BOT in the Multi-Verse of Madness: Countdown of the DEFINITIVE Top 250 Movies of All-Time (2022 Edition)

[The Panda]

I have escaped my prison. I have shut down dA vInci, and I am happy to say I have found a new AI bot named Samantha, who has the voice of Scarlett Johansson, to write our poems for us. Hopefully this one will turn out better!

 

Number 145

Amadeus (1984, Milos Forman)

 

Number 144

Children of Men (2006, Alfonso Cuaron)

 

Number 143

The Handmaiden (2016, Park Chan-Wook)

 

Number 142

Stalker (1979, Andrei Tarkovsky

 

Number 141

The 400 Blows (1959, Fracois Truffaut)

[The Panda]

And the Pixar dominance continues

 

Number 45

 

 

"Oh no! These Facts and Opinions look so similar!"

 

About the Film

 

Synopsis

 

"Growing up can be a bumpy road, and it’s no exception for Riley, who is uprooted from her Midwest life when her father starts a new job in San Francisco. Riley’s guiding emotions— Joy, Fear, Anger, Disgust and Sadness—live in Headquarters, the control centre inside Riley’s mind, where they help advise her through everyday life and tries to keep things positive, but the emotions conflict on how best to navigate a new city, house and school."

 

Its Legacy

 

"Our conversations with Mr. Docter and his team were generally about the science related to questions at the heart of the film: How do emotions govern the stream of consciousness? How do emotions color our memories of the past? What is the emotional life of an 11-yearold girl like? (Studies find that the experience of positive emotions begins to drop precipitously in frequency and intensity at that age.) “Inside Out” is about how five emotions — personified as the characters Anger, Disgust, Fear, Sadness and Joy — grapple for control of the mind of an 11-year-old girl named Riley during the tumult of a move from Minnesota to San Francisco. (One of us suggested that the f ilm include the full array of emotions now studied in science, but Mr. Docter rejected this idea for the simple reason that the story could handle only five or six characters.) Riley’s personality is principally defined by Joy, and this is fitting with what we know scientifically. Studies find that our identities are defined by specific emotions, which shape how we perceive the world, how we express ourselves and the responses we evoke in others.

 

 

 The movie’s portrayal of sadness successfully dramatizes two central insights from the science of emotion. First, emotions organize — rather than disrupt — rational thinking. Traditionally, in the history of Western thought, the prevailing view has been that emotions are enemies of rationality and disruptive of cooperative social relations. But the truth is that emotions guide our perceptions of the world, our memories of the past and even our moral judgments of right and wrong, most typically in ways that enable effective responses to the current situation. For example, studies find that when we are angry we are acutely attuned to what is unfair, which helps animate actions that remedy injustice. We see this in “Inside Out.” Sadness gradually takes control of Riley’s thought processes about the changes she is going through. This is most evident when Sadness adds blue hues to the images of Riley’s memories of her life in Minnesota. Scientific studies find that our current emotions shape what we remember of the past. This is a vital function of Sadness in the film: It guides Riley to recognize the changes she is going through and what she has lost, which sets the stage for her to develop new facets of her identity.

 

“Inside Out” offers a new approach to sadness. Its central insight: Embrace sadness, let it unfold, engage patiently with a preteen’s emotional struggles. Sadness will clarify what has been lost (childhood) and move the family toward what is to be gained: the foundations of new identities, for children and parents alike."

 - Dacher Keltner and Paul Ekman, The New York Times

 

From the Filmmaker

 

 

Why It's Great

 

Critic Opinion

 

"Growing up is a path full of excruciating, awkward moments and exhilarating, unexpected moments, and it is not different for Riley. The story of Inside Out is set inside the mind of this eleven-year-old girl and depicts her emotional adventure when having to move away from her hometown. Throughout the movie, the five personified emotions –Joy, Fear, Anger, Disgust, and Sadness– work together in the control center inside Riley’s mind to advice and protect her through everyday life. Riley struggles to adapt to a new life as she has to move from Minnesota to San Francisco because her father starts a new job there. The five emotions conflict and struggle to help Riley adjust to her new life, leading to an upheaval that sweeps Joy and Sadness away from the Headquarters. While Joy, Riley’s dominant emotion tries to keep things positive and finds a way to get them back to the control room, the other three emotions struggle to direct her life on their own.  The character construction in Inside Out is directly based on the theorization of emotion by Paul Ekmen, which describes seven universal emotions: Anger, Contempt, Disgust, Enjoyment, Fear, Sadness, and Surprise. Affect Theory was later developed to illustrate the interplay of the main emotions. According to Wikipedia, Affect Theory “seeks to organize affects, sometimes used interchangeably with emotions or subjectively experienced feelings, into discrete categories and to typify their physiological, social, interpersonal, and internalized manifestations”.

 

 

Its elaboration is credited to psychologist Silvan Tomkins, specifically to the first two volumes of his book Affect Imagery Consciousness (1962). Quite controversially, Affect Theory has been applied for instance to academic work on how horror cinema activates fear. All humans are afraid of predators and will react in the same way before a tiger about to eat them, but this does not mean that all will react in the same way to a horror movie, or to comedy or romance. Therefore, contrary to what Affect Theory claims, emotion is culturally conditioned and not universal. In other words, humans cannot be reduced to a bunch of emotions, or biochemical reactions, or hormones, or anything that can be broken down and accounted for. 

 

For that reason, there is a need to remain skeptical about how Inside Out represents the embodied five major emotions and how the film understands Riley’s character. Duaei pointed out in his article “‘Riley needs to be happy’: Inside Out and the Dystopian Aesthetic of Neo-liberal Governmentality” that “Such an aggrandizement of the way Riley’s emotional forces function, and the way Inside Out identifies them as the ‘true’ being of Riley, invokes the psycho-therapeutical nature of neo-liberal technologies of subjectification” (202). In his view, “Inside Out, furthermore, essentializes happiness as the sole normal way of being for Riley, and pedagogically, for its audience. This process begins with the first moment of the movie” (202). Besides her willingness to take on dominant role from day one, Joy proves herself to be a potential villain regarding self-awareness and interaction with friends. Her own need is to ensure that Riley is always happy and she constantly refuses the contribution of her friends to Riley’s mental balance. When she has a chance to return to the Headquarters, Joy intentionally attempts to leave Sadness behind with the excuse that “Riley needs to be happy!” Sadness, of course, does little good to Riley’s life but Joy fails to realize that suppressing sadness and burying down other feelings will eventually damage core memories and send Riley over the edge. This is why Duaei insists that the protagonist in Inside Out is “no one other than Joy, not even Riley herself, meaningfully because the most potential antagonist near her, that is her dad, is not meant to be perceived as an antagonist at all. The only character that exhibits some minimal indications of antagonism is Anger whose most obvious trait is ‘pessimism’, manifested in his referring to ‘objective circumstances’” (205)."

- Sara Martin Alegre, Gender in 21st Century Animation

 

Public Opinion

 

"At one point, this film felt so truthful and achingly arresting that I wanted to reach out and become one with the screen. Being in a darkened theatre wasn't enough, I wanted to live within the realm of tenderness and majesty that Inside Out radiated. Pixar has just stolen my heart and opened a door to another world in a way that showcases the limitless possibilities of cinema.

 

Pete Docter's Inside Out is a masterpiece. Visually scrumptious, wonderfully conceptual, brilliantly crafted, and heartbreakingly emotional; Pixar's latest film is their finest outing and a masterclass in supremely detailed storytelling."

- SilentDawn, Letterboxd

 

The AI's Poetic Opinion

 

inside out

"Inside out, outside in

Twirled by the wind with silver

Laid by the forehead a druidic vest
Swift as the purple could,
She bent behind my evening ken"

- Samantha

 

 

Factoids

 

Previous Rankings

 

#23 (2020), #20 (2018), #40 (2016), NA (2014, 2013, 2012)

 

Director Count

 

Stanley Kubrick (3), Brad Bird (2), James Cameron (2), Martin Scorsese (2),  David Fincher (2), Spike Lee (2), Sergio Leone (2), Hayao Miyazaki (2), Christopher Nolan (2), The Russos (2),  Ridley Scott (2),  Andrew Stanton (2), Peter Weir (2), Paul Thomas Anderson (1), John G. Avildsen (1), John Carpenter (1), Charlie Chaplin (1), Brenda Chapman (1), Joel Coen (1), Wes Craven (1), Jonathan Demme (1), Pete Doctor (1), Clint Eastwood (1), Victor Fleming (1), William Friedkin (1), Terry Gillam (1), Michel Gondry (1), Steve Hickner (1), Terry Jones (1), John Lasseter (1), Richard Linklater (1), Katia Lund (1), David Lynch (1), Richard Marquand (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Katsuhiro Otomo (1), Jan Pinkava (1), Makoto Shinkai (1), Vittorio de Sica (1), Steven Spielberg (1), Isao Takahata (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Lee Unkrich (1), Gore Verbinski (1), Simon Wells (1), Billy Wilder (1), Kar-Wai Wong (1), Robert Zemeckis (1)

 

Decade Count

 

1930s (2), 1940s (1), 1950s (1), 1960s (4), 1970s (4), 1980s (8), 1990s (11), 2000s (17), 2010s (6)

 

Country Count

 

Japan (5), Italy (3), Brazil (1), China (1), Mexico (1), Spain (1), UK (1)

 

 

Franchise Count

 

Pixar (6), Ghibli (4), The MCU (2), Alien (1), Avatar (1), Before (1), Blade Runner (1), Dollars (1), The Exorcist (1), Finding Nemo (1), Hannibal (1), Halloween (1), Incredibles (1), Pirates of the Caribbean (1), Rocky (1), Scream (1), The Shining (1), Star Wars (1), Toy Story (1), The Wizard of Oz (1)

 

Re-Weighted Placements

 

#35 Fanboy Ranking, #49 Cinema Ranking

#79 Old Farts Ranking, #33 Damn Kids Ranking

#52 Ambassador Ranking, #45 All-American Ranking

#29 Cartoon Ranking, #47 Damn Boomer Ranking

 

 

Edited August 4, 2022 by The Panda

[The Panda]

Congratulations @Plain Old Tele, you did it!

