Subscribe to Listverse
You may recall that we published a list of movies about movies not too long ago. It caused a bit of controversy due to the lack of a few entries. This list includes some of those omissions, plus a few films that are absolutely must-sees. Be sure to mention any that are missing from this, and the first list, in the comments.
A camera crew follows a serial killer/thief around as he exercises his craft. He expounds on art, music, nature, society, and life as he offs mailmen, pensioners, and random people. Slowly he begins involving the camera crew in his activities and they begin wondering if what they’re doing is such a good idea, particularly when the killer kills a rival and the rival’s brother sends a threatening letter.
This is the only movie on this list that I have not yet seen and therefore cannot accurately give any rating but the review on IMDB stated that “Our killer’s absolute disregard for human life, other than a thick crew of visually stunning characters, is nothing short of a masterpiece.”
A week in the life of Ben, a powerful Hollywood producer, as he juggles negotiations with a studio head so that his newest picture can open at Cannes in two weeks. Fighting with a high-strung director who must make edits to the film, with an actor and his agent because the star has arrived on the set of a new picture with a full beard, and with his most recent ex-wife, Kelly, who may have a lover. Can Ben keep it all together, get the green light from the studio to go to Cannes, move his new picture past the beard crisis, and maybe return to Kelly’s good graces?
What makes this movie interesting is that it views the life of a Hollywood producer who tries to keep his personal and professional life in check but it keeps getting screwed up by the people around him. This movie has a good story, likable characters and it’s funny.
(you might recognize some of the actors in this film: Robert De Niro, Sean Penn, Catherine Keener, Bruce Willis, John Turturro, Kristen Stewart)
Side note: Catherine Keener also stars in the #5 film on this list “Hamlet 2″
Jerry is a junkyard worker who attempts to sabotage a power plant he suspects of causing his headaches. But he inadvertently causes his brain to become magnetized, leading to the unintentional destruction of all the movies in his friend’s store. In order to keep the store’s one loyal customer, an elderly lady with a tenuous grasp on reality, the pair re-create a long line of films including The Lion King, Rush Hour, Ghostbusters, When We Were Kings, Driving Miss Daisy, and Robocop, putting themselves and their townspeople into it. They become the biggest stars in their neighborhood.
I really enjoyed this film, the story was original and well written, the actors were good and Jack Black works great with Mos Def.
Side note: Jack black also stars in the #9 film on the first “movies about movies” list “Tropic Thunder”
In the beginning of this film we meet a documentary team of three young men and a young woman. They are heading for the south-American jungle to search for real cannibals. After a while the crew is reported missing and a rescue team is sent from the US. This team gets in touch with an amazon tribe called the Tree-people. The tree-people gives them the only remains of the first crew – the film rolls containing the material this crew shot during their search for real cannibals. Back in the US we get to see these films. Now we know exactly what happened to the first crew.
Now in this film we get to see (real) animals being cut apart and a young girl getting skewered. If you liked “faces of death” you’ll really enjoy this movie. Good luck trying to find a (legal) copy, this film has been banned in 50 countries.
Dana Marschz is a failed actor and recovering alcoholic who’s moved to Tucson to teach high school drama where he’s plagued by bad reviews, student indifference, budget woes (he and his wife, who is trying to get pregnant, take in a boarder), and his own teaching limitations. Because the other electives are closed he finds himself with a large class of seeming gang-bangers, and the principal informs him that drama will be cut next trimester. On the advice of a student reviewer, Dana decides to stage his own play, a sequel to “Hamlet” in which the prince and Jesus, with the use of a time machine, try to save Gertrude and Ophelia. Can Dana for once pull something off?
This movie is ridiculous but funny.
Side Note: actress Melanie Diaz also stars in the #8 movie on this list “Be kind Rewind”
The next great psycho horror slasher has given a documentary crew exclusive access to his life as he plans his reign of terror over the sleepy town of Glen Echo, all the while deconstructing the conventions and archetypes of the horror genre for them.
This movie is similar to “Man bites dog”; a serial killer takes a film crew around town and shows them how to be a proper murderer. What makes this movie good is that the killer explains some of the horror movie clichés and gives step by step instructions on how be a real killer.
Max Schreck’s performance in the classic film Nosferatu has become legendary. What if the reason he was so good is that he really was a vampire? That’s the premise of this film, which features director F.W. Murnau, so enamored with creating the perfect vampire film that he seeks out an actual member of the undead to play the title role. But when Schreck starts taking more and more advantage of the opportunities to feed he suddenly has, can Murnau come to his senses and destroy him?
This was a good movie, the awkwardness of Max Schreck gives the film a humorous side and his loneliness a tragic side.
Zack Brown and Miriam have been friends since high-school and share an apartment with many unpaid bills. In a reunion party, they find that the former high-school star is now a porn actor, and this inspires them to make a porn film to pay their bills. They cast the actors, actresses and crew, and Zack writes the screenplay.
Funny movie, perhaps not Seth Rogens best performance but nonetheless worth watching.
Three film students travel to Maryland to make a student film about a local urban legend… The Blair Witch. The three went into the woods on a two day hike to find the Blair Witch, and never came back. One year later, the students film and video was found in the woods. The footage was compiled and made into a movie. The Blair Witch Project.
Really good movie, excellent acting and story, unfortunately if this movie was released today it would not get as much attention as it did back in 1999 because nowadays a horror movie needs a bunch of blood and shock effects to be valid which is truly sad.
This is not technically about the making of a movie, but rather about working on a screenplay and working for a big time producer. It is a must-see film and definitely deserves a place on this list. The synopsis: Buddy Ackerman (Kevin Spacey), a big time movie producer on the rise, hires young Guy (Frank Whaley) to be his assistant. Guy thinks he’s finally hit the big time. But Buddy has other ideas. He torments Guy with petty requests and daily reamings for bringing him Equal instead of Sweet-N-Low. Guy decides that he is fed up with Buddy’s torture and goes to Buddy’s house and ties him up and begins his revenge. Guy’s lover, a script writer who has “screwed” her way to the top, is dragged into this. You have to see this film – it is great.
