AlexChristianLovendahl

I mean, until I started talking to film fans nonstop, only Mancini's Panther theme remotely impacted my life. My Fair Lady is a pretty strong adaptation, so I'd grant that one.

This is a point that I find worthy of more exploration and discussion, partly because I agree with elements of this. Specifically, it seems vital to me to include The Merchant of Venice and The Taming of the Shrew in Shakespeare's canon so that it's understood that he was still human and not immune to the whims of his time, as one might think only reading As You Like It and Othello. The Canon has to acknowledge the frailty of artists; at least, artists that match their times or hold legacies. The problem is that Blake Edwards doesn't matter apart from Tiffany's; the response is that Tiffany's and its success have legacy enough. I think one of the demonstrable differences between The Canon and certain voting ideologies is that this is a canon, not a pantheon. Though the tagline introducing the show focuses on the idea that these are unilaterally "the best movies of all time," the arguments often center on the traditional definition of "canon" as "requires knowledge for cultural literacy." Tiffany's and its racism meet many requirements of "canon"; that racism is genuinely justified as a reason for keeping movies from "the pantheon." Tiffany's is not godliness, nor is it next to it like some amazing movies inducted into the canon like Pather Panchali. I struggle to understand what I learned watching Tiffany's, even with the pod, so I voted no. But I'm comfortable with "yes" as well, and I think this merits a yuge discussion here in the forums.

I watched this movie for the first time and definitely liked it. But I think the final film is a bit too uneven to make my canon list. I had very little interest in any cast member other than Holly, and the actual structure of the film was not one that I thought made especially good use of her. You could make a great movie starring Holly Golightly, I just don't think it's this one. I do really like a lot of the production design and camerawork, so this is a soft no. One strong question I have, though; during the party scene, when the friend is introducing Jose and Rusty, there's this amazing 180 degree tracking shot that I would've sworn wasn't going to show up used this way for another ten or twenty years. It feels honestly like it's right out of Boogie Nights, and it's so stimulating in this movie! Is there an earlier use of that camera movement in a party scene? I know Kurosawa used this camera movement, but never to create this sense of a jumpin' shindig.

As for the Creed question, I think that film is canon, and I think Chi-Raq is potentially canon for academics but requires loads of its viewers.

Loooooove A Most Wanted Man. Think it's devastating. These are movies in my top 10% that most don't mark, setting aside some top-flight directors that made recent masterpieces. -Mauvais sang, Leos Carax, Netflix -The Only Son, Yasujiro Ozu, Hulu Plus -A Most Violent Year, JC Chandor, Amazon Prime -The Assassin, Hsiao-Hsien Hou, Netflix -Zardoz, John Boorman -Frank, Lenny Abrahamson, Netflix -Pain & Gain, Michael Bay -School Daze, Spike Lee -Dear White People, Justin Simien -You, The Living, Roy Andersson -The Double, Richard Ayaode, Netflix -Love & Mercy, Bill Pohlad -Behind the Candelabra, Steven Soderbergh, HBO

With Re-Animator in the Canon, E.T. gets swapped out. I hate hate hate this movie! I'm not too mad it's in The Canon; Devin's argument was a good case for it to appear, and I at least kind of remember Combs's performance. But I think it's one of the most mean-spirited, mindless genre pictures I've seen from the 80s, and I didn't find it fun at all. I almost (almost) have more affection for C.H.U.D. II: Bud the Chud. Almost.

