Movieguide and the Top 100 Films

Now, as you may know, the Greatest Movies list that is most trusted is the Sight & Sound survey. Held every ten years with hundreds of critics giving their personal top ten, it was describes by esteemed critic Roger Ebert as "by far the most respected of the countless polls of great movies--the only one most serious movie people take seriously." Now that perennial favourites Movieguide have waded in, however, that's all going to change! Or perhaps not...


Before I reveal the top ten, here's what the Sight & Sound Poll came up with in 2002, with their position on the Movieguide list in brackets:


Closest runners-up:
Seven Samurai (81)
The Searchers (60)


The top ten:
10.Singin' In The Rain (71)
9. 8 1/2 (N/A)
7. Sunrise: A Song Of Two Humans (N/A)
7. The Battleship Potemkin (1. Only kidding, it's not there either)
6. 2001: A Space Odyssey (N/A)
5. Tokyo Story (N/A)
4. The Godfather & Pt. 2 (Do you even need to ask? These were never gonna make the cut.)
3. The Rules of the Game (N/A)
2. Vertigo (74)
1. Citizen Kane (77)


Yes. That's not a typo. It really does say 77. The film that more critics than any other would place as the greatest film ever made didn't even make it into the top three-quarters. And over half of the films that real critics would place in the top 10, didn't even make it into the top 100 and those that did couldn't crack 70. Even taking into account The Godfathers, which were far too violent and 'immoral' to ever make it into their list, and Potemkin, which was communist propaganda therefore evil (right-wing propaganda is fine though, you'll be glad to hear), that's a pretty poor state of affairs. Also missing out were the likes of Goodfellas, The Bicycle Thieves, Raging Bull, Apocalypse Now, M, Schindler's List and Dr. Strangelove along with countless others. Which is also pretty shit for such a list. Films that did manage to make it however, include Casablanca (79), Metropolis (52, not too bad), The General (90) though probably not high enough. Further 'Top Movies' included such films as The Pink Panther (93. Good film. But not that good.), Song Of The South (69. Really? That film which is so racist they won't release it on DVD?), The Prince Of Egypt (26. Yup, better than Kane etc. is this animated adventure about Moses.) and Braveheart (24. I'm not going to even say anything about this.).


Right I believe it's now time to reveal Movieguide's Top 10 best films ever. Here goes:


10. Repentance (Basically because it was responsible for the breaking of the USSR)
9. The Hiding Place
8. Chariots of Fire
7. Babette's Feast
6. The Robe
5. Ben-Hur (Spartacus is better. And it helped break the black-list. And Kirk Douglas isn't a cunt like Heston...)
4. Sergeant York
3. A Tale of Two Cities
2. Les Miserables
1. It's A Wonderful Life


Now, I'll have nobody say that I dislike Frank Capra's It's A Wonderful Life or that it is in any way bad. I just can't accept it as the best film ever made. I really like it, but it didn't change the face of cinema like Citizen Kane or The Godfather did. Don't get me wrong, its by far and away not the worst film I've ever seen top one of these lists, but I feel top 10 or 20 is about as far as the film can go.


So, no. 1 isn't an awful choice, it's just a shame about the rest of the 100 really....

Movieguide and The Kids Are Alright

Look at those horrible lesbians...
image via wikipedia

Now, I'll admit straight that I haven't yet seen The Kids Are Alright, an independent movie that was up there with the big-hitters of The King's Speech and The Social Network during the awards season. However, since this doesn't concern the quality of the film so much as its content I think I'll get away with it. I'll let Movieguide provide the summary:

THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT is a despicable, explicit, obscene movie about a lesbian couple with two teenage children who are torn apart when one of the women suddenly begins a torrid affair with the biological father who donated his sperm. THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT contains abundant foul language and explicit, depicted sex scenes and nudity combined with a humanist, homosexual worldview that makes for an abhorrent movie.

It's nice that they're looking at the film objectively, on its own merits though isn't it?
Movieguide traditionally devotes a paragraph at the start of the review covering the moral (according to their, err... nutjob... beliefs) aspects of the movie. Here is that paragraph, in full, with comments from your guide to this horrible homophobic world (that would be me, incidentally):

