Kevin's Watch

1. Silence of the Lambs
2. Rear Window
3. The French Connection
4. North by Northwest
5. The Third Man
6. The Usual Suspects
7. Seven
8. The Manchuran Candidate (original)
9. Fargo
10. Chinatown
11. LA Confidential
12. Double Indemnity
13. Marathon Man
14. Reservoir Dogs
15. Vertigo
16. The Departed
17. Memento
18. Dial 'M' for Murder
19. Body Heat
20. Cape Fear (the original)
21. The Fugitive
22. Blood Simple
23. The Killing
24. Blue Velvet
25. The Constant Gardner

Source: AOL Moviefone

Hmmmmm. Some movies there I wouldn't classify as thrillers, but whatever.

But if The French Connection makes it, then To Live and Die In L.A. should make it too.

Oh, and The Mean Season too.

Agreed, several movies in this list do not belong, and definitely French Connection doesn't belong at all.

"Thriller" is a tough category to define. What exactly is one? I'd call The French Connection a crime drama. Come to think of it, I'd call most of those films crime dramas.

Well, it's tough to have any "thriller" without some crime involved. But it is a tough genre to define. I'd say Silence is a good example of a thriller, also Seven and Cape Fear.

I'm actually amazed at how many of these movies I've never seen.

I don't think Fargo belongs on the List.

_I don't remember being thrilled about anything other than the closing credits myself.

I'd think films like Enemy of the State or Chain Reaction would classify as thrillers.

"thriller"? hmmm. yeah i think its a spurious categorization myself.

i agree most of the films on that list are crime dramas.

and if Blue Velvet is on that list, why isn't Psycho?
there are three Hitchcock films on there but, by golly, isn't he "the master of suspense" ?? you'd think you'd see more of his films on there.

i can't get a handle on exactly what a thriller is supposed to be looking at that list.

and michael jackson has a different definition entirely!!

drew wrote:I don't think Fargo belongs on the List.

_I don't remember being thrilled about anything other than the closing credits myself.

Fargo's a Film Noir, or whatever they call it. The same goes for Blood Simple and L.A. Confidential, and about half the other movies on the list. Can't believe they didn't put in The Maltese Falcon while they were at it.

Silence of the Lambs is #1? Give me a frickin' break. I'll take The Fugitive over it anyday of the week.

Hell, I'd take Manhunter over SotL.

The majority of the list falls into the film noir or neo-noir crime drama category. I'm not sure I'd define most of these movies as true "thrillers" but perhaps is a problem with the definition of the word.

Kinslaughterer wrote:The majority of the list falls into the film noir or neo-noir crime drama category. I'm not sure I'd define most of these movies as true "thrillers" but perhaps is a problem with the definition of the word.

Yeah, when I think thriller, I think of a movie like Wait Until Dark, or something in that vein. I sure don't think Reservoir Dogs. It is a tough classification, though.

Cail wrote:Hell, I'd take Manhunter over SotL.

I'd take "Red Dragon" over "Manhunter."

dlbpharmd wrote:

Cail wrote:Hell, I'd take Manhunter over SotL.

I'd take "Red Dragon" over "Manhunter."

Oh no way. William Petersen played Will Graham way better than Ed Norton and Michael Mann owns Brett Ratner.

But that's a whole 'nother thread...

Cail wrote:

dlbpharmd wrote:

Cail wrote:Hell, I'd take Manhunter over SotL.

I'd take "Red Dragon" over "Manhunter."

Oh no way. William Petersen played Will Graham way better than Ed Norton and Michael Mann owns Brett Ratner.

But that's a whole 'nother thread...

i was skeptical of Red Dragon and would have agreed with you before i saw it, but...

i liked Ed Norton and i've never been that fond of Michael Mann.

edit: urk. last of the mohicans! heat! okay, i like some michael mann.

Ed Norton's a fantastic actor, but he was completely wrong for the part; too young, too fresh-faced, not haunted enough. Petersen had the world-weary look that Graham was supposed to have, and by all rights should've reprised the role.

Not to mention Cox's Lecktor is way more faithful to Harris's character than Hopkins' over-the-top portrayal of Lecter.

Mann's film is a gripping character study that's artfully shot, Ratner's film is a gaudy vehicle for Anthony Hopkins to chew up the scenery.

The greatest difference is that Ralph Fiennes is outstanding as Dolarhyde.

Fiennes was outstanding as Dolarhyde, and probably the best thing about the remake.

agreed

One film that is definitely a thriller that isn't on the list is Breakdown with Kurt Russell.