)
October 25th, 2009 at 1:38 am
I enjoy this list. Blair Witch creeped me out when it intially came out. Of course I was younger, more naive.It’s lost it’s punch.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:40 am
Now I wath movies like Cannibal Holocaust and don’t even flinch.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:45 am
List verse is the sh*t!!!
October 25th, 2009 at 1:45 am
I occasionally watch them as well.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:54 am
holy shit
October 25th, 2009 at 1:55 am
Blair witch and Man Bites Dog are amazing acting masterpieces! My girlfriend and i watched Blair Witch when it was on then went camping that night for full effect!! You can imagine the rest….!
October 25th, 2009 at 2:09 am
Great list. However, I have to disagree with the comment that The Blair Witch Project wouldn’t receive as much attention today due to a need for gore; Paranormal Activity, a film much compared to Blair Witch in style and execution, has received a lot of press and is doing well at the box office.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:10 am
I loved Be Kind Rewind! I remember going to the movies to see Blair Witch and I have to say I didn’t like it. The scariest thing in the movie was that guy’s runny nose.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:17 am
@saopauloesquecida (8): are we going to run away togther, or what?
October 25th, 2009 at 2:21 am
I don’t agree with what you said about Blair Withc being released today and not being popular. Paranormal Activity is one of the most popular movies at the moment and is the same type of movie as Blair Witch even leading people to walk out of theaters because of how scared they are.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:28 am
Kevin Smith is my Hero!!! I love Zach and MIri, good for you adding it to this list!!! May need to go and watch it now!!!!!
October 25th, 2009 at 2:30 am
” If you liked “faces of death” you’ll really enjoy this movie, good luck trying to find a (legal) copy, this film has been banned in 50 countries. ”
Yeah, the movie isn’t that obscure. You can find the DVD at amazon.com. But it is an extreme movie, the animal killings are a bit too brutal to watch.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:32 am
be kind rewind is totally the best…robo cop.. XD
October 25th, 2009 at 2:48 am
I don’t like the comment at the end of entry number two. Cinema evolves with time, that’s why we’re watching talkies with colour and everything. Likewise, “horror” – which doesn’t mean much as a genre title anymore – has changed a lot. I think that you’re probably a fan of the older, more supernatural horror movies? I personally don’t mind some of the new stuff, torture porn isn’t great, but I’ve always been an exploitative movie fan.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:01 am
I’ve been meaning to watch Be Kind Rewind for ages, but it looks like I’m gonna have to add Man Bites Dog to my list of ‘to watch’ as well! Sounds fairly creepy/unsettling but in an interesting way. I was really expecting to see The Player on here, and was kinda pleased that it wasn’t!
October 25th, 2009 at 3:47 am
Movies don’t talk, They speak.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:54 am
WHAT!!!! not again,where is bowfinger now thats #1
October 25th, 2009 at 4:08 am
‘Now this is a good film, we get to see (real) animals being cut apart and a young girl getting skewered.’
I find this a worrying comment. Perhaps for horror fans it is good entertainment to watch a girl being skewred?
Why is it that cutting apart of REAL animals makes for a ‘good film’?
All together offensive enough to me not want to return to ListVerse.
October 25th, 2009 at 4:38 am
You’re still missing Truffaut’s Day for Night (La Nuit américaine), not to mention Blake Edwards’ brutal send-up of the Hollywood system, “S.O.B.” These two, and especially the first, are conspicuous by their absence.
October 25th, 2009 at 4:56 am
What about The Moguls – where a whole small town bands together to make a porno? Genius film.
October 25th, 2009 at 4:56 am
@ Duke of Omnium (19): Great contribution. You led me to rememeber Godard’s Le Mépris. While it might not be its main theme, it revolves around the shooting of a movie, and is a great, wonderful film. That Brigitte Bardot is on top of her game doesn’t hurt, either.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:05 am
Okay, bad list with very poorly written blurbs/descriptions accompanying each item. Too many good, even great films missing (again) and too much schlock and bad films included. I mean COME ON—”Cannibal Holocaust?” Godawful. And I have to agree with FJ on that comment the list author made, which was just plain bizarre. “Cannibal Holocaust” is NOT a “good” film, even by schlock horror fan standards. Suggesting it IS a good film–and for the reasons the author gave–is off the wall and a tad disturbing.
And… XIII… what is that, your age? Because you display a level of ignorance about films in general which indicates that you *don’t know enough* about film to be popping up online to write film LISTS. Sorry to be cruel here, but please–find something else to write about. You’re clearly unaware of truly great classics and even contemporary gems–some of which others have already mentioned–and your statement about The Blair Witch Project is particularly suspect. You talk as if 1999 was a hundred years ago, and as if Blair Witch Project existed in an age where there were no big-budget, special effects-laden horror films. This is absurd! THE VERY REASON Blair Witch was so huge, such a success, and such a standout was that it scared people without ANY of the usual SFX gore, without the big Hollywood budget and stars, without the usual cliches of Horror movie splatter and gloss. It came out at a time when there had been some THIRTY YEARS of blood, gore, guts and effects-filled horror on the screen, from The Exorcist through the endless Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street movies, through Screams and I Saw What You Dids and so on. The “mad slasher” genre ITSELF was already some 20 years old, AT LEAST, when Blair Witch came out… AND the genre, and other effects-filled horror films, were at the height of their power. That’s WHY Blair Witch caught on—because it did something UTTERLY different, without effects, blood and gore, or an onscreen mad killer with a knife.
AND it’s happening all over again with Paranormal Activity, which takes the same cinema verite tack to frighten the audience. So not only was it done ten years ago DESPITE the prevailing styles and cliches–but it’s being done AGAIN today.
But the ordinary, “mainstream” horror films ten, twenty, even thirty years ago were no less filled with gore and blood. In fact, if anything, there was MORE blood and explicit gore in the 80s and 90s.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:16 am
I just can’t believe you still not mentioned “Living in Oblivion” from Tom DiCillo starring Steve Buscemi. This is THE definition of a movie about movie !!!
