of perspective and overall film history, it has a bit more merit than Bloggy Magoo's 50 Hottest Boobies list. 

I'm just happy somebody reads my stuff.

Two things:

1) I'll take "snobbery" over "OLD STUFF'S LAME PFFFFT" any day of the week. (Oh, and where are these other lists? Please point me to them so I could read their insightful thoughts.)

2) As the list has gone on, newer films rise in the poll, providing a sense of changing tastes and more by people with a sense of film history. After wading through dozens of "Best Movies Ever" lists that don't stretch back before 1980, it's a fucking relief.

I think Dr. Harford raises a good point about the first 30 having nothing from the past 30 years (if it's true, I didn't take time to investigate closely).

In the Mood For Love and Mulholland Dr. are in the top thirty, and I certainly think those are two of the top five or six movies of this century.

In The Mood For Love and Mulholland Dr are both in the Top 30.

EDIT: D'oh! Also Shoah.

There are two ways to approach any movie list:

1) "This list doesn't have movies that I like GRRR!"

2) "This list has lots of films that I haven't seen, I'll check those out."

The latter option seems healthier.

You have to wake up pretty early in the morning to beat Bloggy Magoo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangy 

Two things:

 

1) I'll take "snobbery" over "OLD STUFF'S LAME PFFFFT" any day of the week. (Oh, and where are these other lists? Please point me to them so I could read their insightful thoughts.)

 

2) As the list has gone on, newer films rise in the poll, providing a sense of changing tastes and more by people with a sense of film history. After wading through dozens of "Best Movies Ever" lists that don't stretch back before 1980, it's a fucking relief.

I don't think old films are lame. Many of the best films I've seen are older ones. However this list has only four movies from after 1980, and that indicates to me they're examining the film world with a certain myopia.

I am glad that lists like this exist to point me towards classics I could have missed, but it also bothers me when I sense an elitism about what constitutes good cinema. That is all.

The fact Vertigo topped this list probably didn't help my disposition when reading through it, I'll say that. As you guys point out, it's not even Hitchcock's best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Harford 

I don't think old films are lame. Many of the best films I've seen are older ones. However this list has only four movie from after 1980, and that indicates to me they're examining the film world with a certain myopia.

If by "myopia" you mean "a working knowledge of decades of film history", then yes. I concede that sadly, I am not that myopic.

I'm not saying I agree with the list, but the "these guys don't seem to know what they're talking about" argument doesn't work so hot with this one. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangy 

If by "myopia" you mean "a working knowledge of decades of film history", then yes. I concede that sadly, I am not that myopic.

 

I'm not saying I agree with the list, but the "these guys don't seem to know what they're talking about" argument doesn't work so hot with this one. 

I never meant to imply that they didn't know about film.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

 

I'm just happy somebody reads my stuff.

"Bloggy Magoo" + your Tom Hanks Ice-T avatar = sudden bark of laughter scaring the dogs.

Also: so okay, am I the only one whose favorite Hitchcock is, in fact, Vertigo? Because I've been seeing it around, not just here, people using this new #1 status as a stick to hit Vertigo with, "It fuckin sucks anyway." But for me, it's Vertigo, with Shadow of a Doubt a close second.

We are all agreed that even if Vertigo is not, in your view, Hitchcock's best, or better than Citizen Kane, it's still great, right?

...right?

Confession: When I saw Vertigo years ago, I wasn't a fan. Liked it, but one of the best films ever? Then I rewatched it. It's a masterpiece.

My main quibble with the top 10: Man With A Movie Camera, a fascinating exercise in filmic technique that I was happy to watch...once.

But hey, the point of these things is always to generate debate, traffic, ad sales, etc. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Blank 

Also: so okay, am I the only one whose favorite Hitchcock is, in fact, Vertigo? Because I've been seeing it around, not just here, people using this new #1 status as a stick to hit Vertigo with, "It fuckin sucks anyway." 

 

Vertigo is my favorite Hitchcock as well, and it's a great film, but I can still enjoy it and realize it's not his best.  I mean, the #1 pick is so off, they may as well put Psycho as #1.  I feel that's Hitch's best, but nobody's gonna call that the best film of all time...except maybe an overeager film student... while drunk and high.

