Sight & Sound

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
senseabove
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#551 Post by senseabove » Mon Dec 05, 2022 4:15 am

furbicide wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 2:54 am
Secondly, I don't know exactly what the role of Girish Shambu – the author of the Tweet in question, and a respected film critic in his own right – was in voter selection, but my anecdotal impression is that he was most likely just one of a number of international critics asked to submit lists of new potential invitees from various geographical regions. If he and others took that directive as a mission to reach out to people from less represented backgrounds, then ... isn't that part of the point, and entirely legitimate?

The notion that this constituted some kind of a "kamikaze mission", as Kremer puts it, is ridiculous. It's not as if Shambu was able to choose what his recommended invitees submitted. Expanding the franchise to a more diverse group of people was both the explicit (and entirely justifiable) aim of this year's expansion, and one consultant's personal feelings about wishing to upend the canon in no way suggests that anyone was putting a thumb on the scale.
Shambu was one of several on a Film Comment panel/podcast, explicitly produced in anticipation of the S&S poll, about the purpose of list-making, gaming or not gaming your S&S list, canons, representation, with a sidebar on the place of documentary in the broader canon, etc, etc., and talked about this a little bit, and yes, I had the impression that was basically it: suggest critics to invite to participate.

It sounds like this was already the case in 2012 as well, they just expanded it even more; while the 2002 list was based on 145 responses, the 2012 list was based on 846 responses from ~1,000 asked—"though I can’t pretend that the 1,000 or so individuals were selected by any more rigorous process than simple chains of recommendation"—and they "were also keen to include among them critics who’d established their careers online rather than purely in print." Online criticism has obviously only overtaken print further in the past decade, so in that regard, it's... a more accurate reflection of contemporary film criticism. And, at least so far as it looks from my little corner of Film Twitter, the folks they added this round are still critics who are published in reputable places. Screen Slate and Little White Lies and RogerEbert.com may not be Cahiers or The Times, but they're undeniably influential voices in contemporary film criticism. Given that they nearly dectupled list requests last decade and expanded the final count from 10 to 100, they seem to have intentionally been laying the ground work for this even greater expansion and the shuffling it would lead to.

ethel
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#552 Post by ethel » Mon Dec 05, 2022 4:17 am

I’ve never been able to see Jeanne Dielman and have always found it offputting that its staunchest defenders refer to it as an ordeal, gruelling, alienating, a chore, boring &c, and possibly even more interesting to analyse than to actually watch. I’ve picked at a little of the Chantal Akerman Eclipse set (secondhand), but it mainly remains in my “to do” pile.

Another curious feature of discussion of this film is that sooner rather than later, most commenters solemnly recount Delphine Seyrig’s epic preparation of some meal or other. I’m reminded of a scene in a film by Joseph Losey (who?). In his sublime Accident (1967) scripted by Harold Pinter, there’s a scene of spectacularly boozy lunch with Dirk Bogarde drunkenly preparing an omelette while doing lines of dialogue. The scene runs maybe 6 or 7 minutes. The camera is motionless in the corner of the kitchen, implacably recording a vast wide shot, allowing the audience’s eye to bounce around the frame and revel in the crackling tension among the various characters, particularly the truly, utterly revolting men (a Losey specialty). Then everyone gets to tuck in to the omelette.

It sounds to me like it does a lot of what devotees claim for Jeanne Dielman, while managing to be deliriously entertaining as well.

The film manages innovative cutting (or not cutting), and interesting sound mixing also, not forgetting Johnny Dankworth’s score for solo jazz harp [sic!]

The lunch is just one of many exhilarating, funny, fearsome scenes in this unjustly forgotten film (out on a superb Blu) by a practically forgotten director. Losey was increasingly disparaged for years after his death, except among the French. (His English wife and collaborator’s fascinating memoir Ma vie avec Joseph Losey was translated for French publication but has never appeared in English.) Accident is in my Top 10 on most days, but in my Top 100 always.

Still, I see an eminent director put Andy Warhol’s static shot of the Empire State Building (8 hours) in his Top 10, so I feel I’m on solid ground with a film as superbly achieved as this Losey masterwork. Do not miss!

