IMDB Top 250

[MrCarmady]

I loved Lagaan, does any of his other stuff measure up to that?

[Holymanm]

but i've also rated about 10% of the list with the lowest possible rating on imdb, 1/10

That's me with the SCFZ Top 250

[Curtis, baby]

Agree with those saying it's the worst list. I've seen 172. Highest unseen is Schindler's list. Highest I have 0 interest in seeing is some Avengers movie

[Holymanm]

3 Idiots, Like Stars on Earth, and Dangal are all on Netflix in the US. They're all Aamir pictures and also the highest entries on the list I haven't seen. I watched PK on netflix last night for the 2014 poll. Since Holymanm is clearly trying to ruin my life, I guess I'm going to watch all of these.

Hated PK. Neither its intended whimsical charms nor Aamir's "alien" facial expressions had any effect on me.

just a few to go!

I don't much get the 3 Idiots hate. From what I recall - six years ago - it's a fun mainstream flick with some cute and/or rubbery faces, some pretty innocuous moralising (as mentioned), and some pretty innocuously defined characters, and it might be easy to watch, standard Indian movie running time notwithstanding. I could see it being a little tepid maybe...but I think there are worse things out there (any superhero movie ever made, apparently)

[nrh]

I loved Lagaan, does any of his other stuff measure up to that?

i might be minority in having fairly low opinion of lagaan but out of the post 2000s stuff (where he rebrands himself as middlebrow quality cinema guy) i'd say talaash, dhobhi ghat and dangal are worth checking out. haven't seen dil chahta hai but it's a beloved film and very important for helping to create a 2000s multiplex middle class cinema space. have heard mixed things about mangal pandey but ketan mehta is a fascinating director and there are some good arguments for it's take on historical myth. would avoid everything else. some people swear by ghajini and rang de basanti but can't really sign off on those.

for the 80s/90s rangeela, jo jeeta wohi sikandar, qayamat se qayamat tak and earth are all great but not really anything like lagaan. the small arty films holi and raakh i don't think are available in decent quality with subs.

[MrCarmady]

I loved Lagaan, does any of his other stuff measure up to that?

i might be minority in having fairly low opinion of lagaan but out of the post 2000s stuff (where he rebrands himself as middlebrow quality cinema guy) i'd say talaash, dhobhi ghat and dangal are worth checking out. haven't seen dil chahta hai but it's a beloved film and very important for helping to create a 2000s multiplex middle class cinema space. have heard mixed things about mangal pandey but ketan mehta is a fascinating director and there are some good arguments for it's take on historical myth. would avoid everything else. some people swear by ghajini and rang de basanti but can't really sign off on those.

for the 80s/90s rangeela, jo jeeta wohi sikandar, qayamat se qayamat tak and earth are all great but not really anything like lagaan. the small arty films holi and raakh i don't think are available in decent quality with subs.

That's me sorted for this year then, will keep you posted.

Agree with those saying it's the worst list. I've seen 172. Highest unseen is Schindler's list. Highest I have 0 interest in seeing is some Avengers movie

I beg to differ...
https://www.icheckmovies.com/lists/reddit+top+250/

[Holymanm]

SHICHININ NO SAMURAI is probably the only film in the top 20 that actually deserves to be higher

when an eiga (that's Japanese for un film) as marvellous and wonderful as that one is seen as 'boring' (to put on a list) because it's all 'canon'... I'm flippin' out with this whole concept of making niche lists with opaque pearls of obscurity just to be all wild and crazy. Akira-kun might have worn one, but he still ain't no old hat himself

[liquidnature]

The IMDb Top 250 was basically my gateway into cinema, so I have it to thank for that, but yeah, horrible and unappealing list. It's like the worst of Oscar bait mixed with whatever the young masses are rewatching on Netflix, with a few classics thrown in for the cred.

Highest unseen: One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest
Worst film on the list: Amelie

The Letterboxd Top 250 is actually surprisingly good, all things considered. Lots of excellent stuff on there.

