Open Preview See a Problem?We’d love your help. Let us know what’s wrong with this preview of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die by Steven Jay Schneider. Thanks for telling us about the problem.
Friend ReviewsTo see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. Reader Q&ABe the first to ask a question about 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die Community Reviews· 2,996 ratings · 227 reviews Start your review of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die
If you only ever saw movies from this 1001 list you’d be missing a whole ton of fun and you’d have to be really quite insane but still you’d have a pretty great time. Yeah, your favourite movie may well not be
in here but you know what? You're just one insignificant worm and your opinions don't count. And so am I. And so is Steven jay Schneider! We are the worms! Don’t know why I did not review this before, I have been using it for years. I’ve seen 492 of the 1001 movies listed, and lemme tell y If you only ever saw movies from this 1001 list you’d be missing a whole ton of fun and you’d have to be really quite insane but still you’d have a pretty great time. Yeah, your favourite movie may well not be in here but you know what? You're just one insignificant worm and your opinions don't count. And so am I. And so is Steven jay Schneider! We are the worms!Don’t know why I did not review this before, I have been using it for years. I’ve seen 492 of the 1001 movies listed, and lemme tell ya, it will take strong inducements like the kidnap of a close family member to make me see some of the rest of them, for instance Ben Hur (1959), Peking Opera Blues (1986), or Braveheart (1995). This beautifully displayed and really heavy don’t drop it on your foot or it’ll be the A&E for you list whizzes from the dawn of film to a few years ago and all across the globe taking corners so fast you might get carsick. Also, should you want to be a 1001 completist, some of them are impossible to find, like Gun Crazy (1950), Butterfield 8 (1960) and The Decline of the American Empire (1986) for reasons too boring to contemplate probably. Anyhow, could anyone really like all 1001? TWO LISTS TEN GREAT MOVIES I TOTALLY LOVED AND WOULD NOT HAVE SEEN WITHOUT THIS BOOK TELLING ME I SHOULD Fires Were Started TEN HORRIBLE MOVIES I WOULD NOT HAVE SEEN WITHOUT BEING BROWBEATEN BY THIS DREADFUL ELITIST BOOK INTIMIDATING ME The Life And Death Of Colonel Blimp This list is more interesting than the first. All ten are drooled over by everyone who knows anything about movies. But somebody needs to go through these top 100 all time critics choice movies and point out that many of them are, or have become over time, sorry to say, ridiculous beyond redemption (A Matter of Life and Death, who can tolerate this agglomeration of industrial strength whimsy; The Umbrellas of Cherbourg – who can listen to this non-music mimsywibble for more than ten minutes even if Catherine Deneuve is in it) or flat out tedious (Barry Lyndon, Wings of Desire, oh my God, walk walk, talk talk or what) or the humour has become rancid (Boudou) or the staginess and campery has now become an incomprehensible barrier to a modern audience (Shanghai Express). But heck, who’s complaining. As we nearly drown in the deluge of cultural overproduction, as blockbuster budgets reach the size of some countries’ GDP, we need some kindly people to fling us a few life preservers now and then. Swim this way! Glug! ...more
I just completed a fairly big project. The original idea of course was to see all these 1001 films but then they kept publishing updated editions, adding some new titles and throwing out some old ones. The total number of films listed in all editions is currently 1228, quite a large number. As the years rolled by it became clear to me that there were a few types of film that the gang who put this vast book
together thought would be good for me instead made be feel ill, so I excused myself from t I just completed a fairly big project. The original idea of course was to see all these 1001 films but then they kept publishing updated editions, adding some new titles and throwing out some old ones. The total number of films listed in all editions is currently 1228, quite a large number. As the years rolled by it became clear to me that there were a few
types of film that the gang who put this vast book together thought would be good for me instead made be feel ill, so I excused myself from those. In the end there were 293 of those. I know, sounds like a lot. The intro calls this an all-time, all-genre-, all-world must-see films list… if you make the effort to go and see the films discussed herein, you can be sure to die a happy moviegoer. In short, the more you see the better off you’ll be. There are dozens of great
movies listed here that I would most likely have never come across otherwise, but I do think I and you too can die contentedly having never seen The Jazz Singer (1927 – Al Jolson in blackface); The Ten Commandments (1956 – Charlton Heston as Moses); Horror of Dracula (1958 – another silly Hammer horror); The Nutty Professor (1963 – Jerry Lewis, no thanks); Salo or the 120 Days of Sodom (1974, the great Pasolini’s last film which always appears towards the top