As I said, this is the moment where any movie that makes it in and is not as good as a Paul Thomas Anderson canon/pantheon tier movie (of which I say there are five or six) will get me riled. I'll be holding Canon votes far more harshly at the idea that Boogie Nights may be optional. I love There Will Be Blood as well, but not just as well. Some notes for Boogie Nights: -Philip Seymour Hoffman's Scotty is one of the best, most tragic side characters in any movie. -The opening tracking shot is absolutely one of my favorite opening shots in any movie; beyond the stunt, it has so much energy, and the cast does such a good job introducing itself. -Julianne Moore is heartbreaking in the custody scene, but somehow even better in the shot of her doing coke at the pool party while her son is trying to call her. -This is one of the all-time great movie soundtracks, almost to the point that it distracts the pace of the movie in some of the party scenes. But the characters love the soundtrack so much that it always plays for me. -Speaking of that; how about that choreographed dance sequence to Machine Gun? Is that not one of the most fun scenes in PTA's history, and it highlights the heightened reality of the 70s bubble about to come crashing down on them? -The obvious meta-narrative tones are fun for what they say about Hollywood, but that PTA is able to vent this especially personal frustration and make such a loving movie is pretty amazing. Boogie Nights is my best movie of the 1990s; Whisper of the Heart, one of the most painstakingly made Ghibli flicks, is the only competitor for my favorite. There Will Be Blood is one of my favorite 2000s movies, but would get stiffer competition from great movies like Mulholland Drive. Last note; I love Magnolia as much as any PTA movie, really, but it would be crushed in this vote. It, The Master, and Inherent Vice are the only PTAs I've heard earn significant hatred from a large chunk of viewers, probably for the very reasons they're each such masterwork. But, well, so it goes.

You know how Amy feels irritated that any gore exploitation movie will be in The Canon after x-ing out The Fly? That's gonna be me for literally 99% of movies after this one. I think vs. episodes should be for two edge cases that might otherwise not get in but one should be in; Boogie Nights and There Will Be Blood are, if not quite, very nearly the best films of their entire decades.

Dislike the argument that a film matching another's purpose eliminates its canonicity; that's just silly. Most films probably have an analogues, and it's in the difference that you can see beauty. But if the primary argument is that this is a fun movie everybody likes, I have to vote against, as I hate this movie and would prefer to not watch it again. Combs is good and memorable as West, but there is nothing else that sticks out in my memory as a positive. Devin argued well for the movie, and I can put my bafflement for this thing aside. If it gets in, I'll live.

It's unfunny, not scary. ugly, culminates in a sleazy rape scene, and is amateurishly made. Combs is the only light in this piece of darkness, but I'm reading the rest of the thread now.

Some of the more nuanced responses get me all misty-eyes about Kiki all over again.

I'm looking forward to hearing arguments for Re-Animator because it is the movie that inspired my Letterboxd "Your Movie Sucks" tag. I hate this thing and would love to hear coherent argument for why it isn't horrible.

I didn't mention these, but I'd vote yes for them. The Social Network is the only one that's borderline, but it is such an iconic performance from Eisenberg that I'm willing to pull it along.

Mine is probably Halloween 4, my introduction to horror movies in general. What a goofy movie. The highlight is probably when Myers mounts someone to the wall with a shotgun.

Muthsara nailed my argument. Kiki's Delivery Service, above Brave and along a small handful of movies, is perhaps the best kids movie ever made simply because it cherishes womanhood and girlhood. Take its use of role models, from the bakery owner to the artist. Take its depiction of frustration with romance vs. identity in Kiki, Tombo, and the cats. It's a masterwork. It loves women without demeaning them. And then, it's also directed by Hayao Miyazaki, one of the three to five best animation directors of all time; he's absolutely my favorite. I don't care that this isn't my favorite Miyazaki; my favorite is Devin's loathed The Wind Rises, which is a movie so beautiful because it asks, "How do we pursue passion in the face of human suffering and atrocity?" It is one of my three or four absolute favorite movies. But Kiki's is honestly the one I might want in the canon most myself. It is the most underloved kind of movie, a slice of life movie aimed at girls of color. And not just women, but girls! (This may raise the "anime portrays everyone as white people" argument, but anyone who's watched enough anime knows that when white people show up, they're a foot taller and have crazy Roman/German features; anime depicts Asian people more simply and captures them in sensibility and creator.)

