Board 8 > Board 8 Ranks Crime Films Part II: Disorganized Crime - The Rankings!

(+) Yeah! (+)

Its the last scene with her I think that won her the award. Its the leads that are the standout though.

Hmmmm, thought Bonnie & Clyde would be closer to the middle, it's nothing amazing but it's solid. For the tiebreaker do you drop the highest and lowest scores?

Johnbobb posted...

Hint for #22: Only Vis got this one right, so I'll give you all another chance; here's another movie with a character's name in the title!

Ok now it's Serpico

Yeah I am also sticking with Serpico.

jcgamer107 posted...

For the tiebreaker do you drop the highest and lowest scores?

I do! That was what gave Bonnie and Clyde the slight edge

22. Serpico (1973)
Directed by Sidney Lumet
Score: 187

Seanchan: 10
Suprak: 13
Johnbobb: 15
Inviso: 15
Lightning: 16
Mythiot: 19
Poke: 21
Seginus: 26
jcgamer: 26
Karo: 26

Seanchan
Serpico is just the coolest motherfucker to ever be a police officer. Pacino did an absolutely bang up job here, though Ill say its a trip listening to him before his voice really changed. Despite the slow pace and a bit of repetition, this one really kept my attention, as you watch Serpico try to navigate the corruption of the police system.

Johnbobb
Why I included it:
There are a lot of police corruption movies, but Serpico is THE police corruption movie. It was so good at highlighting police corruption that the police unsurprisingly hated it upon its release for its negative portrayals of corrupt cops, depite being based on true events that had just happened in the two years prior, but apparently not good enough to prevent that corruption from continuing for the next 50 years, which the real Frank Serpico still speaks out against to this day.

What I thought:
Pacino losing Best Actor for Serpico would be a shock, if Pacino hadn't also lost for Dog Day Afternoon and Godfather Part II and The Godfather. Serpico is unabashedly likable from the start - he turns down dirty money, he's light on minor offenders and calls out shitty behavior from cops and he's just the absolute best with animals. So when we start to see him lash out at his girlfriend and become reckless in his career, it never feels like the typically angry guy freakout you might expect from a 70s crime film. Instead, it comes off as desperation, really capturing Serpico's POV as someone doing everything he possibly can to fix things from the inside at full danger to himself, only to ultimately feel hopeless. It doesn't just highlight bad cops, it highlights that under the existing systems it's impossible to be a good cop, because being a good cop gets you killed.

Favorite 1/2 star Letterboxd review:
the only pleasant thing was al pacino serving absurd amounts of c*** the entire time

Inviso
This was gritty in a good way. We start out with this wide-eyed, optimistic rookie cop who wants nothing more than to be a cop and do a good job of cleaning up the streetsbut right off the bat, the police force is kinda fucked up. Serpico puts in a bunch of effort trying to do a good job, but the cops around him are lazy and eventually want to take credit for the hard work HE puts in. But he keeps his nose to the grindstone and tries to rise in the ranks, only to learn that every cop on the force is corrupt a fuck, and hes not willing to take that role himself. At first he tries to sit back and just be good, but eventually he cant turn a blind eye to the corruption any longer. He tries desperately to get someone to help him, to no avail. The whole situation affects his health and home life, as we watch his life devolve as hes just trying to maintain his morality in an immoral world. Its really interesting to watch Serpico fight without ANY back-up for most of the movie, up to and including him getting shot in the face while two fellow cops stand next to him and let it happen. He never stops fighting though, and I think that really helps to sell him as the sole hero of the film, and it makes for an interesting character study in its own right.

Lightning
What's this for? For bein' an honest cop? Hmm? Or for being stupid enough to get shot in the face?

It is quite odd to think that this film was all based on real events that at the time were quite recent centred around someone who at the time of the films release was only in his thirties. Its a quick turnaround to say the least. Even stranger is that as of this writing the real Frank Serpico is still alive at 88 years old with the film turning 50 last year. Needless to say he lived quite the life in his younger years. Though he eventually moved back to New York state (via the Netherlands) despite the ending text crawl.

This reality makes Serpico an odd film to judge as somebody who is not massively familiar with the real story. It is kind of hard to take this one good cop narrative on its face automatically given the current realities of police corruption and violence in the United States. Though on the other hand, the film is excellent at portraying the sheer corruption of the NYPD, which is laid out at its best early on with the sandwiches. Its such a petty bribe for such a petty reason yet they take it anyway. Despite being a cop movie with a cop as its hero, the film makes its feelings on at least most of the police very clear and it really works for the drama.

With this kind of film however it (other than the excellent cinematography) all comes down to Al Pacinos oscar nominated performance. Needless to say he totally sells it, and the whole film works because of him. Looking back on it theres a real argument that this is his best work, he brings the character from idealistic to beaten down but persevering without missing a single beat, all the while rocking some incredible outfits. Thanks to him this film to me holds up as a classic.

4/5

Seginus
Theres only one honest cop left in New York and his name is Frank Serpico, a man whose facial hair grows so rapidly and powerfully it sparks a gay panic in his precinct and mitigates headshots at point blank range. Yeah, I know it was just a montage technique to show the passage of time, but the way they cut it together made it seem like he was pulling a Jumanji with the beard. The movie makes some funny choices like that. The music is another other one, way too saccharine and sweet for the subject matter. I like this composer, (Mikas Theodorakis) Ive heard some of his symphonic works before, but his effort didnt fit here.

The real story of a whistleblower fighting a corrupt institution is inspiring on paper, yet the movie doesnt quite land. It boils down to a lot of shouty Al Pacino and nobody outside of Pacino is memorable.

Coca-cola apron, take a drink.

jcgamer
Not bad, and maybe its unfair to have watched this after Dog Day Afternoon, but this really felt like a practice exercise and build-up to that very (superior) movie. I like young Al Pacino alright but I couldnt get too into this one. Decent story but the lone white knight cop vs corruption has been done a thousand times. Serviceable but not great.
5/10

Karo
A newbie cop balks at taking bribe money and his follow officers don't like that. He tries blow the whistle and they like that even less.
Nothing really amounts of his efforts other then him looking progressively more and more like Che Guevara until eventually he ends up shot and that finally works out for him I guess.
Being basted on a true story means this is a fairly accurate portrayal of police, but it amounts to being just a paint by numbers 'good cop fighting corruption' movie that is highly forgettable.