of the Most Disturbing Movies of All Time lists – coprophagy, anyone?) and so many others, all for different reasons. (no thanks, Pier Paolo) The editor hastens to say that one person’s Midnight Cowboy will always be another person’s Ishtar, or as I might put it, one man’s Bad Boy Bubby might be another person’s Human Caterpillar. And of course there is no way to judge in one single aesthetic between Meshes of an Afternoon (14 minute experimental short, most intriguing), Satantango (7 hours, requires patience) and Terminator 2 (my favourite action movie - requires no patience). So they try to be inclusive and that meant not excluding popular genres like slapstick comedy, blaxploitation and movies that are of somewhat questionable aesthetic merit (Pink Flamingos, Saturday Night Fever, Blair Witch Project), wholehearted populist appeal (Top Gun, Rain Man, Big, ET, Titanic) or dubious ethical or ideological value (Birth of a Nation, Triumph of the Will, Salo). They throw in cult movies (El Topo, Mondo Cane), experimental stuff (Dog Star Man, Limite, Flaming Creatures), kung fu, Ealing comedies, and 25 silents from 1903 to 1924 which I decided to forgo (what a philistine). So they are not just sticking to the time-honoured list of great auteurs. (However there are way too many Fellini pix in here.) This may be stating the obvious but it is the best time in history to be trying to watch all these movies because there are many sites out there whose mission is to make them all available (for free). Even so, there were 37 I could never find. So maybe those will turn up later. The end result of all this is very banal indeed – I liked or loved about two thirds of the titles, and I disliked or actively hated about one third. But as my old granny used to say, you can’t like everything. And she also said it takes all sorts to make a world. Even the sort that would make a movies like The Royal Tennenbaums, Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song and The Sound of Music. TEN GREAT MOVIES I PROBABLY WOULDN’T HAVE SEEN WITHOUT THIS BOOK Land without Bread
I'm annoyed. Color me annoyed. Which is a shade close to mustard yellow. 1001 movies. ONE THOUSAND AND ONE MOVIES. And they didn't include The Labyrinth. Or Mary
Poppins. Or The Seven-Year Itch. Or a multitude of other movies that there is absolutely NO reason to leave off the list. ESPECIALLY when I turned the page and saw the words "There's Something About Mary". You're going to include a shitty-ass movie like that, which is not in any way funny, and you're going to leave off something as incredib 1001
movies. ONE THOUSAND AND ONE MOVIES. And they didn't include The Labyrinth. Or Mary Poppins. Or The Seven-Year Itch. Or a multitude of other movies that there is absolutely NO reason to leave off the list. ESPECIALLY when I turned the page and saw the words "There's Something About Mary". You're going to include a shitty-ass movie like that, which is not in any way funny, and you're going to leave off something as incredible as The Labyrinth? I don't
think so. I plan to make a list of the movies I haven't seen yet from this book. But if I owned it, I'd toss it. It lost so much credibility when I realized they left out my movie.
Feb 15, 2009 Evan rated it it was ok Since this list keeps getting updated, it's a bit of moving target, meaning that newer
editions by necessity have to chop off even more older titles in order to accommodate the newer entrants. So, does this mean that movies on the older lists that haven't been forwarded to make the cut are no longer "movies you have to see before you die?" Hopefully, all of the lists are being referred to by the OCD list checkers. I'm an insane movie nut, yet even I am not sure if you have to see any movies befor I'm an insane movie nut, yet even I am not sure if you have to see any movies before you die,
much less anything on these lists. For what they are, they are generally well-selected, possibly because in addition to the standard canon they have dipped into fare championed by eccentric but vital critics such as Jonathan Rosenbaum. There are commercial films on here that do not belong on this list, as they really don't need help in being seen; lists like these are only valuable if they champion the undeservedly obscure. Any list that would include puff like Beverly Hills Cop but not
Sadao Yamanaka's Humanity and Paper Balloons (1937, Japan) suffers from the usual half-assedness. For every trifle on here I could cite dozens of greater films that are MIA. I'd say that any given edition of these lists is probably about 20 percent top-heavy, meaning that about that percentage of what's on them shouldn't be. My count for the first edition of this list (2003) is 959 out of the target 1001 titles seen, which puts me of course in either the masterclass league or the
nutcase league. (I have copies of all 1001 movies in my vast archive, so I can see them all whenever I choose.) My strongest eras are the silent period through the 1960s, in which I've literally seen all but a handful of the titles. I think from 1930-1950 I've seen all but two. (I've seen more than 1001 titles from the silent movie period alone, which is not something too many living humans can claim). By comparison, the later 2013 update finds me having seen only 918 of the 1001,
and that's because my film viewing has dropped markedly over the past decade. Newer films from the 2000s are my blind spot, but thankfully the lists are not loaded down with all the crappy comic book movies that I hate. (KevinR@Ky 2016)
I really like this book.
May 26, 2020 Liquidlasagna rated it really liked it The book is fairly good into the
1980s, and then it totally falls apart. Personally i would have preferred way more 1960s film, but it's one of the few books/lists anywhere to like the Czech Film 'The Ear'. Basically it got banned after it was completed in 1970, and came out in the 90s, but to deal with the subject matter of government wiretapping and state surveillance is as others have said 'it's amazing they got that far with it'. It would be like the Czech version of 'The Conversation'. 90% of The book is fairly good into the 1980s, and then it totally falls apart.Personally i would have preferred way more 1960s film, but it's one of the few books/lists anywhere to like the Czech Film 'The Ear'. Basically it got banned after it was completed in 1970, and came out in the 90s, but to deal with the subject matter of government wiretapping and state surveillance is as others have said 'it's amazing they got that far with it'. It would be like the Czech version of 'The Conversation'. 90% of the film picks are pretty fine, till somewhere in the 80s to the early 2000s where they just pad it with every trendy success and radically artsy film. Criterion Film can be trusted on making wise choices for recent cinema, Harold Bloom of Yale could be counted on picking 70s and 80s classics of Western Literature in the 1990s, but Schneider and his near half dozen henchmen, are just throwing in their pet fets, and nothing less. If you think Passion of the Christ is as good as Blade Runner or La Notte, you got to be kidding. I almost wondered if the idea of the book was to add films appealing enough to the Gen X'ers and New-New World Cinema types, for 15% of the book, and then stitch on a fairly orthodox list of 874 classics of cinema. it's like a novel where it's a nine out of ten, and the last 50 pages get a three out of ten. Hearing that the new editions are pushing out the older films, basically makes me say, get the first edition and give the others the middle finger. ...more
Sep 26, 2010 Sean rated it did not like it So generic it's almost frustrating. PS, you don't need to see Independence Day before you die. So generic it's almost frustrating. PS, you don't need to see Independence Day before you die. ...more
I might have enjoyed this compilation more had the author made more of an effort to show some enthusiasm for the films mentioned. The writing style of this book is drier than eating Saltine crackers while drinking powdered
milk in the Sahara desert. As a result, I found myself becoming frequently bored. Also, I don't know if this was some sort of sick joke, but how is it that schlock like "Armageddon" and "There's Something About Mary" make the list of movies one must see before their death, yet Also, I don't know if this was some sort of sick joke, but how is it that schlock like "Armageddon" and "There's Something About Mary" make the list of movies one must see before their death, yet great films like Charlie Chaplin's "The Great Dictator" are completely left off the list? Boring prose and trite picks for movies leave the quality and accuracy
of this book something to be desired.
RATING: 4 STARS I love these kind of reference books on movies as it is interesting to see how my opinion differs, or is
similar. Very easy to read and fun. I recommend this to all film buffs, or if you just need to expand your tastes in movies. ***I received a complimentary copy of this ebookfrom the publisher through Edelweiss. Opinions expressed in this review are entirely my own.*** I love these kind of reference books on movies as it is interesting to see how my opinion differs, or is
similar. Very easy to read and fun. I recommend this to all film buffs, or if you just need to expand your tastes in movies. ***I received a complimentary copy of this ebookfrom the publisher through Edelweiss. Opinions expressed in this review are entirely my own.***
Jul 05, 2015 Natalie rated it it was amazing My face was glued to this book from the minute I got it. I've only seen 131 of these movies, so my to-watch list has grown considerably... ;D My face was glued to this book from the minute I got it. I've only seen 131 of these movies, so my to-watch list has grown considerably... ;D ...more
I can’t rate this because I don’t remember the writing but I do remember reading this book cover to cover and looking at it whenever I had friends come over when I was a teenager🤎
Apr 28, 2020 Will R rated it liked it I finished it. I would not recommend a cover-to-cover read; this book, ironically, became like a movie that had overstayed its welcome. It would be a great book for film buffs to turn into every few days and find a new movie for the evening. I'll stick to rewatching Peep Show. I finished it. I would not recommend a cover-to-cover read; this book, ironically, became like a movie that had overstayed its welcome. It would be a great book for film buffs to turn into every few days and find a new movie for the evening. I'll stick to rewatching Peep Show. ...more
Nov 12, 2011 A. rated it liked it I am not a huge movie person, but I wanted to see how many of these I have already seen, and I
haven't seen very many. Movies just aren't my thing but these are the ones I have seen:
Nov 19, 2007 Professor rated it it was amazing Although I was unable to finish the book before I felt guilty and stopped abusing my librarian privileges to continually renew it, I found that it was an excellent book-covered "Bests" or "Greats" in every genre, time period, and country. As a serious movie buff it is often hard for any sort of movie list, even a "1001" one, to come up with stuff I haven't heard of before, but this book did just that; what's more they treated genre films respectfully and gave them their due. A friend said it was Although I was unable to finish the book before I felt guilty and stopped abusing my librarian privileges to continually renew it, I found that it was an excellent book-covered "Bests" or "Greats" in every genre, time period, and country. As a serious movie buff it is often hard for any sort of movie list, even a "1001" one, to come up with stuff I haven't heard of before, but this book did just that; what's more they treated genre films respectfully and gave them their due. A friend said it was the perfect bathroom book and I tend to agree with him-not that the reviews are poorly written, but they are concise enough that you can pick it up and put it down easily and the wide range of films covered will ensure that almost anyone can find something interesting. ...more
I'm not sure when one is allowed to mark this as read but I've read the introductions and ticked every movie I've seen so I'd say that's as close as I can get right now. From what I've seen the collection seems to be pretty solid, some of my favourite (especially newer) films are missing but as a guide for what to watch when you have no inspiration this is a wonderful source to get back to. I'm not sure when one is allowed to mark this as read but I've read the introductions and ticked every movie I've seen so I'd say that's as close as I can get right now. From what I've seen the collection seems to be pretty solid, some of my favourite (especially newer) films are missing but as a guide for what to watch when you have no inspiration this is a wonderful source to get back to. ...more
Sorted by specific genre at the start of the book, then laid out chronologically, and finally indexed alphabetically in the final pages, 1001 Movies You Must See
Before You Die is an incredibly inclusive book. It was published in 2003, so the last movie included is 2002’s Chicago (also included as the image on the spine of the book), but Steven Jay Schneider has come out with several other editions, published in 2005, 2012, 2013, and 2015, so you can check those books out if you want a more mode Sorted by specific genre at the start of the book, then laid out chronologically, and finally indexed
alphabetically in the final pages, 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die is an incredibly inclusive book. It was published in 2003, so the last movie included is 2002’s Chicago (also included as the image on the spine of the book), but Steven Jay Schneider has come out with several other editions, published in 2005, 2012, 2013, and 2015, so you can check those books out if you want a more modern list. On each glossy page is a film still, the basic credits (writer, director, cast, Oscar nods,
etc) and a few paragraphs about the plot and why it’s a must-see. The reason this 950-paged book is so great is because the contributors (over fifty people, credited in the beginning of the book) have really done their research. Foreign movies, silent movies, unknown movies, and really strange movies are included alongside blockbusters, Oscar sweeps, and classics. Granted, there are lots of movies in here that I would never want to see, but it’s a really cool list for movie buffs, and in
particular, people who actively seek out obscure films. http://hottoastyrag.weebly.com/1001-m...
This is a nice little (well, not exactly little) book that gives information on movies. I used it to make a list of movies I want to watch, so it was handy in
that way. However, there were a couple of things I did not like about the book. For one thing, none of the pictures were labeled. I know the pictures came from the movie being described, but it would have been nice to know who the actor was, who the character was, and maybe a little blurb about that scene. The other thing that bothered me w For one thing, none of the pictures were labeled. I know the pictures came from the movie being described, but it would have been nice to know who the actor was, who the character was, and maybe a little blurb about that scene. The other thing that bothered me was that some of the descriptions were very dry. I suspect some of the movies I read
about are actually quite good and worth seeing but I did not add them to my list because the description was so boring. Not good for a book claiming you must see these movies before you die.
An ok guide for films to watch, which is mostly filled with what you'd expect to see if you're watching movies. What I did like is that it
takes you chronologically from 1920s till 2010s, so that was something. Other than that and the fact that I did find a bunch of films from early 30s to late 60s that Ive never head of before ( and going to check them out ) the rest was pretty much what it is with some films that don't deserve to be over there simply because they made it to the box office. Oh w What I did like is that it takes you chronologically from 1920s till 2010s, so that was something. Other than that and the fact that I did find a bunch of films from early 30s to late 60s that Ive never head of before ( and going to check them out ) the rest was pretty much what it is with some films that don't deserve to be over there simply because they made it to the box office. Oh well! I'd stay away unless you really want that cool cover.
There's tons of lists all over the internet that are much better.
