This one isn’t mine — Owen and I are each posting ours next week. But I’m fascinated by this compilation of 100 important movies, as chosen by a team of obsessives at the British newspaper The Telegraph. Of note: 1) Farenheit 9/11 is No. 1 — not because the judges think it’s best, but because, well, the Brits have a fancy political theory. Avatar is No. 100 because, well, because it’s Avatar. Saw is No. 14, because “the decade of Abu Ghraib found its cinematic equivalent. Mamma Mia! is No. 18 because it’s the highest grossing British movie of all time. (Who knew?) The Passion of the Christ comes in at No. 9 for being a “phenomenal work of outsider art.”
As for Gladiator, above? The Telegraph cineastes rank it No. 53. EW ranks it No. 3. Discuss.
Image credit: Everett Collection
Number one is wall e
I hate that ew does not have an edit button.. anyways, what i wanted to say is, personally, my number one movie of the decade is wall e, follow by adaptation, moulin rouge, almost famous and munich
Oh and zodiac and both kill bill movies should be on my list too
Wall e?? Really?? Thats probably in my bottom 10!!
Agree, Dark Knight is #2 and Inception will be #1 for the next decade
Picking movies before you’ve even seen them pretty much disqualifies you from the conversation.
@crispy – its a comments section douche-bag, I don’t think any of these rankings are official, its all in good fun, relax and take a laxative.
No, it does seem a little early to pick favorites for an entire decade yet to be.
Personally, I didn’t think Gladiator was all that memorable. If I had to choose a sword-and-sandals epic, I’d watch 300. Or Rome (no battle in Gladiator approached Titus Pullo’s own gladiatorial fight in the first season).
i see where you are coming from (although i personally like gladiator the best), but i think one of the points is that there probably would not be 300 or Rome without Gladiator as a predecessor.
If Farenheit 9/11 is number one then maybe Twilight should be number 2 just to show how credible this list is (if you haven’t noticed this is all sarcasm)
Love the sarcasm. I am not a fan of Twilight, but anything is better than Michael Moore! It is amazing the crap he spews and people listen and believe it.
you mean kinda like how people think glenn beck is able to tie his own shoes?
It’s amazing how people listen to either of those men. Just like it’s amazing how people listen to Biden and Palin.
I appreciate your sarcasm BUT
while I have no opinion on Fahrenheit 9/11 and I think Moore is a tool I do have to say that Twilight was an important film- a rubbish film but an important one. It highlights a significant change in marketing and content and the series has to hold a record for most rapidly produced sequel… good or bad it is a film that refuses to be ignored.
How does Twilight qualify for a significant change in marketing and content and rapidly produced sequel? Marketing: posters and previews everywhere the cast making international appearances within hours–see Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. Content: Twilight is about humans, werewolves, and vampires–it’s a monster movie thinly veiled as a Romeo and Juliet, Pretty in Pink, and Cinderella. Rapidly produced sequel: Lord of the Rings was produced a year apart, I believe. The original Harry Potters were in rapid succession too, if I’m not mistaken. If Twilight is significant for anything, it’s the obsessive behavior exhibited by its rabid fans who cannot differentiate between real and fiction, or refuse to believe that.
The Lord of the Rings films were filmed all at once then each film underwent a year of post production before it was released theatrically. It took from 1999-2003 to get all three films complete and that is only filming and post production that doesn’t include pre production. I wouldn’t qualify it under the Twilight super fast (and amateur) movie making.
Gladiator was slightly above average at best. When that movie first came out its reviews were not out of this world. It still only holds a 77% on RT. Actually this list lost all credibility with the inclusion of the SAW films.
It’s not a list of the finests films, but the most defining. Gladiator brought a dead genre to big box-office success and critical reception. It also made Russell Crowe & Joaquin Phoneix household names.
Ok, so this list is movies that “defined” the decade, not necessarily the best movies. Interesting. I’m not even sure it’s possible to do that without some distance and the proper perspective. Toughie. Devil Wears Prada?
Gladiator will always be the most overrated movie of the decade in my book, follow by the LOTR trilogy and hangover
Their list might be a bit sketchy, but Farenheit is definitely among the top 5 of the decade
what the hell is up with the Gladiator hate???
laser envy
I like Gladiator. I was entertained and I kind of saw it as a love story. All he wanted was to go home to his wife and son.
The Gladiator hate comes from the fact that it is a so-so movie (my opinion, but many others share it) and was wildly overpraised. I probably wouldn’t hate it as much if critics hadn’t drooled over it so profusely.
Gladiator is very overrated and about almost as fleeting as the English Patient was in the 90′s.
The English Patient is a brilliant movie. Gladiator just wasn’t as good so don’t compare the two.
Lord of the Rings Trilogy – never anything done like it before and set the stage for Kill Bill. Telling a complete story and having to use a sequel to do it, not making a sequel because the first was a blockbuster.
Ah, leave it up to the Brits to tear apart a cinema standard they will probably never attain. Sorry. Moore is really good with editing things out and not telling the whole truth, Avatar looks like a bunch of dread wearing smurf hippies with pointy weapons and cannot possibly be anywhere in the top 100 of the decade when there are movies like The Dark Knight and Up. And I realize they ranked higher, but the sheer fact that 9/11 is #1 almost discredits the whole list for me.
Your last sentence says it all!!
I’m having trouble putting my mind around “definining movies” vs “good movies”, but how on earth is ‘School of Rock’ more defining or important than ‘Milk’ or ‘Crash’???
Ugh, nutty Brits.
Wait. ‘The Incredibles’ is the 3rd most defining movie of the decade??
I fold.
I can see that. Pixar certainly defined cinema in the ’00s (I can’t bring myself to say noughties). And The Incredibles was sorta the tipping point that said these animated movies are as much for adults as for kids. It might have been the first one to feature fully realized human characters too.
Okay, that just affirms my suspicion that the whole defining vs good thing is over my head. I couldn’t really think past the cartoon people or story. The part of my brain that is supposed to understand this is quite possibly a black hole. I’ll stick to arguing good vs bad. heh
I totally agree with Crispy. Pixar has had a massive impact on cinema and not only was the incredibles a deliciously entertaining piece of cinema for both adults and children but it also showed us that animation could go beyond disney morality.
@ambient lite: crash was pretty horrible.. a “lifetime” movie full of cliches and stereotypes. And seriously, it was so bad it came close to being racist
Come on. Was it really worse than School of Rock?
to be honest i’ve never seen this movie, nor do i really want to, but i think that Borat has had a huge influence ever since it came out. but my favourite film this decade was monsters inc. if you don’t cry at the end, you aren’t human
Pretty much anything that pixar did this year was gold.. and I don’t HATE gladiator or lord of the rings, I just think they were average and well, boring
Sigh.. and I meant this DECADE rather then YEAR
Oh, you know what movie not on their list that *defines* the decade… Cloverfield. Love it or hate it, that whole “found footage” genre became a big deal in the era of cam phones and youtube.
blair witch project- cloverfield was a product of that film…
both of them should be on the list. Blair Witch because it created the genre, Cloverfield because it’s just freaking hot !!