(HHH, HoHoHo, PCPCPC, FeFeFe, C, LLL, V, SSS, NN, AA, DD, MMM) (I imagine that those are codes for something...) Very strong humanist, pro-homosexual, politically correct, (How evil all those things are! What about the children?!) confused feminist worldview about a lesbian woman who cheats on her “partner” with the sperm donor of their two children (She is her partner. Not her "partner". Get over it.), with some redemptive focus on forgiveness after sins are exposed; about 50 obscenities (including many “f” words), two strong profanities and 16 light profanities; some brief violence includes a slap and a man throws his motorcycle helmet in disgust at himself (Oh the horror! Won't somebody please think of the children? Who knows what damage seeing a man throw his helmet will do to those young minds!); very strong sexual content includes lesbians watching explicit male homosexual pornography (I like the way that you feel the need to mention that it is homosexual porn as if its somehow worse...), plus explicit scenes of depicted fornication and sodomy (Not fornication! You sound like Miriam Margolyes in that episode of Blackadder II...), and lesbian gives a confusing answer to her son’s question of why she and his other “mother” watch porn movies about male homosexuals (Leave the homosexual porn alone already! I fear someone may have a complex...); images of upper female nudity (Oh no!), rear male nudity (Oh the children!) and upper male nudity (You know, Jesus is almost always depicted with no top on too...); alcohol use and drunkenness; smoking and teenage friend of a main teenage character snorts cocaine with him; and, cheating, vandalism, teenager tries dangerous skateboard stunt, lying, spying, landscape designer unfairly dismisses an employee, teenage rebellion, daughter talks back to one lesbian “mother,” and no solid moral compass or foundation. (What about the Nic, or Jules at the end? Oh, wait, they're lesbians. How can they possibly be good compasses...)

Here are a few choice quotations from the main body of the review, again with the odd comment from myself, but mostly I'll just let their own hatefulness speak for itself:

THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT is a despicable, crude, obscene example of the moral perversion running rampant in today’s godless secular humanist society and in the homosexual “community.” As such, it also shows the complete breakdown of morality among most, if not all, liberals and leftists, especially among those who promote homosexual and “transgender” behavior, including the approval and promotion of such evil perversion among the world’s children.  (What 'evil perversion'? The idea that homosexual relationships are normal, and nothing to be afraid of? Because that isn't evil. It's quite the opposite in fact.)

                                                                                                                     

The main message of this movie, which includes very strong explicit sex scenes and abundant obscene language and doesn’t make much sense (Then why do [and I can't stress this next word enough] real critics think it does?), is that homosexual couples and families have problems just like traditional heterosexual ones, but that, like traditional families, love, forgiveness and family bonds can overcome those problems (You've taken in it's point surprisingly well, actually...). This is probably what a licentious, lamebrain, loony leftist will see (Ah. One step forward, two steps back...). A media-wise person, however, will discover an obnoxious, obscene movie with unappealing, confused characters (Ha! Media-wise my arse. Brainwashed by Fox News more like). He or she also probably will note that this movie proves that homosexual couples who have children are indeed perverted, damaged, misguided people who lack the moral sense that comes when people accept a biblical worldview, turn away from sin, and continually seek refuge, redemption and salvation in God through Jesus Christ. (Look you twisted, evil person. You have seen in this film what you want to see. The fact that there are hundreds of movies, TV shows and books that depict actual cases of heterosexual affairs has, I notice, completely been missed from this 'review'. Instead you focus on this fictional depiction of a homosexual person being unfaithful as proof of your prejudices. Are you suggesting that no heterosexual christian man or woman has ever been unfaithful? Because that is bullshit of galactic proportions. I also note that you completely skip over the whole homosexual couples are just the same as heterosexual couples bit. Oh, and I think you'll find that you're ever-so-perfect 'biblical worldview' is a mish-mash of old ideas that have been a part of human society since the inception of humanity, and therefore not exclusive to those who believe in the existence of a supernatural being that created all life, and pieces stolen from various other religions with the bits you don't like left out. Morality was created by evolution to keep unhelpful practices [such as interbreeding] at a minimum as well as keeping the large group of proto-humans functioning as a whole, and thus are not solely the preserve of Christians. Morals were around a long time before Christianity and will be around a long time after Christianity has left the Earth except in a few madmen that nobody takes seriously. And hating homosexuals, or anyone else different to you for that matter, is not moral. It is immoral, and something that would have been driven out long ago had religion been overthrown centuries ago. Oh, just one last thing. There is no God. And in the immortal words of Robert Pirsig: "when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion." (Lila: An Inquiry into Morals, 1991)

Of course, the characters in THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT do none of these things. Also, the movie itself contains enough extremely explicit, obscene content that it will turn off any viewer who doesn’t share its leftist, liberal, homosexual worldview. THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT is made by radical liberals/leftists for radical liberals/leftists, the kind of liberal/leftist who sees nothing wrong in exposing people to lots of strong foul language and explicit sex scenes with nudity. Its existence, and its reported acclaim at Robert Redford’s Sundance Film Festival, proves that the pro-homosexual liberal/leftist agenda has become morally bankrupt, artistically vapid and intellectually repulsive. (Not nearly as repulsive as you.)

