Filmlist

It will be some time before we can anticipate a landmark New Year. 2000 was the granddaddy of all for anyone alive at the time, and 2001 was memorable thanks to Stanley Kubrick and his masterpiece set in that year. As 2002 approaches, though, we can, at the very least, look forward to Sight and Sound Magazine's updated list of the Top Ten Films of All Time.   Considered to be the definitive film top ten list( or lists considering that in 1992 both a director's list and critic's list were published) the Sight and Sound list polls are taken every ten years, and reflect the choices of some of the most prominent critics and directors in the film world.
     I share with many the view that a list of the top ten films is essentially pointless and that one opinion of what should be on that list is no better than another. Still the idea is intruiging, especially to a film buff, and if we go so far as to come up with lists of the best films, then it is only fitting that we determine a "best" list. Sight and Sound is it, mostly because of the prestige of the voters, partly because of quality of the magazine, and a little because of our need to rank things. So which films will appear on the 2002 lists?
A look at S&S List history may give us some clues.
     In 1952 De Sica's "The Bicycle Thief" topped the first S&S list and was followed mostly by silent films, understandable considering movies were still young at that point. Chaplin films held the next two spots on the list that year("City Lights" and "The Gold Rush" were second and third respectively) but were excluded for the next 40 years.   One of my favorite directors, David Lean, showed in a three way tie for tenth place on the '52 list with "Brief Encounter", but never placed again with any film on any year. In 1952 a little less than half the films listed were directed by Americans and about half were silent pictures.
     "Citizen Kane" reared its head in 1962, topping S&S's list, a postition Welles' classic would retain each decade after.   The films on '62's list were generally more recent as films from the 30's and 40's appeared.
"The Bicycle Thief" fell to sixth place, the last time it would place on any S&S list.
       By 1972 one can start to see the real giants. Renoir's "Rules of the Game," third in 1962, placed second, a rank it would keep through 1992. Eisenstein's "Battleship Potemkin" and Dreyer's "The Passion of Joan of Arc" had also become list regulars. Welles, Buster Keaton, and Clyde Bruckman were the only American directors contributing films to the list in '72.
     American films made their best showing to date in 1982 as "The General," "The Magnificent Ambersons," and "Citizen Kane" reappeared along with Ford's "The Searchers," "Vertigo," by England's Alfred Hitchcock, and Donen and Kelly's "Singin' in the Rain."
    By 1992, the critic's list had become a pretty balanced representation of film to that point, if such can be done in 10 films(actually 12) offering four American films, two silents, films from Japan, France, Russia, a western("The Searchers"), and even a science fiction film("2001: A Space Odyssey"). A director's list was also compiled in '92, which favored more recent and American films.
     Whichever films appear on next year's list, there is certain to be passionate disputation. In my own opinion past lists have excluded certain films I like and have included some I find unworthy. For example "Singin' in the Rain," greatest film musical though it may be, should never have been praised as one of the top ten films while movies like Reed's "The Third Man," Lean's "Lawrence of Arabia," or Bergman's "The Seventh Seal" were not recognized. Also distressing is the realization that certain little known but great films, like Kubrick's "Barry Lyndon," will never be considered.
     I think 2002's S&S list will attempt to keep a balance of genre, nationality, and year to its entries. We might even see the first inclusion of a film directed by a female, though I can't imagine what it would be. As time passes it becomes increasingly difficult to summarize the best of all of film's history into a simple list of ten entrites. If a list is to be diplomatic and include films from different countries and of different genres only for the sake of diversity, then it fails to truly gage the best films ever made. It seems hard, though, not to diversify since one of the virtures of the body of film created by mankind thus far is its seemingly endless range of both form and content. It goes to show, perhaps, that top ten lists based on opinion don't work in the first place, usefull only as a topic of discussion and reference. Trivial as it may be, S&S's 2002 list(s) will be poured over by film buffs the world over and I, for one, am as curious as anyone.
Here's my idea of what might appear on the 2002 list:
"Citizen Kane" will almost certainly top the new list. I expect to see Kurosawa represented by either "Rashomon" or "The Seven Samurai." "Rules of the Game" will likely make the list again, though I hope not at its usual number two position.. Coppola's "The Godfather" and Scorsese's "Raging Bull" may appear, especially on the director's poll. I also think it is likely that a more recent film than "Raging Bull"(the most recent film ever listed on an S&S ranking) will be introduced. Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction," I think, is the most promising candidtate. The entry of a documentary, African American film, or animated feature is also possible. We might even see a hugely popular film like "Star Wars." I don't think more than two silent films will be included and I fear for Kubrick and his 1968 masterpiece. The critic's list might play out something like this:
1. Citizen Kane
2. Rashomon
3. The Searchers
4. The Godfather
5. The Rules of the Game
6. L'Avventura
7. 8 1/2
8. Intolerance
9. Pulp Fiction
10.Tokyo Story

I won't even attempt to create a top ten list of my own, but here are some films that I would consider if I did:
City Lights, The Third Man, Citizen Kane, A Clockwork Orange, 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Seventh Seal, La Strada, North By Northwest, Pulp Fiction, Barry Lyndon, Lawrence of Arabia, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 8 1/2, The Godfather, The Godfather: Part II, Psycho

End Note:
What is the best criteria by which to form a list? No one will ever agree on a list based on content. Is Sci-Fi more valid than Western? Are Bogart and Becall better than Hanks and Ryan? The only way to compile a list of greatest films that eliminates( or at least greatly reduces) dispute is to rank them by technical innovation. If a film advanced the art of the motion picture then it is great, if by that achievement only. If a film was clearly the first to employ important tools and tactics to filmaking then it is rather hard to deny it's worth. "Citezen Kane"'s technical brilliance is the primary reason it tops all serious best film lists. Its story and acting are great, but so are the stories and performances of many films. 'Kane's revolutionary production was the deciding factor. Technical innovation is the most sound way to rank films in any kiind of meaningful way. Of course, the most groundbreakingly technical film will never be considered as the greatest ever without good content.   Let the debates continue....