There are many great films on that list but also some not-really-that-good ones and I don't need to mention the fact that it's mostly centered on american cinema, so some people won't see many of their favourites but it's a decent work, compared to many other books of the series. There are many great films on that list but also some not-really-that-good ones and I don't need to mention the fact that it's mostly centered on american cinema, so some people won't see many of their favourites but it's a decent work, compared to many other books of the series. ...more
Of course it's no wonder when putting together a list as large as this one, one is bound to have several disagreements. It's the entire feeling of the list however that doesn't inspire me with enough trust to think Schneider actually knows what he's talking about and secondly, I'm not exactly sure that the films on this list are placed there by sound criteria. The choice that a particular movie's on there isn't always properly explained and several people on the internet cruising through Schneid Of course it's no wonder when putting together a list as large as this one, one is bound to have several disagreements. It's the entire feeling of the list however that doesn't inspire me with enough trust to think Schneider actually knows what he's talking about and secondly, I'm not exactly sure that the films on this list are placed there by sound criteria. The choice that a particular movie's on there isn't always properly explained and several people on the internet cruising through Schneider's list have already complained some titles are impossible to come by, having only screened at a small festival way back in the day. It doesn't make for a particular interesting read, too. I'd much rather recommend Roger Ebert's 'The Great Movies', that isn't only explained in more detail, but better endowed with cinematic passion and written in a better fashion as well. ...more
Again, a list of things I should do (or not do if I want to live forever?). I'm sure I haven't seen most of these.
1) A star is fucking born??? Guess which version I'm talking about? Yes, it's the one where I'm hanging around with 98 other people....in the same room... during covid. But it's just to prove that the
movie is shite and nothing we haven't seen before (srsly! it's like the fourth time we're seeing the same movie?) 2) Some movie credits are missing. But no worries, contributors have bios :) 3) With each update, older titles get replaced by newer. Which means movies in older versions that didn't mak 2) Some movie credits are missing. But no worries, contributors have bios :) 3) With each update, older titles get replaced by newer. Which means movies in older versions that didn't make the cut are no longer "movies you have to see before you die"??? 4) I just wanted to make this list longer, but never
mind, it might get chopped later... like the classics ;)
May 19, 2011 Bear rated it liked it I've flipped through this book and there's no way in heck I'll ever see all these films. Nor would I want to because I have a mind of my own. (And better taste!) But it was still fun to see what other people think everyone should see. I've flipped through this book and there's no way in heck I'll ever see all these films. Nor would I want to because I have a mind of my own. (And better taste!) But it was still fun to see what other people think everyone should see. ...more
I'm considering this book finished because I've finished entering everything into a spreadsheet. The older sections of the list aren't so bad, but once you get into the modern era it's a very very very male list. Yeesh. I'm considering this book finished because I've finished entering everything into a spreadsheet. The older sections of the list aren't so bad, but once you get into the modern era it's a very very very male list. Yeesh. ...more
Cinema, like other artistic mediums, has a storied history. 1001 Movies to Watch Before You Die is another
book in this series and it focuses on movies. The edition I have found is from 2015 so it is slightly more recent. The editors of this project acknowledge that producing a list that is meant to cover all great movies is daunting, to say the least, even if one has 1001 spaces to fill. So a team of experts gathered together for this project and probably spent months determining what to leave Cinema, like other artistic mediums, has a storied history.
1001 Movies to Watch Before You Die is another book in this series and it focuses on movies. The edition I have found is from 2015 so it is slightly more recent. The editors of this project acknowledge that producing a list that is meant to cover all great movies is daunting, to say the least, even if one has 1001 spaces to fill. So a team of experts gathered together for this project and probably spent months determining what to leave out and what to leave in. Certainly, there are several
movies that a list wouldn’t be the same without, but these are the ones that so many others have listed. There are many that I would have included in such a list. Citizen Kane comes to mind but why? I have watched that movie before, but I don’t have the overall knowledge of movies to make that decision. That is where this book comes in. It gives a small synopsis of the movie, includes little bits of trivia, and discusses the people who went into its production. Take a movie that would receive
a lot of raised eyebrows with the recent protests in the United States; Birth of a Nation. I have never watched this movie, but according to the essay paired with its listing in the book, I can see why they include it. The director introduced so many new techniques that make you disappointed that it had to be from such a movie. It even has historical context since it was the first movie played at the White House for President Woodrow Wilson. The book also includes other little tidbits that
you might have heard of before. It’s a Wonderful Life is a holiday classic, but it wasn’t always like that. The movie received lackluster reviews and was largely forgotten until the copyright expired and television stations showed it every year during the Christmas holidays. Take The Ten Commandments as another example; the uncredited voice of God from the Burning Bush is done by Charlton Heston. Don’t be fooled into thinking that the book only covers American Movies, however. The book goes all
over the world, finding respectable entries from all sorts of genres and countries. Some movies were left out, but this makes sense. You can always make your list of movies, and this particular list just happens to be done by experts in the field. I could even list the ones I have watched for some fun trivia. For example, did you know that I have only watched the first Toy Story movie? Shocking, I know, but I never got around to the sequels. The movies in the book are organized
chronologically. There is one major complaint I have with the design of the book. On the edge of the page, it tells you what year the movie came out and has a color-coding for the decade. The color coding is at the same level making it a bit confusing. If it were me, I think I would have had it in steps, where the first decade is at the top and the next decade is slightly lower and so on through the decades. This would make it so that you can easily get to a decade you want to find. So in
short, if you love movies this is a good book to read; if you don’t enjoy movies I don’t know why you chose this book. It is an unbeatable combination of informative and enjoyable.