Leaderboard:
Inviso: 80
Karo: 70
Poke: 65
Seanchan: 63
Johnbobb: 61
Lightning: 57
Seginus: 55
Mythiot: 45
Suprak: 51
jcgamer: 27

Only a tiny bit of movement here, with Seanchan taking a fairly substantial jump up to 4th place with a tight run for 3rd.

Hint for #21: Fuck it, one more time let's go, a 3RD consecutive drop of a movie with a character's name in the title.

About right for Serpico

Johnbobb posted...

f*** it, one more time let's go, a 3RD consecutive drop of a movie with a character's name in the title

lol oh. I reckon Ocean's Eleven this time.

Frank Serpico is such a cool name he practically deserved a movie just based on that

I think Leon is on the chopping block now

I really enjoyed Bad Times at the El Royale

Did anyone have any guesses who the mystery celebrity was in Bad Times at the El Royale? I assumed there was no definite answer, but maybe they did have a specific person in mind and I just didn't put it together

Johnbobb posted...

Not bad, and maybe its unfair to have watched this after Dog Day Afternoon, but this really felt like a practice exercise and build-up to that very (superior) movie.

Oooh, you're not gonna like my take on that movie... Apparently we've got swapped opinions on these two films!

I'm going to guess Raising Arizona for the next one? Leon is another good shout. I think most of the rest with character names are going to take a while before they drop.

I'll continue with my doomed Baby Driver guess. Eventually it will be right!

Yeah not till the Top 10 though

Gonna guess Raising Arizona.

Oh yeah that does have a character name doesnt it. Will also go with Raising Arizona, and my alternate is Lon. That seems like it should be in the middle somewhere.

Peer pressure has convinced me to switch to Raising Arizona.

damn, thought I'd be able to trick you guys on that one. Sorry Seginus!

21. Raising Arizona (1987)
Directed by Joel & Ethan Coen
Score: 172

Seginus: 1
Mythiot: 3
Suprak: 11
jcgamer: 18
John: 19
Inviso: 21
Lightning: 21
Karo: 23
Seanchan: 27
Poke: 28

Seginus
I have loved this since I was a kid, seen it dozens of times and it gets more nostalgic every time I go through it. For being a screwball comedy it packs a surprisingly cathartic emotional core, This is truly one-of-a-kind. The writing and performances are so good practically every line is quotable. And when I think of Nicolas Cage, this is still the role that first comes to mind. The premise of a wholesome kidnapping is bonkers and seems like it should hardly work but it does. The prologue is incredible, the ending is incredible, the dream sequences and fight scenes and car chase and music and characters are all fantastic. This movie makes me laugh and cry every time I watch it (the ending gets to me), and you cant ask for more than that. Im so biased for this one I cant budge it from the top spot, its very near and dear to me.

Also has the best product placement. The Huggies people must have been over the moon with this chase scene.

jcgamer
Pretty good but probably below average for the Coen Bros. Nicolas Cages character actually seems tame compared to how Im used to seeing him, so thats kind of a negative. Its fine but no real interest to rewatch any time soon.

6/10

Johnbobb
Why I included it:
Coen #2 - If Blood Simple was the film that established the Coens ability to make a thriller, Raising Arizona established their ability to make a flat out comedy. It's one of Edgar Wright's favorite films and a big inspiration for his Simon Pegg and Nick Frost collaborations years later. It really pushed the careers of both Nicolas Cage and Holly Hunter into full force, and is frequently considered one of the best crime comedies of all time.

What I thought:
Legitimately I think this might be Cage's best role. This is Cage on full tilt while always feeling distinctly like his own character rather than just Nicolas Cage playing himself, as I feel like his stardom further down the road began to lead to. Holly Hunter is similarly an actress who I feel like later got kind of typecast into no-nonsense roles, but her shouting at HI to go climb up a window and steal a baby is about as nonsense as it gets. Their chemistry is great, and the infamous botched robbery chase down suburban roads is one of the best on-foot chases I've watched.

Favorite 1/2 star Letterboxd review:
Kidnapping toddlers is not and should never be a laughing matter.

Inviso
This movie wasnt terrible, but I feel like over the course of its runtime, it was very hit or miss. There were definitely segments that I really enjoyed, and I think the entire ending sequence from the confrontation with Smalls to the happy ending dream were solid, and the intro scene were solid as well. But for me, Im just not a huge fan of children, as Ive stated in numerous rankings over the years. And Im especially not a fan of babies, and the very concept of obnoxious baby things they do. Having a whole movie with a plot revolving around kidnapping a baby for purposes of raising it leads to all the worst tropes (namely a whole segment revolving around the need for diapers, and a later segment revolving around diapers). It just wasnt my cup of tea, and I also wasnt a huge fan of the addition of the two escaped convicts, who served as little more than weak comic relief. Its a movie hard carried by Nicolas Cage and Holly Hunter, thats for sure, but theyre just not enough to truly hook me on this plot.

Lightning
I tried to stand up and fly straight, but it wasnt easy with that sumbitch Reagan in the White House.

The Coen brothers second film and a pretty stark contrast to Blood Simple while structurally and thematically being quite similar. Its still a rural American-set crime caper about a simple idea that spins off in crazy directions. However, while that film was a dark, even harrowing drama this is a hilarious comedy. For something so different to their previous film they not only preserved their style but they actually managed to pull the genre shift off.

Honestly, I dont actually have too much to say about this one. I really enjoyed this movie, it was a ton of fun throughout. Nic Cage and Holly Hunter are terrific leads, the former surprisingly reserved for such a comedic role. The supporting cast are great too but particularly John Goodman. The gags just land (one dated joke in the intro aside), especially the ones with the extremely patient old store clerk getting robbed towards the end. I was laughing the whole way through it.

Lastly I have to say, maybe the ending was a little sappy but it did get me emotionally. Aside from the end credits being too jaunty. It works ultimately because the film makes you care for the characters. And for an 80s comedy like this thats a big achievement.