These are the ones in my actual pantheon of favorite movies which I've watched more than once, the ones that are never going anywhere. -A Separation -Black Swan (Aronofsky's best) -Django Unchained -Frank -Holy Motors -Inherent Vice (maybe PTA's best) -Inside Llewyn Davis (the Coens' best) -Living Stars (Argentinian documentary/dance film) -Magic Mike XXL -Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (Wright's best) -Spotlight -Spring Breakers -Tangerine -The Master -The Tree of Life (Malick's best) -Whiplash I'd also add the following based on first watches: -Melancholia -Snowpiercer -The Act of Killing/The Look of Silence -The Assassin -The Hateful Eight (Tarantino's best) -The Tale of Princess Kaguya (Takahata's best) -The Wind Rises (Miyazaki's best) I'm also glad that Fury Road is in the canon.

We can have a Grave of the Fireflies discussion another time, especially because as Ghibli films go I think it's one of their three worst. Let's talk about some other anime geniuses if Miyazaki should be set aside! How about Satoshi Kon, whose Perfect Blue, Millennium Actress, and Paprika are masterpieces which begot masterpieces (Black Swan, Holy Motors, and Inception, respectfully!) themselves? How about Katsuhiro Otomo's Akira? How about Masaaki Yuasa's Mind Game? That all said, Miyazaki is my favorite director. You cannot go wrong with the man, and Kiki's Delivery Service is a perfectly lovely introduction. I hope, if it gets voted in, that we can make Devin watch one that's more to his taste; maybe Porco Rosso which is about love, war, and mixed loyalty, or maybe The Wind Rises and its tragic view of passion.

I think most of the best suggestions have been made in this thread. But I'd love a guest episode with someone who might defend Paranormal Activity. That's certainly not my favorite horror movie, but it's structurally sound, has a legion of die hard fans who keep going to see the new ones, and is overwhelmingly influential and culturally saturated.

Many of my favorite films haven't earned universal "love" status yet, and not just the ones from the past few years. The one that's hardly been validated as a legitimately great movie rather than a bizarre antiquity? Zardoz. I love Zardoz. I think Zardoz might be a better movie than most Kubrick movies. I think it's fricking fantastic.

This is a serious borderline vote for me, which will end up with me voting more harshly against other flicks that would be canon. If Stand By Me was borderline when I rewatched it a couple weeks ago, it's flat and plum out of the canon now. One quick show note: They Live's fight scene is definitely one of the great movie fight scenes mostly because movie fight scenes are rarely all that good. They're usually just between characters who are that interesting, so they're tense. This is about two guys who, while dramatically interesting, are kind of flat working joes, and this fight is just electric because of the way it's choreographed and edited. They Live is fascinating and uncomfortable. I might write a very long essay about it tomorrow, honestly, where I feel out a whole collection of responses. Is it wrong to say that it's kind of unbelievable that church riot scene happens in a pre-Rodney King L.A. movie? Prescient. But then the movie too quickly aligns with Nada; I think it'd be more tense, more horrifying, more prescient if the movie gave even a flicker of doubt to the viewer. I think this is what Amy was trying to verbalize about why the movie being angry made her uncomfortable; it makes Nada's shift into violence a little too simple and a little too sympathetic to not feel like it's actually endorsing the behavior of the Bernie bros and the lone gunmen who want to make the back of your scalp bleed until you see their light. I love Carpenter, and this probably ranks third for me (with an overdue Halloween rewatch upcoming.) This is a culmination of many of his themes, from the way violence visits quiet neighborhoods to his distrust of authority. Hell, Nada is maybe best enjoyed as a fan of Jack Burton's. Nada never really has the lines or charisma to be like his favorite action stars, but, unlike Jack, he has the ability to actually kick some ass. But a culmination of themes is not necessarily an artist's best work; Herman Melville's Pierre, written after Moby Dick, is a mess of a novel that is almost best read simply to understand the guy who wrote it. They Live is not that confused, to be clear, but simply arguing why it's so interesting as a fan of Carpenter isn't enough to convince me that it's canon. What convinced me to vote yes was watching it tonight sitting next to my sleeping brother on the couch. He briefly woke up during the "put on the glasses" fight, and I almost told him to stay up to watch it. I decided that I'd rather tell him in the morning so that he actually watches the whole movie before it leaves Cinemax's free VOD listing. That kind of urge where you want someone to see the whole darn thing rather than the coolest scene? That's canon.