Feb 21, 2022 evelyn rated it it was amazing ok i didnt read this cover to cover but i did spend abt 2hrs going through and tabbing/annotating all the movies ive watched. Ofc there are so many amazing films that arent on this list but im very attached to this book and have decided to work my way through as many films as i can :)
My Mum's boyfriend got me this for my 23rd birthday. I've marked off the movies that I've seen and read their respective essays. I'm going to watch quite a lot of these in the future and can see myself coming back to this book on a daily basis. Great read! My Mum's boyfriend got me this for my 23rd birthday. I've marked off the movies that I've seen and read their respective essays. I'm going to watch quite a lot of these in the future and can see myself coming back to this book on a daily basis. Great read! ...more
This has been a fun Texans, but I see a lot of movies that didn’t make the list though..
A book you are likely to read from cover to cover only over the decades (after 10 years, I still haven't), the selection and write-ups are as variable as you would expect to find in a collection chosen to span the decades,
genres, movements and directorial styles represented here. There are films here from Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Greece, Turkey, Holland, Belgium, Spain, Cuba, Portugal, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, South Korea, Iran, Mali, Senegal, Phi A book you are likely to read from cover to cover only over the decades (after 10 years, I still haven't), the selection and write-ups are as variable as you would expect to
find in a collection chosen to span the decades, genres, movements and directorial styles represented here. There are films here from Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Greece, Turkey, Holland, Belgium, Spain, Cuba, Portugal, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, South Korea, Iran, Mali, Senegal, Philippines, New Zealand, many from Hong Kong, Taiwan and China, several from Australia and Russia, India and Japan, many from Italy and France, a clutch from Germany and
Britain, but the host is from the U.S., whose studio system from the Thirties spawned thousands upon thousands There are a number of films directed by women, 2008's The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigelow) and Penny Marshall's Big (1988) being the most prominent among the fifteen or so featured here, the most prominent script being Nora Ephron's for When Harry Met Sally (Rob Reiner, 1989), and I noticed that there are notably many women editors scattered throughout the decades, genres and countries.
Woody Allen, for example, used two steady female editors over the decades, Susan E. Morse in the front half, and Alisa Lepselter in the latter half. 'Some films are held in high esteem for their impressive artistic breakthroughs or stunning acting debuts. Others are revered simply for being the best of a kind.' - Joshua Klein, p.268 (on Singin' In The Rain, 1952). Some write-ups, and so some films you might choose to see which otherwise would not have come across your radar through
the public outlets (cinema, Film4, Amazon Prime, Netflix, and a handful of independent film channels like the Horror channel, Sony Movies, Paramount Network and the oft-repeats of ITV4), you read because you know you will never watch the film (Los Olvidados, Buñuel, 1950, a superb critique by Martin Rubin, p.256) because you couldn't subject yourself to so much destitution, and some you watch because the review (Requiem For A Dream, Aronofsky, 2000, Mikel J. Coven, p.891) seems to provide some
relief from the destitution, such as the 'uniformly magnificent' acting - but is nonetheless a bleak viewing experience. Some reviews, such as Jonathan Rosenbaum's of Antonioni's La Notte (1961), actually persuade you to watch the successor of one which a previous review had convinced you to watch and which you found little worthwhile (L'Avventura, 1960) - and that's quite an admission, proving that these critics are not only partisan towards the films they love and have selected, but also
provide some meaningful critiques which can persuade you to suspend all prejudice and give a film highly acclaimed by others the chance it deserves. This certainly applies to those films which require critical acclaim to bring it your attention, unless you come across it in a film or other cultural module of study. That's one reason why this book is worth reading, rather than just dipping into. There are lots of films we will see, and in some way appreciate, even if we don't 'like' them, that
otherwise we would never have bothered with. Some curios amaze, such as Chelovek S Kinoapparatom (1929, Dziga Vertov, p.72), which is a fascinating early silent film documenting a day in the life of a Russian city (mainly Moscow), from the early morning wake-up to the late-night cinema. Some are curios which appal, such as that 'eye' scene in Un Chien Andalou (1928, p.68), Buñuel's directorial debut and Surrealist montage co-written with Salvador Dalí. I defy anyone not to turn away or
off. Some you choose to watch simply because they feel great, like Meet Me In St. Louis (Vincente Minnelli, 1944, pp.192-3 [wrongly indexed]), and some you watch because their acclaim is so great, such as It's A Wonderful Life (Frank Capra, 1946, pp.222-3), which IS probably one the greatest feel-good films ever - to use IMDb-user gushing parlance. Some are so highly acclaimed and greatly disappoint, such as the restored Powell-Pressburger The Red Shoes (1948, pp.236-7), which Kim Newman
describes as a 'luminous masterpiece', and which I have tried to watch three times over ten years, only just finally achieving the full picture, which bored me again in spates, and made me laugh where I shouldn't in others. (Perhaps it's a 'girls' film'?). Some domestic dramas are equally lauded but for some indefinable reason (which ultimately you do define) do not impress equally. Take Dodsworth (William Wyler, 1936, p.130, Rahul Hamid) and Stella Dallas (King Vidor, 1937, p.135, R.
