Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Movies and TV => Topic started by: Fellfrosch on June 21, 2007, 09:41:02 PM
-
The list itself is kind of interesting, but more interesting is the essay by Ebert, which is essentially a justification of this kind of list at all; his main point is that, accurate or inaccurate, the lists serve to interest people in good films.
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070621/COMMENTARY/706210301
For those interested, I've only seen 47 of the movies on the list. Guess I have some watching to do.
Also: Titanic? Forrest Gump? Give me a break.
-
55 for me. I own over a dozen of them.
but I agree with you. A couple of those choices are sketchy, at best.
My second to last mission companion was my greenie, and he totally ruined Gump for me. He spent three months telling me that it was the best movie ever. I got home and saw it and was like, 'ok, the shrimp bit is amusing, but wha?"
-
Sigh, only 33 for me. I guess I don't watch enough R-rated movies.
-
Mediocre list, considering. I wonder how they do the survey, does each person choose 100, or only 50, or 150. Hmm.
-
I've only seen 71 of them. Maybe it would have been more if I'd had more time lately, but I want to save some good movies for middle age, you know?
-
Sigh, only 33 for me. I guess I don't watch enough R-rated movies.
Uhm... only about a third of those movies are R. 7 of the top 10 are lower than R. Don't use that as your excuse. The fact that it's largely arbitrary is a much better one.
-
But I like excuses that aren't valid.
-
Well, then, carry on. Who am I to stop it?
-
My excuse is that tepid is not a color.
-
That's so odd...my excuse is that color is not tepid.