Tag Archives: Top 10

Top Tens – History: Top 10 Empires (10) India – Maurya Empire

Posted on by

India under Maurya rule c. 250 BCE (based on map p. 69 of Kulke, H.; Rothermund, D. (2004), A History of India, 4th, Routledge) by Avantiputra7 for “Maurya Empire” Wikipedia and licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

 

 

(10) INDIA – MAURYA EMPIRE (322 – 184 BC)

The Maurya or Mauryan Empire ranks in top spot among Indian empires, mostly due to my fandom of its emperor Ashoka, held in semi-legendary regard as one of India’s (and history’s) greatest emperors, as well as the first state to rule almost the entire Indian subcontinent (except the southernmost part that consistently held out against other Indian empires except their own and the British).

The Indian subcontinent has seen the rise and fall of numerous empires that could well be the subject of their own top ten, even if most are little known outside Indian history – reflecting that they almost never extended beyond the subcontinent, at least in direct territorial extent. In fairness, the Indian subcontinent has always been virtually a world of its own, particularly as a proportion of world population and economy (the latter at least until the ascent of Europe).

There are a number of candidates for top spot among Indian empires. There’s the Gupta Empire, from the fourth to later sixth century (and therefore contemporary to the declining west Roman empire), often considered the golden age empire of classical Hindu India.

There’s the early modern Islamic Mughal (or Mogul or Moghul) Empire, which might well be considered the height of empire in pre-British India as well as that best known in general history, not least because it gave India its most iconic landmark, the Taj Mahal.

And of course there was the crown jewel of the British Empire that was the British Raj – although that is usually not ranked among Indian empires as such.

However there can only be one empire for this entry and that is the Maurya empire, which one might consider the Roman Empire of India, or at least the equivalent of the rising imperial Roman republic with which it was a contemporary.

And its founder for which it was named, Chandragupta Maurya, ranks almost as highly in legendary esteem as Ashoka – or Rome’s Romulus for that matter – rising from humble origins from a cowherd and essentially to bandit leader to defeat the Nanda Empire (which had faced off none other than Alexander the Great) and forge his own empire instead.

Back to Ashoka, he extended the empire to its greatest extent before, as it is told, being sickened by the violence of the Kalinga War (against the Kalinga state on the Bay of Bengal), he converted to Buddhism and pacifism, thereafter ruling with legendary benevolence.

Although his empire extended only throughout the subcontinent, its influence extended well beyond that through his patronage of Buddhism and Buddhist missionaries, which arguably played the same role expanding that religion as Roman imperial state patronage did for Christianity.

One of Ashoka’s edicts proclaimed the territories “conquered by the Dhamma”, from the Buddhist term Dharma and reflecting the moral law or sphere of influence within Buddhism, to extend to the west through the Hellenistic kingdoms to Greece itself

The empire declined and fell within fifty years of his death, which shows you where pacifism gets you as an empire. In fairness, that was due as much to the subsequent line of succession, although it hasn’t stopped some historians alleging that Ashoka’s pacifism undermined the “military backbone” of the empire – while others assert that the extent or impact of his pacifism was “greatly exaggerated”.

 

Art of the Samath Lion Capital statue for Ashoka – the closest thing to a flag I could find for the Maurya Empire

DECLINE & FALL

Nothing to see here – it all fell apart quickly after Ashoka. That’s where pacifism gets you – I guess it’s a Darwinian world after all

THE MAURYA EMPIRE NEVER FELL

On the other hand, the Maurya Empire never fell – arguably having the most enduring influence of any Indian empire through its patronage of Buddhism.

THE SUN NEVER SETS

The sun obviously set on the Maurya Empire, which was limited in physical extent, as almost all Indian Empires were, to the Indian subcontinent. However, I think it might properly be reckoned as a world empire, particularly in its “territory conquered by the Dhamma” or influence through Buddhism – a world religion on which the sun does not set.

EVIL EMPIRE

One of the few empires, at least under Ashoka’s legendary benevolence, that avoids the tag of evil empire, albeit arguably at the cost of its endurance.

In The Outline of History, H.G. Wells wrote “Amidst the tens of thousands of names of monarchs that crowd the columns of history, their majesties and graciousnesses and serenities and royal highnesses and the like, the name of Ashoka shines, and shines, almost alone, a star.”

RATING: 4 STARS****
A-TIER (TOP TIER)

Top Tens – History: Top 10 Wars (10) American Indian Wars – Sioux Wars

Posted on by

Custer’s Last Charge – entered according to act of Congress in the year 1876 by Seifert Gugler & Co. with the librarian of Congress at Washington D. C. (public domain image – “Sioux Wars” Wikipedia)

 

(10) AMERICAN INDIAN WARS –
SIOUX WARS (1854-1891)

The wars that defined the American West and ‘manifest destiny’ of the United States. The wars that put the frontier into Turner’s frontier thesis, as its literal frontier – or front line.

In origin they predate the United States itself, extending to the European colonial powers or American states prior to independence (or union). The American Revolutionary War and War of 1812 were also American Indian Wars, as the British and Americans each had their native American allies.

They were of existential importance to the native American nations or tribes, given that they ceased to exist as independent polities outside of reservations or territories within the United States, if at all. They were also of fundamental importance to the United States as well, given its “acquisition” of territory from those same tribes or nations.

Hence the span, scale and scope of the American Indian Wars in total extends for centuries across a continent. So as for which American Indian War to nominate for this entry, I’ll go with the archetypal or definitive entry, particularly from their place in the culture, history and mythology of the American West – the Sioux Wars.

Even those extended for almost half a century from the First Sioux War in 1854 to the Ghost Dance War in 1891 (and through the Great Plains but as also as far as Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado), with the most definitive Sioux War as the Great Sioux War of 1876 fought by two of the most famous native American war leaders, Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse.

The Sioux Wars feature the archetypal or definitive image of the American Indian Wars fought by mounted native American warriors as well as many of the landmarks of the American Indian Wars – from Colonel Chivington and the Sand Creek Massacre, through the Battle of Little Bighorn and General Custer’s Last Stand, to the Ghost Dance and the Wounded Knee Massacre.

However, the American Indian Wars take their place as wars within even wider themes – indeed, among the widest and oldest in human history.

Firstly, there is the theme of wider native American wars, which the native American nations or tribes found themselves fighting in for half a millennium throughout both American continents against the European colonial powers or their settler successor states, including my next entry.

Secondly there is the theme of wars against tribal nations or tribes, not only in the Americas but worldwide. I’ve heard it said that the basic political states are empires and tribes (or tribal confederacies). That seems somewhat overstated, but certainly tribes or tribal nations throughout the world found themselves under fire in the same period – in the Americas, in Africa, in Siberia and Central Asia, and in Australasia or Oceania.

Thirdly – and overlapping with the previous theme – is the longest theme or war of all, spanning millennia, the wars of sedentary agricultural societies or states against nomadic hunter-gatherers. And it is a war that, despite setbacks at the hands of mounted nomadic herding tribes, has been overwhelmingly won by agricultural states – riding roughshod over the nomadic hunter-gatherers at their frontiers, through their weight of numbers and the things that come with it, the titular “guns, germs and steel” of Jared Diamond.

Even the ghost dance falls within those wider themes over millennia – and millennialism. Of course, I tend to think of all religion as a ghost dance, but particularly so when societies face overwhelming material odds against them and essentially resort to magic to win wars.

And it’s not always tribal societies. The Boxer Rebellion was essentially the Chinese ghost dance – as was the Taiping Rebellion before it, a conflict that tends to be strangely overlooked in history, despite more casualties than the First World War. Of course, the Taiping or Boxer Rebellions show that the ghost dance can get a few good punches (heh) in before it goes down, but it is almost universally doomed to go down, except in fantasy.

Although occasionally even in history the ghost dance wins its weird victories. One tribal confederacy or kingdom that popped up during a power vacuum in its region, but then found itself progressively overwhelmed by successive empires until it existed at the whim of a final one, also resorted to a ghost dance that increasingly substituted heavenly victory for an earthly one.

That of course was the Jewish tribal confederacy or kingdom and its great messianic ghost dance, existing at the whim of the Roman Empire. The Jewish kingdom itself did not survive the Roman Empire, but its ghost dance did – ultimately succeeding first to the imperial cult of the Roman Empire, and then to the remnants of the imperial state itself.

ART OF WAR

The Sioux tactically demonstrated the speed, surprise and shock that is part of the art of war – indeed, similarly to the mounted horse tribes of central Asian steppes that were so effective elsewhere, not surprisingly given the geography of the Plains.

The only problem was they were too little and too late – a few centuries too late, against an industrial adversary that used the true strategic art of war (for winning without fighting) – picking curb stomp battles from a position of overwhelming material superiority.

It also demonstrates something of an issue for guerilla warfare. Guerilla warfare is often touted as the ultimate expression of the art of war – and it often is, avoiding pitched battles to outlast the adversary, but it had one limitation, particularly in pre-modern history.

Mao Tse-Tung wrote that “the guerilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea” – which is all very well unless your opponent is willing and able to drain the sea, displacing or eliminating the whole people (or at least enough of them).

WORLD WAR

Not of themselves, but the Sioux Wars and the American Indian Wars were part of a wider world war in its total scope, the native American wars as one continent descended on two others

STILL FIGHTING THE AMERICAN INDIAN WARS

We’re still fighting the American Indian Wars – or rather their legacy, although in some cases native American wars are still being fought in the Americas. The American Indian Wars persisted in actual warfare until 1924 (!) – and subsequently in the form of the new and more effective ghost dance of political activism.

GOOD GUYS VS BAD GUYS

Ah USA – although it’s difficult to imagine the contemporary United States without the American Indian Wars, it’s equally difficult to see the US as the good guys from our modern perspective

RATING: 4 STARS*****
A-TIER (TOP TIER)

Top Tens – History: Top 10 Books (10) Anthony Kaldellis – The New Roman Empire: A History of Byzantium

Posted on by

 

(10) ANTHONY KALDELLIS –

THE NEW ROMAN EMPIRE: A HISTORY OF BYZANTIUM (2023)

 

 

My wildcard tenth place entry as best history book of 2023 is this history of the eastern Roman Empire – from founding to fall of Constantinople, with more than a millennium of history in between them.

 

By the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453 AD– on the threshold of the Spanish discovery of the Americas and marking the start of the early modern period – the empire was effectively reduced to the city itself with some spare change left behind in the couch in the Peloponnese.

 

It had come a long way – and fallen so far – from its glorious founding as new imperial capital from the former city of Byzantium by Constantine in 330 AD, reigning as sole emperor over the whole classical Roman empire. From that point the empire was almost inevitably destined to be divided (again) into western and eastern halves, with the latter ruled from Constantinople and almost inevitably destined to outlast the former.

 

The founding of Constantinople and its rule over the eastern empire that became the sole empire once its western counterpart fell prompts consideration of what to call that empire, which is addressed from the outset of the book – and in its title.

 

It was of course, as they considered themselves to be, the continuation of the Roman Empire, but it also had important distinctions from the former classical empire – distinctions that allowed it to endure as long as it did and not merely as a “pale facsimile of classical Rome” but “a vigorous state of its own, inheritor of many of Rome’s features, and a vital node in the first truly globalized world”.

 

Western history has borrowed from Constantinople’s former title Byzantium – as indeed does the book’s subtitle and its author as self-described Byzantist – to call it the Byzantine empire, often to the detriment of the empire’s continuity with the Roman Empire. I guess Constantinopolitan Empire doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue.

 

That is something which this book resists, advocating persuasively against that usage. While it is no doubt a term with an unfortunate history of usage, much like the general usage of Byzantine as a pejorative adjective, I think the title of Byzantine Empire may well be too ingrained in common usage to shake.

 

The common alternative has been to call it the Eastern Roman Empire – a usage similar to that of various Chinese dynasties to distinguish their geographical extent at different times, such as the Southern Song dynasty.

 

The book makes a persuasive case for a title as the New Roman Empire but then doesn’t really use that beyond the book’s title and introduction, instead preferring to use Romania – a usage that I don’t think will catch on for potential confusion with the modern nation of that name. Also come on – neo-Roman Empire was right there!

 

As for the book’s history of that thousand-year empire, it’s pretty much summed up by that earlier quote about it as a “vigorous state of its own” – one which endured through “innovative institutions and a bottomless strategic playbook”, the latter including what in modern parlance is called soft power and set out in one of the book’s many engaging points.

 

Another engaging point is that the book plays into my preference for thematic history, not simply chronicling what happened but asking how and why it did – above all, the question of how and why the empire “lasted so long lies at the heart of the book”.

 

That can be broken down into further questions, which the book engages. How and why did it survive when the western empire didn’t? How and why did it almost succumb to enemies after that, notably the Persians and Arabs when it came within a heartbeat of falling? How and why did it then rebound after those and other occasions of decline?

 

As to the book’s big question of how and why it lasted so long, a fundamental part of the answer is reflected in its preferred usage of Romania – that the empire transformed itself to resemble not so much subjects under imperial rule as participants in a Roman nation state.

 

A further engaging point is that the author doesn’t shrink on occasion from laying down some snide snark – such as when channelling his inner Procopius, he lets the occasional barb slip that he really doesn’t like Justinian. He quips that the Plague of Justinian was the only thing the emperor didn’t want to name after himself – ooo, sick imperial burn! Of course, in this house, Justinian is a hero – although even I have to admit he overextended the empire.

 

Less engaging for me is when he detours into the endless theological disputes in the broader history of Christianity within the empire. Yes, yes – I know the history of the empire is intimately caught up with the history of Christianity within it but my eyes mostly glazed over when the book went there.

 

Except for the dispute over icons – that kept my interest, although I suppose it helped it just involved the simply use (or prohibition from use) of images and not some mindbogglingly pedantic semantics. Also, there was the book’s insight that the iconoclasts were not as, well, iconoclastic as they were made out to be.

 

Even so, I preferred the book’s more straightforward political and military history of when the empire was kicking ass or having its ass kicked.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

X-TIER (WILD TIER)

Top Tens – History: Top 10 Empires

Posted on by

“The Rhodes Colossus”, a cartoon by Edward Linley Sambourne published in Punch magazine in 1892

 

Given my interest in military history, it’s not surprising that I’ve also always found empires a fascinating subject of history, again from the fortunate perspective of being well removed from the sharp end of them. Empires are typically creatures of military conquest or power, and rise and fall by war.

Indeed, the two books that define my historical (and political) worldview are Sun Tzu’s The Art of War and Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (yes – I know I’ve shortened the title for the latter) – so it’s not surprising that their subject matter, war and empires, also define my primary interests in history.

Not all empires are equal, however. Not even the same empire, as like the proverbial river of Heraclitus, you cannot step into the same empire twice.

Of course, that is perhaps implicit in their rise and fall, particularly when the fall of one empire is at the hands of the rise of another – such as when you have a tale of two empires, in a strikingly memorable phrase (for the 1945 Soviet offensive against Japan in Manchuria), one “at the absolute top of its game” and the other “dying and insane”.

So these are my Top 10 Empires of History. These are not ranked by how large, populous, rich, powerful or influential they are, but by my historical interest in them – although this tends to overlap with the former criteria. For example, of the ten largest historical empires by area at their greatest extent, all but two of them pop up in my Top 10 (with the other two in my special mentions).

Just some further notes, as with my Top 10 Wars, I have some ratings within each entry:

 

DECLINE & FALL

I have to admit that my particular interest in empires is not so much in their robust rise, but in their decline and fall. But again, not all empires are equal in their decline and fall. Some empires seem to collapse almost overnight, but others hold the line over incredible areas or incredible periods of time (or both), even rebounding or bouncing back. My interest is in the latter, so just how impressive or tenacious was each empire’s decline and fall?

 

THE EMPIRE NEVER FELL

On the other hand, rating the empires by their temporal span, particularly for that arguably never fell, or still haunt the world as ghosts or shadows.

 

THE SUN NEVER SETS

Rating the wars by their geographic scale as world empire. It was famously said of one empire as descriptive of its extent that the sun never set on it. Actually it was said of at least one other empire before that, with precursors even before that, but never mind that now.

 

EVIL EMPIRE

Yes, yes – they’re all evil. But just how evil?

