Perfect Movies

[Donnadogsoth]

Generally the definition tends to be "without flaw or defect" or something to that regards. Something can be the best of its craft and still not be perfect.

How do you define flaw or defect?

[Cikomyr]

How do you define flaw or defect?

And objectively definable problem. Like the occasional flaws of FX in Aliens.

[Donnadogsoth]

They have. The fact that you're just saying "nuh-uh" doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

Alien: The build-up is dragging. Ripley dressing down to panties and showing butt is completely unnecessary.

I didn't think it dragged, good grief, everything filmed before 1998 drags, that's hardly an objection. And I didn't think the seminudity was unnecessary.

1: The airvent sequence ends with a rather poor shot of the alien pulling a notorious "jazz hands" pose. It's passable on first viewing due to the shock factor, but doesn't hold up too well on repeated watches. Admittedly it's mostly due to the practical limitations of a full-body costume in an enclosed space, but it'd be much improved by having the alien actually moving forward to grab Dallas, or at least swiping/bringing its hands together instead of holding that awkward pose.

post facto dissection of something that was simply meant to scare. It was an alien, man, it did something scary and alien.

2: When Ash is being reactivated, there's a very obvious cut from the dummy head being put on the table to the actor talking. This could be improved by inserting a quick shot to the other characters in the scene to mask the transition. The dummy head also isn't very convincing and the amount of synthetic blood on it doesn't match with the actor's make-up.

Merely a symptom of (a) having seen the film too many times, and (b) being the child of a hypercritical society that has been trained to look for such things. These are flaws on the part of the viewer, not on the part of the film.

No, but if there were scenes where it became an active hindrance, then it would be an imperfection. Just like the fact that Alien used a fellow in a rubber suit isn't an imperfection, but the fact that it occasionally looked like a fellow in a rubber suit is.

On the contrary again: an Alien that didn't look like a man in a rubber suit would look fake because it would be obviously a contrivance.

Yes, but it doesn't do it consistently. If I made a movie to engage a two year old, and it did that despite being riddled with plot holes and terrible acting, it wouldn't suddenly be a perfect movie because the two year old didn't notice those things.

On the contrary, such a film would be perfect for two-year-olds. Just as Alien is perfect for horror/sf audiences of 1979.

[Chen]

And objectively definable problem. Like the occasional flaws of FX in Aliens.

Actually I'm not sure it needs to be objectively definable. Perfection itself need not have an objective definition. What some may find flaws, others may not. That said, if there is an objectively definable problem with a movie, by definition it is not perfect.

Ghost, for example, has a number of situations where you can see film crew and/or equipment in mirrors during the movie. This is an objective problem. That was not intended and it is a mistake. As such Ghost cannot be a perfect movie. Other aspects of the movie though, like some of the scenes were Patrick Swayze is talking to people he KNOWS can't hear him to me get a bit grating. But that's not an objective flaw. If we ignore the mirror bit and that were the only flaw I found with the movie, I could still say it's not perfect but others may not agree with me.

[Bohandas]

Kung Pow: Enter the Fist. Because all the things that are wrong with it are wrong on purpose.

[Cikomyr]

Kung Pow: Enter the Fist. Because all the things that are wrong with it are wrong on purpose.

Disagreed. Being purposely flawed doesnt make you any less flawed.

[Ruslan]

In the genre of martial arts movies, I would mention Shaolin Soccer (comedy) and Ong-Bak (serious). Not very complex or elaborate films, but what they set out to do, they do flawlessly.

[137beth]

1.
(a) It has to convince on its first viewing, which it did. We didn't see the zipper. Criticising it for not working as well on subsequent viewings because we have developed standards for how aliens should behave seems like cynicism. Dallas didn't think it was unconvincing.
(b) It's an alien, man, why should it do the expected?

2.
Again, this is noticed on subsequent viewings by jaded and overeducated audiences. We can tell King Kong is stop-motion and hahaha how fake is that?! But that doesn't stop King Kong from being a perfect movie.

Not buying it. My favorite plays are those I enjoy more the second or twentieth time I watch them than the first. My favorite novels are those I enjoy more upon rereading than the first time. My favorite comics are those I enjoy more on subsequent readings. My favorite music are all pieces I enjoy more after hearing/playing it many times. I'm not much of a movie person, but movies I like tend to be good on repeated viewings.

[Donnadogsoth]

Not buying it. My favorite plays are those I enjoy more the second or twentieth time I watch them than the first. My favorite novels are those I enjoy more upon rereading than the first time. My favorite comics are those I enjoy more on subsequent readings. My favorite music are all pieces I enjoy more after hearing/playing it many times. I'm not much of a movie person, but movies I like tend to be good on repeated viewings.

Then you're obviously not jaded or overeducated with respect to the movies, plays, novels, comics, and music that you enjoy.

[Dienekes]

Not buying it. My favorite plays are those I enjoy more the second or twentieth time I watch them than the first. My favorite novels are those I enjoy more upon rereading than the first time. My favorite comics are those I enjoy more on subsequent readings. My favorite music are all pieces I enjoy more after hearing/playing it many times. I'm not much of a movie person, but movies I like tend to be good on repeated viewings.

I think it kind of depends on what the piece of media is going for. For example I could reread LotR or The Iliad or Catch-22 a hundred times because I read them for the world or the humor or the sense of weight to the story. Or I could rewatch The Godfather or Die Hard for the acting or awesome fights.

