<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>


<channel>
	<title>Film Junk &#187; Lists</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.filmjunk.com/category/columns/lists/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.filmjunk.com</link>
	<description>Blog And Podcast</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:48:47 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
		
	<item>
		<title>Will Ferrell is Hollywood&#8217;s Most Overpaid Actor of the Year</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/18/will-ferrell-is-hollywoods-most-overpaid-actor-of-the-year/</link>
		<comments>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/18/will-ferrell-is-hollywoods-most-overpaid-actor-of-the-year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:32:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Industry News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=29005</guid>
		
	                <description><![CDATA[

Every year the folks over at Forbes put together a fun little list of the most overpaid actors in Hollywood. It's fun because it's a chance for people to call out some of the big shots who earn a lot of money but fail to deliver massive box office success. Not surprisingly, at the top of the list this year is Will Ferrell, a funny guy experiencing a fair bit of backlash right now, thanks in large part to the dud that was Land of the Lost (hey, I actually liked it).

In order to create this list, they compared actor's earnings versus the budgets and profits from their most recent films, and looked for the lowest return. Since it might be unfair to penalize actors for doing smaller art house films, they only take into account movies that opened in at least 500 theatres. They also only chose actors who had at least 3 such films in the last 5 years. Despite all of this, I still can't help but feel that Leonardo DiCaprio ended up on the list because of his choice to do less mainstream projects.

At any rate, it makes for an interesting discussion, particularly since this story comes hot on the heels of yet another headline trumpeting the so-called death of the movie star [1]. Check out the top 10 list after the jump, and for contrast, see also their list of Best Actors for the Buck [2]. Do you think all these A-listers are indeed overrated and overpaid? Are movie stars still necessary in this day and age?


1. Will Ferrell -- $3.29 returned for every dollar spent
2. Ewan McGregor -- $3.75
3. Billy Bob Thornton -- $4.00
4. Eddie Murphy -- $4.43
5. Ice Cube -- $4.77
6. Tom Cruise -- $7.18
7. Drew Barrymore -- $7.43
8. Leonardo DiCaprio -- $7.52
9. Samuel L. Jackson -- $8.59
10. Jim Carrey -- $8.62

[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSTRE5AC5AI20091113
[2] http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/24/best-actors-for-the-buck-business-entertainment-payback.html<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[&lt;img src=&quot;/images/weblog/2009/11/willferrelloverpaid.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;willferrelloverpaid&quot; title=&quot;willferrelloverpaid&quot; width=&quot;500&quot; height=&quot;281&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot; /&gt;

Every year the folks over at Forbes put together a fun little list of the most overpaid actors in Hollywood. It&#039;s fun because it&#039;s a chance for people to call out some of the big shots who earn a lot of money but fail to deliver massive box office success. Not surprisingly, at the top of the list this year is Will Ferrell, a funny guy experiencing a fair bit of backlash right now, thanks in large part to the dud that was &lt;em&gt;Land of the Lost&lt;/em&gt; (hey, I actually liked it).

In order to create this list, they compared actor&#039;s earnings versus the budgets and profits from their most recent films, and looked for the lowest return. Since it might be unfair to penalize actors for doing smaller art house films, they only take into account movies that opened in at least 500 theatres. They also only chose actors who had at least 3 such films in the last 5 years. Despite all of this, I still can&#039;t help but feel that Leonardo DiCaprio ended up on the list because of his choice to do less mainstream projects.

At any rate, it makes for an interesting discussion, particularly since this story comes hot on the heels of yet another headline trumpeting the so-called &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSTRE5AC5AI20091113&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;death of the movie star&lt;/a&gt;. Check out the top 10 list after the jump, and for contrast, see also their list of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/24/best-actors-for-the-buck-business-entertainment-payback.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Best Actors for the Buck&lt;/a&gt;. Do you think all these A-listers are indeed overrated and overpaid? Are movie stars still necessary in this day and age?

