Line's Top 100 Films of All Time

[Paulie]

What's up with the write up for Miller's Crossing?

 

[Line]

What's up with the write up for Miller's Crossing?

It's a really odd film in it being so sensationalizing that, apart from a few scenes, much of the film blurs together when times comes to recollect it. Sure, it's a 1990's violenced version of 30's and 40's noir but there's so much more to it than that, especially in movements concerning the depths of its characterization. Because I couldn't write anything that is, in my mind, worthy of representing the film it was suggested to me that I could do a one word review or a haiku poem. I combined the ideas and viola!

 

[Paulie]

It's a really odd film in it being so sensationalizing that, apart from a few scenes, much of the film blurs together when times comes to recollect it. Sure, it's a 1990's violenced version of 30's and 40's noir but there's so much more to it than that, especially in movements concerning the depths of its characterization. Because I couldn't write anything that is, in my mind, worthy of representing the film it was suggested to me that I could do a one word review or a haiku poem. I combined the ideas and viola!

Sounds good to me!

Oh, do you think Brazil will make an appearance on your list? I might watch that again sometime soon as it was really interesting and I didn't fully get the whole understanding of the film. I hate distractions.

 

[Line]

Sounds good to me!

Oh, do you think Brazil will make an appearance on your list? I might watch that again sometime soon as it was really interesting and I didn't fully get the whole understanding of the film. I hate distractions.

Spoiler

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showpost.php?p=11507693&postcount=140

 

[Paulie]

Ahh you just made my night. I thought it was awesome!

 

[Line]

Ahh you just made my night. I thought it was awesome!

Gilliam's a tricky director has he repeats many fantastmic motifs but is quite good at inferring different contexts through them. Many of his films are very surreal and raise issues but none exceed the boundaries of important filmmaking like Brazil does.

Spoiler

For the record, that wasn't the number of where the film will appear on the list but where I ranked it in my top blind-dvd-purchases of all time.

 

[Duality]

your write ups are very interesting and insightful.

saving private ryan has to be on there close to the top 25. that is just an amazingly powerful and emotional film to watch. the best war movie of all time.

 

[Paulie]

Gilliam's a tricky director has he repeats many fantastmic motifs but is quite good at inferring different contexts through them. Many of his films are very surreal and raise issues but none exceed the boundaries of important filmmaking like Brazil does.

Spoiler

For the record, that wasn't the number of where the film will appear on the list but where I ranked it in my top blind-dvd-purchases of all time.

Tease.

His ideas are indeed odd. He sort of vanished after Fear and Loathing.

 

[Line]

your write ups are very interesting and insightful.

saving private ryan has to be on there close to the top 25. that is just an amazingly powerful and emotional film to watch. the best war movie of all time.

Not even close. I do appreciate the comment on the write ups though.

Tease.

His ideas are indeed odd. He sort of vanished after Fear and Loathing.

His 2006 release Tideland was really divisive and polarizing of the mainstream and Gilliam fans alike. I'm still on the fence as to whether or not I'd like to see it; I generally prefer Lynch in terms of Americanized avant garde surrealism.

 

[Duality]

Not even close. I do appreciate the comment on the write ups though.

His 2006 release Tideland was really divisive and polarizing of the mainstream and Gilliam fans alike. I'm still on the fence as to whether or not I'd like to see it; I generally prefer Lynch in terms of Americanized avant garde surrealism.

What?!?!?! why? are you disagreeing with the fact it was a great movie or that i called it the greatest war movie of all time? you better not say both !!!!!!

 

[Paulie]

His 2006 release Tideland was really divisive and polarizing of the mainstream and Gilliam fans alike. I'm still on the fence as to whether or not I'd like to see it; I generally prefer Lynch in terms of Americanized avant garde surrealism.

I witnessed the Lynch experience for the first time a week ago; Mulholland Dr. I was hooked the whole time. I heard Lynch has quite a few must sees, so I threw his name on my "must see" list.

 

[Braaq]

What?!?!?! why? are you disagreeing with the fact it was a great movie or that i called it the greatest war movie of all time? you better not say both !!!!!!

I think he is disagreeing with the "greatest war movie of all time" comment, but not that it is a great war movie.

 

[Duality]

I think he is disagreeing with the "greatest war movie of all time" comment, but not that it is a great war movie.

fair enough. but what are your thoughts on the movie line?

 

[Line]

I witnessed the Lynch experience for the first time a week ago; Mulholland Dr. I was hooked the whole time. I heard Lynch has quite a few must sees, so I threw his name on my "must see" list.

Outside of Eraserhead there are still a few more of his films on my list here, one coming up quite soon.

fair enough. but what are your thoughts on the movie line?

Braaq was right, I just meant it was far from the greatest war film of all time.

As for my thoughts you'll have to forgive me if I'm purposely vague because I don't want to keep giving away what is and isn't going to be on the list. It was quite an epic directional feat on the part of Spielberg and the inspired attention to detail astounds me at times. While it is certainly a moving picture he did misfire on a few occasions and took conventional Hollywoodesque routes instead of sticking to naturalism induced reactional motifs. The movie is very decidedly about the weight of life but it wades a bit too shallowly at times within a more inspired, philosophical realm. It's a film with heart and meant to evoke a specific response which it does accomplish but Spielberg, to me, has always been a greater storyteller and technician than one to really offer any existential thought.

 

[Duality]

Outside of Eraserhead there are still a few more of his films on my list here, one coming up quite soon.

Braaq was right, I just meant it was far from the greatest war film of all time.