4/5

Karo
An infertile childless couple is turned down at adoption, and thus they turn to the only logical means of recourse left to them... kidnapping!
Because the main characters apparently weren't dumb enough or something these two prison buddies are then added to the cast randomly. Their main role in the movie is to be obnoxious and stupid! Yay.
Regardless, all characters in the film are portrayed extremely inconsistently, their motives and personalities changing on a whim whenever it would provide some cheap lulz.
A lot of child trafficking later we get this weird ending where the kid's dad is like oh you kidnapped my baby and did god knows what to him but since you brought him back now, we cool. What the fuck.
You can be quirky and funny without being so divorced from the way real people act that it feels like it was written by an AI desperately trying to understand the human way of thinking.
Despite the movie's title, very little time is devoted to the raising of the child, and how hilariously bad these morally challenged parents would be at taking care of a baby. I feel there was a lot of humor to be had that was missed here.
It just feels disjointed and lacking of any real direction in the story, and I have to say it one more time: nothing good ever comes from Arizona.

Seanchan
This one just didnt quite click for me. When people talk about suspension of disbelief theyre typically talking about action movies, where maybe the effects look bad or characters do implausible things. Raising Arizona is obviously a comedy, and there were some good chuckles to be had. But I think the movie lost me during the big chase sequence after H.I. goes to rob the store for diapers. The cops and everyone else just constantly shooting, the pack of dogs, the musicit was practically Looney Toons in execution and just a bit too over the top for me.
Couple of other random thoughts: Cages hair (apparently it was supposed to mirror his mental state?), the picture of JFK next to his black cellmate, Mother scratcher, late title card!, John Goodman coming out of the mud (funniest thing in the movie), please stop screaming (brothers when they forgot about the baby).

Leaderboard:
Inviso: 80
Seginus: 75
Karo: 72
Poke: 72
Seanchan: 69
Johnbobb: 63
Mythiot: 63
Suprak: 61
Lightning: 57
jcgamer: 30

This was for sure going to cause some shakeups as we lose our first #1 AND a #3, launching Seginus all the way up to 2nd place behind Inviso, who got a perfect 0 this round. jcgamer continues to not be bothered while the gap between last place and second to last gets wider and wider.

Hint for #20: This won't tell you much about the movie, but this one has a strangely consecutive ranking, with the placements, with 8 of the 10 rankings falling into consecutive order from 16 to 22

I am going to guess my number 17.

You were the only guess, but you were correct!

20. M (1931)
Directed by Fritz Lang
Score: 169 (tie)

Mythiot: 5
jcgamer: 12
Seanchan: 16
Lightning: 17
Suprak: 18
Seginus: 19
Karo: 19
Inviso: 20
Johnbobb: 21
Poke: 22
jcgamer

I like this movie a lot, despite having some flaws typically found in early cinema (several shots are slightly sped up, for example, which kind of took me out of it). Peter Lorre was a wonderful actor, transcending language with his expressive and intense performance. The ending was not too satisfying - I wanted to see the mafia (rightfully) tear him to bits, but its a well-done and significant early thriller.

8/10

Seanchan
It can sometimes be tough to rate old movies. First, because they tend to be a lot slower paced and more statically shot. Second, you lose out on a lot of the context of what made them special because those innovations become the assimilated tropes of the broader movie culture. That said, Ive often found that many of the classics still hold up pretty well because a well told story is still a well told story.

Id not heard of M before this project, so I went in with a bit of trepidation to a movie over 90 years old. Coming out, I found a fine movie, maybe even a good one, though it certainly shows its age.

This was apparently the directors first talkie, as they preferred to film with no sound. This is very apparent from the (I believe) complete lack of a soundtrack. In 2024, its very odd to hear no music whatsoever in a movie, not even during the credits. There were also points, such as the police moving out in force, where theres no sound for what felt like multiple minutes causing me to wonder if my receiver was on the fritz.
I found a lot of the themes to still work today. The paranoia of the faceless serial killer. The ruthlessness and terror of mob mentality. Police catching flak for not doing enough by politicians.

The best scene, and best editing, has to go to the simultaneous meetings between the police and the criminals on how best to handle the situation of catching the killer. The police want to redouble the effort to search everywhere (an affront to privacy, IMO) and believe recidivism is a likely cause. The criminals prefer to use the streets as it were, with beggars acting as their eyes and ears.

Most of the tension of the movie comes from wondering who will catch the killer first and how. Ill say, given the circumstances, I have no fucking idea why that last girl would have gone with the killer to multiple locations. I also have no fucking idea how the police didnt notice the enormous entourage of people invading that office building. In the end, the criminals catch him, we get the speeches about how he just cant help himself, and then the police have the final say.

Couple of other random thoughts: Hitler mustache on the one guy at the beginning! Smoking, smoking, smoking, and more smoking. In the Hall of the Mountain King. The ending seemed abrupt.

Lightning
Somebody must look out for the children!

Fritz Langs M is an absolutely seminal piece of crime drama that effectively defined the entire genre. It also serves as one of the very first serial killer movies, arguably the first, the other contender being Alfred Hitchcocks silent film The Lodger. It is easy to see how influential this film is watching it today, but the big question is one of how it works on its own right when viewed in the modern day.

Luckily for this film, it mostly holds up. The black and white cinematography has stayed beautiful to this day with some long, ominous shots and great images like the killer retreating into the shadows. The opening sequence does a tremendous job of setting up the horror and grief of these murders without showing anything explicitly, and the last act with the public trial shows both the peoples rage at whats happened and the moral dilemma of what to do about it brilliantly. There are sequences in here that are as good as anything youll see today.

On the negative side, there are points where the movie is showing its age. In particular a lot of the scenes with the police carrying out their investigation would have been dramatically streamlined if it were filmed today. Additionally the tone can feel a bit all over the place at times. However, even this only further emphasises how revolutionary this film was, none of the language of crime cinema had been invented yet. Overall its a bit hard to evaluate a film this old today as there are parts that are brilliant and parts that are less so but were clearly a product of their time. Either way this is still well worth a watch.

