FOTR - AFI #50 best of all time
 

Last night the American Film Institite had a tenth anniversary new poll of their 100 Years 100 Best Films award show. All three LOTR films were now eligible and made the cut of 400 nominated films. FOTR made the list as the #50 best film of all time. TTT and ROTK did not make the list. Of all the new films made in the last ten years, FOTR was the highest on the list.

CITIZEN KANE was again #1 and THE GODFATHER climbed to #2. Biggest jumper on the list was the John Ford western THE SEARCHERS which was #96 ten years ago but now climbed to #12.

Yah for FotR!... I'm not surprised that it made it instead of its fellows.

I will never understand why Citizen Kane is so well liked.

I agree. FOTR was much the better film, with fewer of
PJs changes.

You've obviously never seen it. ;)

Ah, but I have. Once and a half :) . I found it interesting, but not that interesting.

Kane completely revolutionized the way films were made- it really redefined cinematic art as profoundly as Beethoven redefined the symphony. In some ways it's hard to realize from our perspective just how revolutionary it was, just because so many of Welles' innovations have become the standard toolbox for filmmakers ever since.

That, and it totally rocks.

uh oh...I think I see...coming towards us....no no NOOOOOOO!!!!

Chat Skwerels!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Trying to fend off said squirrel]

If Saruman was a 20th century news mogul would he be like Kane? :p

Instead of "Rosebud..." 'twould be "Precious...".

*The Dark Elf shrugs*

Certainly the films on the list warrant such praise (except perhaps Star Wars, Annie Hall, Titanic and Tootsie *rolls eyes*). I noticed several older films have fallen off the list (such as Ran, Battleship Potemkin and All's Quiet on the Western Front) in favor of more recent films (Blade Runner is a good addition, as is Unforgiven, but The Last Picture Show and Sophie's Choice?); this does not mean the older films are not great, it's just that fewer folks are drawn to anything lacking technicolor (short attention spans, lack of flashing lights, etc.).

Personally, I'd like to see A Man for all Seasons or The Lion in the Winter added. Superb dialogue, intellectually stimulating and droll as all get out. Add The Elephant Man to that list as well. And the most appalling non-appearance? Monty Python's Holy Grail is not included in the 100 Funniest Movies of all Tiime, but Private Benjamin and Bull Durham are? Ummm...as the drunken mallard would say, 'that's fupped duck.'

Those AFI lists are American films only, which accounts for some of the missing masterpieces you mention, like Ran (or rather, Seven Samurai).

Now everyone can debate whether or not FotR is really an American film...:eek:

Of course, silly of me. I was looking at an earlier 100 best list (1998) that mentioned AFI in the Google blurb, but which wasn't the actual AFI list. Bah! Never mind.

P.S. Except for the funding, FotR had really nothing whatsoever to do with the U.S. except for some pre-film casting calls in New York and L.A. (neither did Lawrence of Arabia or The Third Man, for that matter). There is a reason that FotR's premiere was in New Zealand and not in L.A.

I like to think that Lord of the Rings was an international film.

from Morthoron

A big AMEN from my corner on that. I love Kate Hepburns speech on the nature of war and how it comes from our own faults rather than political and economic causes. Saw LION again recently and was struck at the very high level of the script allowing actors to say more than a couple of lines at a time. That is almost unheard of today with short lines by almost everyone.

ELEPHANT MAN should be on the list - its an outstanding film in every possible way. Great how Lynch captured the feel of an early 30's film while at the same time pushing some boundaries to give it a new feel.

I realize that many here prefer FOTR because it has less PJ changes than the other two movies --- BUT --- I am 100% sure that the AFI gives that no consideration at all. The AFI is notorious for downgrading any type of sequel as evidenced by both STAR WARS and the GODFATHER. EMPIRE is almost universally considered by film critics to be a far superior film to the original but is not even on the list while SW gets a ridicoulously high rating. Sure its a pop culture phenom - but great film? Please. GODFATHER II is also generally considered to have eclipsed its original but is further down on the list. AFI simply does not want to consider that sequels may be better.

I'm not surprised it was The Fellowship either, it is the best of the trilogy! Congrats to FotR!

Neither will I ever understand why Casablanca (#3 on the list) is so well-liked. The Big Sleep was a much better Bogart film, plus it had Ingrid Bergman.

