• 0 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Posted by Meowayne (6084 posts) -
#2 Edited by Meowayne (6084 posts) -

The list is constantly changing, of course. Just to get a general idea. You can find the list here: 
http://www.imdb.com/chart/top

My latest count was 109. Its horrible, being a fan of movies yet born in the late 80s - so much to catch up on. : /

#3 Edited by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -
@Meowayne:  Most of them are very very old fucked up movies which were voted best by old people. Im not interested in seeing so many 30s-70s movies... 
Dont get me wrong i love me some classic movies but the industry has ALOT to offer as masterpieces than so many old classics .. 
 
Edit: My score is 88 .
#4 Posted by Meowayne (6084 posts) -

Ahmad: You should. Age has nothing to do with a quality of the film - both in the negative and in the positive sense. 
 
For example, I have recently seen "North By Northwest" for the first time. Excellent movie. You'd be surprised at how "modern" a good old movie can be.

#5 Edited by Brians (1458 posts) -

I'm pretty happy with the 79 movies I have seen on that list so far.  Which is good for me since I was only born in 1988.
 
And Meowayne 100% right North by Northwest is an excellent movie.

#6 Posted by DJbruce92 (129 posts) -
#7 Edited by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -

120 and, wow, there are some bad films in there. Pirates of the Caribbean, Inglourious Basterds and Lock, Stock are three of the 250 best films of all time? Get out of town. 
 
EDIT: I completely agree with North By Northwest. If you didn't know the actors, you could probably convince someone it's a modern film with grindhouse style film making.

#8 Posted by chrissedoff (2075 posts) -

you don't have to see every one of those movies. just because they're rated highly by imdb users doesn't mean they're great movies. for example, you can skip donnie darko and oldboy, they're pretty shitty movies on the real.

#9 Posted by Brians (1458 posts) -
@HandsomeDead: At least it wasn't the even worse sequels for Pirates.
#10 Posted by Meowayne (6084 posts) -
@DJbruce92 said:
" Last time I updated  http://www.icheckmovies.com/list/top+250/djhusky92/ I had seen 34. I have most of them on the list. Just haven't watched them yet. "
Oooh. That is a great site. *click click*
Is there something similar for games?
#11 Posted by davidwitten22 (1708 posts) -

63. And chrissedoff Oldboy is a tremendous movie.

#12 Posted by Brians (1458 posts) -
@davidwitten22: Yeah did the guy who disliked Oldboy forget how awesome the Hallway scene with that hammer is?
#13 Edited by chrissedoff (2075 posts) -
@davidwitten22:  tremendous[ly dumb] movie [for teenage stoners]
#14 Posted by MikkaQ (10268 posts) -

Eh that list is shit. I mean LOTR among the top 10 movies of all time? Seriously? I mean it was decent, but I can think of probably 250 movies I considered better.

#15 Posted by OneKillWonder_ (1693 posts) -

If I counted correctly, I have seen 48 of those films, which is actually less than what I thought it would've been. That list fluctuates and different movies come and go quite frequently, though. 
 
And Oldboy totally is a great movie. I didn't know what to think of it when I first watched it, but after letting it sink in for awhile, I realized I loved it. I should try to watch that again soon.

#16 Posted by ez123 (1945 posts) -

Kick Ass is there but not Crank? Fuck that list.

#17 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -
@DJbruce92:  I just went on that website and checked the ones ive seen. ive seen 88 movies on that list. Another 10 that i know of and arent interested in seeing, and another 10 i have on DVD and havent seen yet.
#18 Posted by Lone_f (281 posts) -

77, I was surprised I saw that many o.O

#19 Posted by ScottishGamer (215 posts) -

26... to be honest as someone who is far from a big movie fan and only really watches a film about every 2-3 months or so , I expected the number I had seen to be a LOT lower! 

