The AFI is at it again!

[Sabin]

I'm not sure Wes, but I'll say this: while I feel that 'Schindler's List' is a great film, it doesn't really comment on anything that is actually going on. Even Oskar Schindler whose reform is rather underdeveloped (not necessarily a bad thing) has a lot in common with other cipher leads like Peter O'Toole in 'Lawrence of Arabia'. I'd argue, he's a much less active protagonist but no matter. I read an interesting article by Jonathan Rosenbaum (another fan of the film) who calls 'Schindler's List' a great reproduction by Spielberg of Hollywood classicism in its tear-jerking, and that, basically saying nothing new about the Holocaust, serves primarily as reminder. That would classify 'Schindler's List' in my mind as an epic.

'The Lord of the Rings' on the other hand is incredibly detailed in what it has to say about the innate meaning of the Shire as more 'Heavy Metal'-style state of mind that you can't return to or really leave. It's condemnation of Sauron as a blandly evil omnipresent force has a lot in common with 'Schindler's List''s faceless Orc-like Nazis, but in its depiction of Gollum it does comment on the nature of the tortuous duality of possession and the eradication of the self. Is the ring a placebo? Did it just serve to unleash the corruption within us all? Are we doing it to ourselves even when we have the best intentions in mind? Is there such a thing as the best of intentions?

It's also gay as fuck which is a subtext that 'Schindler's List' can't begin to topple both in intensity and outright gayness. Lots of stuff going on in 'The Lord of the Rings' that 'Schindler's List' can't really claim to comment on, and thusly because 'The Lord of the Rings' is very concerned with defining its world, battles, and gayness it probably belongs in the category of fantasy. It's a parable.

(stopped being serious at second paragraph but only kind of.)

[OscarGuy]

When I saw the Courtroom Drama category, the first thing that popped into my head is: They're looking for a way to recognize To Kill a Mockingbird again.

What makes me most angry is that they have a Romantic Comedy category (which should have been romance), but they have no fucking Horror category? These people are idiots some times.

And Shrek is hardly the most egregious inclusion in the Top 50 Animated Films section.

Of course, as always, the lists bear very little strength by not allowing foreign entries. For Animation alone, there are several foreign entries that would be better than 80% of what they did list.

And I noticed that they didn't do a lot to include sequels in the races and how does Schindler's List count as an epic when Lord of the Rings isn't listed? They have a very narrow definition of Epic...almost as bad as Epic Movie's overly broad definition of Epic.

[Eric]

I actually checked this last week because I thought, not having heard anything about them doing a new list, perhaps the AFI reign of terror was over and that they decided to go out on a near-respectable note (the updated 100 list with Nashville, The Searchers, et al).

But no. Instead they declare Legally Blonde a courtroom drama.

[rain Bard]

Animation is not a genre and I can't believe they're considering Shrek, which is simply schrecklich.

[Penelope]

How convenient that they couldn't fit Brokeback Mountain into either Western or Epic. And since it specified Romantic Comedy, it certainly couldn't go there....

[The Original BJ]

When will these people just STOP?

http://www.afi.com/tvevents/100years/10top10.aspx