 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.158.246.78
In Reply to: IMDb "Top 250 Films".... posted by Draz on November 11, 2006 at 19:09:30:
I also find it alarming that "Shawshank Redemption" is #2 on the list and "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" is #5.I happen to know that there is an effort by a "fistful" of teenage male Tarantino fans to make TGTB&TU the #1 film on the list. As recently as a couple months ago, this 1966 spaghetti western was #11. Of course, now that fans of "LOTR:Return of the King" (currently #4) caught wind of this, there has been an effort to defend that movie's rank.
It's ridiculous. Imdb's Top 250 list is really a useless popularity contest since they have little control over fraudulent and incompetent voting. Some people with too much time on their hands will open multiple accounts to rate decent films that they don't like 1/10 ("Titanic" is the most obvious victim of this practice) and to rate mediocre films 10/10 (the "Lord of the Rings" and "Star Wars" movies being the most apparent benefactors). The sad part is that many younger people are influenced by the list and will use it to catch up on the "great" films that they missed.
Follow Ups:
First of all protecting younger people who would use the IMDB to catch up on the great films is rather silly. Firstly the IMBD is a voting contest nothing more nothing less.While I agree that some people will rate films above their favorite a 1/10 and rate their's a 10/10 does it honestly matter? I pretty much disagree with the entire list placement -- but that is true even if I look at the lists of professional film critics who will generally overate a self indulgent piece of crap because it has subtitles instead of actually discerning between good and bad foreign films.
The comment about "incompetent voting" is not exactly fair because there are a number of very bright individuals who love Lord of the Rings and while I found the whole thing to be a tedius exercise in mediocrity the fact is many very knowledgable film geeks like those films.
Most film critics rate Citizen Kane number one all time -- I have an honors Education and English literature degree - and Citizen Kane is not in my top 100 because it just does not hold up, is stiltedly acted, and the wonderful cinemetography actually detracts from the film like nails on a chalkboard detract from listening to a teacher. (I would FAR rather watch the Shawshank Redemption to most of the films I have seen -- and number 2? I can live with that)
First you say someone is taking a list too seriously, then you attack one of the most playful great films ever made!I love filmed theatre as much as the next person (literally; I love Olivier's "Othello", but also not quite as literally; for example, I also love Lumet's "Long Day's Journey into Night" and Kazan's "A Streetcar Named Desire"), but there is something about the filmmaker who plays with film the way a child opens presents on Christmas morning, drunk with the medium's abilities and potentials.
If you want to see great acting in Welles, watch Agnes Moorehead in "The Magnificent Ambersons." If you demand I show you great acting in "Kane", then look again at Everett Sloane's beautiful moment talking about the girl he saw on the ferry, or Agnes Moorehead (again) in her scene. I think the 25-year-old Welles discussing his holdings with George Coulouris isn't too shabby, either.
Perhaps one day we can hunker down between discussions of SWPBS and VFTs and compare favorite films in greater detail.
Good post. With the exception for calling The Titanic to be high on the list.
Not calling on "Titanic" to even be on the list. Just pointing it out as the most obvious example of fraudulent imdb voting. Look at the voting breakdown on its rating page - not exactly a perfect bell curve. It has nearly 10% 1/10 votes, primarily from young male Star Wars fans who were angy at it eclipsing their beloved films at the box office.
I see! Then we fully agree in the context of your view.
personally I think Titanic is a truly awful film. (Cameron just in effect did a remake of Terminator in that movie) while I think the first Star Wars is one of the all time greats and Lord of the Rings a major acomplishment in cinema. So what does that show you? If you are smart it shows you once again the diversity of legitimate opinions in art. If not it will show you that you are right and I am wrong. If young people are influenced by such a list then we can be happy to know they will be digging up a good many masterpieces that are not really all that mainstream.
