Another dumb Time magazine list: the All-Time 100 Best Movies. At least it's not in any ascending or descending order. I don't think I would have thought of Finding Nemo.
Posted by Bobby Farouk at May 24, 2005 04:57 AMFinding Nemo? Are you serious? No, please tell me because there is no way I am going to read that article. I'm laughing and feeling slightly sick at the same time.
Posted by: Alan Hogue at May 24, 2005 09:12 AMMy dad was given some movies on CD at his retirement party. He was reading off the titles and when he got to that one he saw "Finding Memo." Guess he needed the time off.
At least "The Life Aquatic" isn't on the list. We saw that one last night. Weird, weird movie, and if they were trying that hard to make it look amateurish why did they bother paying such a whopping special effects crew?
Posted by: Martha Bridegam at May 24, 2005 11:07 AMFinding Nemo is probably the cheesiest flick on the list but I don't think Drunken Master II warrants a place either. If I had to pick a martial arts film it would be the Five Deadly Venoms.
I'm glad they allowed television movies and included The Singing Detective.
A cursory glance reveals not as a much as a nod towards Renoir or Powell & Pressburger - in other words, this list is a joke.
Posted by: Alan Allport at May 24, 2005 12:17 PMCNN explained the selection process this way:
Schickel and Corliss each picked 100 films, and 40 to 50 titles made both lists. The two debated other choices before determining the final list that includes many genres.
The pair then chose one favorite for each decade since Time first hit newsstands in 1923.
Sounds only slightly idiotic.