So I'm curious which you think is his best. I'm not saying that pugnaciously, or anything. Someone's view of "Hitchcock's best" says a lot about what they value most in movies. I say it's Vertigo, probably because I think the best movies are movies like that: lush, obsessive, personal, not especially concerned with plot. (Lynch is one of my top three directors for a reason.) Someone else says Psycho, they might love the ingenuity, the perversity, etc. Someone else says Shadow of a Doubt, they might love performances above all else. Someone else says The Birds, fuck 'em.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Harford 

I never meant to imply that they didn't know about film.

True, my apologies. I think I had a bad reaction to the phrase "reeks of snobbery," which all to often, to me, reads as "reeks of knowing what they're talking about." My hangup, not yours. Sorry.

Ebert on Twitter:

Heh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Blank 

because I think the best movies are movies like that: lush, obsessive, personal

I think some of the worst crap is like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Blank 

So I'm curious which you think is his best. I'm not saying that pugnaciously, or anything. Someone's view of "Hitchcock's best" says a lot about what they value most in movies. I say it's Vertigo, probably because I think the best movies are movies like that: lush, obsessive, personal, not especially concerned with plot. (Lynch is one of my top three directors for a reason.) Someone else says Psycho, they might love the ingenuity, the perversity, etc. Someone else says Shadow of a Doubt, they might love performances above all else. Someone else says The Birds, fuck 'em.

Toss-up for me between VERTIGO and NORTH BY NORTHWEST, two very different movies.  Depends on my mood.  

Originally Posted by Mangy 

I think if the list is made by a group of the world's pre-eminent filmmakers, film academics and critics, and comes out every 10 years in order to provide a sense of perspective and overall film history, it has a bit more merit than Bloggy Magoo's 50 Hottest Boobies list. Plus, it always encourages me to seek out older classic films that I've missed. 

It is good for all of that. I have no problem with lists. Lists are fun. Lists can be informative. And S&S's list is a great instrument of historical perspective. I was inspired to check out Man with the Movie Camera today because of it.

Did I say that listing movies is dumb? No. I've written movie lists. Ranking movies is dumb. And that's what I said. Because it is.

I originally wrote something long and equally nasty and condescending in response to this, but I'll just let it go.*

I think that ranking art is, in principle, participating in the wrong conversation, no matter how prestigious the people having that conversation are. What is it with this obsession with identifying "the best," especially in movies? Why do we try so hard to quantify quality? What value is there in that? This list that S&S has put together is a great one, but ranking it means that people are far less likely to consider the movies themselves as they are to consider the relative placements of the movies. Everyone is talking about how Godfather dropped this many spots and so and so. Who cares? These are works of art, not sports figures. And this was a poll, anyway, so it's basically a popularity contest. Sure, it's the popularity contest amongst some quite esteemed figures, but a popularity contest nonetheless.

Maybe there's an argument to be made that Vertigo is somehow objectively better than Citizen Kane, and vice-versa (There isn't, either way). Who cares? When you put these movies together in a context of competition, it draws attention from their true merits to their comparative merits. It discourages us from evaluating the unique goodness that each movie has to offer. It encourages silly, petty argument (you just know that this will inspire a wave of anti-Vertigo backlash).

*Although, yes, I did know about Sight & Sound and its poll before today, thank you very much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiteboy Jones 

 

Did I say that listing movies is dumb? No. I've written movie lists. Ranking movies is dumb. And that's what I said. Because it is.

 

Ranking movies IS dumb. Thats why I can never do it. I always just list in no particular order.

Also, I've always liked Vertigo more than Citizen Kane. Don't get me wrong though, they're both incredible movies...two of my favorites of all time.

Did I miss something? I feel like ten years ago THE BICYCLE THIEVES was a consensus top five all-timer, Since then, no one regards it as such. Hello, it's a perfect movie! I'd rank it above "Vertigo," which is still a titanic achievement.

Surprised that "Close-Up" made the top fifty, as I had no idea that was the preferred Kiarostami, always thought it was Taste Of Cherry. "Close-Up," for the record, is a brilliant film.

Hey, Renn! Man with a Movie Camera was 1929, not 1939!

Vertigo's great, don't know if I'd call it the best ever. Lots of other great movies. I haven't seen enough of them. Dumb or not, ranking movies is at least sparking spirited debate, which isn't dumb. That's all I got.

I don't see Troll 2 anywhere on that list. I'm tired of seeing pretentious movie lists leaving off entries the public loves!

The Rules Of The Game is nowhere to be found, shocking considering this was made by film "experts".  I'd put that way above Vertigo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

The Rules Of The Game is nowhere to be found, shocking considering this was made by film "experts".  I'd put that way above Vertigo.

