4 ms·

There are a couple of strong periods in that list, but comparing, say, the 50s or the incredible run from the early 70s to the 80s against the contemporary peri

There are a couple of strong periods in that list, but comparing, say, the 50s or the incredible run from the early 70s to the 80s against the contemporary period makes it look like children took over the ticket booking in recent years. Even the family films back then seem to have had an artistic depth and cultural resonance beyond the empty spectacle and brand familiarity that dominate the present hits in the list.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Apocryphon 4y ago
Seems to be caused by the author's somewhat arbitrary selection of films from those recent years. Many are neither Best Picture winners, nor Oscar bait, nor even top grossing movies. Using Rotten Tomatoes' Top Movies seems to be a choice fraught with issues; what does most popular even mean for them, based on the user-submitted audience scores for that site? Why RT and not IMDB? Why not just use top grossing for everything? Yes, the MCU-ification of everything is not great, but if one was to complain about popcorn blockbusters, that's a trend that's existed since Jaws/Star Wars, and there were far worse fare from the '80s-'00s.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mewse-hn 4y ago
  Yeah, I was confused by the criteria to be included in the list. I focused on the inclusion of 1989's Glory (which is a fine movie) to try and figure it out, Glory isn't in the top 10 grossing movies for that year. I tried to navigate rotten tomatoes to see what it thinks the top films are for 1989 but couldn't figure out how to set up a filter. Maybe if I create an account I could do it, but not interested enough to pursue further.
msla 4y ago
The 1950s were hardly a pinnacle of good filmmaking: The era was ruled by horse operas, fer chrissake! You think superhero movies are ominpresent now, oaters were inescapable from the 1920s until the 1970s! And the endless parade of Teen Idols and war movies and Creature Features... strictly for the gum chewers, believe you me. And, after all, it was the era of the Hays Code, which comprehensively dumbed things down to the level where it wouldn't even get banned in Boston.
- mellosouls 4y ago
  I'm going by the list. The 50s entries are clearly far more impressive than recent ones.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    That's because there's clearly a flaw in how they chose the recent ones.
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      Yeah there's a great bounty of amazing films in the last couple decades, but... a solid 2/3 of the picks on the 2000-on part of that list aren't things I'd pick as examples of great cinema, even factoring in popularity pretty heavily.
- projektfu 4y ago
  It was the B-movie era. You usually saw a double feature and a cartoon or two for your dime. The same night could include Giant and a forgettable sci-fi flick.
ivan_gammel 4y ago
Fully agree. Contemporary cinema is still an art full of pleasant surprises, yet there’s Spiderman in the list. It’s not a bad movie, but ignoring the whole A24 thing?..
JKCalhoun 4y ago
Agree. Having seen now perhaps 75% of the "1001 Films to See Before You Die", you begin to see the breadth and depth that film can be. It makes most of the popular films of the last decade or two look like a single, narrow genre within film. So many entertaining films I would not have been exposed to otherwise. I had first knocked out the "AFI Top 100" but the "1001" brings in all manner of foreign films, experimental films, more silent films, etc. To be sure, the "1001" has exposed me to some real, um, turds. But, hey, Warhol did some great silkscreen prints. And while French New Wave never resonated with me, I get it now, having seen everything that came before. And you can see how films like "Easy Rider" probably were not possible until New Wave kicked down the walls. And that has been the joy of my own "film school" at home: seeing how the medium has grown and evolved over the years. It is, as I say, why I am so disappointed in Hollywood's recent offerings. (Note: I understand the blog focused on American films/history. Just relating my own experiences once I stepped outside of American cinema.)
nescioquid 4y ago
I've seen a complaint throughout the later half of the 20th century which I don't see much anymore: culture has become "youth culture". It is no longer a common gripe because we can't see this distinction any more. Others here think this is simply the result of a selection bias, but I think it is more than that. Sure, there are still "grown up" films being made, but look at where the cultural moment is and has been -- very much oriented to and catering to youth. The dominance of youth culture is in turn probably a second-order phenomenon, given mass culture and commercial advertising.
- rnk 4y ago
  How about it's because kids buy most of the tickets, so lets cater to them.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Apocryphon 4y ago