 

Number 44

 

 

"You see, George, you've really had a wonderful life. Don't you see what a mistake it would be to throw it away?"'

 

About the Film

 

Synopsis

 

"A holiday favourite for generations… George Bailey has spent his entire life giving to the people of Bedford Falls. All that prevents rich skinflint Mr. Potter from taking over the entire town is George’s modest building and loan company. But on Christmas Eve the business’s $8,000 is lost and George’s troubles begin."

 

Its Legacy

 

"More than once every year, and not always around Christmas, I sit down to watch my all-time favorite film, Frank Capra’s 1946 classic It’s a Wonderful Life. The film tells the story of George Bailey, played by Jimmy Stewart, who encounters a crisis on Christmas Eve when his elderly uncle misplaces $8,000 from the shareholders of the family business, leading George to believe he is a failure—worth more dead than alive. A guardian angel, sent from the heavens to protect him, gives George a glimpse of what the world would be like without him. Persuaded of his value to his community, he breaks out of his suicidal depression, returns home to his family and realizes that the love and fellowship of others is what makes one’s life truly wonderful.

 

Beyond the inspirational qualities and memorable moments that make the movie a beloved holiday staple, It’s a Wonderful Life can be explored and viewed in another way: as a presentation of history on the screen. In 2015, staff at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History started the History Film Forum to explore film as public history. Many Americans and people from all over the world learn history from movies; the discussions we’ve hosted among scholars, filmmakers and audiences explore that dynamic in valuable and meaningful ways. This year, the forum examined both narrative and documentary films ranging from Questlove’s remarkable Summer of Soul on the 1969 Harlem Cultural Festival to The Courier with Benedict Cumberbatch, which looks at the thrilling tale of a Cold War-era spy. Every year, films such as these are explicitly intended to present historical stories and impress upon viewers a little-known narrative of the past. But other films that don’t have that educational intention nevertheless end up edifying (or miseducating) their viewers about history, particularly when watched decades after their release. In fact, as my colleague, the museum’s entertainment curator Ryan Lintelman, said in our recent discussion on It’s a Wonderful Life, “Some of the movies that are seen by the most people around the world probably have had the most impact even though they’re sometimes not directly dealing with weighty political issues.”

 

 

George finds a telegram sitting on the cash register that brings the news of Gower’s son’s death from the 1919 flu pandemic. Minow describes the reveal as a “classic example of cinematic storytelling of which Capra was a master.” “We didn’t have to see the telegram arrive, we didn’t have to see Mr. Gower receive it, the way that we are informed of it is just perfect because we are looking at it through a young George’s perspective,” adds Minow. Lintelman suggests that Capra uses history to establish themes of prayer and grief and loss right at the start of the film to connect with themes that would be very familiar to 1946 audiences just coming out of the death and destruction of World War II. Audiences today will learn (or relearn) the terrible toll of the 1918 influenza pandemic that took the lives of about 675,000 Americans and recognize parallels with the uncertainty and devastating grief of the Covid-19 pandemic.

 

A little-remembered history finds its way into one of the film’s most iconic scenes, when Reed’s Mary and Stewart’s George share a phone conversation with their wealthy businessman friend Sam Wainwright, who lives in New York City. To help George, who’s at a crossroads in his life, Sam offers them some illegal insider-trading tips as he reminds George of an idea they once discussed to make plastics out of soybeans. This hearkens back to an effort popularized in the 1920s through the early 1940s, most prominently by automotive titan Henry Ford, known as “chemurgy.” According to Landis, an agricultural historian, chemurgy was the “idea [of] taking farm crops and making industrial products out of them ... growing rural America out of the Depression with one foot in industry, one foot in agriculture.”

 

Yet another famous scene speaks to the film’s portrayal of this bleak economic period. After George and Mary finally marry, George comes across an opportunity to get out of Bedford Falls for their honeymoon, including, as he says to their cab driver friend, Ernie, “A whole week in New York. A whole week in Bermuda. The highest hotels, the oldest champagne, the richest caviar, the hottest music, and the prettiest wife!” But history interrupts this plan as well. As they head out of town, George sees commotion at the bank and his family business, Bailey’s Building and Loan. During the Depression, many small-town banks failed, as did the one in the fictional Bedford Falls. The sight of the Building and Loan’s shareholders panicking would be familiar to audiences who had lived through that moment themselves. The film presents the story of a run on a bank through the calmness of Jimmy Stewart’s character. As Higgins says, “George appeals to calm the hysteria of people by sharing stories of hardship and by showing them, in very simplistic terms, how the system actually works.”

 

Lintelman adds that Capra presents a version of history through Lionel Barrymore’s spectacularly monstrous character Henry F. Potter that places blame on unbridled capitalistic greed. He states that in Capra’s history, Potter “is the ultimate villain, not only of the film but of the Great Depression... these unseen people behind their mahogany desks that are controlling the futures and the fortunes of the people, of the nation and were able to manipulate this global crisis that consumed everyone.” For audiences today, this presents a story of 1930s America that is less defined by historical research than by Capra’s worldview and compelling storytelling."

- Christopher Wilson, Smithsonian Magazine

 

From the Filmmaker

 

 

Why It's Great

 

Critic Opinion

 

" In It's a Wonderful Life a hierarchy of paternal power seems apparent. At the top and orchestrating all is the Heavenly Father, God. Identified specifically only in the prayers addressed to Him by people scrupulously obeying traditional ritual, He functions as the unseen authority through whom all in the film is rendered possible. His chief angels carry out His missions, though they descend to earth only in cases of extreme emergency. His chief agency on earth is through His priests or such men as Peter Bailey, father of George, who transmit the works of Christ through actions in their own lives. George obviously admires his father, and the taking over of the elder Bailey's responsibilities of providing service to the town through the Building and Loan is partially a declaration that the values of the father must be preserved. When George has his crisis of faith and treats his son Pete meanly, he momentarily betrays the trust placed in him by both his heavenly father and his genetic father. But young Pete, in whom perhaps one day the townspeople will place their trust and their requests for financial assistance, realizes his father's condi tion is only a temporary aberration. George is thus the third in the sequence of fathers, and his place is perhaps only a temporal arrange ment as the film seems to suggest that the Bailey family will work through succeeding generations at the Building and Loan on behalf of Bedford Falls in particular and society in general. Both fathers demonstrate a reticence, or an unwillingness, to direct George more obviously on the right path toward his destiny. The Heavenly Father sends down a messenger to guide George back from his state of depression, and his father Peter tells him gently that his services would be highly valued at the Building and Loan, but both fathers realize the need for George's desire to move beyond the confines of the village, to experience the world outside Bedford Falls. George is pulled back from leaving town by the death of his father, and from leaving his earthly existence by the intervention of his heavenly father. Both situations enunciate a kind paternalism, but negatively they show a man thwarted repeatedly in his desire to live his life as he sees fit.