&lt;span id=&quot;more-29005&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
1. Will Ferrell -- $3.29 returned for every dollar spent
2. Ewan McGregor -- $3.75
3. Billy Bob Thornton -- $4.00
4. Eddie Murphy -- $4.43
5. Ice Cube -- $4.77
6. Tom Cruise -- $7.18
7. Drew Barrymore -- $7.43
8. Leonardo DiCaprio -- $7.52
9. Samuel L. Jackson -- $8.59
10. Jim Carrey -- $8.62<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/18/will-ferrell-is-hollywoods-most-overpaid-actor-of-the-year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>

	
	<item>
		<title>Big Surprise: Top Grossing Movies of the Decade Are Basically All Franchise Films</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/17/big-surprise-top-grossing-movies-of-the-decade-are-basically-all-franchise-films/</link>
		<comments>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/17/big-surprise-top-grossing-movies-of-the-decade-are-basically-all-franchise-films/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 23:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Industry News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=28920</guid>
		
	                <description><![CDATA[

Here's another list for you to digest as we approach the end of the decade. Jason Kottke [1] recently took a look at the list of highest-grossing films from 2000-2009 courtesy of Wikipedia [2], and makes the observation that only one movie in the top 20 is based on an original screenplay. The rest of the movies are all adaptations of books or sequels to existing franchises.

Now, it's pretty easy to jump on this list and whine and moan about how it means there is nothing original in Hollywood anymore. While I agree that there is a problem with studios valuing brand over concept, don't forget, we are talking about the movies that made the most money here. OF COURSE familiar characters and titles are going to attract more viewers than strange and unfamiliar ones... doesn't that make sense? A lot of people don't even see movies at the theatre, so they don't discover something until it hits TV or DVD. The first installment is the one that introduces the concept, attracts a following and then builds the franchise. Even the first movie from an existing property needs to build an audience -- notice that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone and Spider-Man are the only movies on this list that are the first in their series?

Anyway, I'm not saying it's good, but it's certainly not surprising. Unfortunately it's this trend that has also resulted in the whole toy and board game movie debacle. Maybe we need a few brand-based movies to fail so that people realize that good stories are also important. Check out the top 20 grossing movies of the decade after the jump. What do you think, is it depressing or deserving?


1. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
2. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
3. The Dark Knight
4. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
5. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
6. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
7. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
8. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
9. Shrek 2
10. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
11. Spider-Man 3
12. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
13. Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
14. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
15. Finding Nemo
16. Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
17. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
18. Spider-Man
19. Shrek the Third
20. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

[1] http://kottke.org/09/11/the-2000s-according-to-wikipedia
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_in_film<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[&lt;img src=&quot;/images/weblog/2009/11/topgrossingdecade.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;topgrossingdecade&quot; title=&quot;topgrossingdecade&quot; width=&quot;500&quot; height=&quot;273&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot; /&gt;

Here&#039;s another list for you to digest as we approach the end of the decade. &lt;a href=&quot;http://kottke.org/09/11/the-2000s-according-to-wikipedia&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Jason Kottke&lt;/a&gt; recently took a look at the list of highest-grossing films from 2000-2009 courtesy of &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_in_film&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Wikipedia&lt;/a&gt;, and makes the observation that only one movie in the top 20 is based on an original screenplay. The rest of the movies are all adaptations of books or sequels to existing franchises.

Now, it&#039;s pretty easy to jump on this list and whine and moan about how it means there is nothing original in Hollywood anymore. While I agree that there is a problem with studios valuing brand over concept, don&#039;t forget, we are talking about the movies that made the most money here. OF COURSE familiar characters and titles are going to attract more viewers than strange and unfamiliar ones... doesn&#039;t that make sense? A lot of people don&#039;t even see movies at the theatre, so they don&#039;t discover something until it hits TV or DVD. The first installment is the one that introduces the concept, attracts a following and then builds the franchise. Even the first movie from an existing property needs to build an audience -- notice that &lt;em&gt;Harry Potter and the Philosopher&#039;s Stone&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Spider-Man&lt;/em&gt; are the only movies on this list that are the first in their series?

