Cinema's greatest classics

[ajay124]

@sam9s
''You got some very impressive list there and I am surprised with that list in hand you still quit hollywood viewing.''

I will try to explain why I don't like Hollywood films anymore.Before I begin I would like to state that the intention is not to offend any fan of these films.The way I look at them is just my personal opinion.Could be totally,completely wrong...
Among the few Hollywood films I have seen in recent decades are Pulp Fiction,Kill Bill 1 & 2,No Country For Old Men.These films are well planned,well executed and have a distinct directorial style.They have won worldwide acclaim from critics and fans alike.Oscar's too.But for me the subtext of these films was that they were an unabashed hymn to violence.They glorify and revel in it.They make violence seem sexy,desirable,fashionable.The camera turns gloatingly,lovingly,seductively on weapons of mass destruction.The landscape is strewn with dead bodies.These film's have big stars.John travolta!Uma Thurman!Tommy Lee Jones!Javier Bardem!But the real stars of these films are an 'interesting' 'esoteric' and 'odd' variety of glinting ,menacing weapons maiming,torturing and killing people.To relieve the images of blood and gore these films pack in wisecracks and oneliners which are supposed to be funny but personally they leave me stonecold bored and disgusted with their weak attempts at making violence look amusing.Sure,No Country has a humanist ending tacked on in the form of Tommy Lee Jones' soliloque.But that is just the 10 l-a-s-t minutes after 110 minutes of mindless murder and mayhem.The IMDb site says that No Country For Old Men won 4 Oscar's,another 94 wins and 45 nominations---so it is quite possible that I am wrong and all those folks handing out awards and nominations are right....

 

[thevortex]

Excellent thread and wonderful recommendations! I am sure this would be a great experience for people who have not experienced too much of world cinema (like yours truly) to indulge in it.

Ajay124 - the thing about 'No Country for Old Men' is that nobody really understands why it got the Oscar. I would only ask that you not base your opinion of Hollywood movies on this one big blunder. Of course it is not that Hollywood is the best in the business even though its certainly the biggest.

Trois Coleur (Three Colours) was in many ways an introduction to me about world cinema. As was 'Memories of Murder'. Both were momentous movies - that left me ruminating for hours and even days on end after the experience.

 

[mahiruha]

One name missing from the list is Modern Times by Charlie Chaplin. My all time favourite.

 

[esanthosh]

the thing about 'No Country for Old Men' is that nobody really understands why it got the Oscar

With time, I have learned not to attach too much importance to Oscars. Academy awards, have in a way, have become equivalent of our own national awards. Some deserving movies do get recognized, but many worthy movies fall "short" due to lack of lobbying, the political climate, mindset of the country, the favours and flavours etc.,

Let's see - If my memory serves right, Denzel Washington, Halle Berry, Morgan Freeman, Sydney Poitier all got oscars the same year? It was nothing but the "theme" of that year (IF my memory was right). The Coen brothers and Scorsese likewise have been "contenders" for a long time, but had a "look in" only when the academy choose to.

Is the award to the right person? May be. But is it for their best or the most valuable effort? Not necessarily.

I sure "like" Forrest Gump, but over "Shawshank Redemption" (completely reject SR and award FG)? Nah! But, that's only my very personal opinion

@ajay124,

May be you've moved on. But from the long list of films you provided, it would be nice if you continue to have one foot in the heavenly world movie lawn and one foot in hollywood "mud" - as far as recommending to others is concerned

All I can say is "Hope is a good thing, may be the best of things"

 

[asliarun]

@sam9s
''You got some very impressive list there and I am surprised with that list in hand you still quit hollywood viewing.''