But seriously, no empire rises to or maintains its power by being nice. They do it by crushing their opponents or rebellious subjects – “they make a desolation and call it peace”. Hence rating how brutally or ruthlessly they did so – just how evil was each empire?

But also seriously, history usually does not repay moral judgements, particularly contemporary moral judgements. Almost every empire proclaims itself to be spreading civilisation or bringing some benefit to its subjects – and all but the most destructive have at least some merit in those claims. Empires were often the only means for any political unity above the tribal level, or indeed peace from inter-tribal warfare, although of course both were typically achieved by an imperial “tribe” or nation subjugating others, usually with great death or destruction, even if it subsequently absorbed or adopted the latter as citizens or soldiers of empire.

Also, prior to modern concepts of ethnic national self-determination, I tend to regard all polities as imperial in nature, at least in so far as they comprised any more than one ethnic group, and generally even in the case of more homogenous or tribal polities over their own members, in the absence of any concept of participatory representation.

 

So these are my top ten empires in history. And yes – this is another of my deep dive top tens, counting down from tenth to first place and looking at individual entries in some depth or detail of themselves.

But wait – there’s more! The subject is prolific enough for my usual twenty special mentions per top ten and for honorable mentions beyond that.

 

Top Tens – History: Top 10 Wars

Posted on by

 

One of the most iconic photographs of war – Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima by Joe Rosenthal of the Associated Press

 

I’ve always found wars a fascinating subject of history, from the comfortable armchair of hindsight and the fortunate perspective of being well removed from any firsthand experience of them. History, particularly military history, has always been something of a hobby of mine. So of course I have ranked my Top 10 Wars of history.

Just some notes – these are not ranked by scale of destruction or historical impact, although I’d like to think that most or all of these entries would rank highly by those criteria. They are also not ranked by moral justifiability or in terms of being ‘good’ wars, to the extent that such a term can be used for wars, if at all. Rather, they are ranked in terms of historical interest to me – and I tend to be interested in the broader themes of history, so I have preferred a broader classification of the wars in each entry, although I do nominate individual wars (or conquests or invasions) within each entry.

 

Just some further notes – I have some ratings within each entry:

 

ART OF WAR

Rating the wars by the art of war shown in them, typically by the victors of course, albeit based on my more idiosyncratic application of Sun Tzu’s Art of War.

 

WORLD WAR

Rating the wars by their scale – some wars might well be considered world wars (or at least part of world wars) beyond the two twentieth century wars formally designated as such, from World War Zero to World War X.

 

STILL FIGHTING THE WAR

Rating the wars by their span, particularly for those wars we are arguably still fighting.

 

GOOD GUYS VS BAD GUYS

Rating the wars by taking a shot at choosing moral sides or nominating the good guys and bad guys – or not, since history usually does not repay moral judgements.

 

So these are my top ten wars in history. You know the rules – this is one of my deep dive top tens, counting down from tenth to first place and looking at individual entries in some depth or detail of themselves.

But wait – there’s more! The subject is prolific enough for my usual twenty special mentions per top ten and for honorable mentions beyond that.

Top Tens – History: Top 10 Books

Posted on by

Marble bust of Herodotus, the “Father of HIstory” – public domain image donated to Wikimedia Commons as part of a project by the Metropolitan Museum of Art

 

History repeats itself – the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.

History does not repeat but sometimes it rhymes.

History is just one damned thing after another.

Ah yes, history – and three of my favorite quotes about it.

The first is paraphrasing an actual quote by Karl Marx – often overlooked by people, even Marxists, as someone who could be quite the capable prose stylist when not bogged down in denser prose or theory.

The second is often attributed to Mark Twain – someone who is widely acknowledged as a capable prose stylist, except that he doesn’t seem to have actually said it.

The third quip is often quoted from historian Toynbee – correctly but somewhat misleadingly because firstly, it was adapted from a preceding popular saying about life, and secondly, he was using it to criticize historians who simply sought to chronicle history rather than analyze it.

Toynbee definitely fell in the latter category – a historian whose central theme was identifying, well, the themes of history, its cycles and patterns, its plot and rhythm (or history rhyming if you will).

History has been a subject that has fascinated me since childhood, when I read it avidly – and still does as I read it now, hence my Top 10 History Books.