Anyway, I&#039;m not saying it&#039;s good, but it&#039;s certainly not surprising. Unfortunately it&#039;s this trend that has also resulted in the whole toy and board game movie debacle. Maybe we need a few brand-based movies to fail so that people realize that good stories are also important. Check out the top 20 grossing movies of the decade after the jump. What do you think, is it depressing or deserving?

&lt;span id=&quot;more-28920&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
1. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
2. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man&#039;s Chest
3. The Dark Knight
4. Harry Potter and the Philosopher&#039;s Stone
5. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World&#039;s End
6. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
7. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
8. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
9. Shrek 2
10. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
11. Spider-Man 3
12. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
13. Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
14. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
15. Finding Nemo
16. Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
17. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
18. Spider-Man
19. Shrek the Third
20. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/17/big-surprise-top-grossing-movies-of-the-decade-are-basically-all-franchise-films/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>

	
	<item>
		<title>Is Avatar One of the Top 100 Movies of the Decade?</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/11/is-avatar-one-of-the-top-100-movies-of-the-decade/</link>
		<comments>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/11/is-avatar-one-of-the-top-100-movies-of-the-decade/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sci-fi]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=28644</guid>
		
	                <description><![CDATA[

The end of the decade is almost upon us, which means that over the next month or so you can expect to see all kinds of lists counting down the "Best Of" the previous 10 years in just about everything. One of the first publications out of the gate with their Best Movies of the Decade list is London's Telegraph [1], who count down their top 100 movies from 2000 to 2009. There are some interesting choices and some predictable ones, along with a few movies I've never even heard of.

One thing that has a few people raising an eyebrow, however, is the fact that they've included James Cameron's Avatar on their list, based solely on the 15-minute IMAX preview! Isn't that a little presumptuous? To be fair, they did tack it on at the end of the list at #100, but it still feels like they're going mainly based on hype rather than anything concrete. Do you think that Avatar will end up being one of the decade's best films? Do you agree with the rest of their choices? I have a feeling they're going to get some flack for that #1. Check out their top 20 after the jump, and read the rest over at Telegraph.co.uk [2].


20. Lost in Translation
19. Capote
18. Mamma Mia!
17. 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days
16. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
15. Before Sunset
14. Saw
13. West of the Tracks
12. Amelie
11. The Lives of Others
10. Slumdog Millionaire
9. The Passion of the Christ
8. Amores Perros
7. Borat
6. Memento
5. The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring
4. There Will Be Blood
3. The Incredibles
2. Brokeback Mountain
1. Fahrenheit 9/11

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/6501160/Top-100-movies-defining-the-noughties-00s-in-film.html
[2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/6501160/Top-100-movies-defining-the-noughties-00s-in-film.html<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[&lt;img src=&quot;/images/weblog/2009/11/avatartop100.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;avatartop100&quot; title=&quot;avatartop100&quot; width=&quot;500&quot; height=&quot;281&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot; /&gt;

The end of the decade is almost upon us, which means that over the next month or so you can expect to see all kinds of lists counting down the &quot;Best Of&quot; the previous 10 years in just about everything. One of the first publications out of the gate with their Best Movies of the Decade list is London&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/6501160/Top-100-movies-defining-the-noughties-00s-in-film.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Telegraph&lt;/a&gt;, who count down their top 100 movies from 2000 to 2009. There are some interesting choices and some predictable ones, along with a few movies I&#039;ve never even heard of.

One thing that has a few people raising an eyebrow, however, is the fact that they&#039;ve included James Cameron&#039;s &lt;em&gt;Avatar&lt;/em&gt; on their list, based solely on the 15-minute IMAX preview! Isn&#039;t that a little presumptuous? To be fair, they did tack it on at the end of the list at #100, but it still feels like they&#039;re going mainly based on hype rather than anything concrete. Do you think that Avatar will end up being one of the decade&#039;s best films? Do you agree with the rest of their choices? I have a feeling they&#039;re going to get some flack for that #1. Check out their top 20 after the jump, and read the rest over at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/6501160/Top-100-movies-defining-the-noughties-00s-in-film.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Telegraph.co.uk&lt;/a&gt;.

