AndroidOnTheRun

Greatest of all time. :) And, it's like, a pun, because in the movie, there's a goat... get it... no... Neil would've chuckled.

I've been spinning this one all week after seeing this thread pop up... it really holds up well. Just great songwriting all around. It's so interesting to listen to this and Victor because of what it reveals about how unique members of a band interact to form a whole. You get a sense of "Good thing that Alex guy came along to bring in some nasty riffs and heavy edge, and good thing that Geddy fellow vetoed all his pitches for spoken-word albums."

I like that this post appears to deftly sidestep the nonsensical argument brewing above it to bring us back to the topic at hand, then just rips that wound right back open again. ;)

I'm guessing Alex is like that roommate who always eats your groceries in the middle of the night and leaves a huge mess. I'm guessing Neil is like that roommate who alwasy wants to talk about philosophy or some shit. Geddy seems just right.

Won't pass up an opportunity to say how much I love this song. Great piece of songwriting and one of the best examples of their work succeeding as strongly lyrically as it does musically. Killer vocal performance from Ged, very emotional. This one just gets me right in the gut, ya know?

God bless you for using a tiering system. I broke my own rule in starting this thread, which is "Never rank; always tier."

Obviously with 8 films opinions are going to vary greatly, but I think these are pretty good evaluations of the movies on the whole. I think a really strong point in Azkaban's favor is that it works as a standalone film better than the rest -- while it leaves out some nuance, it makes the complex major plot twist really work in its favor, and it exploits the advantages the visual medium has there. HBP, for me, is most memorable for the impossible-not-to-notice phallic depiction of the quidditch brooms... I was like, this has to be intentional -- so much of it is teenage boys posturing -- but was it meant to be this funny? 7.2's big mark against it, for me, was that it seemed to shortchange all of the scenes I was most looking forward to seeing onscreen, particularly Neville vs. Nagini. That seemed so anticlimactic to me, when in the book it was the most badass thing ever! I really think 7.1 had only one weak scene -- the dancing -- and even that was just slightly off. The animated sequence is marvelous. I'm with you on Goblet... a friend of mine once pointed out that, more than any other movie in the franchise, it fails to keep you from saying "Um... can't they just use magic for this?"

Here we go... 3 7.1 1 2 7.2 6* 5 4 *If the sixth movie had skipped that last "uplifting" scene and cut straight to credits after "...I AM THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE," I'd have put it third overall. ETA: To be clear, top is best, bottom is worst in this list.

Harry Potter is better... i can't be objective......cause God i'm such a potter fan. the saddest was when that film series wrapped up. Books were not bad either ;) Mick Books were better, but the films were often too great for words (I, being younger than Emma Watson, was always the right age to crush on her!). And as books and films about humanity, they ad a lot to say that isn't typical of either the genre, or films aimed at a young target audience. HP is great stuff. I missed the train while the series was actually ongoing somehow, but I read all 7 books over the course of a week the summer after #7 came out. It was an intense experience, to say the least. The movies are uneven, but the best ones are really good film adaptations of some pretty dense books. Good casting went a long way, IMO. Can we have a Rank the HP Movies thread bc I could get in on that discussion all day. (BRB, gonna start it...)

This makes it harder for me to see the depth in a film like Jurassic Park when the guy reviewing it falls asleep during one of the most fiercely raw and aggressive historical films ever released by a major Hollywood studio. It might seem deep and profound to you, and maybe it is, but my life and family history demands a little more deep, soulful meditation on what life is, and will be in years to come, than a bunch of nobodies running around a tropical island avoiding big lizards. If Jurassic Park is the greatest example of moviemaking summing up the entire human race in less than two hours, then I will stick to Tolstoy's novels and tales of bitter truth, and realistic joy, thank you! But I did find the dilophosaurus extremely endearing haha I can't make clear enough that I ain't hating on Schindler. I should clarify that I fell asleep bc we were watching it in a history class and I was tired and with the lights out in the back of the room... dozed off. Did not mean to imply the movie itself put me to sleep! And anyway, I hope my experience of one movie would have no bearing on your perception of another. :) I don't claim that JP is all-encompassing! Just that it perfectly balances being a great popcorn flick *and* having bigger themes (human behavior, our relationship with science and nature, etc). Of course it's apple to oranges trying to rate a fun if thoughtful sci-fi thriller against a film about a real, horrific event. Yikes, I'm not trying to do that! I meant my "Jurassic Park is the greatest" comments in a lighthearted way, I hope that's evident... I do think there's more to JP than just action and dinosaurs, but I'd never recommend the appreciation of one work exclusive of all the other art that's out there. Maybe I'll finally get around to seeing Schindler. I haven't avoided it on purpose, I'm just so lazy about watching movies. Still, strange that so many of the only-a-dozen-or-so people in the world who don't love Jurassic Park were here on this forum today! ;)

I'm not like, arguing Schindler's List is bad or unimportant. I don't feel qualified to evaluate it, as the only time I saw it, I fell asleep.

Not saying this to cause trouble, but I fell asleep during Schindler's List and have never felt like giving the whole thing another chance.

There are a lot of movies I like for nostalgia's sake. JP isn't one of them. There was so much that was lost on me or over my head when I first saw it; it's only improved with every viewing. A dense and intelligent observation of human nature. Because that's the thing; it's not just a movie about dinosaurs. It's a movie about people. It's a movie about life, in every sense, and a movie about living.