*cough* Anyway. Despite the fact that RotK got all the Oscars, I've always felt that FotR was much closer to the books, and that's why it's the best of the three, to me.
I feel like a traitor saying that, because Book!Faramir was my favorite character, but yet again... the arguments about Gallant Captain Faramir apply to TTT, and there was too much of his personality left out of RotK.

ummm....Bergman was in Casablanca. Perhaps you meant somebody else?

Transparent Attempt To Keep This Post On-Topic: she's pretty hot too.

I am extremely happy to see FotR on the list, as it's also my favourite of the three. I'm still surprised that RotK didn't make it instead considering the amount of attention it received. And I really don't consider TTT and RotK to be sequels; they're more like continuing parts to the story. After all, a sequel is an extra edition to a story that's already been concluded, and is usually not planned when the first film is made (at least that's how I define it in my book :rolleyes: ).

Sauron, is there a direct link to this list that you could give us? It would be much appreciated. :)

Possibly, although she does come second to a horse in one of the latter movie. I think the real reason FotR was the best was becauseshe is hot enough to churn butter just by looking at it. Wanna know why Sam was able to recover from the ordeal of the Quest? Just look at those thirteen lil hobbits. Maybe Frodo would have been healed if he had had his Rosie.

from Brinniel

If you go to afi.com there is a section there for their lists. You have to download the All Time 100 list -- it only takes a minute and is well worth it because they have pages of analysis and a great chart which shows which films went up or down from ten years ago.

Hope that helps.

Whoops. Er... I swear I said Lauren Bacall.

It makes very little sense to me to exclude TTT and ROTK from the list. I realize that FOTR is often the most popular of the three on this board because it supposedly has less deviation from the book, but from my experience, the other two films (particularly ROTK) exceeded it in popularity and critical acclaim. I personally think they at least match FOTR's quality, if not exceed it.

The sequel rule is stupid if it excludes them. As others have said, TTT and ROTK are not sequels in the traditional Hollywood sense; one might as well have said that FOTR was a prequel.

Originally posted by Elladan and Elrohir
I believe all three LotR films were eligible to make the list. After all, both The Godfather and The Godfather, part 2 were on the list. All eligible films were voted on by AFI members, and the top one hundred vote getters are the ones listed. The Two Towers and The Return of the King simply did not make the top one hundred in votes.

There ought to be some sort of distinction between the Most Entertaining and the Most Important movies.

Citizen Kane may be the most important, but it is hardly the most entertaining. The term "Best" is very vague and doesn't really say what is being used to judge... it leads one to ask "best at what?"

Glad FotR is on there, of course. I like to think it sort of stands for all three movies.

And Casablanca is a stupid movie.

:Merisu:

The original ballot that was sent out to the folks asked to vote lists the criteria:

StW, it may please you to know that the movie Becket (1964, starring Peter O'Toole, Richard Burton and John Gielgud) has finally been released on DVD. It's a superb bookend to The Lion in Winter, with O'Toole playing a much younger (and feistier) Henry II and Burton as Archbishop Becket. They just don't make movies like that anymore (FotR included).

Well, haven't checked yet if one of my favourites is on there, but here's some good news about it>

Olivier's Henry V http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nhenry120.xml

Now that's a cavalry charge! Watch & weep PJ!

I'd like to see how FOTR counts as an American movie. The American author? The American director? The American writers? The American filming locations? The American production and design companies? I've got nothing against the US but this seems a bit forced.

American money?

The definition given above cites 'significant creative and/or production elements from the United States'. I suppose money counts as a production element but that still seems rather thin.

If a movie is budgeted and marketed by Hollywood then it is a Hollywood film and thence American. There's nothing thin in it but fat wallets and bigtime marketing companies.

And that's what Hollywood films are, an enterprise, a way of making more money with money... :(

That is great news. Unfortunately, it will probably take forever to get over to the States, and even longer still to reach DVD format. Did you like the Kenneth Brannagh version? Totally different in viewpoint than the Olivier masterpiece, but quite good in its own right. To put a LotR spin on this post, I still consider Sir Ian McKellan's portrayal of Richard III one of the best Shakespeare adaptations I've ever seen. The look of utter malevolence on McKellan's face in the film's final scene is horrifying.

You mean fourteen!

FotR Is NOT an American movie, except it was funded by Hollywood...grr Hollywood they're like Sauron always wanting money and power.

WHAT?! That is not right. It should go like this!...

#1. ROTK
#2. TTT
#3. FOTR
#4. Memphis Belle

lol, jk. Yeah yeah, go FOTR!