Re: novel adaptations - I used to do the very same, but like mentioned by others, the only problem is I would never get around to actually reading the novels, so now I just watch the films anyways. I finally started reading The Chronicles of Narnia after 15 years of having it on my bookshelf and telling myself I'd read it every year. Need to finally read the The Diary of Anne Frank, War and Peace, and Moby Dick as far as books go. The quarantine has at least been good for that - starting things you always said you would start but always made excuses not to. I would do the same thing for directors as well, always wanting to watch their films chronologically, and I still prefer that, but I've relaxed a bit now and allow myself to watch their films out of order.

[rischka]

no film could do justice to moby dick

[nrh]

no film could do justice to moby dick

orson sir would have gotten close. or maybe ruiz. capitan achab isn’t a good movie but I really like denis lavant in the role.

[Holymanm]

PK wasn't so bad... some fun songs, some classic "I love you but my milieux will not allow it!" melodrama, etc. But yeah, the crazy eyes on Aamir + that odd mouth thing he had going on were a little more distracting than compelling, and unfortunately the 10-minute opening scene in Bruges was by far the highlight... of the two-and-a-half-goddamn-hours-long movie...

[liquidnature]

no film could do justice to moby dick

sorry, i worded it poorly. I didn't/don't even know if there is a Moby Dick film, I just meant finally reading books that I have had on my shelf forever.

[flip]

I'm flippin' out with this whole concept of making niche lists with opaque pearls of obscurity just to be all wild and crazy.

i wouldn't say most people who like making those kinds of lists want to be "all wild and crazy". if i think about the kind of list i find useful, it isn't a list with the searchers and vertigo and seven samurai on it. i already know those are 'great films', so it doesn't help me to see them on yet another film list. it does help me when a list features titles i'm not familiar with, or wouldn't otherwise consider watching, because then i might discover something new and worthwhile.

[Holymanm]

just 'wild and crazy' in the sense of intriguing, interesting, and full of odd picks. of course if that's just someone's actual favourite movies (e.g. for a top 50), then whatever... not everyone has to love vertigo. but if you do love vertigo, and nevertheless leave it off your top 50 solely because 'it's too obvious', then... it's not your "top 50". it's something else; either a "recommendations list" or at least a "modified* top 50" not to get all ridiculous about it, but i am talking to le maître de la langue, so maybe you get it

* for maximum reader interest and satisfaction

[wba]

I get your suspicion, Holymanm. Personally, I'm always interested in "honest" lists. People who leave out films because "they are widely known" or such make me suspicious and seem unsympathetic to me. A film is great, no matter if 2 billion people have seen it or just 2. And what constitutes an "interesting" list is for each reader to decide. But it's equally ridiculous to "suspect" people of being dishonest, if they don't include Vertigo or some other classic on their lists.

For example: I love Kurosawa and enjoy "Seven Samurai". But probably the only way it would pop up in any of my lists would be if I made a "Top 30 best Kurosawa films" list.
I don't love Kurosawa because of "Seven Samuari", in fact my love of Kurosawa has nothing to do with that specific film, and if he'd never directed it that wouldn't change my appreciation of him. Still I'm glad he did it, in some way, cause it's a film I enjoy.

[FLABREZU]

the moon is out and its time for experiments

[Holymanm]

But it's equally ridiculous to "suspect" people of being dishonest, if they don't include Vertigo or some other classic on their lists.

Oh, for sure. I was just referring to when people do actually (often openly) do that; I wouldn't say I otherwise suspect people of it. ...Or do I... (Where is :shiftyeyes: when you need it?)

I do wonder what it would be like to see something like 2001, or Lawrence of Arabia, or Spartacus, or whatever as a completely unknown movie, recently uncovered from some obscure vault, and shown in a little old theatre with 5 other people in the audience. Would 2001 go from a 4.5/5 semi-classic I always like watching, to a 5/5 top 50 total classic, where I'd love it that much more because I'd "discovered" it (and had never seen it parodied and referenced a million times)? I hope not, but who knows!