4/5

Seginus
A thematic pick for the first entry on the list, M directly pits the forces of organized and disorganized crime against one another. When an erratic and impulsive serial killer terrorizes the town, it strains the working relationship between the local police and established crime syndicate, who conduct their own manhunt to restore the status quo. The way the movie plays up the irony of this situation, cross-cutting between the separate cop and gang meetings as if theyre the same scene, is timeless. The narrative follows through by having the gangsters catch and try the killer, which makes for an interesting finale. But ultimately, Beckert pleads a pretty lousy case of the voices-made-me-do-it, and his claim that the gangsters are no better than him seems hardly tenable given what were shown/told of them.

Theres some really memorable camerawork in this, I have to applaud the long tracking shot through the deli and up through the window. I like that it took the time to indulge in this slice-of-life scene that didnt move the plot but did a great job illustrating the sense of community at stake.

Also, good lord theres a lot of smoking in this movie. Some of those rooms they were hotboxing looked unbreathable.

Karo
Both the police and a group of mob bosses attempt to catch a serial killer who has somehow still remained at large despite his brazen and uncautious modus operandi.
The movie doesn't go anywhere really surprising, and the story begins to fall apart under scrutiny. Like, they took THAT long to check the vicinity of the crimes for any former mental patients living there? lol

In places it almost seemed to be starting to make some commentary on paranoia or the mistreatment of society's dregs, but this never went past the surface level and was soon forgotten. Yeah there's some good stuff about the justice system/death penalty near the end, but then we get an anticlimactic resolution where the result is just now he gets arrested and that's it?

I would say this is something that is very cinematically ahead of it's time, but it is an example of good directing making a not so great story seem better than it really is.

Inviso
This movie was neither bad nor good, in my eyes. I think it had some flaws, like a VERY noticeable lack of sound design or music at key points during the film, and a somewhat disjointed narrative. BUT, I can also appreciate the plot itself, in terms of spending the first five to ten minutes setting up this mysterious murderer, and really instilling that sense of ominous dread that builds until the visuals of a lost ball and a lost balloon. From there, you get neighbor turning against neighbor and general accusations across the board, all in service of the police being at their wits end trying to catch this child serial killer, to the point where their overzealousness is hurting the criminal underworld. The idea of criminals hunting down a murderer is kinda interesting, especially since they have methods beyond those of the police (who, to their credit, also figure out the murderer). And Peter Lorres pleading monologue ALMOST makes you feel sympathetic for himuntil you remember he murdered multiple little girls. But definitely understand how he became a big, American movie star, given that he did so well in this role.

Johnbobb
Why I included it:
From the master Fritz Lang, and his personal favorite of his own movies. M basically sets the stage for every serial killer police hunt movie to come over the next century. It defined Peter Lorre's career as a legendary character actor, and also helped to form the idea of the likeable mob (which we'd see explored a lot more when crime films hit their stride in the 60s and 70s) who despite their crimes still hold themselves to a higher standard than a child murderer and who can organize just as well, if not better, than the police.

What I thought:
M's biggest flaw is probably that it takes a little longer than it really needs to to get where its going, especially in a movie where the "race" between the mob and the cops is so central to the film. However, it's never uninteresting, even when the audience is impatiently waiting for someone to finally recognize the whistle we hear early in the film. And the ending, when we finally get to see Lorre in his full terrified state at the hands of people who are never really going to give him anything resembling a fair trial, stands as one of the best crime film endings to date.

Side note, looking for low Letterboxd reviews just has me groaning because so many of them are "they're trying to make us sympathize with child murders" and I just cannot roll my eyes hard enough at this braindead take.

Favorite 1/2 star Letterboxd review:
can u tell im taking a film class

Leaderboard:
Inviso: 80
Mythiot: 78
Seginus: 76
Poke: 74
Karo: 73
Seanchan: 73
Johnbobb: 64
Suprak: 63
Lightning: 60
jcgamer: 38

Another sizable hit from Mythiot manages to lift him all the way up to 2nd, but still short of Inviso even after two straight 0 scores on the board. jcgamer gets a little bump, but not nearly enough to shake things up, while the 2nd to 6th and 7th to 9th races stay tense.

Hint for #19: what we've got here is failure to communicate

I figured I would be the outlier on Raising Arizona, but I'm totally surprised that Blood Simple did better with this crowd. I gotta honor some of the quotes that have been rolling around my head for decades:

They told me her insides were a rocky place where my seed could find no purchase

Now there's what's right and there's what's right, and never the twain shall meet

You're young and you got your health, what you want with a job?

I know you're partial to convenience stores, but dammit H.I. *grabs milk out of the fridge* the sun don't rise and set on the corner grocery

I don't know, they were jammies! They had Yodas and shit on 'em!

You gotta get 'em dip-tet boosters yearly or else they'll develop lockjaw and nightvision

Gummint do take a bite, don't she?

It's a crazy world / someone oughta sell tickets / I'd buy one

Raising Arizona deserved better. I was also very pleasantly surprised by M. There aren't too many films from the early 30's that kept my attention as well as that one did.

Johnbobb posted...

Hint for #19: what we've got here is failure to communicate

Hey that's kind of a crime movie, and a great one

My best guess is Blood Simple

Did anyone else find M very hard to rank? Looks like we mostly settled on the middle.

By the way I didnt mention it in my writeup but the scenes without sound were not intentional, they were scenes cut from the film before its international release that were inserted back in but the sound was missing. Strangely it kind of worked for me. Also the Hitler moustache was common before he came along, it was a working class moustache. It is notable how in photos pre-WWII you can see that moustache everywhere then after it disappears!

Guessing Blood Simple too.

LightningStrikes posted...

Did anyone else find M very hard to rank? Looks like we mostly settled on the middle.

By the way I didnt mention it in my writeup but the scenes without sound were not intentional, they were scenes cut from the film before its international release that were inserted back in but the sound was missing. Strangely it kind of worked for me. Also the Hitler moustache was common before he came along, it was a working class moustache. It is notable how in photos pre-WWII you can see that moustache everywhere then after it disappears!

Guessing Blood Simple too.

Yes, definitely. Also didn't help that it was the very first movie I watched.

My comment about the mustache was mostly my surprise at seeing it. I know it was a popular style pre-Hitler but it was very jarring to see until you remember M predates the Nazi leader.

I'm going to guess Blood Simple as well. It's the film that jumped into my head given the hint.