What's Le Règle du Jeu (no. 4) in English?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

The Rules Of The Game is nowhere to be found, shocking considering this was made by film "experts".  I'd put that way above Vertigo.

It's on number 4. It just has the French title.

I think this change-up was mostly borne out of a desire to stir things up a bit. Not that Vertigo isn't a remarkable movie of course.

*Obligatory forehead slap*

*le trombone triste*

Interesting take on why so many critics voted Vertigo to the top: http://badassdigest.com/2012/08/02/what-the-sight-sound-poll-says-about-us/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Harford 

I am glad that lists like this exist to point me towards classics I could have missed, but it also bothers me when I sense an elitism about what constitutes good cinema. That is all.

If there's one thing the last roughly eight-ish years have taught me, its that a certain healthy amount of elitism is a sorely underrated commodity. 

Also not that anyone should care, but I absolutely adore the hell out of Vertigo with every fiber of my being and it easily cracks my top 3 Hitchcock movies. If ranking movie is inherently silly anyhow, then I don't see what's to get so bent out of shape over Vertigo dethroning Kane after all these many years. I mean best Hitchcock or no, its still fucking Hitchcock right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Harford 

The fact Vertigo topped this list probably didn't help my disposition when reading through it, I'll say that.

Seeing In the Mood For Love, 8 1/2, Rashomon, 2001, and Taxi Driver on it, to name but a few, certainly helped mine. As far as "stuffy film scholar lists" go, you can certainly do a damn sight worse than a lot of what's on here. Shit, I'll take it.

Just saw this. My apologies.

Agreed. Calling something "elitist" is just another way of shooting the messenger so you don't have to bother listening to what they say. The Internet has this hillbilly "You Ain't No Better'n Me!" attitude so much of the time that it's become exhausting.

Sigh.  I have to be that guy.  No Kurosawa in top 10?  Whaaaaa?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cognizant 

Sigh.  I have to be that guy.  No Kurosawa in top 10?  Whaaaaa?

Le Règle du Jeu is French for The Seven Samurai.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curiosity Cosby 

What's Le Règle du Jeu (no. 4) in English?

In fairness French is an odd thing to get one's head around. For all its reputation as the most romantic of the romance languages they don't even have their own words for "blonde" or "brunette", and are forced to borrow from the English.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whiteboy Jones 

Interesting take on why so many critics voted Vertigo to the top: http://badassdigest.com/2012/08/02/what-the-sight-sound-poll-says-about-us/

First of all, I re-read your response, apologies again for the "snarkbomb" thing.

Second, I like the idea of his take on Vertigo being #1, but it would seem by that reasoning that the most audience-as-voyeur Hitchcock film is Rear Window.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cognizant 

Sigh.  I have to be that guy.  No Kurosawa in top 10?  Whaaaaa?

There's about twenty different directors you could say that about, though. One of the several reasons why ranking movies like this is kinda silly.

I have to admit, I have a tough time deciding between Kane and Vertigo, but I might give Vertigo the nudge because it resonates with me on a more personal level. I'm nuts about Hitchcock, though, and I'm kinda amazed that so many people (including David Edelstein, whose "oh Vertigo-is-okay-but-what-has-it-done-for-me-lately" response will soon be all the rage with high minded critics, mark my words) are sorta shrugging their shoulders at the movie in response. It is a masterpiece, after all. The tough thing about Hitchcock is another problem with these kinds of ranking; his career is so impressive, which movie do you choose to represent it? To me, Vertigo makes sense; it's one of his most uncharacteristically personal and revealing works, it's absolutely beautiful and features incredibly thoughtful film making and surprisingly emotional, effective performances (have you ever seen Jimmy Stewart so raw before)? 

So, yes, as much as ranking sucks, as silly as the Sight & Sound list really is (despite its insistence that it's the authority on film ranking), I'm sorta fine with this choice. It's nice to see Hitchcock at the number one spot. It's only one list out of several and there will be several more. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangy 

First of all, I re-read your response, apologies again for the "snarkbomb" thing.

 

Second, I like the idea of his take on Vertigo being #1, but it would seem by that reasoning that the most audience-as-voyeur Hitchcock film is Rear Window.

There's a lot of watching in Vertigo; whole sequences of watching, following, watching, following. It's not as obvious or in your face as Rear Window, but it's there.