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Sight & Sound

#553 Post by MichaelB » Mon Dec 05, 2022 4:17 am

I can confirm that I was approached for contact details for critics from central/eastern Europe who hadn’t participated before. I thought that this was a perfectly reasonable request at the time, and I still do.

I can also endorse the claim made above about the survey being sent after the poll invitation.

Robin Davies
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 2:00 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#554 Post by Robin Davies » Mon Dec 05, 2022 9:10 am

rde wrote:
Sun Dec 04, 2022 7:44 pm
Noiretirc wrote:
Sun Dec 04, 2022 7:17 pm
I sort of get where rde is coming from. (I know....I know....the band is playing, perhaps for both of us?)

I've insisted in this thread that politics IS a part of this process, whenever any organization compiles a list of Greatest Ever Art. Unlike rde, I believe that this is unavoidable. It's human nature. I cannot and will not complain about it. It is what it is. Now, this can be bad for some of us, depending on what list we are dealing with. But in this/my case, I like the politics of S+S. I love what they do, who they want to associate with, and their values/mission. And even though I see baffling omissions, I'm still very happy overall with what they have done here - especially with the #1 spot.
Well, I appreciate that.
Your post #510 was perfectly reasonable and did not deserve the abuse it received.

User avatar
TMDaines
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:01 pm
Location: Stretford, Manchester

Re: Sight & Sound

#555 Post by TMDaines » Mon Dec 05, 2022 9:59 am

domino harvey wrote:
Fri Dec 02, 2022 2:59 pm
Does the order factor into the tabulation? Why do some contributors have 15 films?
Scorsese has been famous for never complying with the requirements. I presume others have also adopted a take-it-or-leave-it approach.

User avatar
TMDaines
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:01 pm
Location: Stretford, Manchester

Re: Sight & Sound

#556 Post by TMDaines » Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:05 am

Noiretirc wrote:
Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:36 pm
1986: Top Gun. Wow. What a great film.

A few weeks later my friend and I were completely stuck on what to do on a Friday night. Blue Velvet? Well, whatever.

That night changed my fucking life.

My life is divided into - before Blue Velvet, and after Blue Velvet.

I never watched Top Fucking Gun ever again.

My life now became all about Films That Matter. And Sight And Sound became a big part of that search. I'm thrilled that I found the lists and discovered the films. I don't always "get" every recommendation (Ozu has never hit me....sue me!) but my life has been very enhanced by the journey that Sight And Sound helped me with.

And later it led me to The Criterion Collection, and this forum. I know that you are all happy for that. Thank you.
I'm not sure I have one film exactly that acts as my BC and AD moment, but starting a degree in German and Italian changed my life. I had little interest in film until I was 19. Then, I decided to be a good boy and do all the recommended reading and viewing before starting university. The first of those films I remembered watching is Die Ehe der Maria Braun, then Roma città aperta and Ladri di biciclette were there too. They pretty much got me hooked and in I went. I have strong memories of borrowing MoC's second edition of Sunrise too, purely because it was directed by a German filmmaker, and that probably got me interested in silent and classical Hollywood cinema.

User avatar
Lighthouse
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 11:12 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#557 Post by Lighthouse » Mon Dec 05, 2022 12:21 pm

I liked the previous list more, there were more films in it which I love, while many of the newbies are films I consider not that great. Well I wanted more new films, but it seems I have other ideas which films of the last 20 years are the most fascinating. The director's list was for me always the more filmic one, and this year it seems to be that even more clearly.

Someone has some ideas where the more radical changes came from, and if he is right, it is bit sad, a win of content over style:

https://www.worldofreel.com/blog/2022/1 ... -and-sound

But of course the S&S poll is not dead, it is still breathing ...