I will try to explain why I don't like Hollywood films anymore.Before I begin I would like to state that the intention is not to offend any fan of these films.The way I look at them is just my personal opinion.Could be totally,completely wrong...
Among the few Hollywood films I have seen in recent decades are Pulp Fiction,Kill Bill 1 & 2,No Country For Old Men.These films are well planned,well executed and have a distinct directorial style.They have won worldwide acclaim from critics and fans alike.Oscar's too.But for me the subtext of these films was that they were an unabashed hymn to violence.They glorify and revel in it.They make violence seem sexy,desirable,fashionable.The camera turns gloatingly,lovingly,seductively on weapons of mass destruction.The landscape is strewn with dead bodies.These film's have big stars.John travolta!Uma Thurman!Tommy Lee Jones!Javier Bardem!But the real stars of these films are an 'interesting' 'esoteric' and 'odd' variety of glinting ,menacing weapons maiming,torturing and killing people.To relieve the images of blood and gore these films pack in wisecracks and oneliners which are supposed to be funny but personally they leave me stonecold bored and disgusted with their weak attempts at making violence look amusing.Sure,No Country has a humanist ending tacked on in the form of Tommy Lee Jones' soliloque.But that is just the 10 l-a-s-t minutes after 110 minutes of mindless murder and mayhem.The IMDb site says that No Country For Old Men won 4 Oscar's,another 94 wins and 45 nominations---so it is quite possible that I am wrong and all those folks handing out awards and nominations are right....

If you think Kill Bill and No Country was violent, you should see Ichii The Killer or Oldboy. Would you say that a Kurosawa movie, which is in your list of recommendations, is not an "unabashed hymn to violence"? There's arterial blood fountaining all over the place! Sure, it has intricately woven stories, great camera work, but it also has heaps of sudden and jarring violence, and also has an iconic Japanese actor in the form of Toshiro Mifune. Could we argue that Kurosawa was using Mifune as a crutch to bolster his violence laden movies?? Don't mean to sound rude, but are you perhaps looking down upon the modern directors because they don't have vintage value or because they lack obscurity?

I agree that most commercial cinema is crap. However, there ARE a few directors who are able to meld their style with the commercial demands made by the studios. A lot of intelligent Hollywood actors make a conscious decision to act in a couple of low-budget indie movies after they have acted in a good commercial movie. This includes many of your big-name superstars as well.

One more thing: Many movie scripts and directors convey many different things in many different ways.. just like books. Kill Bill for example actually reflects Tarantino's long-held fascination for Oriental cinema, and is actually a homage to the kind of theatrics, special effects, and camera work specifically used in Japanese, Hong Kong, and other oriental movies. The arterial blood sprays are actually his way of parodying the whole thing.

You think I'm giving him too much credit? Please read about the number of oriental movies and arthouse/indie directors he has promoted in the past. Yes, he is particularly fascinated by violence and gore, but so is Stephen King. Yet, simplifying this style of work to just violent is just name-calling. You might as well call other art-house directors "pseudo-intellectual" or "arty-farty" or any other adjective. Not just Kill Bill, see his other movies like Jackie Brown, or Pulp Fiction which is non-linear. This guy knows how to tell a tale.

Conversely, would you say that The Old Man And The Sea was an overtly simplistic book or would you call it a children's book for the simple language and sentence construction? But then, that's precisely Hemingway's style. It didn't win him an Oscar, but won him a Nobel prize, for what it's worth.

 

[just4kix]

I can watch "Casablanca" any number of times.

p/s. Critics consider "Citizen Kane" one of the best - is always in top 3 lists all over. But I found it very boring/uninspiring.

 

[nirrej]

I have a question.

If the song sequences are removed from these movies
will you consider them as classics?

1. RGV's Satya
2. Mani's Iruvar

 

[esanthosh]

Don't mean to sound rude, but are you perhaps looking down upon the modern directors because they don't have vintage value or because they lack obscurity?

What's vintage value?

The "best" films have often been completely misunderstood, bashed up by critics and viewers alike. 1927's "The General" was a complete box office and critical disaster. Many decades later, it is considered one of the best films of the silent era. There can be a few hundred such examples over the decades.

People change, perceptions change and point of view changes all the time. Many films become cult classics. Some of them belong to the "so bad that they are good" category. But, we will leave them out for now. In hindsight, a few are considered "ahead of their time". Just because a movie is considered completely and utterly disastrous by this generation does not necessarily mean that it would not be regarded as a cult classic or one of the greats later on.

It's all just.... well.... opinions and nothing more. None of the opinions are either right or wrong. So if there's a "Seven Samurai" out there and majority of people hate it currently, it could get "discovered" after 3 decades as a "good" movie - somebody in moon and some fellow in the latest mars colony could be arguing over whether the film is classic or crap. But they will both agree that things used to be simple early on with DVDs and Blue-Rays unlike Hyper realistic virtual particle holographic movie projector with 28 channel sound appeared

 

[thevortex]

Could not quite make out, esanthosh. But did you say Shawshank Redemption was better than Forrest Gump? Or was it the other way?