I'm not saying "Titanic" is a great film, although I enjoyed it (at least half of it) for what it was - a ship disaster movie with a fictional romance tacked on. (Personally, "The Poseidon Adventure" is still my favorite of the genre.)Not sure how "Titanic" relates to "The Terminator" in any way, much less how it is a "remake" - that opinion is just so far out of left field that I'll leave it alone. Going into "Titanic", I never expected dialogue worthy of Shakespeare, nor did I expect the film to engender deep thought, nor to reveal the meaning of life. I just don't think it deserved the high number of 1/10 votes that it received on the imdb, that's all. Take a look on the user ratings for the movie and you'll see what I mean. There are very few films that genuinely deserve such a terrible rating, much less a 1/10 rating from nearly 10% of total voters. I mean, if you vote "Titanic" a 1/10, how do you rate "Gigli"? There was obviously a huge backlash against "Titanic".
As for the original Star Wars, it has not aged well and benefits in the ratings from nostalgia, but it's rank on the list is fair. It's obviously better than the sequels though, which also show up on the list.
And what can I say about LOTR? To me the final film (which ironically won all the Oscars) is pure dreck and the worst of the bunch. It's interminably long, repetitve, and has four false endings. What's worse than the length though - it's boring as hell. I nearly fell asleep.
How can such a noisy, action-packed cgi-fest be so boring? I found Sergio Leone's "Once Upon A Time in the West", which opens with no music, almost no dialogue, no computer effects - but instead with 15 minutes of 3 gunmen waiting for a train (there's even a prolonged shot of one guy trying to blow a fly off his face that lasts nearly two minutes!) - less boring than the tedious elaborate scenes of tens of thousands of bizarre creatures battling each other in LOTR.
lets review the two movies.1. We meet a male protagonist who is poor and displaced but very resourceful and smart.
2. We meet a female protagonist who is wide eyed, innocent and dripping with unfullfilled potential.
3. Unlikely circumstance throws the two together.
4. The two are then persued for the bulk of the movie by a relentless deadly force.
5. We see a series of narrow escapes.
6. During the course of the chase the two protagonists fall in love
7. In the end the male protagonist dies for the sake of saving the female protagonist.
8. The female protagonist goes on to live a full life fullilling the promise of their great potential having been put in touch with her potential by the chance encounter with the poor displaced male protagonist and the hardship of the relentless persuit they had nearly survived together.
These movies are soooo much the same basic movie it is laughable. Cameron couldn't break from his adolencent fanatasy. Because Cameron was stuck in this rut he failed to portay the true horror of the real situation the people on the Titanic faced which had nothing to do with narrow escapes from a relentless force.
Up until point 6 you described a lot of romance movies. Other than the male lead dying, you can even use those exact (vague) points to describe Disney's "Aladdin".The Terminator is a science fiction film with a time-travelling robot. Titanic is a 1912 historical drama. Any connection you are making is really specious to me.
"Up until point 6 you described a lot of romance movies."hmmm a lot? Name 10. Given there are thousands of romantic movies thats should be easy.
"Other than the male lead dying, you can even use those exact (vague) points to describe Disney's "Aladdin".
Aladdin? lets see.
"1. We meet a male protagonist who is poor and displaced but very resourceful and smart." OK other than displaced. Aladin is very much in his element. so I'll give you half a point.
"2. We meet a female protagonist who is wide eyed, innocent and dripping with unfullfilled potential." OK...
"3. Unlikely circumstance throws the two together." yes.
"4. The two are then persued for the bulk of the movie by a relentless deadly force." Nope. It all falls apart here. they face a common enemy but they are not persued together by a relentless deadly force.
"5. We see a series of narrow escapes." Nope. The two protagonists aren't even together during the bulk of the action much less making narrow escapes together while being persued by a relentless deadly force. while the antagonist is a threat to each that threat is nothing of the same nature as the one found in Terminator and Titanic.
"6. During the course of the chase the two protagonists fall in love' OK except there is no chase. But yes they do fall in love and then out of love and then back in love. wait, doesn't Aladdin after finding the genie come in under false pretenses to try to make Jasmine fall in love only to get busted by the antogonist who is trying to manipulate the situation so he can marry Jasmine and become king? Sorry, the plot at that point is sooo far removed from the basic points I cited that I think your comparison totally falls apart.
