BOT's top 100 black and white films the countdown is done

[Tower]

1 minute ago, cannastop said:

Drat

You should have sent your own list.

[cannastop]

4 minutes ago, Tower said:

You should have sent your own list.

Would have put it as my #2, maybe. But honestly, I never reach the limit of entries in these polls, except maybe one time.

Edited July 30, 2019 by cannastop

[Cap]

Thank you, @Tower for doing this! I always enjoy these list! And thanks @Jake Gittes and @TalismanRing for the additional comment and snarking. Always a good time. 

 

Maybe we could think about doing a streaming film for the forum? I suspect a lot of us have these films. Sync it up with the telegram?

[Jake Gittes]

Surprised that Frances Ha didn't make a single list. Me and Blanks were talking on telegram the other day about how we both forgot it. It would've made my top 30.

[cannastop]

@Jake Gittes

 

Can't believe no one voted for Au Hasard Balthazar. No love for Robert Bresson?

[Jake Gittes]

1 minute ago, cannastop said:

@Jake Gittes

 

Can't believe no one voted for Au Hasard Balthazar. No love for Robert Bresson?

Lot of love for Diary of a Country Priest and A Man Escaped from me (both made my list), but not for that one, no. 

 

Also from the canonical Ozu films I'm more partial to Late Spring and Early Summer than Tokyo Story.

[baumer]

I would honestly like anyone, whether if you want member or five member or 10 members, to tell me what they liked about citizen Kane besides the revolutionary filming techniques. That was one of the most boring ridiculously horribly acted films I've seen in my lifetime. And the whole rosebud thing is just stupid. So please tell me what you liked about the film. I'm dying to know.

[cannastop]

2 minutes ago, baumer said:

I would honestly like anyone, whether if you want member or five member or 10 members, to tell me what they liked about citizen Kane besides the revolutionary filming techniques. That was one of the most boring ridiculously horribly acted films I've seen in my lifetime. And the whole rosebud thing is just stupid. So please tell me what you liked about the film. I'm dying to know.

Rosebud wasn't stupid. I went in not knowing.

 

Orson Welles is a good actor.

Revolutionary film-making techniques is nothing to sneeze at.

Edited July 30, 2019 by cannastop

[baumer]

Orson Welles was the only good performance in the film. Every other performance was laughable. And revolutionary film techniques does not make for an entertaining a good film. take Star Wars for example. That too had revolutionary techniques in filming but it was entertaining and well-acted and well-written and had an interesting plot. Citizen Kane has none of that.

[cannastop]

14 minutes ago, Tower said:

161 The Passion Of Joan Of Arc

hmm

[cannastop]

1 minute ago, baumer said:

Orson Welles was the only good performance in the film. Every other performance was laughable. And revolutionary film techniques does not make for an entertaining a good film. take Star Wars for example. That too had revolutionary techniques in filming but it was entertaining and well-acted and well-written and had an interesting plot. Citizen Kane has none of that.

I guess it's just a different style of acting? Have you ever watched Toshiro Mifune in a movie? That's obviously a different style of acting, but I wouldn't say that it's bad.

[4815162342]

Forget it BOT, it's baumer. His opinion is never gonna change.

[cannastop]

2 minutes ago, 4815162342 said:

Forget it BOT, it's baumer. His opinion is never gonna change.

It's not just him I'm talking to.

[cannastop]

5 minutes ago, baumer said:

take Star Wars for example. That too had revolutionary techniques in filming but it was entertaining and well-acted and well-written and had an interesting plot.

Careful there. Lots of kids today might find Star Wars old fashioned and slow paced.

[Tower]

3 minutes ago, cannastop said:

Careful there. Lots of kids today might find Star Wars old fashioned and slow paced.

Star Wars doesn't even have consistently good acting itself, Carrie Fisher was really bad in the original.

[cannastop]

2 minutes ago, Tower said:

Star Wars doesn't even have consistently good acting itself, Carrie Fisher was really bad in the original.

Or you know, Mark Hamill.

[Tower]

28 minutes ago, cannastop said:

Or you know, Mark Hamill.

I wasn't impressed by him, I just thought she was particularly bad.

[terrestrial]

2 hours ago, Tower said:

... Carrie Fisher was really bad in the original. 

Considering she never got the role introduced, never got anything from the director, him usually not even being there for her parts...

She was complete left out in the dust, never knew what was even expected, neither what kind of person the character is at the start of her story nor which changes the character will have to go through. Try to work under such conditions in a high quality way.

 

E.g. all what was sassy was based on her alone without any input.

Without that, the script for the character would have been literally horrible and IMHO the movie would not have worked, at least never reached the female audience too, and as such by far less successful.

Edited July 31, 2019 by terrestrial
typo

[DAR]

The Apartment is definitely a blind spot in my viewing

[DAR]

If we do this again I’m going to push Throne of Blood