The Chorus Canon • Page 9

We need to fund a research project to find out why some people prefer Casino over Goodfellas. It is so baffling to me.

 

I believe it's called an opinion

thanks dude

 

Why do you prefer it to Goodfellas?

 

not saying you're wrong. I might not even prefer it tbh. both are great and they could both be on there. I just went with that one because I saw it most recently and the idea of me saying "my personal canon" was basically films I have a particular affinity for. it wasn't easy. just found it weird of you to nitpick that one film out of my list is all. but it's no biggie

 

You don't think Casino drags? The arguments between DeNiro and Stone in particular.

 

can you please just explain why you prefer it

 

Personal Canon is fun. Gimmie some time

 

knew I should've went with Goodfellas

 

I've started watching through all Academy Award Best Picture nominees and winners. Still in the early 1930s... I'm thinking of adding in the Palme d'Or winners once I get to the year that started. Anyone done anything like this or similar? I know these award bodies miss a lot of great films that are revered in retrospect, but it's interesting to see what was honored at the time. I also like having a firm list to work through.

 

You are going to watch a lot of garbage if you follow the Oscar route. The Palme d'Or route can be hard because some of the films never got an American release.

The best thing to do is use a greatest films of all time list. They Shoot Pictures, Don't They? just updated their list. The top 100 would give you a sample of genres, countries, and directors.

 

If you’re interested in something like the Palme that moves beyond strictly American cinema, the Golden Bear (Berlin), Golden Lion (Venice), and Golden Leopard (Locarno) winners are worth looking into. You’ll find stuff here that doesn’t show up on some canons.

Tetra said the They Shoot Pictures list, which is probably the best resource. I was working my way through it on and off for years and still return from time to time. For me, it’s very representative of the “core” canon of cinema.

 

One of the things that can be hard when you first start branching out is that it can be hard to differentiate what classics are conventional films and which ones can be very experimental or different. For example, if you wanted to learn more about the French New Wave, Truffaut films are a lot easier for beginners to get into than Godard, and even within Godard's own work it is a lot easier to get people to watch Breathless than it is to watch Weekend. There were a lot of films I had to go back to a few years after initially not getting the praise.

 

Thanks! A quick browse through that list, and it seems high quality, at least based off the films I've seen. I really like the idea of going through the past century through film. I might just add the winners of those three awards to my "to watch" list and slowly go through from the beginning.

This is going to take a decade for me to complete haha

 

Yeah the first big example of that for me was watching 8 1/2 in high school and thinking it was fine but not understanding the acclaim whatsoever. When many people or outlets make greatest of all time lists, it will be a big mesh of films that are great in different ways and they don’t properly elaborate those distinctions. Some films are “great” because of their impact at the time and may not necessarily be the most enjoyable or accessible to a modern audience. A more obscure but influential arthouse film can be slotted next to something that was more of a major mainstream hit when it came out, and a newbie would need to look elsewhere to figure that out and know what they’re going into

 

There should be some sort of recommended tier system. Of course any list of tiers would invite disagreement, but there needs to be an understanding of difficulty.

 

I think part of the fun though can be seeing something early that you're not really ready for, thinking its overrated and then coming back to it later and realising you were just dumb.

 

On Letterboxd someone once made several lists of Entry, Mid, and High-level guides to arthouse films. Which, some of the entry-level films *are* the ones that would arguably be the more difficult ones on a more general “Greatest of All Time” list for someone who is just starting out. And so yeah if you want to get super nitpicky you could be like “8 1/2 is actually much less accessible than Rashamon or Three Colors: Blue!” But when I first came across it I found it very useful

AN ENTRY-LEVEL GUIDE TO ART-HOUSE FILMS

 

It depends on how willing the person is to try new things. I think a lot of people think art films are all black-and-white avant-garde films where people sit around around drinking coffee and smoking cigarettes.

 

Yeah that list is too ambitious. People need to start slower than that.

 

shit I forgot Stroszek

 

That was my experience with 2001 (think I mentioned this in a thread recently). Even more fun, though, is seeing something you’re “not ready for,” not quite enjoying it, but being obsessed with it afterward. (Which, maybe means I was ready, & it was the evolution I needed, lol.)

Remember watching Tree of Life with some friends who were more into movies than I was at the time (which was a low bar, lol), at their suggestion. They paused it during the whole creation bit & were like, “what the heck is this?” but still finished it. Pretty sure their final take on the film was pretty negative. But, a lot about the film kept swirling around my “Green Lantern was fine, I guess, not terrible” mind, until I finally bought the Blu-ray & rewatched it by myself.

(I then remember asking for “cinema” recommendations on AbsolutePunk, wording it clunky, & getting mostly ignored with a think a little mockery on the side, lol. Having to lurk quietly to find recommendations was so dumb.)

 

It’s a fun project but kind of a drag if you go strictly chronologically. If you’re not married to that I’d strongly suggest jumping around.

I think I have about 12 left, one of which is lost and two of which are only in the UCLA archives.

Ignore Tetra. I can count on one hand the picture noms that aren’t at least pretty good.

 

This is an interesting list. In particular because I cannot imagine picking that particular Godard myself.

Koyaaniqatsi was so weirdly hypnotic and moving. I expected it to be a chore and it was not at all.

 

Tetra? I guess I'm not completely married to the concept... watching dozens of 1930s movies in a row doesn't fill me with excitement haha

Also, curious which noms you aren't a fan of.

 

I really liked going through my list chronologically because it allowed me to kinda get used to the vibes of older movies which made certain films feel more impressive than they might have done had I watched them out of that context. I generally just watched the ones that most excited me while doing that though.