"7. In the end the male protagonist dies for the sake of saving the female protagonist." Aside from the fact that Aladdin has by this point taken a radically different plot direction, this is a huge point in the similarities between Terminator and Titanic. It's one thing to find movies that have similar set ups at first, it's another to find movies that match point by point from begining to end.
"8. The female protagonist goes on to live a full life fullilling the promise of their great potential having been put in touch with her potential by the chance encounter with the poor displaced male protagonist and the hardship of the relentless persuit they had nearly survived together.'
Same as above.I commend your attempt to refute my point. The Aladdin idea was pretty good really even if it doesn't hold up under closer scrutiny.
You're putting much more effort into this digressive argument than it warrants. The point is "Titanic" suffered a backlash in the imdb ratings. I'm not trying to claim it's a great movie, any more than "The Poseidon Adventure" is. I simply enjoyed it for what it was. And to me, this somewhat accurate recreation of a 1912 transportation accident (with fictional romance or without) isn't anything like the time-travelling armageddon science fiction fantasy, "The Terminator". That's all I'm saying.
Both "Titanic" and "The Terminator" involve time shifts, technology run amuck, over confident authorities, a young couple (each from different worlds) fleeing a mad pursuer, and only the female surviving.
That's a stretch. Terminator is science fantasy. Titanic is a historical drama. The only thing they really have in common is leaden dialogue.
Terminator's woman survived because of her spunk, resourcefullness, and her strength, which she discovered during the course of the film. A tribute to women, given that most films make them victims, generally stupid and dead, surviving only by luck. Titanic's heroine survived because of a man - he let her stay on the floating furniture while he sunk to his watery grave, and he led her to safety from the giant tomb which was to be the ship. Her survival had less to do with her than him. In these respects, I think the films are different. I would argue that in that respect Terminator is more akin to Halloween.
Have to agree with Rico. In fact, most people who hated "Titanic" found the "Rose" character too independent, self-confident, selfish and resourceful for a girl of her age, in her class, in the Edwardian age. Remember that it was Rose who decided not to get on a lifeboat when she had a chance, setting up the situation where Jack was forced to wait in the water. And she saved Jack from being handcuffed in the bowels of the ship, so his survival up to that point was solely a result of her bravery.I don't know anyone who hates Titanic because "Rose" was too weak !
She was British, though she ACTED independent. The man was an American, so we know that she relied on him greatly. Probably a parallel in that somewhere.But I digress. I think that she decided not to get on a lifeboat is less important than why she decided not to get on a lifeboat. Because of "her man." Why did she rescue him from the bowels of the ship? Because of "her man." She ACTED independent, but she needed "her man." (said in my best Southern accent)
And I did not hate Titanic.
Is a man who makes sacrifices to rescue "her woman" weak? Curious double standard there, usually adhered to by lesbian feminists.
Linda Hmilton's (I'll ignore the fact that she can't act) strength and resourcefulness CAME from Reese. She starts off by telling him she can't even balance her chekbook. It's only over time that she learns to make a field dressing and shoot a gun and, later, defeat the Terminator.Winslett's Rose swims from her "raft" to get a whistle, blows it to be rescued, hides from Cal and his nenchman on the Calpurnia, has a successful life as an aviator, actrsss, etc., and is plucky enough to keep the diamond necklace for 84 years.
"plucky enough to keep the diamond necklace for 84 years"Sure. Then she chucks it overboard, later to be "discovered" by some greedy treasure hunter who buys himself the most expensive BAT gear, when she could have instead appeared on Antiques Roadshow, been quoted a seven figure value, drummed up some publicity, sold it at auction for seven figures with a smiling Keno brother (there are three, after all), then helped her poor granddaughter through cancer treatments. Those British think they are soooooooooo superior.
not only coul she have funded any great charity of her choice she could have saved the folks trying to find the damn thing from a lot of trouble and expense. I hate Titanic
If you hate Titnaic as it was released, you really should see the "original ending" Cameron filmed. Old Rose's behavior in that regarding the disposition of the diamond will really get your blood boiling. It was truly an offensive and abysmal ending which would have cost the movie $100's of millions at the box office.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