As for my thoughts you'll have to forgive me if I'm purposely vague because I don't want to keep giving away what is and isn't going to be on the list. It was quite an epic directional feat on the part of Spielberg and the inspired attention to detail astounds me at times. While it is certainly a moving picture he did misfire on a few occasions and took conventional Hollywoodesque routes instead of sticking to naturalism induced reactional motifs. The movie is very decidedly about the weight of life but it wades a bit too shallowly at times within a more inspired, philosophical realm. It's a film with heart and meant to evoke a specific response which it does accomplish but Spielberg, to me, has always been a greater storyteller and technician than one to really offer any existential thought.

interesting and i see where your coming from. thanks for your thoughts

 

[Line]

Wiene, 1920​

Years ahead of it's time in terms of narrative and insight, Cabinet is often heralded as having the first great twist ending ever put to cinema and one wouldn't be incorrect to call it one of the best finales, period. Instances in film such as this, where the director is capable of dealing so competently in perspective, are such savored treats for the cinephile as its ideologies inspired both audience and filmmakers in ways beyond foresight. Of course, even the common filmgoer, or one that dabbles in silent film perhaps, will be first to point out the expressionalist set pieces (as seen above) that encompass every corner of the frame. They indeed not only form a singular work of art but are art at the highest level in themselves as they do not exist in order to purport mood but to create a contextually inspired masterpiece that which encapsulates the ferocious inner workings of our protagonist Francis. It's in the very least a technical element that transcends mere craft and it makes the (for the time) unthinkable motifs of the film flourish. Alas though, I shall let the pictures do the talking...

 

[Line]

Lynch, 1980[/CENTER]

Throughout my critiques I think it has, by this time at least, become apparent that I have a penchant to disregard the emotional throngs that a film might put one through unless of course it is realized in itself and necessary to the conceptualization of the film as a whole. Here, in a movie that most judge as being a very noteworthy emotionally burdening experience, it's Lynch's handle on the motifs and themes that has me much more intrigued and couple quite nicely with the noteworthy technical merits as well.

Throughout the course of what is one of Lynch's more narratively straight-forward tellings we the viewer examine the relationship between Dr. Frederick Treves (Hopkins) and "elephant man" John Merrick (Hurt). What had begun as a rescue of Merrick from a side-show lifestyle quickly evolves into a series of trying times, reflecting, in part, man's innate desire to, in a sense, create via seeing something through. Treves for all intents and purposes is indeed a good man as his motives, which can appear to be self-promoting at times, pale in comparison to those of the common, everyday man. I don't believe the statement in itself is that the common folk are necessary morally bankrupt as individuals but instead as people in regard to extreme social shifts. The film can and does succeed as a somewhat subversive look into man's willingness to react towards something it does not understand. For some time now people have been musing over the actual intent behind laughter and other superficially joyous expressions, many of which we see demonstrated by Merrick's "early followers". Surely comfort and joy are stretches within the context of a side-show so one would assume (at least I would) that said feelings demonstrate the desire for escapism, for something outer-worldly and impractical; the way they saw Merrick as a man. The guiding light in the case of the film is that as viewers, regardless of his appearance, there is a clear and incredibly developed mapping of humanity which in turn asks what our true enjoyment in escapism and entertainment comes from if there is indeed more below the surface. Merrick as a whole is a real person and not a metaphor though the demonstration of his life can be seen quite allegorically. It's up to us, again, as the viewer to take what we get from not only the film but from people and the world itself as we peer out through our own limited windows.

 

[Pain]

The Elephant Man has to be the only movie that made me shed a tear. Great write up.

 

[Line]

The Elephant Man has to be the only movie that made me shed a tear. Great write up.

Thanks. It is quite a moving and affecting film which is something I rarely say.

New entry in a minute.

 

[Line]

Evans, 1993​

Though this choice may be seen as one that is less technically proficient when placed in the company of its surrounders, The Sandlot remains the greatest family film I've seen; a moving and responsibly resonant picture that adequately explores our inner nostalgist. It's also the greatest film about baseball ever made.

The journey and transformation of Scotty Smalls is not only a highly recognizable one but one that is also culturally apt and well-defined. Of course, keeping in my tradition of touching on little in terms of plot, Smalls moves into a new neighborhood and is forced to reconcile his socially phobic yearnings by meeting new friends and thus discovers baseball. While the film takes place in 1962 it's quite evident that Evans was appropriately musing heavily on the current state of adolescence and how technological interference is an ever-growing problem. Trust me, such themes are there. Twice in the movie we actually see the use of technology stall the growth and progress of our main characters as Smalls uses his Erector Set toys as a social crutch and again when confronting "the beast". In the latter of the two instances, several attempts are made using childlike ingenuity to foil what can best be described as a force of nature. The beast wins handily every time. It is only when another character was willing to scrap the advances of modernity and pickle the beast (save, PF Flyers but this again harps on motifs of mythology) that such a daunting task could be overcome, which says quite a bit about the film's stance on growing up in modern America.

Obviously, the environmental recapturing of 1962 was necessary in terms of creating a fulfilling atmosphere but it was not a throwback piece for the director as it was the year he was born. Therefore the longing can't come from memories themselves but of a cultural repetition; where once again an era of pureness and self-discovery are taking a back seat to a new movement. Of course, that isn't to say that the film is anti-progressive but aware of its feelings and the important of roots. The idolization shown by the boys for many sports figures, most notably Ruth, plays distinctly well against the ideology that such perspectives will be forever changing in their eyes, regardless of their age. Their spirit is that of innocence and discovery, a combination that greatly resonates when accompanied with the purest of games, in the most important of arts.