Greetings from France.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:39 am
Randall,
I think you state valid arguments to support all of your claims. But if we consider only mainstream movies, maybe the “average gore rate” has risen in the last two decades. If we compare the “Screams”, the “I know what you dids”, and so on, with “Hostel”, “Wrong turn”, “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”, “The hills have eyes” (I know both are remakes, but there is no comparison in terms of commercial exposition between them and the originals, which were much smaller movies), I think the more recent movies went up a notch in the gore scale. Maybe the intensification of violence in the more mainstream, bigger budget, horror movies contributed to lead the author of the list to his conclusion – which, I agree with you, is not accurate.
Of course, since the end of the 60’s loads and loads of movies have resorted to extreme and graphic violece – exploitations, giallos, the italian cannibal movies, and so on. But these are only available to a much more restricted audience.
While on this theme, it should be also reminded that Blair Witch Project was such a huge success because of a very clever, yet simple, marketing strategy.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:40 am
Oh, yes, “The Bad and the Beautiful”, too. You have to love the “Hollywood as Dystopian Gomorrah” type films, down to the Woltz subplot in “The Godfather”.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:40 am
I thought Zack and Miri was really funny. Funnier than I expected. Wasn’t Seth Rogan on a recent list of top Canadian comedians? Hmmm.
By the way, I’m loving the flirtations between mandiemurder and saopauloesquecida. Are we about to witness a delightful listverse hookup? Yay!
October 25th, 2009 at 5:41 am
My curiousity for the crazy makes me want to watch that cannibal holocaust film.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:41 am
Randall strikes again!
October 25th, 2009 at 5:46 am
I think movies have gotten gorier, but maybe not so much because of the taste of the audience or their makers. Makeup effects and CGI have made spurting blood and severed limbs much more realistic.
I suspect that a director would omit these scenes out because their unrealistic appearance would spoil a film’s artistry (or at least work against the suspension of disbelief). Now you can make an evisceration look realer than real.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:58 am
@Duke of Omnium (29): It’s not impossible, even though, as I mentioned, all kinds of violence and torture have been onscreen since the late 60’s. Your hypothesis should rest on the idea, I believe, that higher budget directors would be more careful about how they showed it, and sleazier directors would do it whatever way. It’s not unreasonable.
On the other hand, some more extreme violence could be implied, or shown partially, in the shadows, and I don’t think it was; I think it was more straightforward. You know, just the standard slashing/shooting/impaling (joking!).
October 25th, 2009 at 6:00 am
And let´s not also forget that our idea of realism is shaped by the aesthetics snd resources available on a given time. When we watch an older movie today, it looks a lot less realistic than to its contemporary audience.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:09 am
I absolutely agree with FJ. Torturing animals doesn’t seem like a very valid reason to classify a movie as good.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:25 am
gaste, da boeit toch ni.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:39 am
I’d like to apologize to everyone for what I’m about to say. It really pains me to do this. I have a long history of being snarky and a propensity for antagonistic rants, but I have no choice in this case. I can feel Satan’s Imps dancing around me, jabbing me with their lesser tridents.
I agree with Randall.
At the time Blair Witch came out we had witnessed about 5000 horror movies that focused on teen slashing that went something like this: Let’s have sex, ok, wow that was great, I’m hungry but I’ll be right back, slash, spurt, I wonder when Johnny will come back, I’ll go downstairs, slash spurt, I can’t go to sleep because if I do someone with kill me, sleep, slash, spurt, let’s make out in the park, what was that, slash X 2, spurt X 2, let’s go to summer camp, let’s make out in the cabin after lights out, slash X 2, spurt, X 2, I was secretly in love with the person who was making out with someone else in the cabin, I’ll go investigate why they can’t be found, I’m horrified with what I’ve found, I will have revenge, slash, spurt.
Then comes Blair Witch. It’s marketing campaign was simple – This is a true story. It actually worked for a couple of weeks. Even when people found out it wasn’t a true story but hadn’t seen the movie yet were scared shitless. Why? Well again, it displeases me to say this, but Randall is correct in stating the very reason it was so frightening is because we were all so very bored with the slashing and the spurting. This movie has truly frightening scenarios. You are in the woods, you discover you are lost and seemingly going in circles. You begin to think someone or something is following you. You hear troubling things at night. One of your companions goes missing. You continue to hear weird shit at night and desperation sets in as you recognize you cannot go home. All you have to do is put yourself in their place – on top of it all they never show you exactly what is following you.
That is true horror, you know it’s out there coming to get you.
And the author seems to not know much about the time period when this came out and why it was so effective.
Again, I apologize to everyone for agreeing with Randall. It probably won’t happen again.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:48 am
Have only seen 1 of these movies but can’t say I would go out and see the others. Really not my cup of tea. Interesting choice of lists, though.
@Randall (22): I would agree that during the 80’s and 90’s there was more blood, guts and gore. However, in today’s standards, it looks fake. In some of today’s movies, it’s the realism that bumped it up a notch. Less blood/gore, but make it look more real.
Either way, it’s gross and I avoid that crap like the plague. I like movies where they scare you based on what you don’t see rather than what you do see.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:59 am
Where is Ed Wood? I think even Bowfinger should be mentioned.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:00 am
I watched Man Bites Dog at the cinema, my friend and I were the only ones who stayed to the end. It is a brilliant but absolutely horrific film.
The Blair Witch Project is interestingly spooky and well made.
My favourite on the list is Shadow of the Vampire, such a delicious idea that Max Schreck was a real vampire.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:03 am
I think Randall should actually ASK a schlock horror film fan before assuming they don’t like “Cannibal Holocaust”.
Anyway, Grindhouse Releasing had released the film on DVD, uncut and chock-full of special editions. Would it hurt to do some research?
