Your favorite movie of all time!

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: I will definitely add Back to the Future to my list. One of the most fun movies of all time.

Atavachron wrote: I don't really have a favorite, but I guess JFK comes close.

I'm not surprised, you JFK fan.

BaldJean wrote: first of all, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" was not a short story but a full-blown novel of about 300 pages....

I know you weren't responding to me, and sorry for snipping...

I've read it multiple times and own a copy, and remembered it being more of a novella. I mean I think of 1984 (which I have read a dozen times) as a short novel, but it's 328 pages (depending on which version you read, the page size and the print size, my version is 200 something)). My copy of Androids is closer to 200 pages (220 I think in checking, it's in storage unfortunately as are many of my books ). According to one site it's 258 pages, and 77,142 words (so hardly a short story while not being a read that would take many hours -- a nice read for one evening). It's not like so many of his other short stories that have been adapted. I have a paperbook of various of his short stories which has 9 in 290 pages, including the one that the film Minority report was based on (44 pages), Imposter which was also turned into a not very good film (15 pages), the one that Total Recall was based on (23 pages) the one that the film Screamers was based on (50 pages), just saw the film again recently. It's hardly big print, mind you.

And now for something completely Dickerent:

Monty Python's The Meaning of Life. This doesn't get the respect that The Life of Brian and the Holy Grail get (and I love those too),but the Meaning of Life has my favourite Python material (a s cohesive film, I think Life of Brian is fantastic).

But I want to highlight In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar-wai). I found it such a beautiful film to watch, and really like the way that it is framed visually. For a while east Asian cinema was my favourite (French too). Tampopo from Japan is another favourite. I did a mega-list of some of my favourites before (including my favourite directors), but that is it outside of the purview of this topic. There are advantages to focusing on one at a time even if, like me, you have many favourites (each one being your favourite of its particular ilk an in its own way).

Of ones that I have watched in the last couple of years, In Bruges I loved (that was recommended to me at the forum).

BaldJean wrote: Logan wrote: BaldJean wrote: first of all, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" was not a short story but a full-blown novel of about 300 pages.... I know you weren't responding to me, and sorry for snipping... I've read it multiple times and own a copy, and remembered it being more of a novella. I mean I think of 1984 (which I have read a dozen times) as a short novel, but it's 328 pages (depending on which version you read, the page size and the print size, my version is 200 something)). My copy of Androids is closer to 200 pages (220 I think in checking, it's in storage unfortunately as are many of my books ). According to one site it's 258 pages, and 77,142 words (so hardly a short story while not being a read that would take many hours -- a nice read for one evening). It's not like so many of his other short stories that have been adapted. I have a paperbook of various of his short stories which has 9 in 290 pages, including the one that the film Minority report was based on (44 pages), Imposter which was also turned into a not very good film (15 pages), the one that Total Recall was based on (23 pages) the one that the film Screamers was based on (50 pages), just saw the film again recently. It's hardly big print, mind you. it's been at least 25 years since I read the novel; that's why I'm off about its size. "Blade Runner" has such a great atmosphere and could have been such a great movie. these action sequences do in my opinion stand out like a sore thumb and were absolutely unnecessary. Ridley Scott should have replaced these sequences with scenes that explain the differences between androids and human beings in more detail. if this had been done I would agree that "Blade Runner" is a great movie. but American audiences would most like have considered the movie to be boring without these action sequences, and so they were put in

You weren't too far off, especially based on long-term memory, my memory was that it was shorter than it is (and I last read it maybe in 2007), like a short novel (less than 200 pages) or novella. I do like the story and prefer it to the film. The film is very stylish and des have a great atmosphere and I love elements of it, and I loved the soundtrack, but yeah, it's more about the sound and look than the story. The Voight-Kampff test is my favourite scene from the film with Deckard and Rachel. Lots of scenes I do like. I actually have bene quite harsh with the film at a sci-fi forum I belonged to. I just felt it was a little vacuous ultimately even if I really like the look of the film. Many films I love I do love more for the visuals than the plot or characterisations. I still love the film Dune, which has lot of action, and is generally lowly regarded (it helps that I didn't read the novel until after watching it. For that matter I was considerably older than I was when I saw Blade Runner, which was considerably years after seeing Blade Runner.

The action sequences are fine for me, and I don't remember it being overloaded with them, and they didn't feel gratuitous to me. There's plenty of slow time. I get annoyed with some films that are just chase after chase which don't seem to move the story forward, but this wasn't one of them. Could do a sequel to Run Lola Run called Walk Lola Walk (or as I wrote for a review of it, "Rent Lola Rennt, Rent it Today!"

I do wish that there were more faithful adaptations of various Dick works, even those which would need to be expanded on (though he has plenty of novels to choose from). I was enjoying the series The Man in the High Castle, and I felt that the A Scanner Darkly captured the Dickensian (oh wait that term is for Dickens) feel. A lot of Dick works are paranoiac and/or claustrophobic, but also there's humour and a kind of absurdity works of his. He was an odd man.

Catcher10 wrote: AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: I will definitely add Back to the Future to my list. One of the most fun movies of all time. I concur, we love watching all of them.

SteveG wrote: For me it would have to be Being There with Peter Sellers as there is something completely truthful about an idiot being taken for a genius. What's yours?

Vompatti wrote: BaldJean wrote: Logan wrote: BaldJean wrote: first of all, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" was not a short story but a full-blown novel of about 300 pages.... I know you weren't responding to me, and sorry for snipping... I've read it multiple times and own a copy, and remembered it being more of a novella. I mean I think of 1984 (which I have read a dozen times) as a short novel, but it's 328 pages (depending on which version you read, the page size and the print size, my version is 200 something)). My copy of Androids is closer to 200 pages (220 I think in checking, it's in storage unfortunately as are many of my books ). According to one site it's 258 pages, and 77,142 words (so hardly a short story while not being a read that would take many hours -- a nice read for one evening). It's not like so many of his other short stories that have been adapted. I have a paperbook of various of his short stories which has 9 in 290 pages, including the one that the film Minority report was based on (44 pages), Imposter which was also turned into a not very good film (15 pages), the one that Total Recall was based on (23 pages) the one that the film Screamers was based on (50 pages), just saw the film again recently. It's hardly big print, mind you. it's been at least 25 years since I read the novel; that's why I'm off about its size. "Blade Runner" has such a great atmosphere and could have been such a great movie. these action sequences do in my opinion stand out like a sore thumb and were absolutely unnecessary. Ridley Scott should have replaced these sequences with scenes that explain the differences between androids and human beings in more detail. if this had been done I would agree that "Blade Runner" is a great movie. but American audiences would most like have considered the movie to be boring without these action sequences, and so they were put in There's maybe two or three short action sequences throughout the whole film and American audiences most likely ran out of popcorn and left the theatre before the first one even started. Plus there are no relevant differences between androids and humans.

dwill123 wrote: The Godfather (1972) Patton (1970)

10 favorites: