If you’ve been following the fuss about the ‘Sight & Sound’ poll, there’s a new greatest movie of all time. However do they do it every decade?
How do you choose the world’s best restaurant? For starters, you’d ask what kind of cuisine. (Indian? Italian? Chinese? A bit of everything that comes under that suspicious umbrella term ‘multi-cuisine’?) Then you may consider price range. (Five-star? Roadside?) And there would be additional discussions on whether reservations are needed or if the ingredients are locally sourced, whether the service is good or if a rude-waiter scenario awaits us, and even if parking is a problem. But above all, the qualifier “world’s best” implies an essential familiarity with everything else out there on the planet, just as simply as you wouldn’t be able to pick the best student in class if you didn’t know what every child was up to, or, like the Olympics, if you didn’t have a shortlist of candidates vying to assert their supremacy. Even then, no one can say for sure if there isn’t a faster runner or a more graceful swan-diver in some unheralded corner of the earth, someone who never thought to compete professionally and thus remains unnoticed, unknown.
Unless you’ve seen every film ever made, how can you pick the greatest film of all time? Every time I see a Sight & Sound poll, this is the question that pops to mind. The web site of the British Film Institute, which publishes the magazine, says: “In 1952 Sight & Sound polled the world’s leading film critics to compile a list of the best films of all time. The magazine has repeated this poll every ten years, to show which films stand the test of time in the face of shifting critical opinion… Now, in 2002, the magazine has published its largest poll to date, receiving contributions from 145 film critics, writers and academics, and 108 film directors.” How many of these voters, I wonder, have seen everything there is to be seen (and more importantly, remember what they’ve seen, keeping in mind that last year’s masterpiece is sometimes this year’s overrated embarrassment), and are therefore certain that what they’re doing is indeed picking the best films of all time.
I don’t have a problem with the exercise or the process. If you want the critics’ estimation, you have to poll the critics. My question is about variables, the mental arithmetic, the result. As a critic, I am often asked what my favourite film is (if people don’t know you and they hear you’re a critic, this is almost always their opening question), and I always slime away from the conversation saying that there are too many to mention. And that’s the truth. Besides, what favourite film are they asking about? Favourite drama? Favourite musical? Favourite western? Sci-fi? Or favourite guilty pleasure, a film of no redeeming cinematic merit but which I cannot help returning to every so often? What about mood? Don’t people factor that in while talking about favourites? You may love Beethoven, but his dissonances and dynamic contrasts don’t exactly make for music to wake up to – that’s evening music, while in the morning, still seeking your bearings, you may prefer something less dramatic. When I want to laugh, I’m hardly going to slip a Dreyer into the DVD player.
I prefer, as Maria von Trapp did, a list of favourites that I could pick and choose from, given the circumstances (both external and internal) – on a cold day, however unlikely given my residence, I’d go with warm woolen mittens over whiskery kittens. I am not disciplined enough to make a “top ten” list of anything, let alone movies, and I liken this inability to the hand-wringing of a parent asked to pick a favourite child from his brood. So many movies, so much love. The additional burden comes from the slipperiness with which art evades canonisation. Young or old, male or female, short-attention-spanned or not, sports follower or not, we do not grudge Roger Federer his place in the pantheon because he has volleyed and lobbed his way to all those titles, beating all those others in the process, in matches whose scores left no doubt about the margin of his victory. But how do we arrive on an agreement on The Passion of Joan of Arc?
I suppose we could say that, as with sports, there are measures that art must submit to in order to be canonized – though I suspect if two people will agree on these measures. That said, there’s not much to argue with in the top-ten list just released, which includes 8½, The Searchers, Tokyo Story, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and, at number one, Vertigo, which ended Citizen Kane’s half-century monopoly on the top spot. Kane is now No. 2 – something that makes me neither happy nor sad, for as so many people have pointed out, such lists are ultimately meaningless. Citizen Kane is a great movie, period, and I like François Truffaut’s summation of what makes it so great. “As opposed to a timid beginner who might try to make a good film in order to win acceptance in the industry, [Orson] Welles, with his considerable reputation already established, felt constrained to make a movie which would sum up everything that had come before in cinema, and would prefigure everything to come. His extravagant gamble paid off handsomely.”
Lights, Camera, Conversation… is a weekly dose of cud-chewing over what Satyajit Ray called Our Films Their Films. An edited version of this piece can be found here.
Copyright ©2012 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Ramsu
August 10, 2012
Nice article! Somewhat similar to the one about the Oscar for Best Picture, except the electorate is different and the adjectives used by said electorate to justify their choices are likely to have more than 4 syllables.
When I saw the list, I remember thinking, “What’s so special about Vertigo?” Then again, maybe a whole bunch of people asked the same question about a whole bunch of movies on that list, Kane included.
Having said all that, maybe the ordering is not the point, although it’s what eats up the newsprint. Maybe the point of the list is to go back and (re)visit the films on it and immerse ourselves in a variety of worlds. At the end of it all, we may still have no idea how a list like that is made or whether the films on the list deserve to be there. But we’ll come out feeling, somehow, enriched. Sort of like an analogue of Thompson venturing into Kane’s life, I suppose.
LikeLike
venkatesh
August 10, 2012
So BR , what is your favorite movie ? 🙂
LikeLike
rameshram
August 10, 2012
If youre going to write complete junk at least LINK the sight and sound list so that people(who be not as sophisticated as I, Obviously) may know what the stupid films are!
Films.
http://www.bfi.org.uk/news/50-greatest-films-all-time
directors
http://www.bfi.org.uk/news/sight-sound-2012-directors-top-ten
LikeLike
Govardhan Giridass
August 10, 2012
And why would you quote the BFI website from the 2002 poll and not the 2012 poll?
LikeLike
Pranav
August 10, 2012
To the point! On a different note however, seems like Bergman’s too good for the Judges..
LikeLike
Siddhartha Srivastava
August 10, 2012
I was waiting for your take on the list! I agree about the subjectivity of such a process but still feel that the creation of a “canon” is a very meaningful exercise. My feelings are very well put forward by Scott Tobias in this article.
http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-radical-vision-of-sight-sounds-stodgy-bestfilm,83352/
The only pain for me is to wait and see when more recent films will crack the ten (20-30 years from now?). I sure hope so. I’m waiting to see my favorite film Mulholland Dr crack that big ten!
LikeLike
Njoy
August 10, 2012
There are one or two other things about lists than just being lists I think. One , it gives the more amateur non-critic yet serious film buff a reference point. If I was seriously trying to self study cinema , these lists act as general pointers to the ‘grammar’ that one needs to familiarise with , in developing a degree of taste. Also while reading to learn, these may be the films most critics may point out as examples ( they are their favourite films) and it becomes easier to decipher the thought process if you have seen them.
Another is, beween 2 film lovers it gives a common denominator to discuss/talk. Chances are the lists will be covered by people and it gives a platform to develop a discussion from , which can lead on to better ideas.
The downside of course, is the prejudice. Between a rather unheard of,yet promising foreign film and a film on the S&S list , one will be more inclined to see the latter, sometimes even just for the self gratification that comes with telling someone i have watched this many movie on that list.
LikeLike
Santa
August 11, 2012
Its interesting to me that films that pushed the boundaries of movie-making technology never make it to such lists. I’m thinking of the original Star Wars trilogy. Or Terminator 2. Even Avatar. I understand that these are not going to make it to the favorites list of many movie critics. Heck, some wouldn’t even make it my favorites list (and I’m a very average Joe type movie viewer 🙂 ). But should not lists that attempt to single out the “best” film of all time at least acknowledge the advancement these movies brought about?
LikeLike
brangan
August 11, 2012
Njoy: I agree to an extent. I too started out by seeking out the so-called “classics” and then reading up about them and finding some living up to the hype and being disappointed by others. But given that the same films show up every time, I don’t know that such lists are going to help the newbie develop a critical sense (beyond the first such list; that too in this Internet era, where everyone has an opinion and you only have to type out “greatest films” to get about a 100 such lists, at least some of which are worthwhile). For that purpose, I think those “100 greatest films of all time”-type books (or “1000 films you’ve never heard of”) are more useful.
Besides, do you really want to trust a top-ten list which has no use for Bergman 😉
LikeLike
rameshram
August 11, 2012
?! me?
LikeLike
rameshram
August 11, 2012
bergman is no 17 for persona . where’s antonioni? bunuel? paosolini, fassbinder, oshima, mizaguchi, where’s nanook of the north? where’s the american classics (on the waterfront, casablanca, sirk, fuller, man ray…) so this is like the AFI top 100. the more boring the list, the more widely accepted.
LikeLike
Suganth
August 11, 2012
Here’s Peter Bogdanovich response to Sight & Sound (which the magazine is carrying in its issue) echoing the same feeling… http://blogs.indiewire.com/peterbogdanovich/the-sight-and-sound-poll
“There are so many wonderful pictures to see, that to reduce them down to a Top Ten is a disservice to all the great work that has been done with that haunting 20th century medium of humanity”
LikeLike
Govardhan Giridass
August 11, 2012
Not you rameshram, BR – “Now, in 2002, the magazine has published its largest poll to date, receiving contributions from 145 film critics, writers and academics, and 108 film directors.” Just wondering why he would reproduce stats from 2002 in 2012.
LikeLike
rameshram
August 11, 2012
oh I just think he wrote some poop because the list was uninspiring dreck.
LikeLike
vijay
August 11, 2012
“I too started out by seeking out the so-called “classics” and then reading up about them and finding some living up to the hype and being disappointed by others.”
BR, you are yet to write about the so called classics that disappointed you or which you think are overrated. I think I asked about this a couple of years back. I think it would make for an interesting piece and would also provide for some fireworks in the comments space 🙂
I am tired of desi reviewers also towing the same Citizen Kane-Casablanca-2001 space odyssey.. line when it comes to Holly classics. I would like to read a honest bold piece, for a change, on why somebody thinks, Citizen Kane(just an example) say, is overrated. And at the same time talk about their favorite films or classics which they think were underrated by the American critics. Disagreement is what makes for fun.
LikeLike
Karthi
August 12, 2012
BR,Naeyar viruppam.can we have madhupana kadai review?
LikeLike
brangan
August 17, 2012
Karthi: Things too tight at work. Not going to be doing Tamil film reviews for a while. Will probably end up talking about them in the comments.
LikeLike
Karthi
August 17, 2012
Hmm.have you seen it. any good?
LikeLike