October 25th, 2009 at 7:13 am
You really need to put Living In Oblivion on a list of movies about movies. It’s such a great film, not well known, and definitely worth seeking out to watch.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Hamlet 2 is not a movie about the movies. The characters are putting on a musical for a high school drama class. Funny, but shouldn’t be on this list, particularly when there are so many others – Day for Night, Living in Oblivion, etc., that could have been included. Just watched Swimming with Sharks last week – great flick.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:21 am
I enjoyed reading this post… I’m glad I stopped by! -Emily
October 25th, 2009 at 7:28 am
ohh dear god cannibal holocaust…i still cant watch it all the way through that movie freaks me out soo bad! haha. and i dont care how many people think it sucks, i love the blair witch project!!!!!
October 25th, 2009 at 7:30 am
I don’t think anyone has mentioned ‘Double Exposure’ – also known as ‘The November Men.’ It’s certainly a movie that can leave you guessing about whether you are watching scenes from the ‘movie,’ or scenes from the ‘documentary of the movie.’
October 25th, 2009 at 7:31 am
ohh and randall (22)…what is a good film and what is a bad film? it all is based on ones opinion. personally, i like cannibal holocaust, i find it interesting. so to me it is a good film. you cant really label a film good and bad…can you?
October 25th, 2009 at 7:33 am
I’ve make typos, grammar and spelling errors in my comments here on Listverse, but somehow when the list itself has numerous mistakes, it is jarring and annoying to read. I often wonder why the submitted lists aren’t edited. This list has almost too many mistakes to catch them all, but here are a few:
#8: “the jack black works great with Mos Def.” and “Jack black also stars in the #9 film”…How about “the actor, Jack Black”?
#7: “The tree-people gives them the only remains of the first crew” What? Then there’s this: “if you liked “faces of death” you’ll really enjoy this movie, good luck trying to find a (legal) copy” Try, “Faces of Death” and this should be two sentences.
#6 “drama will be cut next trimester” Too funny, how about “semester”?
#5: “The next great psycho horror slasher has given a documentary crew exclusive access to his life” Should this be “The next great psycho horror slasher movie has a killer who gives..”?
#2: “because nowadays a horror movie needs a bunch of blood and shock effects to be valid which is truly sad.” I’m thinking this should be “blood and shocking effects” and maybe a second sentence like, ” I find this to be truly sad.”? (By the way, I’m with Randall and bucslm, this statement is misguided.)
#1: “begins on his revenge” Mmmm-Kay.
Even a quick read through should have caught some of these slip ups. Can they be fixed?
October 25th, 2009 at 7:50 am
No, the BWP would definitely have the same effect, it was successful because people thought it was real.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:12 am
Ok, I didn’t read all of the comments but I want to clear up a few things on Cannibal Holocaust. First, I just got the lastest un-cut version from bestbuy.com, so it’s not hard to find. Second, yes the animals that get killed are real but almost all are killed for food and in reality all of the animals were eaten by the natives. I’ve heard other people say that animals get tortured and that is not true. Third, compared with today’s special effects and the brutality of some horror movies, Cannibal Holocaust doesn’t even come close. The effects are so cheesy that the scenes lose credibility almost instantly. Even the so called rape scenes just look completely fake (which they are). And, no you don’t see any girl actually get impaled or skewered. Overall, I thought it was a decent movie and Im sure in it’s day it was the worst thing out but not anymore. I think this movie is way overhyphed.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:28 am
Not my cup of tea or G’s and T’s this list, Im from the old school a good western with John Wayne or Lee van Cleef was well worth watching.
Shit 40 years ago us kids used to go to a movie house and watch Zorro – some other hero I forget his name now, but his side kick was called Tonto.
Well those were good times I cant turn the clock back, but I can as sure as hell have a refill my glass (cup) is empty.
Cheers.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:01 am
@FJ (18): Agreed. Fixed.
@Moonbeam (45): we had trimesters at the high school I went to – we had 3 trimesters/terms.
has given is grammatically correct, psycho/horror/slasher can refer to the killer and not the movie eh? Shock effects is a noun. Shocking effects is and adjective and a noun.
That said, I do agree that there were many egregious grammar and punctuation errors. They are now fixed.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:17 am
@45: You’re right, the frequent mistakes are annoying. I hope the book was properly edited.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Good saturday morning list. Best films on her for me were Man Bites Dog and Shadow of the Vampire. I remember sneaking into the Blair Witch when i was younger and srill feeling ripped off. I was young then though. I did recently watch it again and found it much more enjoyable. Oh and i also believe Cannibal Holocaust to be overhyped. Interesting idea, poor execution. Anyways, thats my take on some of the films. I’ll shut up now.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Everyone’s a critic….
Here’s where the horror genre will take us next:
“Billy. You have pulled the tails of cats and dipped girls’ ponytails in inkwells. You gain pleasure from teasing and intimidating your elementary school classmates. Your bullying has caused discomfort to others and interfered with their education. Tonight Billy, your education will become a bit more elementary…”
Yep. “SAW VII: Back to School”
October 25th, 2009 at 9:45 am
@c2422131 (50): Guaranteed. Jamie had a raft of editors as well as the publisher’s staff.
While we’re on the subject of annoying punctuation and grammar mistakes – What’s up with all the commas?
I’ve been driven to distraction lately by their blatant and silly over-use. With, but, from, and most other prepositions do not require the use of a comma. They replace them.
In most instances sentences with the word ‘and’ joining two clauses or separate thoughts do not require a comma either.
Proof read folks! Aloud. As if you’re actually talking to someone.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:49 am
sorry folks…
….Blair Witch Project SUCKED ASS !!!!!
…biggest waste of 2 hours of my life…..
October 25th, 2009 at 10:15 am
I totally agree with what was said about Blair Witch. Everyone I know hates it because it isn’t an action packed gore bath of insanity. It is truly a great film and one of the scariest I have ever seen.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:43 am
I don’t read the lists for the grammer. Anyone (who didn’t actually make the list) with enough time to analize an entire list for grammer mistakes, should find something more productive to do with their time.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:44 am
Just gonna say, in my little opinion, titles 10-6 were all crap, along with The Blair Witch Project.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:46 am
What you said about people seeing only gory scary movies now is completely untrue, Paranormal Activity a low budget with virtually no gore is making tons of money and people love it. It reminds most of Blair Witch and is just as scary.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:53 am
@mom424 (53): Not to sound like some school Marm here, but…it is actually OK to use commas with conjunctions such as “but” or “and.” This is from grammer.ccc.commnent.edu: “Contending that the coordinating conjunction is adequate separation, some writers will leave out the comma in a sentence with short, balanced independent clauses (such as we see in the example…”He hit the ball well, but he ran toward third base.” ). If there is ever any doubt, however, use the comma, as it is always correct in this situation.”
