May 26, 2005
Movies
I don't have the time right now to really comment on this, but here is the Time Magazine Top 100 Films of All Time list.
The first thing that pops into my head is:
OK, give me a break. Crap like Schindler's List and Casablanca are on the list, but Birth of a Nation isn't? I understand that feathers might be ruffled, but let's be honest here.
Also, how could one possibly include ET: The Extraterrestrial and exclude Dersu Uzala?
First, if you have to put some Spielberg piece on there, Raiders of the Lost Ark is his only decent film. The rest is barf.
Of course, what do you expect from a reviewer who cannot tell the difference between Munich and Berlin?
Posted by erik at May 26, 2005 1:20 PM | TrackBackAbout 60% there. Where's A Man For All Seasons? How about The Princess Bride?
Posted by: The Barrister at May 27, 2005 8:10 AMWhat?!? I take everything the mainstream press tells me seriously. After all:
I AM THE LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!!
Hah hah hah hah hah!
I was impressed by some of the entries. 8 1/2 for instance. It still makes me giggle that he talks about Munich when reviewing Wings of Desire. It is sort of like those great shots of Chicago in Vertigo. Ah, but I do remember the days of the Munich Wall. When JFK called himself a Munchkin and all that...
Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at May 27, 2005 12:33 AMErik:
Lists like the _Time_ 100 have to be taken for what they are. Do not take the claims of McNews so seriously; use them as a springboard for discussion.
Did you notice that _Dekalog_ made the list?
SC