 

[asliarun]

What's vintage value?

The "best" films have often been completely misunderstood, bashed up by critics and viewers alike. 1927's "The General" was a complete box office and critical disaster. Many decades later, it is considered one of the best films of the silent era. There can be a few hundred such examples over the decades.

People change, perceptions change and point of view changes all the time. Many films become cult classics. Some of them belong to the "so bad that they are good" category. But, we will leave them out for now. In hindsight, a few are considered "ahead of their time". Just because a movie is considered completely and utterly disastrous by this generation does not necessarily mean that it would not be regarded as a cult classic or one of the greats later on.

It's all just.... well.... opinions and nothing more. None of the opinions are either right or wrong. So if there's a "Seven Samurai" out there and majority of people hate it currently, it could get "discovered" after 3 decades as a "good" movie - somebody in moon and some fellow in the latest mars colony could be arguing over whether the film is classic or crap. But they will both agree that things used to be simple early on with DVDs and Blue-Rays unlike Hyper realistic virtual particle holographic movie projector with 28 channel sound appeared

Vintage value is the "old is gold" phenomenon
Like wine, most people often feel that many "old" things are better than "new" things. While this is actually true in many cases, this theory is sometimes extrapolated to undeserving candidates as well.

On a totally tangential note, whiskies and single malts apparently only age in barrels, not in bottles. So, there is no point in holding on to a good single malt hoping that it will improve with age. That only happens with life partners and wine bottles. Drink it now! We will even notice immediate improvements in said life partner.

Yes, I agree with you that perceptions change over time. In any case, as you said, these are only opinions, and we bandy them around to make our hobbies more interesting. Nonetheless, there IS a difference between good and bad though. For example, it is easy to determine that a well made movie with innovative techniques was a box office flop or even a critical flop only because it did not conform to the sensibilities of that day. In fact, movies that we currently consider violent and gory are perhaps an example of this. This is of course, not to say that all violent movies are necessarily undiscovered gems. It's just that a director or writer's vision is sometimes bizarre enough that the bizarreness (or conversely, the popularity) of it distracts us from the true art.

Anyway, I wanted to add that I don't mean any disrespect to anyone. Just found this discussion interesting, so I thought I'll pitch in my own two cents.

 

[thevortex]

I am just waiting for somebody to come in and give an example for vintage value like - Test cricket is better than T20.

On whatever value basis - that one is true . Sorry about the digression.

 

[asliarun]

Could not quite make out, esanthosh. But did you say Shawshank Redemption was better than Forrest Gump? Or was it the other way?

An American (or perhaps a Zen master) would have replied, Yes.

 

[Adhiraj]

Hayao Miyazaki
Princess Mononoke (anime, nature based)
Spirited Away (anime)

Just awesome!

Another nice one is "Grave of the Fireflies"

 

[thevortex]

An American (or perhaps a Zen master) would have replied, Yes.

And me being the simple Indian, I would have asked 'Yes to which question'?

 

[ajay124]

@asliarun
'whiskeys and single malts apparently only age in barrels, not in bottles'
You are absolutely correct there.Several times I have proudly been served a Johnny Walker or a Chivas Regal from an open/sealed bottle which has been sitting around undrunk at somebodies place for 5 or 10 years.My host was fondly imagining that it had 'aged' and become better.What actually seems to happen is that a whitish sediment develops and floats around the top,the colour of the whiskey darkens and boy! it tastes horrible...
Good ageing in Single Malts and top end red wines only happens under ideal conditions in cellars with the appropriate temp/barrels.Hey,can we start an alcohol thread here?
My personal preference is to drink in moderation,usually alone,very occasionally with someone I can have an interesting conversation,never with someone I find boring,never a blended whiskey,ONLY single malts from the ISLAY region-Lagavulin,Ardbeg,Bruichladdich,Bunnahabhain,Laphroaig,Bowmore and Cao Ila.Also Old World wines from France,Spain,Italy.LOVE the French white wines like Pouilly Fume,Pouilly Fuisse,Sancerre,Vouvray,Chablis...

 

[esanthosh]

Could not quite make out, esanthosh. But did you say Shawshank Redemption was better than Forrest Gump? Or was it the other way?