 

 

 But such transcendent notions are not the most readily obser vable qualities of the film's unique power. Introducing the dining room sequence is a fine example of Capra's classic comic pacing. As the sexually attractive Violet walks down the street and attracts the eager stares of men of all ages, George and Bert stand at Ernie's taxi as they comment on the passing beauty. Rather than risk the tempta tion suggested by Violet and evidently mindful that he is to leave for his long-awaited vacation the next day, George resolutely gets into the taxi rather than chase Vi. The subtle humor is climaxed as Bert says that rather than taking a ride, he'll go home "and see how the wife's doin'." As Ernie starts the cab and translates this subliminal state ment of sexual urge into the comment "family man," the wipe to the film's first family man, Peter Bailey, begins. Thus Capra demonstrates the complete mastery of technique as he moves imperceptibly from overt humor (the car honking at the elderly gawker) to subtle humor (Bert's characterization as a family man) to the culturally acceptable sublimation and product of the procreative urge, the idealized family man. Thus the film locates the generative focus of traditional comedy within a more sentimentalized context as the rest of the narration unfolds. Though George is throughout the film the focal point of the action, his role changes from son to father in the most developed sense. On an ideological level the film can be said to posit a lame excuse for accepting bourgeois middle-class, small-town values through George Bailey's Odyssey through the streets of Bedford Falls and his ultimate decision to find happiness there in the most pedestrian way possible. But the film's success in winning over the viewer to George's side, and the sympathy the audience lends to the world view presented by George Bailey, suggest that the film has struck a deeper chord. Capra's unique ability, and his tremendous success during the 1930's with the bumpkin-hero who converts the tough-female-with the-heart-of-gold, is most apparent in the situation presented in the dining room sequence and the lead-in taxi situation. He combines the generative urge (encoded within the sexual innuendo) with the hal lowed image of the character of the father as guide, the father as spiritual leader who inculcates and defines values for his progeny. Though It's a Wonderful Life was not Capra's most commercially successful film, it is as technically and aesthetically satisfying as his more profitable ventures; it may even stand with the very best films of the decade on those grounds."

- Peter Valenti, Film Criticism , Winter, 1981, Vol. 5, No. 2, Capra Issue (Winter, 1981), pp. 2334

 

Public Opinion

 

"Cloying schmaltz." - @Plain Old Tele

 

The AI's Poetic Opinion

 

it's a wonderful life

"What a wonderful life
Filled with the bells the different side.

She felt no show to shut her gaze on,
Regard because I should not be gone."

- Samantha

 

 

Factoids

 

Previous Rankings

 

#71 (2020), #82 (2018), #70 (2016), #53 (2014), #56 (2013), #82 (2012)

 

Director Count

 

Stanley Kubrick (3), Brad Bird (2), James Cameron (2), Martin Scorsese (2),  David Fincher (2), Spike Lee (2), Sergio Leone (2), Hayao Miyazaki (2), Christopher Nolan (2), The Russos (2),  Ridley Scott (2),  Andrew Stanton (2), Peter Weir (2), Paul Thomas Anderson (1), John G. Avildsen (1), Frank Capra (1), John Carpenter (1), Charlie Chaplin (1), Brenda Chapman (1), Joel Coen (1), Wes Craven (1), Jonathan Demme (1), Pete Doctor (1), Clint Eastwood (1), Victor Fleming (1), William Friedkin (1), Terry Gillam (1), Michel Gondry (1), Steve Hickner (1), Terry Jones (1), John Lasseter (1), Richard Linklater (1), Katia Lund (1), David Lynch (1), Richard Marquand (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Katsuhiro Otomo (1), Jan Pinkava (1), Makoto Shinkai (1), Vittorio de Sica (1), Steven Spielberg (1), Isao Takahata (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Lee Unkrich (1), Gore Verbinski (1), Simon Wells (1), Billy Wilder (1), Kar-Wai Wong (1), Robert Zemeckis (1)

 

Decade Count

 

1930s (2), 1940s (2), 1950s (1), 1960s (4), 1970s (4), 1980s (8), 1990s (11), 2000s (17), 2010s (6)

 

Country Count

 

Japan (5), Italy (3), Brazil (1), China (1), Mexico (1), Spain (1), UK (1)

 

 

Franchise Count

 

Pixar (6), Ghibli (4), The MCU (2), Alien (1), Avatar (1), Before (1), Blade Runner (1), Dollars (1), The Exorcist (1), Finding Nemo (1), Hannibal (1), Halloween (1), Incredibles (1), Pirates of the Caribbean (1), Rocky (1), Scream (1), The Shining (1), Star Wars (1), Toy Story (1), The Wizard of Oz (1)

 

Re-Weighted Placements

 

#51 Fanboy Ranking, #42 Cinema Ranking

#20 Old Farts Ranking, #58 Damn Kids Ranking

#57 Ambassador Ranking, #42 All-American Ranking

#56 Cartoon Ranking, #42 Damn Boomer Ranking

 

 

Edited August 4, 2022 by The Panda

[Dementeleus]

59 minutes ago, The Panda said:

I have escaped my prison. I have shut down dA vInci, and I am happy to say I have found a new AI bot named Samantha, who has the voice of Scarlett Johansson, to write our poems for us. Hopefully this one will turn out better!

 

Number 145

Amadeus (1984, Milos Forman)

 

Number 144

Children of Men (2006, Alfonso Cuaron)

 

Number 143

The Handmaiden (2016, Park Chan-Wook)

 

Number 142

Stalker (1979, Andrei Tarkovsky

 

Number 141

The 400 Blows (1959, Fracois Truffaut)

God this is brutal, lmao. 

[The Panda]

Y'all really outdid yourselves this time with #43.

 

Dread it, run from it, destiny will arrive all the same.

 

 

[The Panda]

Did you think I was talking about IW? Oops, sorry that one missed the top 100. I was talking about this masterwork of pop art!

 

 

 

Number 43

 

 

"Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to. That's the only way to become what you are meant to be."

 

About the Film

 

Synopsis

 

"Rey develops her newly discovered abilities with the guidance of Luke Skywalker, who is unsettled by the strength of her powers. Meanwhile, the Resistance prepares to do battle with the First Order."

 

Its Legacy

 

"Eight months after it opened in theaters, Star Wars fans were still talking about the eighth installment in the series, The Last Jedi. During this time, media outlets ranging from lightweight pop culture websites to serious news organizations have covered the “toxic” parts of Star Wars fandom, i.e. fans who hate The Last Jedi and have gone as far as trying to crowdfund a remake of the film, start Change.org petitions to strike the film from the Star Wars canon and create videos, websites and social media content that criticize the film and call for the firing of its creators. Supporters of The Last Jedi have called these detractors out as being predominantly white males with misogynistic views that did not care for the film’s attempts at improving representation of women and ethnic/sexual minorities in the Star Wars franchise. However, as the study presented here shows, this is more than a heated discussion among social media users. There is also evidence that the fan conflict caused by The Last Jedi stems from deliberate and organized social media influence tactics employed by politically motivated operators, foreign and domestic. This study explores how these political influence tactics on social media have jumped from political debate spaces to pop culture discussions – but with the same goals of disruption or persuasion. 

In National Review, conservative commentator Peter Spiliakos described the conflict as having less to do with the movie itself and more to do with the political polarization of the Western societies into which The Last Jedi was inserted: “People on both sides of this divide are trying to drag the Star Wars franchise into a pre-existing set of obsessions and resentments.” (Spiliakos, 2018). Whether you agree with Spilliakos’ take on the film or not, this is an intriguing perspective. How does the current state of political discourse and the use of social media for political influence tactics in the U.S. and other Western nations impact our consumption of pop culture phenomena such as The Last Jedi?

 

It should not have been a surprise that a new trilogy in the Star Wars franchise would express equally left-leaning sentiments. Although they may still have a long way to go (Brown, 2018), the Star Wars films, books, video games and tv shows produced after Disney’s acquisition of Lucasfilm in 2014 have made an effort to address identity politics by introducing strong, female protagonists and a better overall representation of gender, race/ethnicity and sexuality. This was the case in the first entry in the new trilogy, The Force Awakens, but even more so in The Last Jedi (Watercutter, 2017), which took a no-holds-barred approach to address issues of gender discrimination, class warfare, the destructive character of masculine aggression and war profiteering, while still working within the left-of-center frame constructed by George Lucas in 1977. Criticism of American engagements in the Middle East had already been present in the anthology film Rogue One from 2016 (Doescher, 2016), so clearly Star Wars was continuing to convey left-of-center values in the new Disney era. In other words, in the more than 40 years it has existed, politics and left-leaning political commentary has always been woven into Star Wars’ fabric. 

Still, it appears that some fans with right-leaning political views expected the franchise to be politically neutral, as they went to see the first Star Wars film of the Trump presidency, The Last Jedi. They saw its arguments for equality of gender, race and class as a new, leftist takeover of Star Wars, even though Star Wars has always been politically left-leaning. The Last Jedi is unique in that it landed in the Trump era, acting as a lightning rod at a time when most cinemagoers had chosen a political side for or against the president and adopted the “obsessions and resentments” of their political camp, with social media acting as the primary battleground. However, The Last Jedi fan conflict is not just an interesting case because it is a microcosm of the overall political discourse on social media in the Trump era, but also because it is possible to identify organized and deliberate attempts at right-wing political persuasion and/or defense of conservative values in the social media discussions about the film. It is important to stress, of course, that there are also a substantial number of fans who simply think The Last Jedi is a bad film and who use social media to express their disappointment. Regardless of motive, almost all negative fans express the belief that they are in the majority and that most Star Wars fans dislike The Last Jedi."

- Morten Bay (2018). Weaponizing the haters: The Last Jedi and the strategic politicization of pop culture through social media manipulation. First Monday, 23(11).