The subject of history in its broadest sense is perhaps straightforward enough – “the systematic study and documentation” of the human past or past events, usually demarcated from prehistory as the past or events subsequent to the invention of writing systems (or written history in other words, although it might be corroborated by other sources such as archaeology).

Beyond that, it gets a little tricky with all the permutations of the various subjects of history or even the concept of history itself – so many permutations that it could be the subject of its own top ten and certainly has been the subject of debate among historians.

“History is an academic discipline which uses a narrative to describe, examine, question, and analyze past events, and investigate their patterns of cause and effect. Historians debate which narrative best explains an event, as well as the significance of different causes and effect. Historians debate the nature of history as an end in itself, and its usefulness in giving perspective on the problems of the present.”

I’m not here to seek to resolve any of these debates, if such a thing is even possible – I’m just here to read books on history and, you know, live in it. To adapt my own quote of living in a mythic world, I live in a historic world. We all do.

That said, what I will do is clarify my tastes in history books. I definitely lean more towards Toynbee’s concept of history as themes or patterns, preferring history books that are more analysis than chronicle. All my top ten might be said to be analytical or thematic history, albeit some more than others.

I also tend to prefer my thematic history on a grand scale – the scale of comparative or global history. Not always of course, but often – it is a preference after all, characterizing at least six of my top ten books.

I also tend to have a preference for military history – put bluntly, the history of wars and empires, or indeed of war and empire in the general thematic sense. The latter characterizes two of my top ten books as general histories of war and warfare.

Following on from the history of wars and empires, it might be cliched but foremost among my subjects of preference are the Roman Empire and the Second World War (although Alexander the Great and the Cold War are close – and somewhat overlapping – runners-up for each respectively). Two of my top ten books have their subject as a focus on the Roman Empire, while another two are with respect to the Second World War.

I also can’t invoke capable prose style in my introduction without noting my preference for a good or even literary prose style in my books of history – some historians or historical writers are definitely better than others.

So here are my top ten books of history. You know the rules – this is one of my deep dive top tens, counting down from tenth to first place and looking at individual entries in some depth or detail of themselves. Tenth place is my wildcard entry for the best entry from the previous year (2023).

But wait – there’s more! The subject is prolific enough for my usual twenty special mentions per top ten and for honorable mentions beyond that.

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Films (Complete Top 10)

Posted on by

 

Exactly what it says on the tin – my top ten films.

 

Well, perhaps not quite exactly as these are my top ten non-‘genre’ films – that is, excluding ‘genre’ films such as fantasy or SF films, animated films, films adapted from comics, and horror films, all of which have their own top tens. I also rank comedy films in their own top ten.

 

That said, quite a few of my non-genre films have fantasy or SF elements, just not predominantly so to rank them within the genre – but I will have a special section in each entry to note fantasy or SF elements. Also, almost every film has comedic elements or at least the odd gag – after all, one could classify almost every narrative work by the comedy-tragedy dichotomy of classical Greek drama – so I will also have a special section for comedy in each entry.

 

And yes – I know animation is more a medium than its own genre, although animated films are predominantly fantasy or SF genre. The same goes for films adapted from comics, although that depends on the genre of comic.

 

And no – despite my feature image being the poster for Citizen Kane, “frequently cited as the greatest film ever made”, it is not in my top ten, although I suppose that fortuitously avoids spoiling any entry. While I have seen it, found it engaging enough, and acknowledge its innovative technical brilliance…sadly I tend towards the view of the film expressed by Peter Griffin in The Family Guy, albeit I wouldn’t go quite so far as he did. (In one of its signature cutaway gags, Peter has been banned from the video stores for taping over their movies. In the case of Citizen Kane, he tapes over it to say “It was his sled from when he was a kid. There, I just saved you two long, boobless hours”).

 

It could be worse. It could be Peter Griffin’s opinion of The Godfather – he didn’t care for it, as “it insists upon itself”.

 

Anyway, here are my Top 10 Films, compiled in one post (and page) from their previous individual entries. 