#20 Posted by Brians (1458 posts) -
@chrissedoff: How is a revenge movie for teenage stoners? 
unless stoners are cooler than any I've ever met. Seriously.
 Oldboy: 
The film follows the story of one Oh Dae-Su, who is locked in a hotel room for 15 years without knowing his captor's motives. When he is finally released, Dae Su finds himself still trapped in a web of conspiracy and violence. His own quest for vengeance becomes tied in with romance when he falls for an attractive sushi chef. 
 

#21 Posted by fwylo (3556 posts) -

63 here.

#22 Posted by davidwitten22 (1708 posts) -
@chrissedoff said:
" @davidwitten22:  tremendous[ly dumb] movie [for teenage stoners] "
I'd love to see your justification for that, because Oldboy is one of my favorite movies of all time and it's so clever and well written.
#23 Edited by chrissedoff (2075 posts) -
@Briguile: it's one of those "bro! that shit was twisted!" movies that achieves that effect with a plot that makes some pretty absurd stretches to arrive at its neat little conclusion. just as an example: how the FUCK did that guy know those two people would fall in love and have sex? that is IMPOSSIBLE, and people should have too much respect for their own intelligence to just accept oldboy's stupid, manipulative plot.
i wouldn't even put oldboy on the level of saw, in terms of plot believability. it's more like saw 3. it's a goddamn crime that oldboy is sitting pretty in the top 200 and blue velvet isn't even on that list at all.
#24 Edited by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -

Most of them, so I said greater than 200. 
Rated 291 movies on imdb so far.

#25 Posted by Brians (1458 posts) -
@chrissedoff: I guess I was distracted by some of the power of the visuals in that movie to really care what it was about. But you do have a point about it.
#26 Posted by Dysnomia (689 posts) -

27 I think...

#27 Posted by davidwitten22 (1708 posts) -
@chrissedoff said:
" @Briguile: it's one of those "bro! that shit was twisted!" movies that achieves that effect with a plot that makes some pretty absurd stretches to arrive at its neat little conclusion. just as an example: how the FUCK did that guy know those two people would fall in love and have sex? that is IMPOSSIBLE, and people should have too much respect for their own intelligence to just accept oldboy's stupid, manipulative plot. i wouldn't even put oldboy on the level of saw, in terms of plot believability. it's more like saw 3. it's a goddamn crime that oldboy is sitting pretty in the top 200 and blue velvet isn't even on that list at all. "
You must have a hard time playing video games if you can't suspend even an ounce of disbelief.
#28 Posted by uniform (1832 posts) -

I've seen all but 17 on that list. I own over half of them.

#29 Posted by dankempster (2249 posts) -

Only 48 for me. I'm actually surprised I've seen that many, as I'm not a huge film fan.

#30 Posted by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -
@HandsomeDead said:
" 120 and, wow, there are some bad films in there. Pirates of the Caribbean, Inglourious Basterds and Lock, Stock are three of the 250 best films of all time? Get out of town.  EDIT: I completely agree with North By Northwest. If you didn't know the actors, you could probably convince someone it's a modern film with grindhouse style film making. "
250 is a big number.  The film doesn't have to be a masterpiece to be on that list, it just has to be great.  I think it's a pretty accurate list, I can't think of a movie that should be there but isn't.
#31 Edited by Rirobuge (163 posts) -

The real test of a person's movie taste is counting the amount in the bottom 100 you've seen.

#32 Posted by Fbomb (1168 posts) -

121 on there.

#33 Posted by Colin (707 posts) -

37.
#34 Posted by NickL (2246 posts) -

45 here... i think i might start watching my way through that list this summer though, how many of these are on netflix streaming about?

