Oh no, another list! This time: 50 Greatest Indie Films

[trekgeezer]

Don't worry, there are a lot of our favorites here so most of the arguments will be about their numerical order.


Empire's 50 Greatest Independent Films

[raj]

I've only seen 8 of them:
Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Mad Max
Nosferatu (have DVD)
She's Gotta Have It
Night of the Living Dead (have DVD)
Monty Python's Life of Brian (have DVD)
Clerks
The Terminator

[ulthar]

raj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've only seen 8 of them:

Then I would recommend:

Sex, Lies and Videotape
The Blair Witch Project (of interest at LEAST due to the way it was made..no script, just 'story points').
Slacker (if you ever lived in a college town, this is a MUST - I knew people like the ones in this flick).

Also, glad to see Darkstar made the list.

I personally did not care for "She's Gotta Have It," but I can see the artsy types going for it.

[odinn7]

What? Mad Max wasn't number 1? I am outraged!

[Vermin Boy]

I'm pretty sure I've seen this list before. The main problem I have with it is how loose a definition of "independent" they use-- Slick, Miramax-y productions are put right alongside truly homemade stuff. Sideways may be "independent" by Hollywood standards, but it's not truly independent in the same sense as, say, Bad Taste or Pink Flamingos.

That said, there are some interesting choices on there-- I probably wouldn't have thought to include Life of Brian, which is a truly interesting case of circumventing the system (no studios would touch it and the Pythons were about to give up, when George Harrison gave them all the money he needed because he wanted to see it).

Also, I know it's not a favorite around these parts, but Billy Jack really should be on there. And where the hell is Russ Meyer?

[LH-C]

I'm really surprised that none of John Cassevetes' movies got onto the list. If you have seen any of his stuff, for the most part they are different than the bigger Hollywood movies he acted in.

[daveblackeye15]

Good to see Mad Max and the Blair Witch Project are on there.

Clerks was funny as hell too.

[akiratubo]

I haven't seen most of those.  I won't argue about placement, since "top" lists are all bulls**t, anyway.

Here are a few comments on some of the movies I have seen.

The Usual Suspects is just another crime movie.  The only thing it has going for it is the attempt at a twist ending ... the nature of which was obvious for the entire running time.

Clerks = s**t.  I wouldn't even wipe my ass with that movie.

The Blair Witch Project is a total failure as a movie.  Its marketing strategy deserves all the credit.

Lone Star is 100% filler.  And it's a long damned movie, too.

Mad Max was raw filmmaking.  It showed you what you needed to see.  Period.  More movies should follow this example.

[ulthar]

akiratubo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> The Blair Witch Project is a total failure as a
> movie.  Its marketing strategy deserves all the
> credit.
>

My observation about TBWP is either you really liked it or you hated it.  I liked it, and disagree that is it was a total failure as a movie.  Granted, I laughed through most of it when seeing it at the theatre.  I was laughing because I was having FUN.  It was a FUN movie unlike anything I had seen before, or at least in a LONG time.

That's what I liked about it.  It was new - original - at least in its genre.  Pretty much improv: give the actors an index card with what is supposed to happen and let them go at it.  That kind of thing, at any level, is very risky.  I think it worked, as a fun movie (and yes, I do have my own copy of it); a lot of folks thought it did not work.

I sometimes wonder why the negative reaction is so strong, though.  Is it because it was marketed as 'it might be real' when during the film it is obvious it is just a movie?  (I mean come on, multiple catch lights in the pupils during night scenes?)  Well, if that's all it is, we should just throw away almost any horror film.  The marketing tag lines are always hype.

Anybody remember the one that goes "if this one doesn't scare you, you're already dead"?  My best friend turned to me halfway through it and said "I must be dead."