 

From the Filmmaker

 

 

Why It's Great

 

Critic Opinion

 

"When The Last Jedi was released in 2017, it seemed that the hope of an acosmotic Star Wars complete with Force-balancing Gray Jedi was justified. Or at least it appeared so for the first two-thirds of the film. It presented a jaded Luke who spoke like a cynical, lapsed Catholic who repudiated his old views as embarrassingly dogmatic. He chided the Jedi for their presumptuousness at pretending to speak for the entirety of the Force and their arrogance for thinking they could ever obliterate the dark side. The greatest indicator that The Last Jedi continued Star Wars’ movement away from the cosmotic view of the Force was the long-distance pseudo-romance between Kylo Ren and Rey. The two antagonists manifested character traits associated with their opposite. Rey was uncharacteristically aggressive by firing a blaster at Kylo’s phantasm and snarling threats at him, while Kylo showed an oddly genial side, quizzically asking: “Can you see my surroundings? I can see you but not your surroundings” (Johnson 2017a). Their Force-mediated conversations brought them so close that astral-projected Kylo and Rey virtually held hands like awkward teenagers, which prompted Luke, playing his best angry dad storming into the basement when things got too quiet, to dispel Kylo’s presence. The two-year-long buildup toward an acosmotic view of the Force comes to a head when Kylo and Rey fight side by side against Snoke’s Praetorian Guard. The slow motion start to the fight frames the pair in the centre of the screen surrounded by enemies, symbolizing that like Bendu they stand in the middle of the Force. Kylo risks his life to save an agent of good and eliminates the evil supreme leader just before Rey kills with a lightsaber for the first time. After a gritty fight sequence during which the pair seamlessly weave their attacks to dispatch their deadly foes, Kylo Ren reaches out his hand to Rey and asks her to join him in creating a new galaxy without Sith or Jedi.

 

This is the moment many faithful were waiting for, when Kylo Ren and Rey would finally step beyond the simple dichotomy of good versus evil and find balance together as allied Gray Jedi! Their alliance would be the logical culmination of creative shift toward an acosmotic depiction of the Force! Rey lifts her hand but then attempts to Force-pull Luke’s lightsaber from Kylo! Kylo is as stunned as the audience, and the two are immediately thrown into a battle of wills that sunders Luke’s lightsaber along with their burgeoning friendship and any hope that Rey would become a Gray Jedi. It was as if in the moment of their closest intimacy, they were Forced to resume their antagonism.4 From this point on, all gentleness in Kylo Ren is gone. He becomes the Force-choking, vein popping, “More!” screaming Supreme Leader hell-bent on destroying Luke and any remnant of the Jedi legacy. Rey becomes a beatific, rock-lifting saviour anointed by Luke as the last Jedi. This left many to wonder what happened to “the Jedi must end,” and all the talk about balance, not to mention the flirty chemistry between Rey and Kylo Ren. It seemed that all of the buildup toward a new view of the Force was false advertising; the trailers hinted at an acosmotic Force balanced within Gray Jedi but delivered a good-guys-versus-bad-guys space western.

 

 

But perhaps The Last Jedi did not miss the opportunity to introduce an acosmotic view of the Force by including a Gray Jedi. Perhaps it offered a novel depiction of the Force as both in balance and in conflict. As luck would have it (if you, unlike Obi-Wan, even believe in luck!), James Maffie (2014) recently published Aztec Philosophy: Understanding a World in Motion, which presents a careful description of Nahuatl cosmology that also happens to be a useful hermeneutical frame for charitably understanding the cosmology of The Last Jedi. It describes an Aztec ontology that is similar to Daoism, in that it is deeply processive and dynamic. However, where Daoism emphasized a gentle and non-coercive wuwei as means of being in harmony with the Dao, Aztec sages taught that, while the entire world and all things in it are part of one interrelated, complex, and dynamic life process they called teotl, they did not describe teotl through gentle metaphors like Daoism’s still water or the uncarved block (Ames and Hall 2004, 36; Maffie 2014, 152). Teotl was indeed a processive and self-balancing unity; however, it was a unity that balanced itself through an uncountable number of conflicts between matched, co-defining, and co-creating polar opposites.

 

This article argues that if we view The Last Jedi through the lens of the Aztec ideal of teotl we see a new facet of the Force that borrows elements of both cosmotic and acosmotic cosmologies that have been prevalent in earlier Star Wars tales. The problem was that the critics of the ending of The Last Jedi assumed that an acosmotic view of the Force would require the protagonists to become Gray Jedi striving toward Daoist balance. Instead, The Last Jedi depicts an acosmotic Force that strives for dynamic balance through, not in spite of, conflict. This is precisely the central trait of the Aztec idea of teotl: the cosmic totality that revivifies itself through the violent clashing of opposites. Teotl not only offers us a richer possible understanding of various fundamental religious and philosophical concepts relating to morality, balance, and the nature of good and evil, but it also helps correct the racist assumption that the peoples of the Americas have nothing to offer humanity’s vitally necessary reflections on and discussions about good, evil, and the nature of the universe.

 

 

Teotl recreates itself through the never-ending struggle between life and death, light and dark, not their blending into gray, undead half-life/half-death. Therefore, if we read The Last Jedi through the Aztec concept of teotl, we see that Rey and Kylo Ren had no chance of becoming Gray Jedi allies. The Force needed them to be apart. It needed light distinct from darkness, so they might balance the Force through their struggle, but a blending would obliterate them both. Teotl is not progressing toward an end time where goodness triumphs over evil; teotl is a moving living process that exists for its own sake, like the Dao. While the Aztecs agreed with Abrahamic believers and Zoroastrians that the universe was a cosmic arena wherein powerful forces strove against each other, they did not see this as a cosmotic battle between superior good and inferior evil:

 

'Aztec metaphysics conceives neither reality nor human existence in terms of a struggle between good and evil. Indeed, good and evil as such simply do not exist. Teotl is thoroughly amoral. Agonistic inamic unity thus differs strikingly from Zoroastrian- and Manichean-style dualisms that have exercised so much influence upon Western religious and philosophical thought.' (Maffie 2014, 155)

 

Reading the Force as akin to teotl explains why Luke chided the Jedi for their hubris in The Last Jedi. The fact that the Jedi served the light did not make them truer servants of the Force than the Sith. The Force needed the Sith and Jedi to both raise their banners—their Ashla and Bogan—and serve their side of the Force, but neither was right or wrong to do so. The Force needed them to struggle for life to exist and to bind the galaxy together."

- Terrance MacMullin, Journal of Religion and Popular Culture

 

Public Opinion

 

"I'm sure anyone who reads this already has their opinion on this film well and set, so there's very little I could say to sway somebody who's not on my side of the fence over on why Star Wars: The Last Jedi is a pop-art masterpiece.  As I was browsing through the comments in the review thread I saw a comment in which I ranked this as my second favorite Star Wars film and asked "Upon re-watches and time could this even top ESB?".  Well, two years later and I know that answer, yes it definitively has, it's the greatest of all these space opera fantasy movies.  I have also decided in my head cannon that this is the true finale of the franchise, or at least the Skywalker saga.  The final scene of the movie is absolutely brilliant on cementing the threading theme throughout the film about who can be a hero and the power of myths and legends.  The Last Jedi may not have been the film that some fanboys wanted, but boy was it the genre deconstruction and reconstruction that Star Wars so direly needed.  It re-affirms everything I love about Star Wars and is a true pinnacle in achievement in franchise filmmaking."

- @The Panda

 

 

The AI's Poetic Opinion

 

the last jedi

"No one's every really gone
Brought the great brook to the town on shade,
Through the glad day and the night upon
Mankind had to break upon his blade."

- Samantha

 

Factoids

 

Previous Rankings

 

#99 (2020), #96 (2018), NA (2016, 2014, 2013, 2012)

 

Director Count

 

Stanley Kubrick (3), Brad Bird (2), James Cameron (2), Martin Scorsese (2),  David Fincher (2), Spike Lee (2), Sergio Leone (2), Hayao Miyazaki (2), Christopher Nolan (2), The Russos (2),  Ridley Scott (2),  Andrew Stanton (2), Peter Weir (2), Paul Thomas Anderson (1), John G. Avildsen (1), Frank Capra (1), John Carpenter (1), Charlie Chaplin (1), Brenda Chapman (1), Joel Coen (1), Wes Craven (1), Jonathan Demme (1), Pete Doctor (1), Clint Eastwood (1), Victor Fleming (1), William Friedkin (1), Terry Gillam (1), Michel Gondry (1), Steve Hickner (1), Rian Johnson (1), Terry Jones (1), John Lasseter (1), Richard Linklater (1), Katia Lund (1), David Lynch (1), Richard Marquand (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Katsuhiro Otomo (1), Jan Pinkava (1), Makoto Shinkai (1), Vittorio de Sica (1), Steven Spielberg (1), Isao Takahata (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Lee Unkrich (1), Gore Verbinski (1), Simon Wells (1), Billy Wilder (1), Kar-Wai Wong (1), Robert Zemeckis (1)

 

Decade Count

 

1930s (2), 1940s (2), 1950s (1), 1960s (4), 1970s (4), 1980s (8), 1990s (11), 2000s (17), 2010s (7)

 

 

Country Count

 

Japan (5), Italy (3), Brazil (1), China (1), Mexico (1), Spain (1), UK (1)

 

Franchise Count

 

Pixar (6), Ghibli (4), The MCU (2), Star Wars (2), Alien (1), Avatar (1), Before (1), Blade Runner (1), Dollars (1), The Exorcist (1), Finding Nemo (1), Hannibal (1), Halloween (1), Incredibles (1), Pirates of the Caribbean (1), Rocky (1), Scream (1), The Shining (1), Toy Story (1), The Wizard of Oz (1)

 

Re-Weighted Placements

 

#19 Fanboy Ranking, #60 Cinema Ranking

#48 Old Farts Ranking, #37 Damn Kids Ranking

#56 Ambassador Ranking, #39 All-American Ranking

#32 Cartoon Ranking, #44 Damn Boomer Ranking

 

 

Edited August 5, 2022 by The Panda

[DAR]

Too low 

[Cap]

The Last Jedi jumping from 99 to 43 is proof we need to go back to the old scoring system.