&lt;span id=&quot;more-28644&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
20. Lost in Translation
19. Capote
18. Mamma Mia!
17. 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days
16. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
15. Before Sunset
14. Saw
13. West of the Tracks
12. Amelie
11. The Lives of Others
10. Slumdog Millionaire
9. The Passion of the Christ
8. Amores Perros
7. Borat
6. Memento
5. The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring
4. There Will Be Blood
3. The Incredibles
2. Brokeback Mountain
1. Fahrenheit 9/11<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/11/11/is-avatar-one-of-the-top-100-movies-of-the-decade/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>

	
	<item>
		<title>Rotten Tomatoes Picks the Worst Movies of the Decade</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/09/25/rotten-tomatoes-picks-the-worst-movies-of-the-decade/</link>
		<comments>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/09/25/rotten-tomatoes-picks-the-worst-movies-of-the-decade/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:27:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=26665</guid>
		
	                <description><![CDATA[

When it comes to reviewing movies, I've always found that one of the most difficult things is not deciding whether a movie is good or bad, but rather, deciding whether a movie is bad or downright terrible. Make no mistake, there are many different levels of bad movies, but does anyone really care to get down to the nitty gritty of debating which ones are slightly better than others? It just seems like a colossal waste of energy.

Fortunately, the good folks over at Rotten Tomatoes [1] have recently decided to sift through their vast review archives to give us the definitive Worst of the Worst list [2] for the past 10 years in film. I don't think there are too many surprises here, although the good news is that I think quite a few of these are movies that no one has seen. Maybe now they'll finally find the audience they deserve! Are there any major duds missing from the list? Check out the top 20 after the jump, or head over to Rotten Tomatoes [3] to see if you agree with the full countdown.


20. Crossover
19. Half Past Dead
18. The Master of Disguise
17. Twisted
16. Daddy Day Camp
15. Alone in the Dark
14. Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
13. Constellation
12. Killing Me Softly
11. Merci Docteur Ray!
10. Witless Protection
9. Redline
8. 3 Strikes
7. Strange Wilderness
6. Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
5. National Lampoon's Gold Diggers
4. King's Ransom
3. Pinocchio
2. One Missed Call
1. Ballistic: Ecks vs Sever

[1] http://www.rottentomatoes.com/
[2] http://www.rottentomatoes.com/guides/worst_of_the_worst/?loc=interstitialskip
[3] http://www.rottentomatoes.com/guides/worst_of_the_worst/?loc=interstitialskip<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[&lt;img src=&quot;/images/weblog/2009/09/rottenworstdecade3.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;rottenworstdecade3&quot; title=&quot;rottenworstdecade3&quot; width=&quot;500&quot; height=&quot;281&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot; /&gt;

When it comes to reviewing movies, I&#039;ve always found that one of the most difficult things is not deciding whether a movie is good or bad, but rather, deciding whether a movie is bad or downright terrible. Make no mistake, there are many different levels of bad movies, but does anyone really care to get down to the nitty gritty of debating which ones are slightly better than others? It just seems like a colossal waste of energy.

Fortunately, the good folks over at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rottentomatoes.com/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Rotten Tomatoes&lt;/a&gt; have recently decided to sift through their vast review archives to give us the definitive &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rottentomatoes.com/guides/worst_of_the_worst/?loc=interstitialskip&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Worst of the Worst list&lt;/a&gt; for the past 10 years in film. I don&#039;t think there are too many surprises here, although the good news is that I think quite a few of these are movies that no one has seen. Maybe now they&#039;ll finally find the audience they deserve! Are there any major duds missing from the list? Check out the top 20 after the jump, or head over to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rottentomatoes.com/guides/worst_of_the_worst/?loc=interstitialskip&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Rotten Tomatoes&lt;/a&gt; to see if you agree with the full countdown.