I guess with most horror movies we are asked to suspend disbelief 'just enough' to get into it.  Haunted house movie?  Well, many don't believe in ghosts but still like ghost stories.  Alien movie?  Many don't believe in ETL, but still like to see ET ripping the guts out of some whiney sap on a spaceship. But TBWP asked you to BELIEVE and view it as if it were real. It's not the first film I've seen do that, and they all pretty much 'fail' at that aspect (Wasn't there a Sasquatch movie like that ... shot like a documentary?).

So, my point is that I liked TBWP because it WAS different; if you want the big Hollywood exec types to take a risk once in a while and not churn out the same old mindless, formulaic drivel, maybe we, the consumers, should be a little more supportive of indies that take chances and stray from the beaten path.   At least supportive enough to say "hey, I liked that they took some chances here."

[Ash]

Speaking of The Blair Witch Project...
I just bought the Special Edition of it for $4.88 in the Wal-Mart cheap bin.

I watched it two days ago and hadn't seen it in at least 5 years or so.
I loved it then and I still love it now.

The scene when the tent starts shaking like crazy and they all run out into the woods screaming was truly horrifying.

Awesome film!  :)

[plan9superfan]

If you think about it, Mel Gibson wouldn't be in the same place he is today if it weren't for "Mad Max".

[Derf]

I thought Star Wars was considered an independent film, and it's not on the list?

Anyway, as for the discussion of The Blair Witch Project, here's my two cents worth (Spoilers a-comin'):

It didn't really work for me. I rented it, turned off all the lights to enhance the spooky factor, and watched. The acting was quite good. It was ever so slightly over the top, but excellent for a film made on this level. I was impressed that they even showed a crying person with a snot-filled nose, just like it really happens (I can't think of any other movies that use this little touch, can you?) The mood of the film is nicely set with the creepy twig figures. In other words, there are some good elements to the movie. But ultimately, it's a movie about a psycho in the woods, not a witch, and that just ruins it for me. If the psycho were presented as though he thought he was the Blair Witch, it might work. But he isn't. There's a huge build-up about the legend of the Blair Witch, complete with weird twig men appearing, a sign that the witch is on the prowl, and then, suddenly, there's no witch; it's just Jason Voorhees on vacation. With all the hullaballoo raised by the wiccan community over the negative stereotyping of witches, you'd think there would at least be a witch in the movie.

It was a relatively original presentation, but the story just wasn't that scary as far as movies go. If I were in that situation, I'd probably need to change my pants quite often. However, watching it on the screen, it just didn't do it for me.

(Spoilers a-came and a-went).

[daveblackeye15]

*spoilers for the Blair Witch Project*





I think the Blair Witch is up for interpetation, some people see as whatever is in those woods is the Blair Witch or some Jason like guy.

I believe it was supernatural.

The legend went that this man killed 7 kids, didn't the crew come across seven piles of rocks then later three piles of rocks? I think that whatever shook their tent in the middle of the night (creepy scene btw) might have been the spirit of the seven children doing it, those brats!

That's just how I saw it.

[ulthar]

Right.  That's the way I always saw it, too - that the entity in the woods was not 'of this world.'  I've watched that movie many times, and I never even had the thought that it was some serial killer or Jason type character.

In fact, that's the first time I've ever heard that interpretation.  Like I said before, it's one of those films that garners a love-it or hate-it without much middle ground.

And, you have to give it props for this, a notable distinction (from IMDB )

This film was in the Guinness Book Of World Records for "Top Budget:Box Office Ratio" (for a mainstream feature film). The film cost $22,000 to make and made back $240.5 million, a ratio of $1 spent for every $10,931 made.

[LilCerberus]

Derf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was impressed that they
> even showed a crying person with a snot-filled
> nose, just like it really happens (I can't think
> of any other movies that use this little touch,
> can you?)


In the copilation flick "Terror in the Aisles", there's a scene which I believe is from "Klute" (1971), in which Jane Fonda is listening to an audio recording of a freind's murder and starts to cry, and her nose starts gushing like a busted radiator.