 

 

Theatrical release poster art

 

(10) DAVID LEITCH –

THE FALL GUY (2024)

 

My wildcard tenth place entry for best non-genre film for 2024 goes to The Fall Guy, the most fun I’ve had in a cinema this year so far. And what’s not to love about a movie filmed and set in Australia? (Sydney in case you were wondering).

 

Just like Bullet Train did before it in 2022 as another film directed by David Leitch – and I wouldn’t be surprised if Leitch manages to keep doing it. Bullet Train was probably quirkier fun that The Fall Guy but the latter has a broader and more easy-going charm.

 

Leitch just makes fun popcorn-munching films with standout action set pieces, not surprisingly from his background as a stunt performer – including as stunt double for Brad Pitt (who starred as the protagonist in Bullet Train).

 

His (uncredited) directorial debut was a little film in 2014 called John Wick. He followed that up with Atomic Blonde and its gritty action scenes revolving around Charlize Theron as protagonist – which with Bullet Train and The Fall Guy would comprise my holy trinity of Leitch films to date.

 

Yes – I love John Wick but it’s not pure Leitch as he was co-director with the credited director Chad Stehelski. He also directed Deadpool 2 and Hobbs & Shaw but they’re not quite in the same league as the trinity.

 

As for The Fall Guy, what more do you need to know than it broke a Guiness World Record for the most cannon rolls in a car?

 

Okay, okay – perhaps a little more but it’s clearly Leitch directing “a love letter to stunts” in tribute to his former career, using practical stunts in highly choreographed action sequences and a nice nod to just what goes into bringing an action sequence to the screen. For the record – and I’m sure it’s part of the film’s joke – the film within the film looks as if it would be terrible and cheesily over the top.

 

Beyond that it’s an action-comedy film like its predecessor Bullet Train, but in its case loosely based on the 1980s TV series about stunt performers (so keep an eye out for those cameos from the series). Ryan Gosling is his usual charismatic self as the stuntman protagonist “working on his ex-girlfriend’s (Emily Blunt) directorial debut action film, only to find caught up in a conspiracy involving the film’s lead actor” – played by Bullet Train alumni (and future James Bond) Aaron Taylor-Johnson.

 

And it’s hoot, even if (or perhaps especially as) the plot veers into the usual absurdity of action films.

 

 

FANTASY & SF

 

I suppose you could count the film within the film – an SF film of alien war or invasion. However – few fantasy or SF elements in the film itself unless you count drug hallucinations or the suspension of disbelief from just how absurd the plot gets.

 

COMEDY

 

Definitely comedic elements – so much so that you could probably rank it as a comedy, but I feel the action looms larger, particularly in those exquisitely choreographed and crafted stunts.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****
X-TIER (WILD TIER)

 

Theatrical release poster

 

(9) ROBERT EGGERS –

THE NORTHMAN (2022)

 

“I will avenge you, father. I will save you, mother. I will kill you, Fjolnir”.

 

Well, two out of three ain’t bad.

 

A retelling of the legend of Amleth – the source for Shakespeare’s Hamlet.

 

If there’s one thing director Robert Eggers is known for, it’s for making mythic worlds – films that utterly and viscerally immerse their audience into the world of their stories, characteristically with “their central elements of mythology and folklore”, down to the finest detail.

 

He did it with The Witch and he did it here – with Anya Taylor-Joy as a common denominator between them and I have a thing for those fey eyes of hers. He does it better in The Northman – for one thing he has more mythic elements to play with from Norse mythology (and European magic) and for another he improves upon the more ponderous pacing of The Witch, arguably a side effect of his world-immersion but one keeps much tighter here.

 

His work is pretty impressive as he only has three films under his belt – with a fourth film upcoming in 2024, his passion projecy Nosferatu. (I skipped The Lighthouse, his second film between The Witch and The Northman).

 

I can’t mention Anya Taylor-Joy without mentioning Alexander Skarsgard as the titular Northman, an actor born to play a berserker if ever there was one – and that continuous tracking shot of him through an attack on a village is a thing to behold. (Heh – berserking is in the eye of the beholder).

 

And if we’re to mention standout scenes – there’s my personal standout scene(s) of the Valkyrie and her otherworldly ferocity, even if people mistook her filed teeth for braces.