[flip]

yeah it does always bother me when anyone suggests someone is being disingenuous when they list some obscurities on a favourites list instead of fight club or some batman sequel. not suggesting that's what holymanm was doing, but we've had that conversation before (i remember a long one with uli cain at mubi), and it seems to happen a lot, where people seem to think they know what other people like, or should like. so any time there's even a hint of that in a post, it bothers me a bit - people like different stuff and i'm not sure why some people have a problem with that.

the other thing about lists i that lists serve different purposes for different people, and there doesn't need to be one single idea of what these lists are about. if you ask me what my favourite fifty films are, i can't answer that - how do i compare a brakhage short with a buster keaton? it makes no sense, they can be valuable to me for completely different reasons. so i need to use other criteria beyond "how much did this film mean to me" to make top film lists, and in polls, since obscure films have less of a chance just because so few people could even theoretically vote for them, obscurity seems a good criterion to use sometimes. still, i wouldn't even consider putting vertigo or the searchers or lawrence of arabia or seven samurai on that kind of list.

[Holymanm]

Funnily enough my reason for not having seen it is that I used to avoid adaptations of novels I wanted to read but hadn't read yet, and Kesey is one of my mum's favourite authors, but I still haven't got around to either reading him or watching the movie.

Finally got around to it, and the movie was pretty feeble compared to the book... the source material is good enough that i can see the movie being much more impressive if one hasn't read the original, but yeah nah. 3/5 movie, 5/5 book; classic case of 'book was better'

...in one man's opinion

[cinesmith]

New here. Strange place to start as IMDB is fine as a reference but I don't use it to expand what to view. It's like listening to TOP 40 and expecting some other genre to get played. 223 of the current 250 seen.

Highest on list not seen... #34 Hamilton (2020) Thomas Kail (wtf)
Worst on the list: Avengers Endgame (2019) Anthony & Joe Russo
Highest Rank great film: The Godfather (1972) Francis Ford Coppola
Most Baffling: Joker (2019) Todd Phillips
Most Want to Watch: As 22 of the 28 I haven't seen are all 'post year 2000' features. They all lack any credible time to even declare them as being worthy of that much praise. I guess I'd have to choose 'Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind' (1984) Hayao Miyazaki

[john ryan]

I know I shouldn't care, but other documentaries and filmed performances are ineligible for the top 250. How is Hamilton different, or why is Hamilton different?

[pabs]

I've seen 174. I'm not gonna bother seeing many of them, and I'll actively avoid seeing those awful American sentimental and propagandist films with Tom Hanks (where's the vomit icon here?), and also some of the other war films like 1917. No way. Keep that patriotic, jingoistic American trash away from me.

[john ryan]

hey man, 1917 is patriotic, jingoistic British trash!

it is awful though.

[thoxans]

documentaries and filmed performances are ineligible

i know i shouldn't care - and i really don't, but i'm curious - why are dox and perfs ineligible? seems rather arbitrary... also, just guessing here, but i'd assume hamilton was included cuz imdb (read: amazon) didn't want to deal with the inevitable backlash from the terminally online mob that would call for the site to be shut down for excluding the single greatest achievement in theatre since the days of dionysus (gtfoh with that shakespeare shite)

[john ryan]

documentaries and filmed performances are ineligible

i know i shouldn't care - and i really don't, but i'm curious - why are dox and perfs ineligible? seems rather arbitrary... also, just guessing here, but i'd assume hamilton was included cuz imdb (read: amazon) didn't want to deal with the inevitable backlash from the terminally online mob that would call for the site to be shut down for excluding the single greatest achievement in theatre since the days of dionysus (gtfoh with that shakespeare shite)

Yeah, it's stupid. I don't know why IMDb decided long ago that documentaries don't count as "movies."

[thoxans]

the shawshank redemption > shoah

[jal90]

Seen 187, highest unseen is Forrest Gump.

Not going to break the consensus on this list, it's pretty bad. Its huge recency bias makes it look flashy and inconsistent and the few classics that are represented seem like token choices at this point. It's a weird list when the current flavor of the month gets the spotlight as if it's nothing and yet anything that hasn't aired in the last decade needs a huge rigid consensus to even have enough votes, let alone reach the top.

[thoxans]

seen 174/250 (69% teehee) / highest unseen: the good, the bad and the ugly (#9) / most loved: harakiri (#33) / most hated: the dark knight rises (#71) / idkwti: the intouchables (?)