Hmm... Kind of lost my rag a bit there didn't I...

Movieguide and The Top Ten Lists

Following the success of my post the other day on movieguide's coverage of the Golden Globe Awards, I thought I'd come back and tackle a few of their '10 best films' lists. First up we have this list for the Top 10 films for mature audiences of 2008 (I've thoughtfully put the Rotten Tomatoes consensus in brackets to help you judge, as well as comments from me where I felt they were necessary...):

• 10. Henry Poole Is Here (37%)
• 9. Marley & Me (61%)
• 8. Tyler Perry's The Family That Preys (51%)
• 7. Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (10%. Also, this is the film that believes evolutionary theory caused/causes fascism, the holocaust and such things as abortion and eugenics. Little surprise they liked it really. Oh, and its 97 minutes of anti-evolution, pro-christian lies.)
• 6. The Day The Earth Stood Still (I heard that it was a pile of festering manure, hence its 21%)
• 5. The Longshots (41%)
• 4. Changeling (62%)
• 3. Valkyrie (61%)
• 2. Gran Torino (80% At last! A really good film!)
• 1. Iron Man (94% But with an average of 7.4/10, is it really film of the year territory?)

Right, whilst I agree that Gran Torino is right up there, pretty much the entire rest of the list is complete and utter drivel. Where's The Dark Knight? Or Slumdog Millionaire? Or The Wrestler? In Bruges, Revolutionary Road, The Reader and Frost/Nixon are all ignored in favour of dross like Expelled. I mean, Iron Man was a good way to spend a couple of hours, but best film of the year? Not by a long shot.

Now, let's see what crap they put in 2009's list:

• 10. The Blind Side (67%)
• 9. Confessions of a Shopaholic (23%)
• 8. Invictus (76%)
• 7. Julie & Julia (65%)
• 6. Knowing (33% It is so much worse than that though...)
• 5. Star Trek (94%)
• 4. The Stoning of Soraya M. (58%)
• 3. Taken (58%)
• 2. Terminator Salvation (32%)
• 1. The Young Victoria (76%)

Now, this list is nowhere near as bad as the previous year's, but where is The Hurt Locker, or District 9? Or A Single Man or An Education? Inglourious Basterds? Precious? Up In The Air? A Prophet? There are so many great films not included, yet tripe like Knowing, Confessions... and Terminator make the grade?

Finally, we have their favourite mature films of the last decade:

• 10. The Family Man (52%)
• 9. Fireproof (40%)
• 8. Evelyn (65%)
• 7. Gods and Generals (8%. You've really excelled yourself here)
• 6. Batman Begins (84% Ah. A good film in this list at last...)
• 5. The Queen (97%)
• 4. The Patriot (You would like this... But it's still only 62%)
• 3. Spiderman/Spiderman 2 (89/93%)
• 2. The Lord Of The Rings (92/96/94% But if these are only 2nd then what's...)
• 1. The Passion Of The Christ (Oh, Jesus. I should have known it would be you... 50%)

I could list every single film from the noughties that should be in this list before most that are, but I would be here for hours, so I urge you to put forth your own suggestions in the comments area!

I daresay I shall be back soon enough with their list of 2010's films, so keep those eyes peeled! As an added bonus, they're constructing a list of the best 100 films ever, so when that's complete I can have a go at that too...

The Kite Runner

Kite running. Like gun running,
except different.

The Kite Runner is a 2007 drama film directed by Marc Forster based on the novel of the same name by Khaled Hosseini.... It tells the story of Amir, a well-to-do boy from the Wazir Akbar Khan district of Kabul, who is tormented by the guilt of abandoning his friend Hassan, the son of his father's Hazara servant. The story is set against a backdrop of tumultuous events, from the fall of the monarchy in Afghanistan through the Soviet invasion, the mass exodus of Afghan refugees to Pakistan and the United States, and the Taliban regime.
Yea. I just copied that from Wikipedia. I'm getting lazier and lazier. Anyway, the Kite Runner was nominated for two Golden Globes and an Academy Awards. So, not a bad film. Of course, some people disagree. Do they offer a structured critique of the film that could help potential viewers? Of course not.
 Incidentally, this post does feature some spoilers, as is always the way.