Looking at my remaining list, I've got 3 movies in the bottom third that I'm going to be big (and one possibly a huge...) outliers on. Feeling pretty decent about the rest but I don't think jcgamer is catchable at this point.

damn I thought that hint would be trickier

19. Blood Simple (1984)
Directed by Joel & Ethan Coen
Score: 169 (tie)

Mythiot: 9
Suprak: 9
Inviso: 11
jcgamer: 11
Karo: 13
Seginus: 17
Seanchan: 20
John: 23
Lightning: 26
Poke: 30

Inviso
I had never heard of this movie before watching it for this list, and yet I found myself fascinated. It starts out annoyingly slow, but I get that the pacing is meant to more set up the interrelationships between Ray, Abby and Marty. Its a standard plot: control freak husband finds out his wife is having an affair, so he gets pissed, and after trying to get revenge himself, he instead opts to hire out and get a hitman to score the kills instead. Again, very standard and not all that special. What made this interesting is the twist it takes about halfway through. Martys hitman fakes the murders of Ray and Abby, and expects payment, but when Marty goes through with it, the hitman uses Abbys gun to shoot Marty instead (not shoot and kill, because somehow he survives well longer than he had any right to do). Thus begins the bizarre set of events that lead to the films climax.

Ray thinks Abby killed Marty, because he found her gun at the scene. Abby thinks Ray killed Marty upon hearing that Marty is dead. Marty tried to pass the hitman payoff money as having been stolen by his employees, but with Marty dead, everyone suspects everyone else of being the thieves. And the hitman realizes he left crucial evidence behind, and he needs to get it back, lest he get implicated in the murder. The ending though, with Abby suspicious of Ray and allowing him to get shot and killed because she confronts him in front of an open window? And then she has to escape and FUCKS UP the hitmans hand before shooting him in self-defense? Intense. Knowing now that this is a Coen Brothers movieI absolutely understand it now and thought they did a great job for such an early addition to their filmography.

jcgamer
I figured this would be rough around the edges and not too entertaining, being the Coen Brothers first feature film, but I was pleasantly surprised by the time the credits rolled. Very impressive for a first outing. Right away you can tell these guys were special. Some good twists and short bursts of effective violence.

8/10

Karo
A simple task of hiring a hitman to clean up a marital affair goes catastrophically wrong for just about everyone involved and most of them end up doing the world a favor by removing themselves from the human gene pool.
It's the Coen Bros first movie, and you can see the beginning of the elements they would come to be known for at play here.
Like the title says, it is a bit more simple then their other films which were more daring if you will (for better or for worse), but this is still pretty good and you can see why they got to be so popular.

Seginus
The Coens first effort is raw and rough around the edges, with all their nihilistic tendencies and little of the heart and wit that will become a trademark of their writing. In many ways it feels prototypical of their later efforts, the basic elements will crop up over and over again - schmuck protagonist, larger-than-life bounty hunter, grip of money, infidelity, Frances McDormand. Their metaphysical bent is already apparent with the Schrodingers cat scenarios, they like that uncertainty principle. Along these same lines, this is one of those stories where each character ends up with a misconception of what happened. As far as John Getz can tell, Frances McDormand is the one who shoots Dan Hedaya in the bar, and as far as Hedaya knows McDormand was killed by M. Emmet Walsh, and from her perspective it looks like Getz gets killed by Hedaya, so she she ends up shooting M. Emmet Walsh assuming hes Dan Hedaya. Its actually quite blood complicated.

Getz is the weak link acting-wise, I dont think hes got the depth to pull off this part. McDormand is clearly green too, you can see her charm in spots but its muted. The stars here are seething jealousy Dan Hedaya and snarky hitman M. Emmet Walsh, who gets the honor of bookending and narrating the movie. I think the Coens are the masters of voice-over narration, usually I find the device annoying but they nail it. Its sparse here, only a few lines at the start, but already so dialed in its practically the same technique they use 20 years later in NCFOM, with the philosophical musing over empty desert landscapes. This framing lends the story a sense of scope and gravity, its unfortunate that said story relies on the weak Getz/McDormand pairing to fully work. Never mind chemistry, I can barely take their lifeless performances seriously at times.

One simple detail I like is the consistency of the pearl revolver. Were shown that the chamber has three consecutive rounds, Walsh shoots one into Hedaya, Getz accidentally fires one off by kicking the gun, then Hedaya clicks over the three empties trying to shoot Getz with it, so after Getz takes it we know the next one has to be be the final chambered round, a Chekovs bullet. Every character shoots this gun but nobody actually spins the chamber after Walsh touches it so we can still deduce where its at. I didnt notice this the first time, I guess with movie guns my baseline expecation is magic ammo and offscreen reloads so I was pleasantly surprised that it actually makes sense if you count the shots.

Seanchan
This is one of the few movies where I really found myself paying attention to the cinematography and the artistic cuts between scenes: the opening scene with the wipers going in the rain (and apparently no headlights on?), the framing of Marty at the desk which I think was sort of mimicked by another character later on, the cut from touching the blood inside the car.
Other than thatI dont know, this was a fine movie? Good performances. I wonder why the guy who played Ray didnt make it into other Coen brothers movies.
Couple of random thoughts: Marty is one Nixon looking motherfucker. Who sleeps in a twin bed, against the uncurtained front windows?!? Burying him alive is pretty fucked up.

Johnbobb
Why I included it:
Coen #1 - The first ever movie from the masters of the crime thriller, and the one that defined the dark, gritty, gravely humorous and overwhelmingly bleak tone that defined their style for the next several decades.

What I thought:
Blood Simple might not be the most refined of the Coens' filmography, but their talent for writing and shooting characters and situations that are immediately uncomfortable and distinct were already apparent from the start. What should be a simple crime story of a man hiring another man to kill his wife and her lover turns complicated due to constant misunderstandings and bad assumptions, which decades later we see the Coens lose their fuckin minds with in Burn After Reading. But goddamn, what was their sweat budget?

Favorite 1/2 star Letterboxd review:
This movie is more annoying than when the elasticity of the top of your sock deteriorates & it continually keeps sliding down your leg.

Lightning
The world is full o complainers.