Barton Palmer), for example, two films I had never heard of until here. Both seem from their write-ups similar surveys exploring the break-up of marriages, of voyages of self-discovery for the women, and so on. Yet Dodsworth is an intelligent, adult tragicomedy, while Stella Dallas is a sentimental, cloying, even prim tear-jerker - despite the reviewer's declaration to the opposite, in a write-up that is largely description rather than also part critique, as they should all be. It seems we were
led down the garden path with that one. But you must see them to decide for yourself. That's what's interesting, that promise.... Of the 1005 films in this book (2 of them appear in two parts as two separate films, Olympia, 1938, p.141, and Ivan Groznyj, Sergei Eisentsein, 1944 and 1958, p.197 - both with the paw-marks of dictatorship propaganda on them; and the three Lord of the Rings films), I've seen about a third. If I pressed hard over the next ten years, I may see another third, but
I will never see all of them, precisely because there will be some that I choose not to see, because of subject matter, genre or write-up (and some that can only be obtained through expensive blu-rays, the expense of which, is it worth it?, prevents you from buying until the list is nearly exhausted, which it will never be), and there will be some which I will watch again, for various reasons. One of those reasons is to give a film which has achieved such acclaim and which I had thought little
of a decent second chance, and try to 'see it'. Many of these films needed a revisit in the light of their selection in 1001. Some are hard work (12 Angry Men, Sidney Lumet, 1957, p.331, Angela Errigo, and Der Blaue Engel, Josef von Sternberg [with Marlene Dietrich], 1930, pp.76-7, Adrian Martin), the former rewarding of a revisit, the latter not. Some are greater joys now than at the time of release, and were well worth a revisit, such as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Ang Lee, 2000,
pp.894-5, Joshua Klein), where I found myself mesmerised by then newcomer Ziyi Zhang, who stole the film from Chow Yun Fat and Michelle Yeoh. And another Ang Lee film, Brokeback Mountain (2005, pp.910-11, Wheeler Dixon), which I cried at, at the cinema, when it first came out, I watch every 5 years or so, so as not to over-watch and so spoil it. Yet another Ang Lee film, The Ice Storm (1997), is luminous. I'm surprised that Cold Mountain (Anthony Minghella, 2003) isn't in here. And some that
are, like The Crying Game (Neil Jordan, 1992, p.818, Ernest Hardy) leave me cold, and I would rather switch. Some films were torments of a kind of helpless captivity, such as Bergman's Det Sjunde Inseglet (1957, pp.332-3, Kim Newman), and some joys of experience, like An Affair To Remember of the same year (Leo McCarey, p.334, Angela Errigo). Some were remakes, and where the original did not wow, the new version did, such as the Coen Brothers' 2010 version of True Grit (p.943, Simon Ward),
the last entry in this 2011 edition. Hallee Steinfeld was as good as the great knowns, Bridges, Damon, Brolin and Pepper, such superb casting, such great heights of drama, tension, true grit. It made the Henry Hathaway (who?) original of 1969 with John Wayne as 'Rooster' Cogburn look sluggish and cumbersome, over-weighty, torpid. turbid, turgid, all at once (yes, I always need a dictionary with those three words; but you get the point). Of course, you could talk about the comparisons like
this for as long as it takes to read the book, which is one of the reasons you want to read it, to discuss all this with folk who have opted for their selections and try or succeed to justify them. Despite that poor experience of my first Bergman film, The Seventh Seal, I still intend to look at many of his others (like Persona [1966] and Cries And Whispers [1972], which I've seen two or three times), and am greatly disappointed that my favourite (so far), Sarabande (2003), his last, is not in
this book. That is a stunning blow, it is such a powerful film. But the lists change annually, as they have from this book's inception (see cover) in 2007. The process of selecting what to watch, and the various reasons why, is ongoing and interminable. To say you have read this book from cover to cover is really only the start of a lifetime's endeavour, and if I got hold of the latest (2020) edition, I would probably only be looking at about a third of those in this selection, at a guess,