The ones I love the most are 2001, Otto e mezzo, C'era una volta il West, Madame de, Persona, Apocalypse Now and Mulholland Drive, the ones I like the least are M, Do the Right Thing, The Apartment, Rear Window, Angst essen Seele auf and yes, Portrait de la jeune fille en feu
Last edited by Lighthouse on Wed Dec 07, 2022 4:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Red Screamer
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:34 pm
Location: Tativille, IA

Re: Sight & Sound

#558 Post by Red Screamer » Mon Dec 05, 2022 2:32 pm

Michael Kerpan wrote:
Sun Dec 04, 2022 12:58 am
Red Screamer -- I will be very interested in your father's response to Tokyo Story!
It sounds like he liked it, though not without some effort. His favorite part was the portrait of the older couple's marriage, which he said felt very true to life, and he was impressed with the quotidian details of how each different household is run. He mentioned the actors looking directly into the camera too, which surprised me!

User avatar
Toland's Mitchell
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2019 2:42 pm

Re: Sight & Sound

#559 Post by Toland's Mitchell » Mon Dec 05, 2022 3:07 pm

rde wrote:
Sun Dec 04, 2022 8:02 pm
Who prefers the Director's list?
I mentioned upthread I prefer the director's list because it's more rooted in the craft of film-making, whereas the critic's list leans more towards film theory. Granted both lists have incorporate both craft and theory, but I notice the slight leanings in these directions. And I think both lists are valuable as guides to film-lovers looking to expand their horizons. I also mentioned upthread I hadn't seen, and knew little about, Jeanne Dielman beforehand. I'll certainly be checking it out now, sometime next year during CF's 70s list project.

I also couldn't help but smile when I saw Apichatpong Weerasethakul had Mad Max: Fury Road in his Top 10. Just seems funny the guy who made Tropical Malady and Uncle Boonmee loves Mad Max. Go figure. Edgar Wright and Bong Joon-Ho had it on their lists too. Wonder if that'll be cracking the director's list in a few decades.

User avatar
Lighthouse
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 11:12 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#560 Post by Lighthouse » Mon Dec 05, 2022 3:26 pm

Btw what is the exact question that was asked for the ballots?

Greatest films?
Favourite films?
Most important films?

Well, it's obviously named the greatest films, but much more interesting are the favourite films,the island films.

User avatar
tolbs1010
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 7:01 pm

Re: Sight & Sound

#561 Post by tolbs1010 » Mon Dec 05, 2022 3:29 pm

ethel wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 4:17 am
I’ve never been able to see Jeanne Dielman and have always found it offputting that its staunchest defenders refer to it as an ordeal, gruelling, alienating, a chore, boring &c, and possibly even more interesting to analyse than to actually watch. I’ve picked at a little of the Chantal Akerman Eclipse set (secondhand), but it mainly remains in my “to do” pile.

Another curious feature of discussion of this film is that sooner rather than later, most commenters solemnly recount Delphine Seyrig’s epic preparation of some meal or other. I’m reminded of a scene in a film by Joseph Losey (who?). In his sublime Accident (1967) scripted by Harold Pinter, there’s a scene of spectacularly boozy lunch with Dirk Bogarde drunkenly preparing an omelette while doing lines of dialogue. The scene runs maybe 6 or 7 minutes. The camera is motionless in the corner of the kitchen, implacably recording a vast wide shot, allowing the audience’s eye to bounce around the frame and revel in the crackling tension among the various characters, particularly the truly, utterly revolting men (a Losey specialty). Then everyone gets to tuck in to the omelette.

It sounds to me like it does a lot of what devotees claim for Jeanne Dielman, while managing to be deliriously entertaining as well.

The film manages innovative cutting (or not cutting), and interesting sound mixing also, not forgetting Johnny Dankworth’s score for solo jazz harp [sic!]