&lt;span id=&quot;more-26665&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
20. Crossover
19. Half Past Dead
18. The Master of Disguise
17. Twisted
16. Daddy Day Camp
15. Alone in the Dark
14. Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
13. Constellation
12. Killing Me Softly
11. Merci Docteur Ray!
10. Witless Protection
9. Redline
8. 3 Strikes
7. Strange Wilderness
6. Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
5. National Lampoon&#039;s Gold Diggers
4. King&#039;s Ransom
3. Pinocchio
2. One Missed Call
1. Ballistic: Ecks vs Sever<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/09/25/rotten-tomatoes-picks-the-worst-movies-of-the-decade/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>

	

	
	<item>
		<title>Quentin Tarantino&#8217;s Top 20 Films of the Past 17 Years</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/08/17/quentin-tarantinos-top-20-films-of-the-past-17-years/</link>
		<comments>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/08/17/quentin-tarantinos-top-20-films-of-the-past-17-years/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:35:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Lists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=24499</guid>
		
	                <description><![CDATA[

Regardless of whether or not you think Quentin Tarantino is an egomaniac and regardless of whether or not you're a fan of his films, one of the things you have to love about him is the fact that he's kind of a fanboy in his own right. Let's face it: the guy simply loves film, and he's probably watched more movies (both obscure and mainstream) than just about anyone else on the planet. It's always interesting to hear him talk passionately about the movies that he loves, as witnessed in the recent Oz-ploitation documentary Not Quite Hollywood, for example.

Recently, as part of the promotion for his upcoming film Inglourious Basterds (which hits theatres this weekend), he recorded a short video for Sky Movies [1] talking about his Top 20 films of the past 17 years -- that is, his favourite movies that have been released since he first started directing his own flicks. Any surprises? Well, it's kind of surprising that he managed to narrow it down to just 20, but beyond that, I certainly didn't expect him to be a fan of Team America: World Police! Cool. Check out the full list and the video embedded after the jump.

Battle Royale
Anything Else
Audition
Tsui Hark's The Blade
Boogie Nights
Dazed & Confused
Dogville
Fight Club
Fridays
The Host
The Insider
Joint Security Area
Lost In Translation
The Matrix
Memories of Murder
Supercop (Police Story 3)
Shaun of the Dead
Speed
Team America: World Police
Unbreakable



[1] http://movies.sky.com/<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[&lt;img src=&quot;/images/weblog/2009/08/tarantinotop20.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;tarantinotop20&quot; title=&quot;tarantinotop20&quot; width=&quot;500&quot; height=&quot;283&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot; /&gt;

Regardless of whether or not you think Quentin Tarantino is an egomaniac and regardless of whether or not you&#039;re a fan of his films, one of the things you have to love about him is the fact that he&#039;s kind of a fanboy in his own right. Let&#039;s face it: the guy simply loves film, and he&#039;s probably watched more movies (both obscure and mainstream) than just about anyone else on the planet. It&#039;s always interesting to hear him talk passionately about the movies that he loves, as witnessed in the recent Oz-ploitation documentary &lt;em&gt;Not Quite Hollywood&lt;/em&gt;, for example.

Recently, as part of the promotion for his upcoming film &lt;em&gt;Inglourious Basterds&lt;/em&gt; (which hits theatres this weekend), he recorded a short video for &lt;a href=&quot;http://movies.sky.com/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Sky Movies&lt;/a&gt; talking about his Top 20 films of the past 17 years -- that is, his favourite movies that have been released since he first started directing his own flicks. Any surprises? Well, it&#039;s kind of surprising that he managed to narrow it down to just 20, but beyond that, I certainly didn&#039;t expect him to be a fan of &lt;em&gt;Team America: World Police&lt;/em&gt;! Cool. Check out the full list and the video embedded after the jump.