This film is more interesting as a prelude to the Coen brothers career interests than it is a narrative on its own. You can see basically everything they would fixate on presented here. You have the rural American setting, a simple crime scheme that goes terribly awry, the dark sense of humour and tinges of horror elements. The film is comparatively simple but very much feels like a Coen brothers picture.

I will say, to me this felt a little bit rough in comparison to their later works. It felt like they were still learning as writers and directors. Honestly I had a little trouble getting my head around the (actually pretty simple) plot due to the way it is presented, and the physical similarity between Ray and Marty combined with the low lighting of the last sequence didnt help. The performances also didnt quite have that edge to them that the performances from the directors later works would. So it is not quite on the same level.

Having said all that, this is still a fun time. It does have that great mood of their darker films, and the final cat and mouse sequence is great. Even the opening credits had a distinct style to them with the credits being wiped away by the windshield wipers. The last line is one of the more memorable ones Ive seen too, as is the first one. This was definitely more of a curiosity than a fantastic film in its own right to me. Despite that its nonetheless enjoyable.

3/5

Leaderboard:
Inviso: 88
Mythiot: 88
Poke: 85
Karo: 79
Seginus: 78
Seanchan: 74
Suprak: 73
Johnbobb: 68
Lightning: 67
jcgamer: 46

Inviso starts moving again after a few turns stalled, but not enough to prevent Mythiot from catching up to tie for the kead. Poke climbs as well, as low rankings are finally starting to add up pointswise. Suprak continues to climb bit by bit, losing his spot in the bottom 3. jcgamer still rests safely on the bottom, though the gap is getting ever so slightly smaller.

Hint for #18: We haven't lost a 90s movie since The Boondock Saints at #30. Well here we finally lose a second one!

That was the one that I really liked that I thought would drop super early, so I'll take a top 20 finish! I thought that would be more divisive (and maybe it was since we had two top 10s and a 30).

Something about the vibe of our rankings so far makes me think Heat will go next looking at the 90s movies.

for the record, only 2 movies in the entire ranking didn't have at least one top 10 placement: The Boondock Saints (highest was a 16) and The Town (with two 11s)

similarly, only one movie didn't have a bottom 10 ranking

Lon next I think.

leon probably

Gonna guess Jackie Brown.

18. Heat (1995)
Directed by Michael Mann
Score: 167

Lightning: 7
Seanchan: 12
Seginus: 12
Inviso: 13
Poke: 15
Suprak: 15
jcgamer: 19
Mythiot: 21
Johnbobb: 26
Karo: 27

Lightning
Because shes got a GREAT ASS!

Michael Manns epic crime story that is at first about robbing banks but really revolves around obsession. This film did well critically and commercially when it first came out but in recent years really started to become regarded as one of the best crime films of all time. I watched it for the first time for this project and while Im nor sure Id go that far I definitely see whdre this viewpoint is coming from.

The action and heist sequences here are so well staged, the direction, cinematography and pacing are all perfect. Mann introduces you to all these different characters who, like the robbers, have their own key parts to play in the movie. Really though at the end of the day this film all comes down to Robert De Niro and Al Pacino. The relationship between them is what the whole movie revolves around, even though theyre only really on screen together for one scene. And what a scene it is, probably one of the most hyped up scenes in cinema history and it communicated so much about these characters without resorting to a lick of rote exposition. The two performances to me perfectly encapsulate both actors, from Pacinos slightly manic edge such as when he gleefully runs down the stairs to De Niros stern hint of menace as in the hotel sequence. The supporting cast is also great, with special mention to Ashley Judd who gives her character a lot of life.

The film is not perfect. Frankly I do think its a bit too long. The first act in particular probably could have been slimmed down some. Regardless this is so powerful it earns the time investment it takes to watch it.

5/5

Seanchan
Pacino and DeNiro together at last! Well, for two scenes at least. Im not sure youd say this is both of them at their peak, but they both have such presence that they really drive whats a relatively slow paced start as all the pieces are put into place. Youve got the famous shootout in LA. Youve got a metric ton of oh yeah, that guy actors rounding out the cast. I enjoyed this but maybe not as much as I expected to.
Couple of random thoughts: Did they green screen the background during the convo between DeNiro and the girl?, No, President Palmer what are you doing?!?, Shes got aGREAT ASS!, Oh, this movie explains so much about GTA V.

Seginus
A Swiss Watch of cops and robber stories, but the real draw that its a character-driven movie first and foremost. I remember when this came out there was a lot of excitement for the first onscreen encounter between Pacino and De Niro, of course watching it now for the first time thats old news. I kept thinking of this Jim Gaffigan bit while watching it, I bet a few of us did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imhcq5s9OLs - theres definitely a feeling of having missed the time/place for this one, even though its still pretty great. I had lots of random thoughts about this one.

Im not convinced it justified itself being nearly three hours. I mean, were the subplots with Dennis Haysbert and William Fichtner really necessary? I felt like some of these threads were extraneous and could have been cut without the movie missing much.

Danny Trejo (apparently playing himself) gets beaten within an inch of his life, complete with a ground beef face job, and when De Niro finds him lying there dying Trejo is still for some reason like oh hey great to see you man ay I never told the cops nothing love you bro blehhh, this dude is the most upbeat guy dying in agony Ive ever seen, so silly.

The attempts at romance in this movie are pretty weak. How about that rooftop rendezvous? That greenscreen was so awful it was on par with the rooftop scenes in The Room. Pacino and De Niro may have good chemistry with each other but they dont make great romantic leads, and their roles as such here feel entirely perfunctory. Maybe they match the story in that sense, but only too well. Like, I wasnt buying that Robert De Niro and Amy Brenneman had chemistry at all, so I didnt really feel any impact when he finally ghosted her.

Alright heres my main takeaway - Val Kilmer visits De Niro at his pad and notices its pretty bare, so he asks him when hes gonna get some furniture and De Niros like Ill get some when I get some dont worry about it, then Kilmer doubles down and asks when hes gonna get a girlfriend, to which De Niro responds with the famous quote Dont let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner, and Im thinking, yeah okay, that would explain no girlfriend but is that supposed to explain having no furniture? Like is he also saying that having a couch would make him too complacent? A La-z-boy might be too comfortable to get out of when the cops come? Im sure Im reading too much into it but this scene really made me laugh, it reminded me of the whole guys will literally live like this and think its okay stereotype of a bachelor pad with nothing but a single bean bag chair and a tv on the floor. See ladies, its not for lack of imagination, its just a badass outlaw thing! Gotta watch out for the heat around the corner!