I think this movie is fun and totally unremarkable. Its esteem totally bewilders me. Its popularity doesn't, at least.

...no. Boyz N The Hood is a movie I kind of like for its themes and ideas, and I like Cube and Cuba, but I don't think it holds up as a canon movie. I'm comparatively small canon; even the idea that it could be an experienced film fan's favorite of '91 doesn't mean that I think it has to go in. I also dislike the argument that "other movies have done the theme better," because it dangerously reaches toward the idea that we only need one black story in the Canon. It's similar to the argument that people "shouldn't watch The Danish Girl when we have Tangerine." We deserve more than one "hood movie" in the Canon. But like most opinions I've heard of the still-unseen The Danish Girl(I loathe Tom Hooper,) I think that Boyz is simply not a good enough movie to make the cut. I honestly wish the "prologue" were far more of the movie; giving the childhood sequence more time and more weight would make it feel like an even companion to the adolescent section, and the latter portion touches on many themes without deeply exploring them. (How much more interesting is the Army theme if we acknowledge the idea that black men have too much risk of dying at home to guarantee getting shot at overseas?) Between that and its lack of cinematic energy (we can talk smack about 2 Fast all day, but its intro and climax are wildly energized compared to this movie and 2 Fast's middle hour!) I think this falls short. Ice Cube is good, but not amazing; I save that word for rarities. Cuba is fine, but not especially good. Fishburne is charismatic, but barely acting! (He's far, far better in Spike Lee's School Daze, which Amy conveniently ignores.) I also agree with Devin's characterization of this movie as reinforcing negative stereotypes. There was a lot of this movie to take in, but the example that stands out most forcefully is its depiction of the junkie mom. "I'll suck your ****" is a quote that's taken over depictions of addiction, and it really dehumanizes women and addicts to portray them so flatly. Maybe this is a real thing in junkie communities, but then take me into her life for a second or find an actor who can, don't just chastise her. I do like this movie, mostly for what it says but also for Ice Cube. But it's probably not canon to me. Oh, and someone above complained about the 80s saxophone; I loved that element. It gave the neighborhood a sort of neo-noir romanticism that allowed Fishburne's character to be momentarily believable as an Atticus Finch-style crusader while still carrying a gun.

This movie's okay. I probably slot it about my 50% mark. It's just not canon. At all.

This, for me, is a "big canon" movie. What I like right now about this movie is that it has historicity in its text without becoming a "period" film. I'm comparing it to movies like Milk and Carol, which use cinematic technique to set gay struggle in the past. Brokeback uses its periodic setting to strong effect without disguising itself as irrelevant. A powerful movie I finally watched for the first time. When it came out, I was thirteen, in eighth grade. Even in a liberal neighborhood, this movie couldn't escape the homophobic lambasting of junior high schoolers. Even a couple years later, when I'd gotten over my homophobia, the movie still had a stigma beyond my ability to give it a shot. Ang Lee is a fascinating director because of his range, and though I find Brokeback a bit too sedate to be a "Pather Panchali, The Godfather, or bust" entry into a small canon, it's more interesting than movies like The Lost Weekend or Let The Right One In, neither of which I strongly feel shouldn't be in a big canon. Firm yes for me, but not an ecstatic yes.

Sadly just left Netflix, so don't rely on that!