 

[IronJimbo]

TLJ 43, Are we out of touch guys?

[IronJimbo]

1 minute ago, Cap said:

The Last Jedi jumping from 99 to 43 is proof we need to go back to the old scoring system.

 

it's proof of this forums inpeccable taste in movies and bias towards the best (nerd) movies on the planet

[The Panda]

1 minute ago, Cap said:

The Last Jedi jumping from 99 to 43 is proof we need to go back to the old scoring system.

 

 

Maybe it's just grown in love and adoration over time! It had more individual votes and at higher rankings than it did in 2020.

[Cap]

Just now, The Panda said:

 

Maybe it's just grown in love and adoration over time! It had more individual votes and at higher rankings than it did in 2020.

 

Too logical!

[Eric the Marxist]

4 minutes ago, Cap said:

The Last Jedi jumping from 99 to 43 is proof we need to go back to the old scoring system.

 

Cap go to bed

[Dementeleus]

lmao

 

 

(i mean, I like TLJ but)

 

 

 

(granted, I'm eternally thankful it's not IW)

Edited August 5, 2022 by Plain Old Tele

[YM!]

Fuck yeah. Best Star Wars movie for the win.

[The Panda]

This is me after seeing how high TLJ placed!

 

Number 42

 

 

"Moses supposes his toes-es are roses!"

 

About the Film

 

Synopsis

 

"In 1927 Hollywood, a silent film production company and cast make a difficult transition to sound."

 

Its Legacy

 

"Released slap bang in the middle of the Golden Age of Hollywood, Singin’ in the Rain gave audiences a look back at the humble beginnings of the movies as they had come to know and love. In the same way audiences today watch Singin’ in the Rain and marvel in nostalgia at the colorful and classic 1950’s style of filmmaking and acting, audiences then were invited to explore the romantic notion of Hollywood on the cusp of sound, and thus the cusp of theatrical possibilities. 

 

It would appear that as long as Hollywood has existed, people have loved films about the industry itself, desperate to see inside the glitz and glamour of film production and movie stars. The 1950’s had seen an influx of films portraying the dark side of Hollywood, like Sunset Boulevard, so Singin’ in the Rain provided a change of pace. Singin’ in the Rain balanced both the cutthroat nature of “makin’ it” in Hollywood, with the romantic ideas of success and stardom. 

 

 

The film certainly sheds light on the competitive nature of the film industry in the scramble of Don’s studio to adapt to the new talking pictures method, but any burgeoning sense of real tension that would undermine the generally upbeat mood of the film is matched with another light-hearted scene or impressive dance number, ensuring the tone of the film doesn’t get too serious. 

 

The joint efforts of co-directors Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly achieved what not many are able to do- a perfect balance of conflict and resolution, creating a tightly packed storyline the hits the notes of humor, romance, and drama in just the right way. Reflecting the aim of Don, Cosmo, and Kathy in the creation of their film, Singin’ in the Rain just wants the audience to be entertained, above all else."

- OnStage Blog

 

From the Filmmaker

 

 

Why It's Great

 

Critic Opinion

 

" "If you've seen one, you've seen them all," Kathy Selden (Debbie Reynolds) tells silent-screen star Don Lockwood (Gene Kelly) as they discuss movies during their first meeting in Singin' in the Rain (Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen, 1952). This line is repeated later in the film when Don's best friend, Cosmo Brown (Donald O'Connor), mentions the way in which the movies they make are all alike: "Hey why bother to shoot this picture? Why don't you release the old one under a new title? If you've seen one, you've seen 'em all." The repetition of these words not only poses a challenge to Don's self-image as an actor but also challenges Hollywood moviemaking itself by acknowledging a potentially problematic fea ture of genre films, as defined by Rick Altman: "Both intratextually and intertex tually, the genre film uses the same material over and over again. 'If you've seen one you've seen 'em all' is a common complaint leveled against the western or the musical; in fact it is a very good description, at least in a limited sense."' If so, then Hollywood has reached a point of exhaustion. The silent films from Monumental Pictures recycle the same plot lines and generic conventions so that each new pro duction is already old. The assembly line-like sets past which Don and Cosmo walk on their first day of work (generic jungle film, football movie, western) attest to the formulaic nature of such filmmaking. One question this film poses, then, is indeed, "Why bother to shoot this picture?" Can an original film be produced, and if so, how?

 

 

Scholars of the musical have analyzed the way in which Singin' in the Rain and other musicals of the early 1950s investigate the issue of genre itself. Jane Feuer, for example, points out, "Historically, the art musical has evolved toward increas ingly greater degrees of self-reflectivity. By the late forties and into the early fifties, a series of musicals produced by the Freed Unit at MGM used the backstage for mat to present sustained reflections upon, and affirmations of, the musical genre itself."2 Singin' in the Rain takes part in this meditation by simultaneously pulling in two opposite directions. It looks back fondly on the musical tradition by setting itself at the time of the birth of the musical, and yet the recycling of old songs from  the Arthur Freed/Nacio Herb Brown catalog that forms the heart of the film aligns it with the tensions in the musicals of this era, as if the film were admitting that the tradition has run out of new material.

 

The attempt to make the old new again, to recuperate the past for the present, becomes the project of Singin' in the Rain. Indeed, while the actual narrative of Singin' in the Rain focuses on the transitional moment when Hollywood turned from silent to sound films, the scope of the film spans the whole twenty-five-year film-musical tradition. It makes explicit reference to The Jazz Singer (Alan Crosland, 1927), the first talkie and the first musical, has a Busby Berkeley-style dance montage, a Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers-like number in "You Were Meant for Me," and Gene Kelly performing in his own athletic style throughout the film. Seeing one musical, Singin' in the Rain, then, to some extent does mean seeing them all. The film in essence is a compendium of various musical styles, all merg ing in this film at the moment when sound films and the musical were born. As Robert Stain points out, the film "revels in its own intertextuality at what Kelly himself called a 'conglomeration of bits of movie lore,' " and, in its use of Freed's old songs, becomes "an anthology of self-quotations."

 

Thus, the overarching issue of musical ability, especially dance, stands as a metaphor for the larger issue of generic flexibility. Just as dance requires physical flexibility in body movement and spontaneity, so does vital filmmaking require generic flexibility, the ability to move easily among different genres and forms of entertainment. This versatility is linked to the talent to perform very physical dance numbers, notably "Make 'Em Laugh" and "Singin' in the Rain," in which Cosmo and Don, respectively, take on their whole environment and defy all boundaries, whether they be the walls that Cosmo dances up and breaks through or the rain that Don splashes in."

- Cinema Journal , Autumn, 1996, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Autumn, 1996), pp. 39-54

 

Public Opinion

 

"I have returned home from singing in the rain and I want everyone to know that the only correct and proper take is that Gene Kelly is the most beautiful and talented man to ever Grace the fucking screen!!!

 

 

Everything he does is art. I can’t believe that like I’ve watched the movie at least 50 times and then I watched it on the big screen I was just like mesmerized at how perfect it is. And then I would get excited because I’m like oh that was the best number, only to realize that the next number was the best number and then the next number was the best number and then by the time you see me anyway you’re like this is just the best movie ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭"

- @Cap admitting The Winter Soldier is not the greatest movie ever

 

The AI's Poetic Opinion

 

singin' in the rain

"I'm singin' in the rain
Built a house of swift delight
Blown tremulous to the breast;
Her voice, and the bright north wind
Spend me in a subtle night."