Gump won 6 Oscars out of 13 nominations, Shawshank Zero out of 7 nominations. But, I prefer Shawshank Redemption over Gump. But as I said, my personal opinion and I am (like everyone else) biased.

Zen or Indian or American, asking questions is always >>>>> assuming

an example for vintage value like - Test cricket is better than T20. On whatever value basis - that one is true

+1 to that.

 

[thevortex]

Both were good movies in their own way, esanthosh.

I love Shawshank Redemption's script. Somehow there is a predictability factor creeping in when it is on the visual medium. Forrest Gump however is all visual appeal for me. Hanks did a great job. He was wonderful with the Table Tennis - wonder how many weeks he spent practicing the game!

But certainly Shawshank Redemption was not as bad as 0 wins out of 7 nominations. So yes, Oscars, I take them with large doses of salt .

Why go that far? Just take A R Rahman's Slumdog Millionaire. Both the movie and the music were nothing special. Yet The Oscars just lifted them up. Was it because of the American director or anything else who knows? Humongous hype was generated for the music of that movie. Sadly it did not deserve all that hype in my opinion.

 

[sam9s]

He was wonderful with the Table Tennis - wonder how many weeks he spent practicing the game!

If you are talking about the scene where Hanks shows the ultra ping pong moves, thats totally CGI....

 

[ajay124]

Some more classics of world cinema...
SERGEI EISENSTEIN
Battleship Potemkin/Alexander Nevsky/Ivan The Terrible
MARCEL PAGNOL
Marius/Fanny/Cesar trilogy
JEAN RENOIR
The Rules Of The Game/Boudu Saved From Drowning
FRITZ LANG
Metroplolis/M
ALAIN RESNAIS
Hiroshima Mon Amour/ Night And Fog/Last Year At Marienbad
MARCEL CARNE
Children Of Paradise
CLAUDE CHABROL
Les Cousins/Le Boucher/Un Affaire De Femmes/Violette Noziere/Madame Bovary
PIER PAOLO PASOLINI
Mama Roma/The Gospel According To St. Matthew
CARL THEODOR DREYER
The Passion Of Joan Of Arc/Day Of Wrath/Ordet
EMIR KUSTURICA
Underground/Life Is A Miracle/When Father Was Away On Business
ABBAS KIAROSTAMI
A Taste Of Cherry/The Wind Will Carry Us/Where Is The Freind's Home/And Life Goes On/Through The Olive Trees
KRZYSZTOF KIESLOWSKI
Blue/White/Red/The Double Life Of Veronique/Decalogue
ANDRZEJ WAJDA
Ashes And Diamonds/Man Of Iron
ISTVAN SZABO
Mephisto/Colonel Redl/Hanussen/Being Julia
MIKLOS JANCSO
The Red And White/The Round Up
BELA TARR
Satantango/Werckmeister Harmonies(Have not watched these two.But they are right at the top of my wishlist!)

*I am not listing these films in any order of preference or merit but merely on the basis of which director comes to mind.I have watched roughly 75 % of these films and the rest are included merely on the basis of their reputation or my gut feeling that they will be worth viewing.I consider most of these films to be of roughly equal merit or value.7 or 8 Bergman films are among my personal favorites.But for me Andrei Tarkovsky is incomparable.I believe that Andrei lives among the gods while all other filmmakers past,present or future will merely try in vain to break free from their earthly shackles.His cinema is the closest thing I have had to a religous experience.By religous experience I mean looking up in awe at the perfection and beauty of human creation at its best.I rate Andrei's films as being on the same level as the work of Johann Sebastian Bach,Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,Ludwig Von Beethoven,Fyodor Dostoevesky,Plato,Nietzsche,Ibsen,Fernando Pessoa,Pablo Neruda,Jorge Luis Borges,Pieter Bruegel,Francisco Goya,Pablo Picasso....My preference in cinema.books and music leans towards Europe.But I love JAZZ.America's greatest gift to our planet.I do not want to foist my opinion on anyone but merely to share what I like.I hope others will impart what cinema they like or dislike dispassionately and amicably....

 

[thevortex]

If you are talking about the scene where Hanks shows the ultra ping pong moves, thats totally CGI....

Really? That is sad, man!

But then one has to take their hat off for the CGI specialists. The Table tennis ball moves at serious speeds indeed. A lot of people dont realize that.