Inviso
On the one hand, I really enjoyed the large cast of characters and how we got to really get to know many of them (we saw homelife for Val Kilmer, Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, and we got decent scenes for Waingro, Breedan and Van Zant). It helped to really flesh out the story. But at the same time, the core of the film was the dichotomy between Pacinos dogged pursuit of criminals, and De Niros one step ahead attitude. They had that conversation at the diner, and it was great, but I think the movie might have been better serve by just tightening it up around the two. I get that Waingro and Van Zant were necessary to highlight De Niros inability to let things go (despite claiming hes ready to bolt within thirty seconds at any given moment), but I feel like they were almost not developed ENOUGH to justifying the amount of scenes they got. And this is ESPECIALLY true for Breedan, who shows up and gets killed with almost no real purpose.

Its only because this film has SUCH a long runtime that I mention this, because I think the cat and mouse interplay between De Niro and Pacino was super solid (especially when you get to the famous multi-block shootout). Its crazy just how explosive and violent that scene was, and how LONG it went on for. Its just a shame that we get that big scene and theres all this build-up to an almost father/son relationship between De Niro and Kilmerand then Kilmer just exits the film without any sort of conclusion to his story arc. Its those little things that get to me, because the core of the film is great, but it just needed to be a bit more polished.

jcgamer
I think old Al Pacinos kinda overrated - Ive only seen two performances of his I recall liking - Glengarry Glen Ross, and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (and Dunkaccino, of course - thats a given). Here, he comes off as really over-the-top and almost like a cartoon character. The cast on the whole is really impressive, one of the best on the list, but the storytelling is ambitious to a fault, with the movie running about a half hour long and trying to cram in all these romantic subplots. The diner scene with Pacino and De Niro was built up as this big cinematic moment, but Michael Mann seemed to think just putting them in on-screen together was enough - didnt find it compelling at all. One thing I did appreciate was that De Niro walks out on his love interest exactly 30 seconds after realizing Pacino caught up to him at the hotel, alluding to his rule he repeats earlier in the film.

6/10

Johnbobb
Why I included it:
Aside from the fact that every Pacino/DeNiro pairing is pretty much guaranteed a spot? Heat's inclusion was never in question, holding a spot as arguably the top heist film of the 90s and one of the most acclaimed of all time. Between this and Last of the Mohicans, Michael Mann was riding high in the 90s.

What I thought:
Honestly I was a little more lukewarm on it than I expected to be. Like it was definitely good, but even here Pacino and DeNiro weren't blowing me away like they were in the 70s. The relationships are a pretty central aspect of the film, and I think they're one of the biggest areas it falls flat, with Charlene's tiny warning to Val Kilmer standing out as probably the most intimate moment of the central relationships. It definitely gets really good in the last hour, but overall it just felt a little bloated in getting there. Also, whoever told Val Kilmer that he could pull off a ponytail owes him an apology.

Favorite 1/2 star Letterboxd review:
aw hell nah robert de niro looks like my dad

Karo
This tale of a heist crew and the detectives chasing them, presented in a somewhat confusing manner that leads to me often not entirely sure which characters are gangsters and which are cops until about halfway through.
The scenario is paint-by-numbers and both the plot and characters are so incredibly generic that the movie quickly fades into the shadow of much better films in the genre. To add insult to injury, the movie is excruciatingly and unnecessarily long, with an almost three hour runtime and it doesn't get at all interesting until the last 30 minutes and that is a big problem.
Movies with the word heat in the title have not gone well for me, and this overblown slog that could use more safe-cracking and less jerry springer show is no different.

Leaderboard:
Inviso: 93
Mythiot: 91
Poke: 88
Karo: 88
Seginus: 84
Seanchan: 80
Lightning: 78
Suprak: 76
Johnbobb: 76
jcgamer: 47

jcgamer clearly heard me talking about the last place gap getting smaller, because he buckled down and barely budged here to spite me. Not much change otherwise beyond a slightl boost for Lightning, pushing him barely out of the bottom 3.

Hint for #17: Heading toward the halfway poiint now. This next one is an adaptation of some sort of book.

Bullet Train is my next prediction.

Didnt even get a chance to guess at 18!

Pretty surprised Heat dropped this early. I thought that was supposed to be a very respected movie and expected to be one of the low rankers!

Wow thats really shocking. Also was not expecting to be the highest ranker.

My instinct for the next one would be Bullet Train. However the wording makes me think its a trick and ifs actually Oldboy which is based on a manga.

Here is everything it could be:

A Clockwork Orange
Bullet Train
Drive
Jackie Brown
No Country for Old Men
Oldboy

Argh I thought Heat was a great movie that completely lived up to the hype. Maybe I knew going in it would be more of a drama than a thriller despite the setup?

LightningStrikes posted...

My instinct for the next one would be Bullet Train. However the wording makes me think its a trick and ifs actually Oldboy which is based on a manga.

Here is everything it could be:

A Clockwork Orange
Bullet Train
Drive
Jackie Brown
No Country for Old Men
Oldboy

I sure hope it's Bullet Train... I'm assuming Oldboy is the only other one based on a manga, which the hint is strongly implying.

16. Jackie Brown (1997)
Directed by Michael Mann
Score: 166

Seanchan: 2
jcgamer: 7
Karo: 12
Inviso: 18
Poke: 18
Seginus: 22
Lightning: 22
Mythiot: 22
Suprak: 22
John: 25

Seanchan
I know this is the overlooked Tarantino movie and Im not sure why. I found it to be very entertaining, never dragging despite a fairly lengthy 2.5 hour runtime. The performances are good, the music is good, the story is fun and engaging, and there are occasionally very funny bits. Im not sure I really have much bad to say about this one.
Couple of random thoughts: Sam Jacksons dumb beard and hair. Hello Its for you. Was not expecting Melanie getting shot.

jcgamer
Perhaps Tarantinos most underrated movie. I hadnt even heard of it till after the Kill Bills came out - I think it got swept under the rug a bit cuz everyone was (rightfully) still salivating over Pulp Fiction and basically wanted a spiritual sequel to that.