As a kid I was taught to use the commas in this case.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Swimming With Sharks is such an amazing film – it’s probably in my Top Ten of all time. Kevin Spacey is vile and abhorrent throughout and he’s such a clever actor he even makes you feel a little pity for him when he gets his comeuppance. If you haven’t seen it then it is well worth two hours of your time.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Cannibal Holocaust is actually banned in 53 countries, not 50, and it’s not banned here in America. You Euro Listverser’s should import it from us.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:00 am
@DrEvo82 (56): I get what you’re saying. Usually I just skim over all the errors on the lists because I love Listverse, but this list had so many that it was full of fail, sorry! A couple of other favorite web sites that I go to don’t seem to have as many errors of this type. I’m not sure why.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Blair Witch is a joke. Not at all scary. Shadow of the Vampire, now that is one creepy weird film.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:31 am
I don’t know about you guys but I thought Be Kind Rewind was TERRIBLE.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:32 am
I thought this list was kinda lame until I found ‘Swimming with Sharks’ at the top. Absolutely a delight and thrill to find it there….. what a fantastic forgotten gem. Frank Whaley is Oscar worthy in this (as he is in almost everything he does) and Kevin Spacey as awlays is brilliant. Can’t remember the female leads name but she holds her own with these two awesome performances.
I consider it to be the best movie about hollywood, followed by Altman’s ‘The Player’
October 25th, 2009 at 11:49 am
I’m very worried that one day my great great grandchildren will be watching Saw movies. Torture porn is garbage and nobody likes it, just throwin’ that out there.
Once again, Listverse delivers! I haven’t seen a few of these movies, they look interesting. Except Cannibal Holocaust, I’m not really down with animal cruelty.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:51 am
Love it, three of those movies are in the book the Top 101 horror movies to see before you die.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
I’m not even going to get into the horror/slasher debate going on, but would like to make a couple of suggestions for the list. I haven’t seen it, but the movie For Your Consideration would probably fit well, supposed to be about a bunch of B or C list actors filming a period piece. Sounds interesting, I am a fan of Christopher Guest’s films. My other suggestion, though not about films, I have seen years ago, and remember enjoying it. The 1981 film Mephisto, starring Klaus Maria Brandauer, is about a stage director who increasingly becomes embroiled in the Nazi party due to the popularity of his performance. He is finally receiving recognition, but at what cost? Great movie, I would recommend it.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Absolute crap from beginning to end, and as a career Script Supervisor in Hollywood, I speak with some degree of experience.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Hamlet 2 was freakin’ hilarious. That movie made me laugh so hard it hurt.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
I just saw Paranormal Activity, and it was a phenomenal movie…great acting and really frightening…it should be a bonus on this list
October 25th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
I found a copy of Cannibal Holocaust at the local Virgin Records and wasted my money on it. What a POS… I can see how it caused controversy back then though.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
@Wenchtits (38):
There’s no NEED to “ask” a schlock horror fan, as I AM one.
Don’t jump to conclusions Wench.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
@AshleyR (44):
“…what is a good film and what is a bad film? it all is based on ones opinion.”
Not this lame-ass argument again. So, Ashley, you don’t believe in standards of taste and quality?
Okay, so you never listen to critics, and believe no individual piece of art—or commercial product—is better or worse than another.
Well, sorry, but that’s rubbish. Talent and taste ARE measurable and quantifiable. People who believe otherwise are always those who fear that they haven’t the personal knowledge or taste, themselves, to KNOW what’s good and bad. It’s a form of anti-intellectualism.
Likes and dislikes are personal matters. You may LIKE peas—but I don’t. You may LIKE “Cannibal Holocaust,” but I don’t. But peas are a vegetable that is good for you, and there’s no disputing that. I don’t like them, but I know they’re better for me than potato chips, and I know WHY they’re better.
Likewise, that you LIKE Cannibal Holocaust does not, in itself, make it “good.” In fact it’s a piece of shitty, exploitative filmmaking which demonstrates not only a very poor choice of subject matter on behalf of the filmmakers, but poor STANDARDS of filmmaking. For countless reasons–it’s sub-grade in every way. Crap editing, crap acting, crap photography, etc. Moreover, visceral exploitation is a pretty repugnant reason to make films–and it’s a pretty lousy thing to enjoy them.
“…personally, i like cannibal holocaust, i find it interesting. so to me it is a good film. you cant really label a film good and bad…can you?”
Do you HONESTLY believe that? Do you honestly believe that there’s NO such thing as good or bad films—or any product or work of art for that matter?
October 25th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
@Randall (73): Fair enough Randall, but are you representative of the majority of schlock horror fans’ opinions?
October 25th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
I love the site, but every time I come here, I get redirected multiple times to other spam pages like this one – http://www.designer-optics.com/store/dolce-gabbana-sunglasses/ – and multiple pop-ups, and it’s really starting to get to me.
I admit I haven’t been reading comments lately, so maybe it’s been talked about before, but I still thought I’d say something about it. Apologies if this complaint should go somewhere else!
October 25th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
@DrEvo82 (56):
“I don’t read the lists for the grammer. Anyone (who didn’t actually make the list) with enough time to analize an entire list for grammer mistakes, should find something more productive to do with their time.”
BULLSHIT. Good communication skills is what it’s all about. If you’re writing to an audience, to say something in any way, then you ought to take the time to do it properly–otherwise your message utterly loses validity and worth.