Amazon.com:

I hate having to read a movie!!!!! (Yet you think nothing of inflicting the torment of exclamation marks on others?) I had no idea this movie was subtitled (Seriously? No idea? Perhaps you simply suffered some bad luck, but I'm willing to guess this film would have been sorted in a "foreign films" section, have a sticker or somesuch notice informing you it was subtitled, and this fact would be mentioned in the blurb.). After about 30 plus minutes of reading, I got so bored, I gave up (Yea. It is hard work...). If I wanted to read, I would read the book (But you didn't. Nor did you watch the film. Making your opinion on the worth of such material as useful as... Well... You.) . The kite flying was quite dull as well. (Well. I found it to be more interesting than any kite flying I've ever seen in any other film. But I suppose that's subjective. However, you're an idiot. How exciting did you want the kite flying to be? The kites cut down other kites! That's more excitement than you can legitimately expect from a kite-flying scene! Did you want naked woman to be flying the kites, and for them to hit eagles and make them explode?)

Glad I only rented it. (I'm glad I only rented you. I know that doesn't make sense, but you're not going to read enough of this comment to know.)

Amazon.com:

In this movie, child actors act out boy on boy rape (Actually, it is just implied. What they act out is a fully clothed assault, after which one of the boys begins to undo his belt and Hassan's trousers are pulled at, before the camera cuts away.). In my opinion, you should not rent or buy this movie, even if the book is on your child's school reading list. (Yea! Mess up your child's education! Better still, since you know best, don't send them to school! Tutor them in a basment and eat rats for breckfast!) Granted, the scene doesn't go far, but it goes far enough to let you know what has happened. (Yes, that's how things are shown in films. Do you complain about murders or serious assaults being shown?) Now, THE REAL LIFE BOY ACTOR FEARS BEING ATTACKED because the movie offends Afghan dignity. (Source= http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3639956) This kid has been used. (Your opinion on that matter - arguably valid as it is - is irrelevant to the quality of the film.) Compared to that kid, I am lucky. (Yea. The fact you're luckier or unluckier than an actor has no bearing on whether or not I would like to watch a film though...) I am only out a few bucks for a movie that I will never finish watching. This movie should be rated R (No, because it doesn't show anything that warrants such a rating.) . Then I would not have allowed my children to rent it (Alright... No-one's saying you have to make them watch it...). If you write a review about this movie, please mention the boy on boy rape so that others can make an informed decision. No. I won't, because it is mentioned in the DVD content rating, and explaining it further would ruin part of the plot.

The author of this post has not written any negative reviews of films that feature either man-on-woman rape, or murder, torture, or serious assault. Now, while it is possible he/she simply feels not enough warning was given in the case of this film - despite the clear warning labels on the packaging stating the film features "strong thematic material including the sexual assault of a child" - it would appear that this person rates male-on-male rape assault to be far worse than male-on-female rape or murder. He/she, for instance, doesn't write a scathing review of Shindler's List because the Holocaust was bad. Now, while rape is of course terrible, the sexes of the participants shouldn't make a difference to the way we treat it. So this person's a homophobic idiot, who sees the very implication of something close to homosexuality as being far worse than genocide. That's flawless logic on my part, incidentally. Unpleasant things happen all the time in pieces of fiction, and this one was intrinsic to the plot. If you dislike watching harrowing scenes, then fair enough. But this isn't a piece of child pornography, it's a film where something bad happens to a character.

Movieguide: (Review conclusion) 

THE KITE RUNNER has many good things in it, but a crucial scene at the story’s climax shows the protagonist praying for forgiveness in a Muslim mosque (Could you be going somewhere with this?). During that scene, a song on the soundtrack talks of seeking and finding forgiveness through the false Muslim god (You're a Christian site. We get it. Chances are your readers are also Christians who agree with you, hence why they trust your reviews.) , Allah, and through Mohammed, the brutal false prophet who has led billions of people away from Jesus Christ and into eternal damnation (Not keep on the idea of purgatory then, are you? Still, it must be nice to have an unblinking belief in something). Mohammed, of course, killed his enemies, but Jesus Christ died for his enemies and their salvation (Yea, I've read about them, their both in the Qur'an, right? Incidentally, I'm not going to start a theological debate, but Muhammad lived in the 7th century. Warfare was quite common then. And you're going to keep a straight face and pretend there's not violence in the Old Testament?) . No one can replace Jesus, who is the one and only true Divine Savior who saves us from our sins (God could replace him. God can do anything. Shame on you for doubting him!).

And finally, a short but sweet review from Christian Spotlight:

I found this movie to be political, promotional of Islam, subtitles.which were hard to read due to background scenes. Ha! I lied! It wasn't sweet at all. Well, while the main (Muslim) character did try and find forgiveness from Allah, the fact a character wants forgiveness is hardly a huge promotional piece. It also showed the Taliban in a negative light. Do you think anyone, after seeing this film, rushed out and converted to Islam? Well, no, you image they were still confused by the crafty subtitles, don't you? Because you're a big racist.