#35 Posted by NickL (2246 posts) -
@Rirobuge: What? because out of the thousands and thousands of movies made, the bottom 100 on a list of 250 are gonna be bad?
#36 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
@DOUBLESHOCK said:
" @HandsomeDead said:
" 120 and, wow, there are some bad films in there. Pirates of the Caribbean, Inglourious Basterds and Lock, Stock are three of the 250 best films of all time? Get out of town.  EDIT: I completely agree with North By Northwest. If you didn't know the actors, you could probably convince someone it's a modern film with grindhouse style film making. "
250 is a big number.  The film doesn't have to be a masterpiece to be on that list, it just has to be great.  I think it's a pretty accurate list, I can't think of a movie that should be there but isn't. "
To be honest, the only thing any of them need is to be popular with IMDb users. There's other lists out there like Roger Ebert's Great Movies which are longer but have a more consistent tone to them.
#37 Posted by HistoryInRust (6274 posts) -
@NickL said:
" @Rirobuge: What? because out of the thousands and thousands of movies made, the bottom 100 on a list of 250 are gonna be bad? "
I think he means the list of the 100 lowest-rated films ever made. Not the bottom 100 of the top 250.  
 
On topic: I've seen about 170 of the 250 on that list. Some of the movies on that list just plain shouldn't be there and have been vote-boosted by legions of fanboys (Kick-Ass? Really?). But most of them are really classic. 
#38 Posted by Tordah (2471 posts) -

I've seen about 120-130. Still missing a lot of classics.

#39 Posted by Tordah (2471 posts) -

I've seen about 120-130. Still missing a lot of classics.

#40 Posted by Cloneslayer (1624 posts) -

in the 70s somewhere.  
 
and also that list is wrong. Avatar at 81? more like not on the list

#41 Posted by Rirobuge (163 posts) -
@Sir_Ragnarok said:
" @NickL said:
" @Rirobuge: What? because out of the thousands and thousands of movies made, the bottom 100 on a list of 250 are gonna be bad? "
I think he means the list of the 100 lowest-rated films ever made. Not the bottom 100 of the top 250.  
 
On topic: I've seen about 170 of the 250 on that list. Some of the movies on that list just plain shouldn't be there and have been vote-boosted by legions of fanboys (Kick-Ass? Really?). But most of them are really classic.  "
This. On the left side of the page there's a corresponding list with the 100 lowest rated films.
#42 Posted by Grilledcheez (3943 posts) -

Only 50...that's why I need to get netflix again!

#43 Posted by EVO (3864 posts) -

I counted 107.
 
But that list is far from definitive. There's some questionable films on there like How to Train Your Dragon and many others such as Ed Wood and Children of Men that should be much higher, but IMDb doesn't exactly have the most intelligent userbase.

#44 Posted by Subject2Change (2966 posts) -

As an avid film fan for a while I was trying to do the list, however it changes frequently so I may just copy and paste the list at at current time and go for it.
 
Also another list to go for is the WORST MOVIES and suffer through that.
 

#45 Posted by HatKing (5821 posts) -

My roommates are trying to see them all.  One of them only has about 50 left.  I don't need a list to tell me what to see, I just see things that I think are good.  I have seen a lot of those movies though.  I don't want to count or make a list, but I'd guess at least 150 of them.
Online
#46 Posted by angelfan91 (891 posts) -

68, more than I would've thought.
#47 Posted by Bionicicide (1213 posts) -

51.5
 
.5 for not finishing Batman Begins.

#48 Posted by Sweep (8817 posts) -

135
 
That list is missing a lot of fantastic films.

Moderator
#49 Posted by JJWeatherman (14557 posts) -
@XII_Sniper said:
" Eh that list is shit. I mean LOTR among the top 10 movies of all time? Seriously? I mean it was decent, but I can think of probably 250 movies I considered better. "
Are you kidding me? LOTR was a kick ass series. I think you would find the task of naming 250 better movies to be quite difficult.
#50 Edited by Griddler (3344 posts) -

I'm about 100 down the list and I've seen about 2/3 of them, I'm not going read through all of them/count the ones I have seen
 
EDIT: I have seen 122 of them, basically half, not bad.