Communication is a skill–sometimes an art. It needs to be properly exercised and managed.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
@Mark (75):
Tell you what, Mark–my opinion represents that of ALL the schlock horror fans that I know—how’s that? Make you feel better? What do you want, a fuckin’ poll?
And when you read around you find few people that consider it worthwhile. Every film has its fans, but that doesn’t mean those fans are legion.
People don’t just dislike Cannibal Holocaust because of its exploitative nature or revolting subject. They dislike it because there’s nothing redeemingly good about it, artistically.
That’s what being a schlock/cheesy horror film fan is about—you love “good-bad” movies because they have some redeeming charm about them. I’ve just never met anyone, in my circles, who ever liked “Cannibal,” or found anything TO like about it. “Tombs of the Blind Dead,” sure. “Suspiria,” yes. “Cannibal Holocaust”? Nah.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Blair witch project was lame for me. It’s not scary when they just make you imagine that something scary is going on. I like the feeling of uncertainty, when are you going to die? Saw has none of that, and saw sucks, but movies like Alien and the likes end up scaring me.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
@Randall (77):
Stop arguing
Randall’s right
October 25th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Man Bites Dog…awesome movie. The clip being shown is probably my favorite part of the movie.
October 25th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
…rather, the frame the youtube clip is frozen on…
October 25th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
If I ever meet the people who made the Blair Witch Project i’m going to punch them in the throat until they give me that hour and a half of my life back.
And if I ever meet Kate Beckinsale i’m going to do dark, probably illegal, sexual things to her. Of topic maybe, but I think it needed to be said.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Pretty good.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
To enjoy a film such as Blair Witch necessitates a GREAT imagination on the part of the viewer. Anyone that has been alone in their own house in the dark or a strange place where every creak sets you on edge can appreciate this film. When I’m on a roller coaster, it’s that first climb up the track that sets me on edge the most. It’s the unseen drop that sets the mood. Gore is ok if the story calls for it, but for a truly good scare, NOT seeing but imagining the results is terrifying.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
@Randall (74):
“Talent and taste ARE measurable and quantifiable”. Even though I agree that a work of art cannot be evaluated on the grounds of personal taste alone, I think that calls for MAJOR backing up.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Hoo rah! Zack and Miri was hilarious!
As was most of the other Kevin Smith films!
Boo yah bitchES!
October 25th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
CLOVERFIELD D-:< !!!!!!!
October 25th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
@Kanza (86):
Common sense does not require “major backing up,” Kanza. And what you want from me is a free film class and art appreciation class, and I have neither the time now nor the inclination to offer these. You don’t agree with my statement? Go read some books.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
How about s1m0ne?
October 25th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
get shorty?
final days of frankie the fly?
this is spinal tap?
October 26th, 2009 at 1:20 am
@mandiemurder (9): anywhere you go, let me go too. That’s all I ask of you.
October 26th, 2009 at 1:20 am
all the movies on this list suck
zack and miri is the absolute worst kevin smith movie
October 26th, 2009 at 2:32 am
Great list I’ve seen all but one of these and it seems the trailer of that one “Cannibal Holocaust” has been removed. Would love to see “Man Bites Dog” again but can’t seem to find it in any video stores anymore. It was such a great peice of dark humor.
October 26th, 2009 at 2:44 am
Hmmm interesting. I never knew any of these movies.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:01 am
have not seen any of these films. thanks for the list!
October 26th, 2009 at 4:22 am
@Randall (89):
I think you have proven yourself clever enough, Randall, to be aware that “appreciation” is not synonimous with “measuring” and “quantifying”. Hence, “art appreciation” – which I can and have learned about reading Argan, Gombrich, Hauser, as well as Aristotle, Hegel, and others – is different from talent and taste mesuring and quantifying – of which I have never heard any of the mentioned authors, plus others, write about. Of course, there are many things that fall under that case.
But, as you see, I was not implying that common sense needs major backing up – just that a very bold statement that you did does. A statement that does not belong to common sense, that talent and taste can be measured and quantified. Mind, however, that I never said I disagree with it. Neither that I agree.
In all, note, then, that I don’t want any “film class and art appreciation class” from you. You are not qualified to give me those. But I may, as you suggested, read some books – provided that you tell me which are the authors that support the notion that talent and taste are measurable and quantifyable.
Which is what I asked, in the first place…
October 26th, 2009 at 5:06 am
Am I the only one to notice that Hamlet 2 isn’t a movie about a movie? It’s a movie about a play, well musical to be more accurate. Don’t get me wrong, I laughed so hard in theaters that almost wet myself, but it doesn’t really fit on this list.
October 26th, 2009 at 5:49 am
You know, honestly… I don’t like this list. Too many mediocre movies, and even some outright awful ones, on it.
I mean really… Blair Witch… a “great” movie? No. No that wasn’t a great movie, genius in its use of advertising to build interest and suspense, but it was not great in itself. In fact, I must say that the advertisements for the movie were better than the movie itself. If you compiled all of those and made them into a movie it might even be marketable.
But that load of crap they foisted on the public leads me to believe that its creators should be shot multiple times in interesting places on their bodies – like in the knees or groin.
Before you respond, XIII, please consider that I’ve been a horror enthusiast for my whole life, literally since my parents used to sit me down with them as a baby to watch with them (they have or had pictures), and I write horror myself now. Blair Witch is an abomination and an embarrassment, and should never be considered a horror movie.
October 26th, 2009 at 6:21 am
@Kanza (97):
Kanza, honest to god, off my fucking back. I’ve noted three separate occasions on this website where you’ve needlessly nitpicked at people over the most arcane and pointless minor issues. You did it to Segue in one of the recent threads with that “science as savior or doom” remark or whatever the hell it was, taking an innocent phrase she used as a throwaway FAR too fucking literally and reading into it all manner or bullshit that I can guarantee you was never there in the first place (one because I know Segue–we’re friends, and I know her mind—and two because I don’t make it a habit, unlike you, of forcing an analysis on every turn of a phrase someone uses in the midst of a conversation). There was another instance recently, the details of which escape my memory—and I was going to address BOTH of these but I’ve just been too damn busy to bother.