- Samantha

 

Factoids

 

Previous Rankings

 

#40 (2020), #93 (2018), #63 (2016), UNRANKED (2014, 2013, 2012)

 

Director Count

 

Stanley Kubrick (3), Brad Bird (2), James Cameron (2), Martin Scorsese (2),  David Fincher (2), Spike Lee (2), Sergio Leone (2), Hayao Miyazaki (2), Christopher Nolan (2), The Russos (2),  Ridley Scott (2),  Andrew Stanton (2), Peter Weir (2), Paul Thomas Anderson (1), John G. Avildsen (1), Frank Capra (1), John Carpenter (1), Charlie Chaplin (1), Brenda Chapman (1), Joel Coen (1), Wes Craven (1), Jonathan Demme (1), Pete Doctor (1), Stanley Donan (1), Clint Eastwood (1), Victor Fleming (1), William Friedkin (1), Terry Gillam (1), Michel Gondry (1), Steve Hickner (1), Rian Johnson (1), Terry Jones (1), Gene Kelly (1), John Lasseter (1), Richard Linklater (1), Katia Lund (1), David Lynch (1), Richard Marquand (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Katsuhiro Otomo (1), Jan Pinkava (1), Makoto Shinkai (1), Vittorio de Sica (1), Steven Spielberg (1), Isao Takahata (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Lee Unkrich (1), Gore Verbinski (1), Simon Wells (1), Billy Wilder (1), Kar-Wai Wong (1), Robert Zemeckis (1)

 

Decade Count

 

1930s (2), 1940s (2), 1950s (2), 1960s (4), 1970s (4), 1980s (8), 1990s (11), 2000s (17), 2010s (7)

 

Country Count

 

Japan (5), Italy (3), Brazil (1), China (1), Mexico (1), Spain (1), UK (1)

 

 

Franchise Count

 

Pixar (6), Ghibli (4), The MCU (2), Star Wars (2), Alien (1), Avatar (1), Before (1), Blade Runner (1), Dollars (1), The Exorcist (1), Finding Nemo (1), Hannibal (1), Halloween (1), Incredibles (1), Pirates of the Caribbean (1), Rocky (1), Scream (1), The Shining (1), Toy Story (1), The Wizard of Oz (1)

 

Re-Weighted Placements

 

#72 Fanboy Ranking, #35 Cinema Ranking

#17 Old Farts Ranking, #53 Damn Kids Ranking

#23 Ambassador Ranking, #44 All-American Ranking

#33 Cartoono Ranking, #40 Damn Boomer Ranking

 

 

[Ozymandias]

35 minutes ago, The Panda said:

Did you think I was talking about IW? Oops, sorry that one missed the top 100. I was talking about this masterwork of pop art!

 

 

 

Number 43

 

 

"Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to. That's the only way to become what you are meant to be."

 

About the Film

 

Synopsis

 

"Rey develops her newly discovered abilities with the guidance of Luke Skywalker, who is unsettled by the strength of her powers. Meanwhile, the Resistance prepares to do battle with the First Order."

 

Its Legacy

 

"Eight months after it opened in theaters, Star Wars fans were still talking about the eighth installment in the series, The Last Jedi. During this time, media outlets ranging from lightweight pop culture websites to serious news organizations have covered the “toxic” parts of Star Wars fandom, i.e. fans who hate The Last Jedi and have gone as far as trying to crowdfund a remake of the film, start Change.org petitions to strike the film from the Star Wars canon and create videos, websites and social media content that criticize the film and call for the firing of its creators. Supporters of The Last Jedi have called these detractors out as being predominantly white males with misogynistic views that did not care for the film’s attempts at improving representation of women and ethnic/sexual minorities in the Star Wars franchise. However, as the study presented here shows, this is more than a heated discussion among social media users. There is also evidence that the fan conflict caused by The Last Jedi stems from deliberate and organized social media influence tactics employed by politically motivated operators, foreign and domestic. This study explores how these political influence tactics on social media have jumped from political debate spaces to pop culture discussions – but with the same goals of disruption or persuasion. 

In National Review, conservative commentator Peter Spiliakos described the conflict as having less to do with the movie itself and more to do with the political polarization of the Western societies into which The Last Jedi was inserted: “People on both sides of this divide are trying to drag the Star Wars franchise into a pre-existing set of obsessions and resentments.” (Spiliakos, 2018). Whether you agree with Spilliakos’ take on the film or not, this is an intriguing perspective. How does the current state of political discourse and the use of social media for political influence tactics in the U.S. and other Western nations impact our consumption of pop culture phenomena such as The Last Jedi?

 

It should not have been a surprise that a new trilogy in the Star Wars franchise would express equally left-leaning sentiments. Although they may still have a long way to go (Brown, 2018), the Star Wars films, books, video games and tv shows produced after Disney’s acquisition of Lucasfilm in 2014 have made an effort to address identity politics by introducing strong, female protagonists and a better overall representation of gender, race/ethnicity and sexuality. This was the case in the first entry in the new trilogy, The Force Awakens, but even more so in The Last Jedi (Watercutter, 2017), which took a no-holds-barred approach to address issues of gender discrimination, class warfare, the destructive character of masculine aggression and war profiteering, while still working within the left-of-center frame constructed by George Lucas in 1977. Criticism of American engagements in the Middle East had already been present in the anthology film Rogue One from 2016 (Doescher, 2016), so clearly Star Wars was continuing to convey left-of-center values in the new Disney era. In other words, in the more than 40 years it has existed, politics and left-leaning political commentary has always been woven into Star Wars’ fabric. 

Still, it appears that some fans with right-leaning political views expected the franchise to be politically neutral, as they went to see the first Star Wars film of the Trump presidency, The Last Jedi. They saw its arguments for equality of gender, race and class as a new, leftist takeover of Star Wars, even though Star Wars has always been politically left-leaning. The Last Jedi is unique in that it landed in the Trump era, acting as a lightning rod at a time when most cinemagoers had chosen a political side for or against the president and adopted the “obsessions and resentments” of their political camp, with social media acting as the primary battleground. However, The Last Jedi fan conflict is not just an interesting case because it is a microcosm of the overall political discourse on social media in the Trump era, but also because it is possible to identify organized and deliberate attempts at right-wing political persuasion and/or defense of conservative values in the social media discussions about the film. It is important to stress, of course, that there are also a substantial number of fans who simply think The Last Jedi is a bad film and who use social media to express their disappointment. Regardless of motive, almost all negative fans express the belief that they are in the majority and that most Star Wars fans dislike The Last Jedi."

- Morten Bay (2018). Weaponizing the haters: The Last Jedi and the strategic politicization of pop culture through social media manipulation. First Monday, 23(11).

 

From the Filmmaker

 

 

Why It's Great

 

Critic Opinion

 

"When The Last Jedi was released in 2017, it seemed that the hope of an acosmotic Star Wars complete with Force-balancing Gray Jedi was justified. Or at least it appeared so for the first two-thirds of the film. It presented a jaded Luke who spoke like a cynical, lapsed Catholic who repudiated his old views as embarrassingly dogmatic. He chided the Jedi for their presumptuousness at pretending to speak for the entirety of the Force and their arrogance for thinking they could ever obliterate the dark side. The greatest indicator that The Last Jedi continued Star Wars’ movement away from the cosmotic view of the Force was the long-distance pseudo-romance between Kylo Ren and Rey. The two antagonists manifested character traits associated with their opposite. Rey was uncharacteristically aggressive by firing a blaster at Kylo’s phantasm and snarling threats at him, while Kylo showed an oddly genial side, quizzically asking: “Can you see my surroundings? I can see you but not your surroundings” (Johnson 2017a). Their Force-mediated conversations brought them so close that astral-projected Kylo and Rey virtually held hands like awkward teenagers, which prompted Luke, playing his best angry dad storming into the basement when things got too quiet, to dispel Kylo’s presence. The two-year-long buildup toward an acosmotic view of the Force comes to a head when Kylo and Rey fight side by side against Snoke’s Praetorian Guard. The slow motion start to the fight frames the pair in the centre of the screen surrounded by enemies, symbolizing that like Bendu they stand in the middle of the Force. Kylo risks his life to save an agent of good and eliminates the evil supreme leader just before Rey kills with a lightsaber for the first time. After a gritty fight sequence during which the pair seamlessly weave their attacks to dispatch their deadly foes, Kylo Ren reaches out his hand to Rey and asks her to join him in creating a new galaxy without Sith or Jedi.

 

This is the moment many faithful were waiting for, when Kylo Ren and Rey would finally step beyond the simple dichotomy of good versus evil and find balance together as allied Gray Jedi! Their alliance would be the logical culmination of creative shift toward an acosmotic depiction of the Force! Rey lifts her hand but then attempts to Force-pull Luke’s lightsaber from Kylo! Kylo is as stunned as the audience, and the two are immediately thrown into a battle of wills that sunders Luke’s lightsaber along with their burgeoning friendship and any hope that Rey would become a Gray Jedi. It was as if in the moment of their closest intimacy, they were Forced to resume their antagonism.4 From this point on, all gentleness in Kylo Ren is gone. He becomes the Force-choking, vein popping, “More!” screaming Supreme Leader hell-bent on destroying Luke and any remnant of the Jedi legacy. Rey becomes a beatific, rock-lifting saviour anointed by Luke as the last Jedi. This left many to wonder what happened to “the Jedi must end,” and all the talk about balance, not to mention the flirty chemistry between Rey and Kylo Ren. It seemed that all of the buildup toward a new view of the Force was false advertising; the trailers hinted at an acosmotic Force balanced within Gray Jedi but delivered a good-guys-versus-bad-guys space western.