The lunch is just one of many exhilarating, funny, fearsome scenes in this unjustly forgotten film (out on a superb Blu) by a practically forgotten director. Losey was increasingly disparaged for years after his death, except among the French. (His English wife and collaborator’s fascinating memoir Ma vie avec Joseph Losey was translated for French publication but has never appeared in English.) Accident is in my Top 10 on most days, but in my Top 100 always.
As one of the biggest Losey fans on this site (I think), I loved seeing this post. Accident is my favorite Losey film. It encapsulates his style and recurring themes perhaps better than any of his other films. It's also very cruelly funny. Losey definitely isn't known for his humor, but his explorations of the base, petty exploits of the upper classes have their humorous moments. The scene that you reference is a wonderful long take with great acting, framing, and blocking. However, other than a character making a meal on screen in real time and both featuring Delphine Seyrig, there is nothing comparable about Accident and Jeanne Dielman.... It's like reading a trash novel vs. a formal essay. I prefer the trash novel.

Nothing by Losey will ever sniff the S&S 100, but I imagine The Servant will get a few votes and John Waters will likely continue to carry the torch for Boom! (God bless him).

yoshimori
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:03 am
Location: LA CA

Re: Sight & Sound

#562 Post by yoshimori » Mon Dec 05, 2022 5:02 pm

tolbs1010 wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 3:29 pm
... Accident is my favorite Losey film.
Moi aussi. I believe I had it number 2 on swo's 1967 mini-list, after Point Blank. Someone, perhaps you, had it at 1, but it ranked only 20th in the end. Both the Losey and the Boorman are merciless fun. And both strike me as heavily influenced, style-wise, by Resnais' earlier work (LYAM, Muriel). As someone mentioned pages above, the lack of at least one of those Resnais films on the S&S list is a big surprise.

User avatar
furbicide
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#563 Post by furbicide » Mon Dec 05, 2022 6:30 pm

Lighthouse wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 3:26 pm
Btw what is the exact question that was asked for the ballots?

Greatest films?
Favourite films?
Most important films?

Well, it's obviously named the greatest films, but much more interesting are the favourite films,the island films.
Since 1952 Sight and Sound has conducted a once-a-decade poll of the world’s most respected critics, programmers, academics and curators, asking them each for their top ten films of all time. The collated results are then published in the most globally recognised poll of its kind – Sight and Sound’s Greatest Films of All Time.

[…]

We are not setting parameters as to how ‘film’ is defined. As for what is meant by ‘greatest’, we leave that open to your interpretation too.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#564 Post by Maltic » Mon Dec 05, 2022 8:53 pm

yoshimori wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 5:02 pm
tolbs1010 wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 3:29 pm
... Accident is my favorite Losey film.
Moi aussi. I believe I had it number 2 on swo's 1967 mini-list, after Point Blank. Someone, perhaps you, had it at 1, but it ranked only 20th in the end. Both the Losey and the Boorman are merciless fun. And both strike me as heavily influenced, style-wise, by Resnais' earlier work (LYAM, Muriel). As someone mentioned pages above, the lack of at least one of those Resnais films on the S&S list is a big surprise.

Marienbad was #109 in 2012, Hiroshima #143, Muriel #413 (or thereabouts, they probably share spots with a number of other films). I can't say I'm surprised none of them cracked the top 100 this time, with the new winds blowing and so on.

User avatar
foggy eyes
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:58 am
Location: UK

Re: Sight & Sound

#565 Post by foggy eyes » Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:32 pm

furbicide wrote:
Mon Dec 05, 2022 2:54 am
Secondly, I don't know exactly what the role of Girish Shambu – the author of the Tweet in question, and a respected film critic in his own right – was in voter selection, but my anecdotal impression is that he was most likely just one of a number of international critics asked to submit lists of new potential invitees from various geographical regions.
This is exactly what happened; very well-described. Remember that Girish is the author of The New Cinephilia, so a very sensible go-to person to ask about such things.

pistolwink
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:07 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#566 Post by pistolwink » Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:44 pm

It makes sense that they would mostly ask directors who might be known to Sight & Sound readers, but I've always thought it'd be interesting to include in the survey a bunch of commercial (not "art-film") directors in India, Japan, China, Nigeria, etc. I imagine the results would be different -- if S.S. Rajamouli's ballot is anything to go by, we'd probably see a lot more Spielberg, tentpole films, animation, Disney... and more favorites or classics from those countries that don't have as much international exposure. I wonder if such ballots would show less uniformity than the ones we've seen in 2012 and will see in a month, or more. It is a little weird to see directors from India, the UK, Hungary, Lebanon, etc. etc. all listing the same art-house classics (from the same five or six countries) as if there weren't robust local filmmaking traditions in those places.

rrenault
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Sight & Sound

#567 Post by rrenault » Tue Dec 06, 2022 3:43 am

Well I reckon these things go in cycles, so the best one can do is watch and praise/makes cases for the films they love and/or make the films they feel compelled to make to the best of their abilities irrespective of the vicissitudes of canonical taste.