Movieguide and The Golden Globes

Image from tvcrunch

The christian film review site movieguide.org is a favourite with us weeders. It reviews films based on their morals more than their quality. The films seem to be viewed based on what damage they would do to children, no matter who the target audience of the movie is. Things such as sex, liberal viewpoints, 'pagan worldviews' (anything that ain't christian, basically) and homosexuality are common reasons for their condemnation. Oddly, violence doesn't seem to feature quite as much... But, anyway, today we shall be concerning ourselves with their coverage of the recent Golden Globes award ceremony. This is, I'm afraid, going to be quite a long piece:

There was very little that was “golden” at the Golden Globes Awards last night. (Oh how very droll...)

Tasteless sex jokes and insults flowed freely (The horror! The horror!). And, some of the big winners were movies with graphic sexual content. (Maybe they were just the best movies?)

Some winners, including SOCIAL NETWORK Producer

Scott Rudin (That's their formatting cock-up, not mine. Just to clarify.), mentioned their families or their parents, but there were practically no family values in sight. (Tragedy)

The host, “comedian” Ricky Gervais (I don't like Gervais much myself, but he is, undoubtedly, a comedian. That is his profession) was constantly either hurling insults at the attendees and presenters, or making crude sex jokes (I bet they were pretty funny though...). Some of the presenters picked up on this tone, including Robert Downey, Jr., who’s entire presentation onstage centered on the actresses he had not slept with who were up for Best Actress last night (I can guarantee that was funny...), and Robert DeNiro, whose schtick involved insulting the 90 or so people at the Hollywood Foreign Press Association who decide the nominees and winners (You leave DeNiro alone! Or he'll shave his head and kill you. Or was that just a film? I forget...).

Three of the big winners, THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT, BURLESQUE and BLACK SWAN, contained pornographic sex scenes in them (No. Not one of them featured explicit, unsimulated pornographic acts. Burlesque was also a 12A in Britain, making it extremely unlikely to have contained any kind of sexually explicit content), resulting in very poor performances at the box office. (Excuse me? Black Swan has made $77 million, from a $13 million budget. That's not poor in any way. The Kids Are Alright is a small indie film, so was never going to make much, and Burlesque is shit. So no, supposed 'pornographic sex scenes' have nothing to do with anything.)

Two of the bright spots last night were TOY STORY 3 winning Best Animated Movie and Colin Firth of THE KING’S SPEECH winning Best Actor (They did go to the right people yes, but so did many others). This is fine and dandy, but why didn’t TOY STORY 3, the best reviewed and most popular movie of the year, also get nominated for Best Comedy or Musical Movie? (Actually, metacritic [which records the average score of a film] states that The Social Network is the best reviewed film of the year, with a score of 95/100. Carlos is second with 94/100. Toy Story 3 is third with 92/100. Victory sip!)

At the very end of the show, the host smarmily thanked God for “making me an atheist.” The last time we checked, 82% of Americans say they believe in God and the world has 2.3 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims who believe in one God. (That doesn't make you right. It's still a delusion. Just one shared by a lot of people)

The fact is, as statistics with our Annual Report to the Entertainment Industry confirm, uplifting movies and home videos marketed to families, including those with spiritual values that acknowledge God, make the most money (Because more people can see them. Obviously a film rated U or G is going to be able to make more than one rated 18 or R purely because far more people can view it.). And, movies with graphic sexual content like BLACK SWAN, THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT and BURLESQUE bomb at the box office. (Black Swan didn't bomb! How many times? And how do you explain the likes of Titanic then?)

Maybe the career of Ricky Gervais would do much better if he cleaned up his act! (He's doing pretty well, to be honest. I imagine the American Office keeps him pretty rich for a start...)

I will be presenting highlights from MOVIEGUIDE®’s 2011Report to the Entertainment Industry on Friday, Feb. 18, at the 19^th Annual MOVIEGUIDE® Faith & Values Awards Gala. We expect some of our numbers on what kind of movies moviegoers prefer to be better than ever. (I'll be honest and say I haven't a fucking clue what that is supposed to say.)

Moviegoers want to see good triumph over evil, justice to prevail over injustice and purity to reign over impurity. Don’t you? (Oh... You're intimating that because I like films that sometimes have unhappy endings and deal with real issues, I must be evil. Well, glad I got that cleared up, thanks.)

To steal a line from The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, the people at Movieguide are a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes. And the revolution can't come fucking soon enough.