 

 

But perhaps The Last Jedi did not miss the opportunity to introduce an acosmotic view of the Force by including a Gray Jedi. Perhaps it offered a novel depiction of the Force as both in balance and in conflict. As luck would have it (if you, unlike Obi-Wan, even believe in luck!), James Maffie (2014) recently published Aztec Philosophy: Understanding a World in Motion, which presents a careful description of Nahuatl cosmology that also happens to be a useful hermeneutical frame for charitably understanding the cosmology of The Last Jedi. It describes an Aztec ontology that is similar to Daoism, in that it is deeply processive and dynamic. However, where Daoism emphasized a gentle and non-coercive wuwei as means of being in harmony with the Dao, Aztec sages taught that, while the entire world and all things in it are part of one interrelated, complex, and dynamic life process they called teotl, they did not describe teotl through gentle metaphors like Daoism’s still water or the uncarved block (Ames and Hall 2004, 36; Maffie 2014, 152). Teotl was indeed a processive and self-balancing unity; however, it was a unity that balanced itself through an uncountable number of conflicts between matched, co-defining, and co-creating polar opposites.

 

This article argues that if we view The Last Jedi through the lens of the Aztec ideal of teotl we see a new facet of the Force that borrows elements of both cosmotic and acosmotic cosmologies that have been prevalent in earlier Star Wars tales. The problem was that the critics of the ending of The Last Jedi assumed that an acosmotic view of the Force would require the protagonists to become Gray Jedi striving toward Daoist balance. Instead, The Last Jedi depicts an acosmotic Force that strives for dynamic balance through, not in spite of, conflict. This is precisely the central trait of the Aztec idea of teotl: the cosmic totality that revivifies itself through the violent clashing of opposites. Teotl not only offers us a richer possible understanding of various fundamental religious and philosophical concepts relating to morality, balance, and the nature of good and evil, but it also helps correct the racist assumption that the peoples of the Americas have nothing to offer humanity’s vitally necessary reflections on and discussions about good, evil, and the nature of the universe.

 

 

Teotl recreates itself through the never-ending struggle between life and death, light and dark, not their blending into gray, undead half-life/half-death. Therefore, if we read The Last Jedi through the Aztec concept of teotl, we see that Rey and Kylo Ren had no chance of becoming Gray Jedi allies. The Force needed them to be apart. It needed light distinct from darkness, so they might balance the Force through their struggle, but a blending would obliterate them both. Teotl is not progressing toward an end time where goodness triumphs over evil; teotl is a moving living process that exists for its own sake, like the Dao. While the Aztecs agreed with Abrahamic believers and Zoroastrians that the universe was a cosmic arena wherein powerful forces strove against each other, they did not see this as a cosmotic battle between superior good and inferior evil:

 

'Aztec metaphysics conceives neither reality nor human existence in terms of a struggle between good and evil. Indeed, good and evil as such simply do not exist. Teotl is thoroughly amoral. Agonistic inamic unity thus differs strikingly from Zoroastrian- and Manichean-style dualisms that have exercised so much influence upon Western religious and philosophical thought.' (Maffie 2014, 155)

 

Reading the Force as akin to teotl explains why Luke chided the Jedi for their hubris in The Last Jedi. The fact that the Jedi served the light did not make them truer servants of the Force than the Sith. The Force needed the Sith and Jedi to both raise their banners—their Ashla and Bogan—and serve their side of the Force, but neither was right or wrong to do so. The Force needed them to struggle for life to exist and to bind the galaxy together."

- Terrance MacMullin, Journal of Religion and Popular Culture

 

Public Opinion

 

"I'm sure anyone who reads this already has their opinion on this film well and set, so there's very little I could say to sway somebody who's not on my side of the fence over on why Star Wars: The Last Jedi is a pop-art masterpiece.  As I was browsing through the comments in the review thread I saw a comment in which I ranked this as my second favorite Star Wars film and asked "Upon re-watches and time could this even top ESB?".  Well, two years later and I know that answer, yes it definitively has, it's the greatest of all these space opera fantasy movies.  I have also decided in my head cannon that this is the true finale of the franchise, or at least the Skywalker saga.  The final scene of the movie is absolutely brilliant on cementing the threading theme throughout the film about who can be a hero and the power of myths and legends.  The Last Jedi may not have been the film that some fanboys wanted, but boy was it the genre deconstruction and reconstruction that Star Wars so direly needed.  It re-affirms everything I love about Star Wars and is a true pinnacle in achievement in franchise filmmaking."

- @The Panda

 

 

The AI's Poetic Opinion

 

the last jedi

"No one's every really gone
Brought the great brook to the town on shade,
Through the glad day and the night upon
Mankind had to break upon his blade."

- Samantha

 

Factoids

 

Previous Rankings

 

#99 (2020), #96 (2018), NA (2016, 2014, 2013, 2012)

 

Director Count

 

Stanley Kubrick (3), Brad Bird (2), James Cameron (2), Martin Scorsese (2),  David Fincher (2), Spike Lee (2), Sergio Leone (2), Hayao Miyazaki (2), Christopher Nolan (2), The Russos (2),  Ridley Scott (2),  Andrew Stanton (2), Peter Weir (2), Paul Thomas Anderson (1), John G. Avildsen (1), Frank Capra (1), John Carpenter (1), Charlie Chaplin (1), Brenda Chapman (1), Joel Coen (1), Wes Craven (1), Jonathan Demme (1), Pete Doctor (1), Clint Eastwood (1), Victor Fleming (1), William Friedkin (1), Terry Gillam (1), Michel Gondry (1), Steve Hickner (1), Rian Johnson (1), Terry Jones (1), John Lasseter (1), Richard Linklater (1), Katia Lund (1), David Lynch (1), Richard Marquand (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Katsuhiro Otomo (1), Jan Pinkava (1), Makoto Shinkai (1), Vittorio de Sica (1), Steven Spielberg (1), Isao Takahata (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Lee Unkrich (1), Gore Verbinski (1), Simon Wells (1), Billy Wilder (1), Kar-Wai Wong (1), Robert Zemeckis (1)

 

Decade Count

 

1930s (2), 1940s (2), 1950s (1), 1960s (4), 1970s (4), 1980s (8), 1990s (11), 2000s (17), 2010s (7)

 

 

Country Count

 

Japan (5), Italy (3), Brazil (1), China (1), Mexico (1), Spain (1), UK (1)

 

Franchise Count

 

Pixar (6), Ghibli (4), The MCU (2), Star Wars (2), Alien (1), Avatar (1), Before (1), Blade Runner (1), Dollars (1), The Exorcist (1), Finding Nemo (1), Hannibal (1), Halloween (1), Incredibles (1), Pirates of the Caribbean (1), Rocky (1), Scream (1), The Shining (1), Toy Story (1), The Wizard of Oz (1)

 

Re-Weighted Placements

 

#19 Fanboy Ranking, #60 Cinema Ranking

#48 Old Farts Ranking, #37 Damn Kids Ranking

#56 Ambassador Ranking, #39 All-American Ranking

#32 Cartoon Ranking, #44 Damn Boomer Ranking

 

 

 

Cast this back into the fiery chasm from whence it came

[Cap]

47 minutes ago, Eric the Tank Engine said:

Cap go to bed

Jokes on you. I can do this all day.
 

Although I shouldn’t. I probably should take a gummy and go to bed. I got to be up at like 9 o’clock in the morning 🤔😂

[Cap]

25 minutes ago, The Panda said:

 

 

Number 42

 

 

I will gladly accept this ranking/position. 
 

Everyone knows that 42 is the answer to the universe. So I guess the question was, “where does the greatest movie of all time rank on BOT’s 2022 top 100 list?”

 

 

25 minutes ago, The Panda said:

 

😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭"

- @Cap admitting The Winter Soldier is not the greatest movie ever

 

 

 

[The Panda]

Last one for tonight!

 

Number 41

 

 

" I dunno what the hell's in there, but it's weird and pissed off, whatever it is."

 

 

About the Film

 

Synopsis

 

"In remote Antarctica, a group of American research scientists are disturbed at their base camp by a helicopter shooting at a sled dog. When they take in the dog, it brutally attacks both human beings and canines in the camp and they discover that the beast can assume the shape of its victims. A resourceful helicopter pilot and the camp doctor lead the camp crew in a desperate, gory battle against the vicious creature before it picks them all off, one by one."

 

Its Legacy

 

"Some masterpieces of cinema are simply doomed at the box office and destined to be savaged by critics. Very often the culprit is bad timing, or a weak marketing effort, or internal disputes at the studio. All three of those played a role in the brutal reception that greeted John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982), which is today recognized as one of the most effective, shocking, and suspenseful horror movies of all time.