Look—clearly you’ve got some smarts, I don’t dispute that, but I need to make a further observation or two about you: to begin with, you write somewhat awkwardly at times, (is English not your first language? That’s a serious question) and I get the distinct impression that you’re trying far too hard to sound intelligent and intellectual, but it’s falling flat because your sentences and syntax are rather turgid and needlessly awkward. Whatever the hell you’re doing, tone it down a notch or two, because every time I see one of your comments, I find myself being forced to reread it a couple times to get your gist, and that’s not good.
Oh, and don’t give me any wisecracks about it–I’m a professional writer, a former teacher, and while I’m a forgiving soul about some grammatical and syntactical faux pas… pa? Whatever the plural of that is… I’ve seen your brand of it in students before, who are laboring to sound portentous and important. Stop it.
Now, it’s amusing that you’d automatically assume I’m “unqualified” to teach you anything about film or art appreciation. I beg to differ.
At any rate, once again, my time is limited, and while I’d love nothing more than to jump into a long convo about art and the quantification of talent and quality, I’ve got three lists of my own to finish before Halloween (as they’re timely) and a number of things to do here at the office this morning. Bottom line is, we were offered an argument that there is NO value in criticism, and that good/bad are all matters of personal opinion—and, indeed, I was asked how there can even BE a good or bad in art. I found this a ludicrous “philosophy” and said so, and offered a brief counter to it. Included in that is the assertion that aspects of talent and artistic value CAN be quantified and measured—but for chrissakes already, Kanza, I did NOT mean that scientifically.
We recognize, however, that composition has certain “rules” (LOOSELY speaking) which convey to the eye and mind varying degrees of value, depending on the quality of said composition. We find it difficult, yes, to see the blurred demarcation between “good” and “great,” but that between “bad” and “good” or “worthy” isn’t as hard to see. If one knows enough about it, and studies it well enough, it can be seen how certain elements of a visual composition can cause a work to fail or succeed.
Still a matter of opinion to an extent? Sure. But I wasn’t dismissing ALL opinion from art, I was SIMPLY stating that it isn’t ONLY a matter of individual opinion—which is the argument I was COUNTERING.
You want books to read? Go seek out Kenneth Clark’s works, and Walter Pater… and just off the top of my head, a book by the New York writer James Monaco called American Film Now. Okay? And then stop the nitpickery. I don’t have time or patience these days to bicker.
October 26th, 2009 at 6:31 am
@Moloch1123 (99):
Moloch, I don’t agree with you at all about Blair Witch, but to each his own. (I don’t consider it “great,” just good… and it did scare me, and still does).
But let’s talk horror writing sometime, as I’ve been doing some of that as a sideline to my regular writing, with a friend. Are you published? Plan on it, if no?
October 26th, 2009 at 6:56 am
I think people tend to think “because I like it, it’s awesome” even if it’s not good. I am the queen of bad horror movies and B movies. Teenage Catgirls in Heat? Seen it, loved it. Drive-Thru, in which a group of teens are terrorized by a fast food mascot named Horny the Clown (who deep fries a teenagers face off)? Seen it. Twice. However, I KNOW these movies aren’t masterpeices, or even good on any other scale than the “so bad it’s good” one. Take stock of yourself. I’m smart, well read, a hold a good job, but I have a weakness for terrible horror movies. It is what it is people, and fighting over it is dumb.
I do agree that things like talent and taste are quantifiable. If you don’t, find me someone who thinks Paris Hilton should have won the Oscar for House of Wax.
October 26th, 2009 at 6:58 am
Randall (100):
Assuming that you are not qualified to offer me lessons is just as amusing as assuming that I wanted such lessons from you. I know nothing of your qualifications, as you don’t know of mine.
English is not my first language. Do I write it awkwardly? It didn’t seem that way for me, but I am open to this criticism, and thank you for it. Just as I thanked mom424 criticism about the commas (though I don’t even know if she had read anything I have written); I tend to overuse them, it’s a reflection of my native tongue. I don’t try to sound intelligent and intellectual, and I don’t try to make my writing portentous and important (as a matter of fact, I think I write in a pretty straightforward manner, I try not to resort to uncommon vocabulary or to use unusual phrase structures – even though that might be the case, as you poibted out!); that´s how I write, be it good or bad.
You describe the exchange you had with AshleyR very accurately, and I agree with the bottom line of your ideas – as I said before. I just thought that better arguments could have been provided. The way you wrote, he/she will either believe you or not. Probably not.
Still, scientifical or not scientifical, I know nothing of talent and taste measuring and quantifying. I will look for the books you indicated, though; thank you for that. Then I’ll discover if they can offer basis for measuring and quantifying, apart from proper appraising – which I agree with you, I repeat, there is.
About segues’ comment, I already wrote about it in the other list, and I don’t see the need to repeat it here.
Okay, I’m off your back. Good luck with your work!
October 26th, 2009 at 7:13 am
@callie19 (102):
As I mentioned before, quantifying and appraising are different things. Appraising calls for a judgement, while quantifying does not. I haven’t watched this House of Wax (only the original), but I believe that the critics that *evaluated* her acting unworthy of such distinction were correct.
Quantifying, on the other hand, doesn’t require a judgement. If I say, “That car is moving fast” or “The distance between our homes is too long to walk” that’s a judgement; but if I say “That car is moving at 150 mph” or “The distance between our homes is 1000 miles” that’s not a judgement, it’s a quantification of the car’s speed or the distance – which may or may not be found fast, or too long.
That´s way I said that I don’t know how talent can be quantified – what is the scale that quantifies it? – even though it can, and should, be appraised.
October 26th, 2009 at 7:14 am
@callie19 (102):
By the way, thanks for the movie tip!
October 26th, 2009 at 7:23 am
I love Hamlet 2, but that’s more of a movie about a play, not a movie.
October 26th, 2009 at 7:30 am
@ Randall: Yes, I assumed that you weren’t a fan, sorry. But that still doesn’t speak for everybody.