9/10

Karo
A flight attendant arrested for drug smuggling concocts a plan to use a police sting to screw over everyone involved, from the cops to the dealers. There are many betrayals, and many people end up dead.
I mean it is standard Tarantino fare, and very mid Tarantino at best. This is something that will never stand among his greatest of movies, and often just feels like the Pulp Fiction expansion pack.
So yeah, it is a rather forgettable Tarantino experience, and I think I may have actually seen it before, but forgot about it, which speaks volumes.

Inviso
Ive actually seen most of the Tarantino filmography prior to this list, and there was a time when I sought out Jackie Brown, because I loved just about everything the man ever directed. But for whatever reason, this movie just feels like a step down from Tarantinos top tier. I think Samuel L. Jackson is great as a wannabe gunrunner kingpin, and he just oozes charisma as a natural fact of life. I think Pam Grier plays the stone-cold femme fatale lead really well. In fact, I love the way she comes up with a plan on the fly to play the police and Ordell against one another, while completely getting away scot free from her own criminal dealingsAND she makes off with half a million dollars in the process. THATS great, and THATs some quality female empowerment.

I guess my main problem stems from the supporting cast though. Michael Keaton does a decent job playing both the good cop and the hardass cop later on, so Im not talking about him. This is more the roles of Louis, Melanie, and Max Cherry. De Niros Louis is justhe comes across as completely feckless in a manner that isnt goofy or fun (like, for example, Vincent in Pulp Fiction). Hes just some former criminal who happens to be in the right place at the right time due to a former prison sentence alongside Ordell, and it makes almost every scene of his look like hes just some feeble old man, even though De Niro wasnt THAT old by that point in his career. Hell, he was coming off Heat just two years prior. Melanie is obnoxious as fuck, and I can totally understand Louis killing her, and those two together make up like, one fifth of the movie.

And then you get to Max, and hes justhe feels like hes completely out of his depth. Everyone else is scheming and making movesand then hes just there because hes got the hots for Jackie. His parts of the movie feel dull to me, and they stand out given how major of a character he is. I think it really is those segments: the Louis/Melanie relationship when Melanie sucks and Louis is a weird misanthrope, and the parts where Max is having the movie explained to him through the eyes of Ordell or Jackie, that weaken the film enough for this placement.

Seginus
First time seeing this one, not totally convinced. I think it spends too much time juggling between the modes of exposition and music video, and that pattern gets old after a while. The story isnt as tight as it could be. I do love the two main characters, Max Cherry and Jackie Brown. They had a genuinely sweet relationship. Max Cherry might be best character name in all 30 of these movies. Its funny, its badass, it rolls off the tongue, its memorable. I already forgot what De Niro and Sam Jacksons characters were named and I only saw this like a month ago. Although to be fair, whenever they were onscreen I could barely hear anything over their facial hair.

Lightning
Louis!

This was one of the only Quentin Tarantino films I hadnt seen before doing this list so thanks for the excuse to finally watch it! Overall I think this is one of his weaker efforts, but at the end of the day even a lesser Tarantino is still a really good film. You get that great Tarantino dialogue and all his idiosyncracies that make him such an entertaining director.

The dialogue really is the standout element of this film. There is not much action and the actual caper is a pretty short sequence all told. Furthermore the main plot doesnt even start until over half an hour in. Around 90% of this movie is just people talking in rooms. Yet its so witty and engaging it keeps you with it the whole way. There are some of Tarantinos best lines ever here.

Another highlight is of course the performances. Pam Grier is great and she manages to convey so much in the side view opening alone. Robert Forster is stellar too, despite seeming like a typical tough guy you really feel for him at the end and him slowly becoming a fan of The Delfonics is fun. However its Robert De Niro that is this films secret weapon. Hes so funny here, pottering around Samurl L Jacksons apartment acting kind of useless and confused, until suddenly hes not funny at all. Such a different performance dir him. This film is thinner than most of Tarantinos other fare despite being the same length. Even with that in mind I still thought this was an entertaining watch.

4/5

Johnbobb
Why I included it:
Really felt like this film needed something from Tarantino, and we covered both Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction in Organized Crime. It's also arguably the last Tarantino film that was a straight crime film, with many of his later films being historical fiction stories that are often crime film-inspired without being direct crime films. It's also one of the best throwbacks to classic blaxploitation films, which in hindsight I wish I had included a more direct example of. Looking at the list now, I think Shaft may have been one of the biggest oversights. Maybe in the next crime list!

What I thought:
Not counting Death Proof, which I haven't seen, it's probably Tarantino's worst movie. But that's not to say it's bad at all, the bar is just really really high. It treats its characters as disposable that never really stops catching you off guard.

Favorite 1/2 star Letterboxd review:
quantum tarantulas take on girlbossing

Leaderboard:
Mythiot: 97
Inviso: 94
Seanchan: 94
Karo: 92
Poke: 89
Seginus: 89
Johnbobb: 85
Lightning: 84
Suprak: 82
jcgamer: 57

We have a new leader! Mythiot jumps ahead of Vis, who barely moved this round. Sean takes a massive leap up into the tied 2nd place, and I finally break out of the bottom 3.

Hint for #16: Some of these movies titles are vague or a little obscure. With this one, what you see is what you get.

Boooo!

And I think I might be saying Booo again with the next reveal!

Guessing Bullet Train again.

I forgot Jackie Brown was based on a book. I will also guess Bullet Train next.

Johnbobb posted...

16. Jackie Brown (1997)
Directed by Michael Mann

Wow! All this time he was directing Quentin Tarantino directing the movie.

Johnbobb posted...

Hint for #16: Some of these movies titles are vague or a little obscure. With this one, what you see is what you get.

Shoplifters is the funniest response I can think of to this, followed by Good Time.

Yeah that sounds like either Bullet Train or Shoplifters.

Bullet Train has a bullet train in it.

In shoplifters, they shoplift.

Lets go with Bullet Train then.