Thing is, to me, the first film was, and always will be, a mere popcorn film. The science is patchy, the script is fairly basic, the cast, as iconic as they are now to us who grew up with the films, never rise above adequate. One thing I really found annoying was the sentimental streak that tarnishes nearly every Spielberg movie: the whole deal wih the kids and Alan, who hates kids, and how by the end he warms to the kids, and his girlfriend and him reflect in their glances on how far they have come... It really makes the film too grounded in basic kiddie fare, I really would have loved to have seen what James Cameron could have done with this film (and many of my arguments about the lack of depth, and the cheesy nature of this film, can also be directed at his Titanic). I get why you love JP. I do, but I am afraid I like the concept a whole lot more than the execution. I was six when I saw this film, and read the book (science bits and all) a couple of years later. I remember realising as a child the diference between grown up and child entertainment because of this. The film is just another typical Spielberg action movie. It has its moments but as Science Fiction, Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, ET and even the first three quarters of The war Of The Worlds were better than this (I truly don't think he ever mastered sci fi), as an action film, not a patch on Indiana Jones 1-3, as a thriller. Jaws. Nothing left to be said. This is the same man that gave us both Empire Of The Sun and Schindler's List. Sorry, maybe you enjoy blockbusters more than true moviemaking, but in 1993, Schindler stole the limelight with bothe the critics and the awards ceremonies, and over two decades later, everyone still takes that film seriously, but not so much Jurassic Park. I really could not be of a more polar opposite opinion. The script and performances are top-notch, IMO, and I actually find Alan's arc with the kids to be more interesting now that I'm an adult (I, too, was 6 when I saw the original). It's about human evolution, and the traits that allow our species to survive despite a relative lack of physical dominance. To me, this IS "true moviemaking." I don't draw a line between popular art and whatever else there may be.

I agree there was a lot of missed opportunity. I guess I just wasn't interested in the whole "taming the Raptors" angle... it seemed a little far-fetched to me (I know that's a silly concept when we're talking about dinosaur movies, yeah). I just thought it was kind of light fare while there's a lot more going on beneath the surface in the original. Don't get me wrong; I ate my popcorn and slurped my Icee and had a great time. I was never bored, and a movie being boring is way worse to me than any other flaw JW might have.

I thought in every way it was on the same level. Same good points, same low points. But this time the dinosaurs felt more like real animals, and less like movie monsters. ...am I misunderstanding you? The JP dinosaurs were objectively much more realistic and believable as animals, whereas the JW "dinosaurs" were literally movie monsters, barely based in any actual scientific knowledge. The pterosaurs were basically gremlins. Only the dying Apatosaurus felt real.

What else are we going to feed the T. rex?

Munich was unwatchable... and even that was better than Lincoln.

Sorry, is this a faux-pas? I'm bad at forums. :/

Comparisons between the book and movie aren't really worth anything IMO; the movie is a different story. Inspired by the book yes, but its own monster. I love the book, but I don't think it would make a very good movie as it stands. I don't think there's any kid-pandering in JP... it's as sophisticated a screenplay as I've ever seen.

Who said anything about opinions? Just the facts here, the facts! The Peter Jackson King Kong had a lot of potential, but I felt like it got lost in the middle somewhere... fell victim to the same "too much unnecessary CGI action" bug that plagues superhero movies.

This movie was an incredible disappointment. It was nothing like the original. Where was the wonder and magic that made JP so great? Even the special effects seemed WORSE than the ones from 20 years ago... because in that film, they were in service of a story. In this film... they were pointless.

Spielberg has barely stepped a foot wrong in the last twenty five years! Even the bad films are worthy simply because he went out of his comfort zone! And by bad for him, I mean overall excellent! Terminal, War of the Worlds, Munich, Crystal Skull... all pretty bad. Don't even get me started on the unbearable Lincoln. Terminal is sweet, no worse than 1941, and better than Always and Hook. The War Of The Worlds is flawed, but excellent fun in places and the effects are astonishing. Munich to be fair is a bad film. Forgot it exists. Again, better than Hook. Crystal Skull is sadly not his fault, Lucas had the final say on the chosen script. The cast were good, the bad points at least laughable. Tintin, War Horse, Catch Me If You Can, Schindler's List...these four films are good to absolutely world class extraordinary (Schindler's List is my favourite film of all time, proving that Jurassic Park wasn't even the best Spielberg film of 1993!). Actually I didn't think Crystal Skull was that bad. Take out the fridge and the monkeys, and it's fine. Jurassic Park was the best Spielberg film of 1993, and that's not a dig at Schindler's List. Jurassic Park is the best ___ film of ___. JP is the best. The end. Thanks for not getting me started on Lincoln. ;) I avoided Lincoln...you can have that! I disagree completely about JP, I don't think it comes even halfway to reaching the greatness of the novel. And Jaws is still the dudes best blockbuster. !!! Well, rather than continue to derail this thread, I've made a separate one for JP praise over in Video Vertigo... feel free to come and bask in the light of truth. :)

Jurassic Park is the best movie ever made. This isn't a question; I just think it's nice from time to time to read true statements and nod at them. No need to post in this thread, as everyone just saying "Yes, this indeed is true" over and over again will become tiresome. :) Note: I realize there is a current Jurassic World thread. That's not part of this topic. We need not continue to associate the two grossly unrelated movies any more than Universal Pictures has already forced us to. Additional Note: Yes, the thread title pun is intended.

good job you don't need your sight to enjoy an astonishingly good attempt by Rush at making classic AOR. The moment may be brief, but it can be so bright.