I'm not sure I agree with the notion that because young people "no longer care" about Ford, Hitchcock, or even Welles they never will again, so that's it. It's time to throw in the towel on keeping 'old movies' alive and in circulation for future generations. Filmmakers go in and out of fashion. How many people voting for Sunrise and Rules of the Game were alive when those films had their initial runs? The internet is littered with film nerd threads and forums populated by under-40s discussing Welles, Hitchcock, Tarkovsky, and what-not. Okay, maybe not littered, but...It may be true Hawks and Ford are falling out of favor with younger generations, but I don't think that's as true with Citizen Kane or VistaVision Hitchcock. Just my two cents

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#568 Post by Maltic » Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:09 am

It's hard to see the non-Kane Welles films returning with the next S&S 100 though. The films had lavish physical media releases in recent years, Welles himself had a "new" film on Netflix and a documentary about him, and there was also Fincher's film.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Sight & Sound

#569 Post by MichaelB » Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:24 am

rrenault wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 3:43 am
I'm not sure I agree with the notion that because young people "no longer care" about Ford, Hitchcock, or even Welles they never will again, so that's it. It's time to throw in the towel on keeping 'old movies' alive and in circulation for future generations. Filmmakers go in and out of fashion. How many people voting for Sunrise and Rules of the Game were alive when those films had their initial runs? The internet is littered with film nerd threads and forums populated by under-40s discussing Welles, Hitchcock, Tarkovsky, and what-not. Okay, maybe not littered, but...It may be true Hawks and Ford are falling out of favor with younger generations, but I don't think that's as true with Citizen Kane or VistaVision Hitchcock. Just my two cents
Distribution and availability are - and always have been - absolutely crucial factors. Not definitive ones (Vertigo first cracked the top ten in 1982, when it had been legally unavailable for years), but Ford, Hawks, Hitchcock and Welles had significant advantages over a great many other major filmmakers when it came to earlier polls. But now there's much more competition.

rrenault
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Sight & Sound

#570 Post by rrenault » Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:30 am

Maltic wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:09 am
It's hard to see the non-Kane Welles films returning with the next S&S 100 though. The films had lavish physical media releases in recent years, Welles himself had a "new" film on Netflix and a documentary about him, and there was also Fincher's film.
True. It's also possible the non-Kane films just cancelled one another out to some degree due to vote splitting. Touch of Evil and The Magnificent Ambersons may have just been competing with some of the other Welles films to gain increased visibility in the intervening years, such as Lady From Shanghai, Other Side of the Wind, the Shakespeare films and so on. I feel like with Buñuel in general (although Los Olvidados and Viridiana seem to be jockeying for *magnum opus* status within Buñuel's body of work), it's a scenario where if you ask ten different people what Welles' greatest non-Kane film is you'll get ten different answers.

rrenault
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Sight & Sound

#571 Post by rrenault » Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:42 am

MichaelB wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:24 am


Distribution and availability are - and always have been - absolutely crucial factors. Not definitive ones (Vertigo first cracked the top ten in 1982, when it had been legally unavailable for years), but Ford, Hawks, Hitchcock and Welles had significant advantages over a great many other major filmmakers when it came to earlier polls. But now there's much more competition.
And I'd see this as a good thing. Then again, 100 films is probably too limiting. There's a reason LB and Imdb have a top 250 and not a top 100. Also, it may better to break these lists up into tiers of 20-25 films rather than have numerical rankings. I don't see how suggesting Touki Bouki and Wanda could conceivably be superior to Wild Strawberries needs to be so divisive and indicative of people of "taking the p**s on Western culture".