and would undertake another great process of elimination, discovery and disappointment. It's the process. If I pushed myself really hard every day, I could probably finish this book within 3 weeks - but that would be a chore, though often a rewarding one. This book's meant for cherry-picking as well as a straight read, and the process is the enjoyment, of saying, 'I think I'll watch Groundhog Day (Harold Ramis, 1993, p.819, Joanna Berry) again (What, again? Yes, again?). Or Big (Penny
Marshall, 1988, p.761, Berry again) or The Big Chill (Lawrence Kasdan, 1983, p.691, Berry again) or The Big Sleep (Howard Hawks, 1946, p.216, Joshua Klein) again, all wonderful films'. Or I'll watch L'Avventura (Michaelangelo Antonioni, 1960, pp.376-7, Kim Newman), I've never seen that (have now, but costly blu-ray), or Visconti's Ossessione (1943, p.191, Richard Peña), never seen that (still haven't, another costly blu-ray). But because of (re-)reading this book on and off, in great
spates of intensity, over the past 10 years, and recently very intensely, I go to the library shelf, pick up a couple of DVDs, and watch two or three films a day, my treat this past month for finishing my literature degree. When you're all read out, browsing this 1001 Movies You MUST See Before You Die is an inexpensive little holiday (if you ignore those expensive blu-rays of esoteric cinema). You'll probably find 50 free with film-service subscriptions (like Prime), and of those, 30 you
haven't ever heard of, let alone seen. Check out the 1001 lists on IMDb, with filters for such 'freebees', and the facility to download a CSV of the list for you to play with. I've had a good month with this book, and will have more good months over the years. I only wish they'd started earlier in my life. Catching up now, though.... I may not have read all of the reviews in this book, but I have read something about every film, taking in the country of origin, director and other technical
staff, cast and Oscars. I may have read perhaps 20% of the reviews, at best. Of those, Kim Newman's review of Kiss Me Deadly (1955, p.313) is one of the best of those, as trashy-stylish as the film she's critiquing, utterly outrageous (as both journalism and a way not to speak) and one of the best in it. What I have done is make a very comprehensive list of what I want to watch, and have been working my way through them over the past months. It's been hit and miss, but you don't know till you
choose one, put it on, and sit back... 'And then, you sit in the dark, the screen lights up, the movie begins. It's simple. It's obvious. Elegant, deeply moving, incredibly alive.' - Jean Michel Frodon (on Europa '51, Roberto Rossellini). Steven Jay Schneider is a film critic, scholar, and producer with M.A. degrees in Philosophy from Harvard University and in Cinema Studies from New York University. He is the author and editor of numerous books on world cinema, most notably in the horror genre. They include Eurohorror, The Cinema of Wes Craven: An Auteur on Elm Street, Designing Fear: An Aesthetics of Cinematic Horror, Killing in Steven Jay Schneider is a film critic, scholar, and producer with M.A. degrees in Philosophy from Harvard University and in Cinema Studies from New York University. He is the author and editor of numerous books on world cinema, most notably in the horror genre. They include Eurohorror, The Cinema of Wes Craven: An Auteur on Elm Street, Designing Fear: An Aesthetics of Cinematic Horror, Killing in Style: Artistic Murder in the Movies, Understanding Film Genres, and Traditions in World Cinema. He is also a consultant for film, television, and home video/DVD production companies, a curator for world horror film programs, and a staff member in development for Paramount Pictures. Among his recent titles are 501 Movie Stars and 501 Movie Directors, both available in North America from Barron's. Two additional titles from Barron's are scheduled for publication in Spring 09. They are 101 Horror Movies You Must See Before You Die and 101 Sci-Fi Movies You Must See Before You Die. ...more News & InterviewsAudiobook fans, this one goes out to you. In an effort to find the very best audiobook experiences—books that are great reads and great... “THE MAN WITH A MOVIE CAMERA(1929) the 'honesty' of documentary as compared with fiction film, the 'perfection' of the cinematic eye compared with human eye.” — 3 likes “You have got to be good in that town if you want to beat the crowd.' So says young John on his first sight of New York City. THE CROWD (1928)” — 2 likes More quotes…Welcome back. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account. |
1001 film da vedere prima di morire lista
Articoli correlati
Diritto d'autore © 2024 nguoilontuoi Inc.