Sometimes people like movies if it causes a reaction. Especially strong reactions. This tends to be the case of Cannibal Holocaust.
I’d much rather have a movie cause a reaction of disgust/shock than cause no reaction at all. Maybe I’m masochistic in that sense. It may not particularly mean it is a “good” movie by any definition, but I still like it.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Ahahah, I love Randall.
He gets people all hot and bothered. XD
October 26th, 2009 at 9:33 am
@Kanza (103):
“English is not my first language.”
Well, I did not mean to imply that you do poorly with it. You’re quite close to fluent, in fact. But when you’re not 100% with a language, and are trying to make an intellectual point, reach for simplicity.
“(as a matter of fact, I think I write in a pretty straightforward manner, I try not to resort to uncommon vocabulary or to use unusual phrase structures – even though that might be the case, as you poibted out!);”
Well yes, you do, and no, it’s not terribly straightforward.
I do not, again, mean to hurt your feelings. You actually do well with the language, but in this KIND of discussion, watch for the awkward phrasings. It’s jarring, and can make your meaning less clear.
“I just thought that better arguments could have been provided. The way you wrote, he/she will either believe you or not. Probably not.”
Well both statements are probably true. But this to me is a minor battle, I have much bigger ones to contend with on this site. If you wish to have an honest discussion about the nature of art and so on, I’d love to, if I have the time. But if all you want to do is nitpick at my meanings, then go away and find someone else to pester.
“Still, scientifical or not scientifical, I know nothing of talent and taste measuring and quantifying.”
Again, don’t be so literal. I only meant to indicate that there ARE standards by which we judge works of art and they are NOT ONLY matters of PURE opinion.
Honestly now, I need to move on. I don’t even have time for a lunch today, I’ve got so many f**king meetings to attend.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:04 am
@Randall (109):
No hurt or hard feelings here. I never meant to disturb you with what you call “nitpícking”. I thought it was an important issue that could strenghten your point, instead of making it a “take it or leave it” affirmative. As it turns out, you disagreed with it.
Wish you all the best in the ways you choose.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:05 am
I liked the list, as per usual. However instead of Zack and Mir make a porno, a far better movie was Jeff Bridges “The Moguls” or as it was in Canada “The Amateurs”. As I recall it came out around the same time but was over shadowed by the media attention paid to Seth Rogen.
It is about a small town down and out father who come up with a plan to make some cash for himself, his buddies and his town. All in an effort to find a way to win his son’s respect.
Regardless go rent it!
October 26th, 2009 at 10:12 am
@Kanza (110):
If you wish to strengthen my point, then do so. Offer your own thoughts on it, to respond to the person I originally responded to. You seemed more interested, though, in arguing with ME about it.
And I’m sorry I seem impatient with that, I’m just pressed for time today.
October 26th, 2009 at 10:40 am
What, no 8 1/2?
October 26th, 2009 at 10:44 am
I just farted in the theater.
Will that cause a reaction? Will it be good? Will it be bad? Will it smell like popcorn?
The suspense is palpable!
October 26th, 2009 at 11:45 am
“Paranormal Activity” is crap. If you’ve seen the trailer, you’ve basically seen the whole movie. Don’t waste your time or money…
October 26th, 2009 at 11:47 am
@Randall (77): When it comes to public speaking or news reports I would agree with that. But, these are just lists written buy ordinary people. I notice the mistakes but I don’t really care.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:50 am
@archiealt (83): I agree with you 100%
October 26th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
@Randall (101): I would welcome such an opportunity, Randall! Yes, I am published, nothing paying yet, just working on getting some free publicity.
Most of the problem is finding time around a full time and a part time job, as well as spending time at the gym(health issues), and making sure that I don’t neglect the little lady.
October 26th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Oh, and Randall, most of my disgust with Blair Witch stems from my anticipation prior to watching it, and then my disappointment when I woke up as the credits began rolling. It was that bad for me.
No, I’m neither a gore-whore nor an intellectual snoot when it comes to horror. I’ve watched some great intellectual horror and I’ve seen some stuff that would be downright stomach churning for most people.
It seems to me like the folks who did Blair Witch were trying to pull off a cinematic equivalent of a H. P. Lovecraft story, and consequently overreached because they didn’t have the acting skill to pull it off.
It IS a good story, and it had a LOT of potential, but the actors blew it all to Hell and back with their lack of experience. In fact, the only convincing scene I saw was at the end, and that was the girl crying near the end( I did manage to watch it in parts, a little at a time).
I think I may be able to speak from some experience there, as I was lost in the woods for a short while as a little boy, and I can tell you, even then I didn’t freak out like those punks did. Though to be fair, I grew up in the country, so finding my way in unfamiliar territory was a lot easier.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
yay i have a copy of cannibal holocaust, whooppee
October 26th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
adaptation was good about charlie kauffman writing himself into his movie he is trying to adapt from a book. good movie
October 26th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
I’m sorry Callie, but I’m afraid you have a competitor for the title of queen darling. teenage cat girls in heat? was decent-ish, but I much prefer gore-gore girls, microwave massacre, and frankenhooker.
(oh and I have had a copy of Cannibal Holocaust for years. Its so hard to find a movie these days where the director is arrested and made to produce the actors because the government actually believed they were slaughters. I miss the days of exploitation good-ness.)
October 26th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
slaughterED, not slaughters, its not a vocation! ha.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:24 am
@Moloch1123 (118):
Moloch, let me catch up on a few things here and I’ll get back to you.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:56 am
@Randall (124): 10-04
October 28th, 2009 at 3:29 am
What about adaptation?
The meta-movie to end all meta-movies!
October 28th, 2009 at 4:12 am
I just watched “Behind The Mask” because of the reccomendation on the list. I thought it was great – although would seriously list it as more of a comedy than a proper slasher flick, or even a flick about a movie. Highly reccomend it though, but not if you are looking for a scare. I never even flinched the whole way through, which is pretty big for me.
Thumbs up!
I’m going to check out paranormal activity next. I know that it is meant to be pretty scary, but now I am on a roll…
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Great list! But where’s Bowfinger?!