Seems to be caused by the author's somewhat arbitrary selection of films from those recent years. Many are neither Best Picture winners, nor Oscar bait, nor even top grossing movies. Using Rotten Tomatoes' Top Movies seems to be a choice fraught with issues; what does most popular even mean for them, based on the user-submitted audience scores for that site? Why RT and not IMDB? Why not just use top grossing for everything? Yes, the MCU-ification of everything is not great, but if one was to complain about popcorn blockbusters, that's a trend that's existed since Jaws/Star Wars, and there were far worse fare from the '80s-'00s.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mewse-hn 4y ago
Yeah, I was confused by the criteria to be included in the list. I focused on the inclusion of 1989's Glory (which is a fine movie) to try and figure it out, Glory isn't in the top 10 grossing movies for that year. I tried to navigate rotten tomatoes to see what it thinks the top films are for 1989 but couldn't figure out how to set up a filter. Maybe if I create an account I could do it, but not interested enough to pursue further.

msla 4y ago

The 1950s were hardly a pinnacle of good filmmaking: The era was ruled by horse operas, fer chrissake! You think superhero movies are ominpresent now, oaters were inescapable from the 1920s until the 1970s! And the endless parade of Teen Idols and war movies and Creature Features... strictly for the gum chewers, believe you me. And, after all, it was the era of the Hays Code, which comprehensively dumbed things down to the level where it wouldn't even get banned in Boston.

mellosouls 4y ago
I'm going by the list. The 50s entries are clearly far more impressive than recent ones.
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  That's because there's clearly a flaw in how they chose the recent ones.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    Yeah there's a great bounty of amazing films in the last couple decades, but... a solid 2/3 of the picks on the 2000-on part of that list aren't things I'd pick as examples of great cinema, even factoring in popularity pretty heavily.
projektfu 4y ago
It was the B-movie era. You usually saw a double feature and a cartoon or two for your dime. The same night could include Giant and a forgettable sci-fi flick.

ivan_gammel 4y ago

Fully agree. Contemporary cinema is still an art full of pleasant surprises, yet there’s Spiderman in the list. It’s not a bad movie, but ignoring the whole A24 thing?..

JKCalhoun 4y ago

Agree. Having seen now perhaps 75% of the "1001 Films to See Before You Die", you begin to see the breadth and depth that film can be. It makes most of the popular films of the last decade or two look like a single, narrow genre within film. So many entertaining films I would not have been exposed to otherwise. I had first knocked out the "AFI Top 100" but the "1001" brings in all manner of foreign films, experimental films, more silent films, etc. To be sure, the "1001" has exposed me to some real, um, turds. But, hey, Warhol did some great silkscreen prints. And while French New Wave never resonated with me, I get it now, having seen everything that came before. And you can see how films like "Easy Rider" probably were not possible until New Wave kicked down the walls. And that has been the joy of my own "film school" at home: seeing how the medium has grown and evolved over the years. It is, as I say, why I am so disappointed in Hollywood's recent offerings. (Note: I understand the blog focused on American films/history. Just relating my own experiences once I stepped outside of American cinema.)

nescioquid 4y ago

I've seen a complaint throughout the later half of the 20th century which I don't see much anymore: culture has become "youth culture". It is no longer a common gripe because we can't see this distinction any more. Others here think this is simply the result of a selection bias, but I think it is more than that. Sure, there are still "grown up" films being made, but look at where the cultural moment is and has been -- very much oriented to and catering to youth. The dominance of youth culture is in turn probably a second-order phenomenon, given mass culture and commercial advertising.

rnk 4y ago
How about it's because kids buy most of the tickets, so lets cater to them.