User avatar
MV88
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2022 8:52 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#572 Post by MV88 » Tue Dec 06, 2022 10:00 am

It’s interesting to see how certain directors’ consensus masterpieces shift over time. Buñuel may be something of an anomaly (in several ways, actually) in that there’s really never been a solid consensus about what his best film is, and the top contenders have changed a lot over the years. I agree that right now it seems to be between Viridiana and Los Olvidados, but at least four of his other films were previously in those positions, and there’s probably a good chance another will get that spotlight at some point.

I’m a bit surprised Tokyo Story has remained so firmly on top of Ozu’s filmography in terms of critical consensus now that he’s been in the proverbial canon for decades now and people have had plenty of time to dig deeper into his work, yet with the exception of Late Spring cementing itself as the go-to choice for his second best, it doesn’t seem like there’s been much upward movement for any of his other films despite it being generally agreed upon that he’s one of those directors for whom the whole of his body of work is more than the sum of its parts. Then again, maybe that will be shown to be changing once all the individual ballots are released. Might there be a contingency forming around An Autumn Afternoon or The End of Summer, for instance? I’m definitely interested to see where the attention in certain directors’ filmographies has shifted.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#573 Post by Maltic » Tue Dec 06, 2022 10:27 am

rrenault wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:42 am
SpoilerShow
MichaelB wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:24 am


Distribution and availability are - and always have been - absolutely crucial factors. Not definitive ones (Vertigo first cracked the top ten in 1982, when it had been legally unavailable for years), but Ford, Hawks, Hitchcock and Welles had significant advantages over a great many other major filmmakers when it came to earlier polls. But now there's much more competition.
And I'd see this as a good thing. Then again, 100 films is probably too limiting. There's a reason LB and Imdb have a top 250 and not a top 100. Also, it may better to break these lists up into tiers of 20-25 films rather than have numerical rankings. I don't see how suggesting Touki Bouki and Wanda could conceivably be superior to Wild Strawberries needs to be so divisive and indicative of people of "taking the p**s on Western culture".
There's a point when it comes to precisely those two titles (and conversely perhaps the relegation of The Mother and the Whore), but I don't see availability as a major factor overall tbh? Other new entries include Blue Velvet, The Shining, The Apartment, Get Out, etc.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Sight & Sound

#574 Post by Maltic » Tue Dec 06, 2022 10:50 am

Regarding Ozu, I noticed Filipe Furtado put Tokyo Story on his list with what could be a "tactical" vote. Late Spring went from #15 to #22. I was born, but... and An Autumn Afternoon were in the top 250 in 2012, though quite far down.

User avatar
bottlesofsmoke
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:26 pm

Re: Sight & Sound

#575 Post by bottlesofsmoke » Tue Dec 06, 2022 11:19 am

Maltic wrote:
Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:09 am
It's hard to see the non-Kane Welles films returning with the next S&S 100 though. The films had lavish physical media releases in recent years, Welles himself had a "new" film on Netflix and a documentary about him, and there was also Fincher's film.
I could see The Trial making a push at some point, especially if Criterion puts out a high-profile UHD of it to go with the SC release in Europe. It's been the hardest to see of Welles' films but one that may connect with modern viewers in a way some of his other films don't. I think it may be his best film, or at least it is my favorite of them.
hearthesilence wrote:
Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:30 pm
The Searchers was viewed as a pot boiler to a lot of American moviegoers, but when it starts inching into the top ten, I'm guessing a lot of people gave it a look, thinking there was a lot more to it than they realized, and what it has to say really says a lot about Westerns that probably didn't get enough attention back then.
I remember reading in McBride's book on Ford that The Searchers that the theme of racism was barely mentioned, if at all, in any reviews at the time of it's release. It was dismissed as another routine western. We may be past the time when films will be unearthed as masterpieces from the classic Hollywood era and then reaching heights in the top 100 but I wonder what films from the last 40-60 years could have that kind of reappraisal. Hopefully people are still doing that kind of digging.

Post Reply