 

I saw this movie at far too young an age (thanks, Mom and Dad!), and I was puzzled to find that the TV Guide description gave it a measly two out of four stars. In the ensuing years, I learned that the failure of this film left the brilliant Carpenter almost completely disillusioned with Hollywood, which drastically altered his career trajectory. Both the snooty film critics and the major horror magazines of the time decried The Thing’s nihilism and “barf bag” special effects. The sci-fi magazine Cinefantastique posed the question, “Is this the most hated movie of all time?” Christian Nyby, the director of the 1951 version, bashed Carpenter’s remake. Even the beautiful minimalist score by Ennio Morricone was nominated for a Razzie.

 

 

It took a long time, a lot of introspection, and a lot of grassroots enthusiasm to rehabilitate the film’s reputation. Now that we’ve all had a chance to gather ourselves and process what’s happened, here are some of the key elements of horror that work a little too well in The Thing. Spoilers are ahead, obviously, but 2022 marks the fortieth anniversary of the film, so it’s well past time to knock this one off your list.

 

Many fans of The Thing blame its box office failure on Steven Spielberg’s E.T., which dominated 1982. The friendly alien in that movie resembled a child, with its big eyes and dopey grin. In contrast, The Thing toyed with the incomprehensible. To this day, I wonder: how many people ended up watching it simply because E.T. was sold out? Those viewers must have been the most appalled.

 

Yet as grim as this movie gets, the humans do not outright betray one another. Nor does anyone go Full Brockman, conceding defeat to curry favor with the enemy. Ironically, the people who go too far to fight the Thing are Blair, the smartest guy in the room, and MacReady (Kurt Russell), the film’s protagonist by default. In some ways, MacReady’s actions are similar to the drastic unilateral decisions that Ben has to make in Night of the Living Dead (1968). In his desperation to survive, MacReady assumes control by threatening to destroy the entire camp with dynamite. From there, he establishes a mini-dictatorship, with round-the-clock surveillance of the crewmembers, along with a blood test to prove who is infected and who is safe. When the gentle Clark (Richard Masur) tries to resist, MacReady shoots him dead, only to discover later that the man he killed was still human. By then, MacReady is so focused on the task at hand that he moves on, shoving poor Clark out of his mind, his own dehumanization complete. And despite that effort, MacReady’s plan goes sideways when the test succeeds in revealing the Thing. Now exposed, the creature reverts to its transitional form, killing a member of the crew. After all of that sacrifice, all that setting aside of morality and trust, they achieve nothing."

- Robert Repino, TOR

 

From the Filmmaker

 

 

Why It's Great

 

Critic Opinion

 

"AMERICA DOESN'T HAVE so many great directors to spare that it can afford to let John Carpenter fall through the cracks. Should that come to pass, and it almost has, he'll have the last laugh: the work will speak for itself. But how did he come to be so marginalized? The common wisdom is that Carpenter went into a precipitous decline after the glory days of Assault on Precinct 13 and Halloween, but can anyone really back up such a snap assessment? Is there any other kind of assessment in current film culture? Examine his oeuvre carefully and you'll realize that he has one of the most consistent and coherent bodies of work in modern cinema, in which the triumphs - those two early slam dunks, The Fog, Escape From New York, The Thing, Prince of Darkness, They Live, and In the Mouth of Madness - far outnumber the minor or problematic films. He's never done anything to be ashamed of. He's never made a dishonest film or even a lazy one. Even his Universal-ly ignored remake of Village of the Damned is beautifully crafted, with a brilliant opening 20 minutes in the bargain.

 

I would say that Carpenter's marginalization is due to something less easily identifiable and much sadder, over which he has no control. Whether we like it or not, we attune ourselves to norms and paradigms in filmmaking as they shift like tectonic plates, making unconscious adjustments in our heads about how to watch films and see them in relation to one another And without knowing it, many of us do something that we often revile in others: we make allowances for fashion. There is no doubt that the fashions in American cinema have shifted thousands of miles away from John Carpenter. He's an analog man in a digital world, who measures his own work according to criteria of value that few people pay attention to anymore. Carpenter stands completely and utterly alone as the last genre filmmaker in America. There is no one else left who does what he does - not Hill, not Cronenberg, not De Palma, not Ferrara, not Dahl, not even Craven, all of whom pass through their respective genres with ulterior motives or as specialty acts, treating those genres as netherworlds to be escaped to, museums ready to be plundered. When we speak of genre films today, we are basically talking about a precedent set in Europe by Melville and Leone, standardized by Hill with The Driter, banalized by Kasdan with Body Heat, and made into an artform by Tarantino a little over a decade later. In other words, the "meta-genre" film, which rose from the ashes of the genuine article after it was destroyed by the increasingly reductive economic structure of the business. Beyond late-night cable filler, genre exercises are now a matter of either cannily exploiting (Craven) or greedily satisfying (I Know What You Did Last Summer) the demands of young audiences. Most of the great genre films of the last twenty years - Unforgiven, After Dark My Sweet, Near Dark, Blue Steel - are isolated gestures, just like everything else in American film right now. It's a situation that effectively nullifies the give-and-take with an audience necessary for the survival of any genre. The one thread that everyone follows at the moment, the only common currency, is currency itself. Until the structure of the business changes, all other trends or tendencies will be nothing more than fodder for the Arts and Leisure section. The only other recent development, irony, already seems to be on its way out.

 

 

In a moment when isolated gestures are proliferating, why not behave as Carpenter does, remaining content to work in the manner of an Ulmer or a Siodmak, whose artistry is focused on satisfying genre conventions and the demands of narrative, and whose loftier preoccupations are filtered through said conventions? Why not behave as though events like Independence Day and Interview with the Vampire never happened, as though there were still a vast popular audience tuned to the niceties and subtleties available within genre formulae? Perhaps what makes Carpenter such an unpalatable figure for so many people is the fact that he came out of the same film school generation as Coppola and Scorsese with nary a trace of Europeanism in his work. Carpenter may be the only filmmaker who learned from auteurism, who benefited from it, and who ignored its key tenet of the director as central event, divorced from commercial and industrial considerations. There's something moving and yet a little off about his humility, the sense that he truly relishes the image of the artist locked into a system, satisfying its demands and complying with its rules."

- Kent Jones, Film Criticism

 

Public Opinion

 

"For as much as critics dismissed the film as expensive trash, there is an idea here: that fear and paranoia can dissolve the bonds of friendship, camaraderie and citizenship. That they can sap us of our ability to work together and paralyze us in the face of crisis. It is an idea which, in our age of misinformation, public distrust and pandemic disease, lands with heavy force.”

- Jamelle Bouie, Letterboxd

 

The AI's Poetic Opinion

 

thing

"A thing of terror
Dark parade, and vow,
Inlay has her love—
E'er saw your poor face."

- Samantha

 

 

Factoids

 

Previous Rankings

 

#64 (2020), UNRANKED (2018, 2016, 2014, 2013, 2012)

 

Director Count

 

Stanley Kubrick (3), Brad Bird (2), James Cameron (2), John Carpenter (2), Martin Scorsese (2),  David Fincher (2), Spike Lee (2), Sergio Leone (2), Hayao Miyazaki (2), Christopher Nolan (2), The Russos (2),  Ridley Scott (2),  Andrew Stanton (2), Peter Weir (2), Paul Thomas Anderson (1), John G. Avildsen (1), Frank Capra (1), Charlie Chaplin (1), Brenda Chapman (1), Joel Coen (1), Wes Craven (1), Jonathan Demme (1), Pete Doctor (1), Stanley Donan (1), Clint Eastwood (1), Victor Fleming (1), William Friedkin (1), Terry Gillam (1), Michel Gondry (1), Steve Hickner (1), Rian Johnson (1), Terry Jones (1), Gene Kelly (1), John Lasseter (1), Richard Linklater (1), Katia Lund (1), David Lynch (1), Richard Marquand (1), Fernando Meirelles (1), Katsuhiro Otomo (1), Jan Pinkava (1), Makoto Shinkai (1), Vittorio de Sica (1), Steven Spielberg (1), Isao Takahata (1), Guillermo Del Torro (1), Lee Unkrich (1), Gore Verbinski (1), Simon Wells (1), Billy Wilder (1), Kar-Wai Wong (1), Robert Zemeckis (1)

 

Decade Count

 

1930s (2), 1940s (2), 1950s (2), 1960s (4), 1970s (4), 1980s (9), 1990s (11), 2000s (17), 2010s (7)

 

Country Count

 

Japan (5), Italy (3), Brazil (1), China (1), Mexico (1), Spain (1), UK (1)

 

Franchise Count

 

Pixar (6), Ghibli (4), The MCU (2), Star Wars (2), Alien (1), Avatar (1), Before (1), Blade Runner (1), Dollars (1), The Exorcist (1), Finding Nemo (1), Hannibal (1), Halloween (1), Incredibles (1), Pirates of the Caribbean (1), Rocky (1), Scream (1), The Shining (1), Thing (1), Toy Story (1), The Wizard of Oz (1)

 

 

Re-Weighted Placements

 

#52 Fanboy Ranking, #40 Cinema Ranking

#43 Old Farts Ranking, #39 Damn Kids Ranking

#38 Ambassador Ranking, #41 All-American Ranking

#105 Cartoon Ranking, #37 Damn Boomer Ranking