But when you get to horror or twist ending or suspense it's harder or near impossible to recapture the initial experience. The only such movies I can really rewatch are Fight Club and The Usual Suspects. Because I can enjoy the other things in the film. But most movies that revolve around shock moments don't hold up that well.

At least for me.

[KillingAScarab]

I'm just here to second Dark City. By which I mean that's the reason I exist. Do you know the way to Shell Beach?

[2D8HP]

I'm just here to second Dark City. By which I mean that's the reason I exist. Do you know the way to Shell Beach?

I'd wondered if I was alone in finding Dark City to be superior to The Matrix which had some similar themes.

[Velaryon]

I'd wondered if I was alone in finding Dark City to be superior to The Matrix which had some similar themes.

You definitely aren't. While I initially preferred The Matrix, Dark City holds up a lot better on repeat viewing. Also, it isn't marred by terrible sequels.

[veti]

I'd wondered if I was alone in finding Dark City to be superior to The Matrix which had some similar themes.

To paraphrase Tom Lenk, Dark City should get an Oscar and beat The Matrix over the head with it. It was better scripted, better acted, and infinitely more thoughtful in its treatment of the same premise.

I saw Dark City first (it came out about a year earlier), and after that The Matrix seemed almost painfully shallow at first sight. On repeat viewing it gets worse.

[Giggling Ghast]

I would nominate Army of Darkness as the perfect horror/comedy. OK, some of the special effects are terrible, but that's part of its charm.

[Rothis Sil]

Independence day is the best movie in the world.

[Cikomyr]

Independence day is the best movie in the world.

But its not perfect.

[tantric]

Primer - a)uncompromisingly intelligent SF b)also a bit of existential horror c)won the grand jury prize at Sundance and most importantly d) was made for less than $7000. not kidding.

consider these movie narrative charts, from xkcd:

[Chen]

Very hard to consider Primer perfect. The problem is the time travel in the movie, while complex is not well explained IN the movie. It leads to it being more confusing that it needs to be. Once you actually get past that bit, the story itself is fairly mediocre too. I still liked the movie and it's fairly novel, but perfect, no way.

[tantric]

Very hard to consider Primer perfect. The problem is the time travel in the movie, while complex is not well explained IN the movie. It leads to it being more confusing that it needs to be. Once you actually get past that bit, the story itself is fairly mediocre too. I still liked the movie and it's fairly novel, but perfect, no way.

not to be churlish, but it won the Grand Jury prize at Sundance. that pretty much means that in 2004, it was the most perfect dramatic movie made.

[Razade]

not to be churlish, but it won the Grand Jury prize at Sundance. that pretty much means that in 2004, it was the most perfect dramatic movie made.

No it doesn't. It means it won the Grand Jury prize at Sundance. While that's a big deal for a movie, it doesn't mean anything other than that fact.

[DomaDoma]

Pan's Labyrinth. The unsaid parts of that narrative are worth the entire screenplay of a dozen good films.

[Chen]

not to be churlish, but it won the Grand Jury prize at Sundance. that pretty much means that in 2004, it was the most perfect dramatic movie made.

Even if this were true, which it isn't (as Razade points out), there is a difference between something that is "perfect" and what you've mentioned as "most perfect". It could very well be the best movie made that year or that decade or whatever, but it still is not perfect. I already listed its existing flaws. With said flaws, it is by definition not perfect.

[lunaticfringe]

I just wanna say The Outlaw Josey Wales is hands down more perfect than any of the Westerns (especially if we're talkin Clint Eastwood) listed so far.

[Marillion]

Pan's Labyrinth. The unsaid parts of that narrative are worth the entire screenplay of a dozen good films.

Yes. This. Yes. I truly cannot think of a single flaw within this movie.

Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai is a very unusual film, about a hitman (Forrest Whitaker) who serves a certain Mafia don. He considers himself a modern day (urban, if you will) Samurai and always strives to follow the Bushido code. There are many eclectic oddities in this movie, and frankly it has no business being as good as it is, but amazingly it all works. It's slow, yet uniquely captivating. Violent, yet sublime. Patently ridiculous, yet surprisingly deep. There's not a single wasted shot in the whole film.

[tielemans]

Always liked the Aliens. Considering at what time it was made. Very cool. And the more I review No Country for Old Men, the more I like it.

[dps]

Would it?

I mean.. if we had the original Venus, by the original artist. Without any damage, you are telling me it would be a LESSER work of art than the broken one?

Thats stupid.

Apparently, there are a lot of experts who now think that it never had arms to begin with, which certainly puts a different spin on the "perfect without 'em" POV.

Anyway, going with the "I can't think of any way it could be improved" definition of "perfect", I'd add The Whole Nine Yards to the list.

[Unregistered]

Commando. The perfect 80ies action movie.

[Aedilred]

Commando. The perfect 80ies action movie.

I remember being disappointed in Commando's relative bloodlessness. I'm by no means a gore fiend but considering the amount of ostensible violence in the film, by the end it was starting to look rather staged. Compared to its 80s action brethren, I felt Commando kind of blew the action part of its brief, even if had the formula down pat.

[dehro]

I remember being disappointed in Commando's relative bloodlessness. I'm by no means a gore fiend but considering the amount of ostensible violence in the film, by the end it was starting to look rather staged. Compared to its 80s action brethren, I felt Commando kind of blew the action part of its brief, even if had the formula down pat.

true, but it did gain bonus points for the cheesy oneliners.