&lt;span id=&quot;more-24499&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;Battle Royale
Anything Else
Audition
Tsui Hark&#039;s The Blade
Boogie Nights
Dazed &amp; Confused
Dogville
Fight Club
Fridays
The Host
The Insider
Joint Security Area
Lost In Translation
The Matrix
Memories of Murder
Supercop (Police Story 3)
Shaun of the Dead
Speed
Team America: World Police
Unbreakable

&lt;object width=&quot;500&quot; height=&quot;304&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot;&gt;&lt;param name=&quot;movie&quot; value=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/v/Wz4K-Rxx2Bk&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;param name=&quot;allowFullScreen&quot; value=&quot;true&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;param name=&quot;allowscriptaccess&quot; value=&quot;always&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt;&lt;embed src=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/v/Wz4K-Rxx2Bk&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1&amp;&quot; type=&quot;application/x-shockwave-flash&quot; allowscriptaccess=&quot;always&quot; allowfullscreen=&quot;true&quot; width=&quot;500&quot; height=&quot;304&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot;&gt;&lt;/embed&gt;&lt;/object&gt;<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/08/17/quentin-tarantinos-top-20-films-of-the-past-17-years/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>

	

	

	

	

	
	<item>
		<title>Yahoo&#8217;s List of 100 Movies to See Before You Die</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/03/23/yahoos-list-of-100-movies-to-see-before-you-die/</link>
		<comments>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/03/23/yahoos-list-of-100-movies-to-see-before-you-die/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 17:04:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books/Comics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=17653</guid>
		
	                <description><![CDATA[

It's kind of a strange coincidence that on the same day I purchased a book called 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die [1] (edited by Steven Jay Schneider), Yahoo! posted their own definitive list of 100 Movies to See Before You Die [2]. There have been plenty of lists like these before, and usually they seem to contain just the obvious classics but nothing particularly new or different. The book, however, impressed me with how much variety it has; there are all kinds of hidden gems, cult classics and foreign films included in the mix.

As for Yahoo!'s list, it is pretty obvious that 100 movies is an incredibly small number to limit yourself to. There are probably a good chunk of these that are almost indisputable, and it's hard to argue against how important and influential most of these movies are. Also, unlike the AFI Top 100, it's not just limited to American cinema. Do you agree with their choices? How many have you seen so far? If you're looking for a starting point to educate yourself and expose yourself to some great films, the Yahoo! list is probably a good start. If you want more, I recommend checking out the aforementioned book. I'm hoping to get through it over the next 50 years or so! (You can actually see the full list on the 1001 Before You Die [3] website.)

[1] http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0764161512/spacejunk-20
[2] http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/100-movies-to-see-before-you-die.html
[3] http://1001beforeyoudie.com/<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[&lt;img src=&quot;/images/weblog/2009/03/moviestoseebeforeyoudie.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; title=&quot;moviestoseebeforeyoudie&quot; width=&quot;300&quot; height=&quot;375&quot; class=&quot;centered&quot; /&gt;

It&#039;s kind of a strange coincidence that on the same day I purchased a book called &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0764161512/spacejunk-20&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die&lt;/a&gt; (edited by Steven Jay Schneider), Yahoo! posted their own definitive list of &lt;a href=&quot;http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/100-movies-to-see-before-you-die.html&quot;&gt;100 Movies to See Before You Die&lt;/a&gt;. There have been plenty of lists like these before, and usually they seem to contain just the obvious classics but nothing particularly new or different. The book, however, impressed me with how much variety it has; there are all kinds of hidden gems, cult classics and foreign films included in the mix.

As for Yahoo!&#039;s list, it is pretty obvious that 100 movies is an incredibly small number to limit yourself to. There are probably a good chunk of these that are almost indisputable, and it&#039;s hard to argue against how important and influential most of these movies are. Also, unlike the AFI Top 100, it&#039;s not just limited to American cinema. Do you agree with their choices? How many have you seen so far? If you&#039;re looking for a starting point to educate yourself and expose yourself to some great films, the Yahoo! list is probably a good start. If you want more, I recommend checking out the aforementioned book. I&#039;m hoping to get through it over the next 50 years or so! (You can actually see the full list on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://1001beforeyoudie.com/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;1001 Before You Die&lt;/a&gt; website.)<p>FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT <a href="http://www.filmjunk.com">FILMJUNK.COM</a>!</p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/03/23/yahoos-list-of-100-movies-to-see-before-you-die/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>

	

	</channel>
</rss>
