Jaymole

Coolie High?????

Wow, Spike really is a racist.

inri222

Those are some good ones right there.

LINA WERTMULLER - THE SEDUCTION OF MIMI -1972
LINA WERTMULLER - LOVE AND ANARCHY - 1973
LINA WERTMULLER - SWEPT AWAY - 1974
LINA WERTMULLER - SEVEN BEAUTIES - 1975


For me off the top of my head Claire Denis, Lina Wertmuller & Agnes Varda would make a top 100.
Have not seen anything by Chantal Akerman.

dom56

No surprised at Star Wars films not on his list. Spike called Lucas a terrible sceenwriter.

arminius

This was the unauthorized prequel of Suna No Onna, correct?

PenguinJoe

I kind of agree with him on that especially with the prequel Star Wars movies. Besides the prequels he actually only wrote the first Star Wars Lawrence Kasdan did the second two and I believe Lucas outlined it and maybe wrote a few scenes. Lawrence Kasdan should've wrote the prequels or even Jake Kasdan.

inri222

Kuroi ame (Black Rain) is not an unauthorized prequel to Suna No Onna.

Mike86

Shocked at no Tarantino films on his list...

Honestly it's not a bad list overall but I really dislike Spike Lee. Also it seems a bit odd to me that he included the Coen Brothers on the list but his choice was Raising Arizona. Not that it's a bad film but they have better films in my opinion.

bootsy

Was this necessary. Couldn't even get past the 2nd page without someone that they don't like Spike Lee. He probably doesn't like you either. Also it's HIS list so if he thinks Raising Arizona is the best Coen Bros. work then so be it.

Mike86

I said it was a good list regardless of not liking him. Take it personally enough? Also I'm not even first person here to bash him so not sure why you're only upset over me.

bootsy

LOL not really. Taking it personal would be 'I don't Spike Lee' when that has nothing to do with this topic. If you don't like him and hate him that much why comment at all. You just couldn't help yourself.

Mike86

Alright then you seem to be pretty upset over it for not caring. Whatever I don't really care anymore sorry for upsetting you. Also who said I hate him? I said I dislike him. Mostly because he seems to think way too highly of himself and his films. The only reason I came in was to see if he included a Tarantino film on his list of "essentials" because I know he has some dumb beef with him. Chill out man.

JumpCutz

I really like the list for most part. If I'm picking nits...2001 should be on there in place of Spartacus (despite it's interesting production history). Also as previously noted, there are certainly more compelling Coen Brother films than Raising Arizona, although I really have no problem with that particular entry.

Why So Blu?

Hey everyone, this is a Spike Lee Joint list. If you want a particular movie to be on that list then write up your own damn list.

/rant

GoldenJCJ

Wasn't the reason this list was posted was so we could discuss it?

dan30oly

Terrible fucking list.

It's all a bunch of old shit no one can relate to these days.

RichC2

Yeah, that's why I don't watch Black and White movies. I'm not a dog for fucks sake.

Why So Blu?

Yes, but members be like "this movie should be on it or why is this movie on it," etc..

Mike86

I don't care that he put Raising Arizona on his list. I just find it an odd choice of the Coen Brothers entire filmography to be considered essential. It's a great movie but they've done far better work. Just my opinion though. Honestly I don't see why certain posters are getting so upset over others questioning Spike's choices anyways. It's not like this is a definitive list and no one can think any different.

hanshotfirst1138

I e-mailed Slate once asking of I could write for them. Salon too. Neither even responded. The least they could've done is told me "no."

I agree that the lack of Hawks and Ford is pretty egregious. I was thinking it was a question of the time, but he seems to have included some from the classical period, but it doesn't look like much. No Douglas Sirk though. The lack of Bergman is a pretty big surprise, a bigger name in so-called "art house cinema" is hard to find. The lack of 2001: A Space Odyssey is a bit of a puzzler, he's chosen what are largely Kubrick's more conventional films. Inevitably, of course, some things are bound to be left out, although the absence of The Third Man is pretty hard to justify. Doesn't look like much in the way of horror movies either, you'd think he'd at least have gone with something somewhat artsy like Don't Look Now or The Devil's Backbone or something. I am disappointed to see Cronenberg and Terry Gilliam remain chronically underrepresented. District 9 is an oddity indeed.

Obviously, I know about their personal feud, but Eastwood's "movie star" status made it hard for him to gain critical acceptance for a while from various people.

Again, the net is so broad, what are we judging upon? Filmmaking technique? political and social substance? Historical importance?

Whom?

Women are sadly underrepresented in cinema in general, it's just a chronic problem.

Well, since Star Wars "doesn't exist anymore," maybe he's just passing over it. Not that I'm still bitter or anything. Come on Disney, make my last dream come true! He's not wrong about Lucas being a terrible screenwriter, although in fairness, for better or worse, he did completely redefine cinema as we know it, and some of the set pieces he's crafted have proven hugely influential.

majorjoe23

Did you send samples? Because they're likely looking for freelanceers who submit an idea and examples of past writing. "I'm a good writer and like movies" probably doesn't sway the intern who checks the general mail box.

A "no" email could be seen as an invitation to open a dialog with them "Well, why not?" Check out my Slate/Salon editor slash fic," "What do you smell like?"

No response is your no.

hanshotfirst1138

I gladly would, I asked if they accepted freelance submissions or wanted a sample, since I couldn't find that information on the website.

I'm trying to start somewhere, I have only one prior thing that's actually been published, if the magazine is even still around.

Not exactly what I said.

That's kind of perverse . I would've just taken "We do not accept freelance submissions and are not seeking any new employees at this time."

Yeah, I'm intelligent enough to have gathered that much.

Mabuse

It's a list of essential films FOR FILMMAKERS. Aspiring filmmakers can learn alot more from Blood Simple and Raising Arizona than No Country for Old Men. Both films highlight technique in a very forthright way; expresive camera movement, expresive use of lense selection, montage and cross cut editing, complex sound design, expressive use of music. It's all very obviously on show. In one sense the Coen's were very sophomoric at that time, but that just makes their films from that period that much more instructive. You can learn alot more from Raising Arizona then you can from A Serious Man even if A Serious Man is the better film.

Just as an aspiring filmmaker can probably learn a lot more from watching Mean Streets than The Aviator.

Cabman Gray

That's a pretty fine list there; it's good to see the Rossellini films incuded.

If I had a complaint, it would be the omission of movies made before the 40s. Since this is a list for filmmakers, you might expect the inclusion of at least a couple of silent-era movies - where a lot of film techniques were invented or first used (Griffith's Intolerance would be one example). It also might not hurt to include one of the Busby Berkeley musicals, or a 30s horror film. Some of the FX used then still hold up remarkably well; those in Bride of Frankenstein and The Devil Doll, for instance.

My two cents.

Spottedfeather

Yeah, like we're going to take movie advice from someone that can't make them.....

Supermallet

This may be a rumor, but I've heard that Spike Lee has made several films.