 

I can’t resist wrapping up with this quote by reviewer David Ehrlich for Indiewire, calling the film “primal, sinewy, gnarly-as-f*ck” and “grab-you-by-the-throat intense”.

 

 

FANTASY & SF

 

And how! The mythic elements – reflecting the worldview of its characters – loom so large the film borders on fantasy, including that final volcanic surreal showdown.

 

COMEDY

 

Eggers…isn’t big on comedic elements. So, no – or few and far between.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

 

From the films’ theatrical release poster

 

 

(8) GARETH EVANS –

THE RAID (2011)

100 minutes of awesomeness in a frenetic, claustrophobic martial arts action masterpiece – the martial arts being the Indonesian pencak silat that is showcased by the film’s fight choreography and the claustrophobic being the film’s premise.

That premise being an Indonesian police squad deployed to raid a drug lord’s apartment block in the sums of Jakarta – actually a fortress-like safe house for the city’s worst criminals – only to find themselves forced to fight their way through the complex to carry out their mission or just to survive long enough to escape.

“Good morning, everyone. You may have noticed we have some guests trawling the halls today. Now, I certainly did not invite them and they most certainly are not welcome. So, in the interests of public health, should you rid this building of its recent infestation, well, then, you can consider yourself a permanent resident of this building. Free of charge. You’ll find these f*cking cockroaches on the sixth floor. Now, go to work. And please, please enjoy yourself.”

And yes – it was the same premise that was (independently) used to similarly great effect in the 2012 Dredd film.

And ever since, I’ve enjoyed whenever The Raid pops up in one form or another – most obviously in its 2014 sequel, which maintained the frenetic action of the first. You know you’re in for glorious action when the climax of the film is preceded by a character telling its action hero that the only way to solve his problems is to kill all of the parties responsible. My personal highlight of the sequel was the assassin duo dubbed Hammer Girl and Baseball Bat Man.

I also get excited whenever I see what I call the Raid guys – primarily Iko Suwais and ‘Mad Dog’ Yahan Ruhian – in a film. Even when they were disappointingly wasted in The Force Awakens. Fortunately, John Wick Chapter 3 made up for that.

I’m also counting it as The Raid popping up for any film by the same director Gareth Evans – which admittedly has only been one film after the two Raid films so far, albeit the decent folk horror flick Apostle.

 

FANTASY & SF

No, except to the extent that the intense fighting skill and survival of characters borders on supernatural.

 

COMEDY

Again, not really any comedic elements, except occasionally of the blacker kind

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

 

One of the best movie poster images (for John Wick 2)

 

(7) JOHN WICK (2014 – PRESENT)

 

 “Yeah, I’m thinking I’m back”

 

You sure are, John Wick, you sure are. You too, Keanu.

 

The best action franchise of the twenty-first century. There – I said it. Also one of the best roaring rampages of revenge and one-man armies on screen. Also some of the best poster designs.

 

I also dig the whole assassin mystique and mythos it’s got going, with its intricate rituals and rules, implausible as it all is – the implausibility just makes it more mythic! The Continental, the High Table, and so on. Although I suspect real hitmen are a lot less glamorous and a lot more seedy.

 

“Neo-noir action thriller franchise…set in a shadowy world of assassins and criminals”. I can’t resist quoting TV Tropes that “the films can be best described as what happens when Neo is reimagined in the real world as the deadliest assassin alive”.

 

It has been hailed as reviving the flagging action genre, not least due to its “choreographed sequences and practical effects that were filmed in long takes” – none of that quick cut shaky-cam crap. Also lots of gunplay and headshots – not that John needs a gun to kill anyone. A book, a pencil, a horse – anything will do.

 

This entry represents the franchise as whole – four films deep and spinoffs as at 2024 – but if I have to choose one, it would have to be the 2014 original film for the franchise at its freshest, albeit Chapter Four comes close in the sequels.

 

FANTASY & SF

 

That assassin mystique and mythos borders on fantasy, while John Wick’s skill and survivability borders on supernatural ability (as do the action sequences in general).

 

COMEDY

 

Surprisingly for a film set in the underworld of assassins, it hits some black and dry comedic beats.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

 

The iconic James Bond gun barrel opening sequence

 

(6) JAMES BOND (1962 – PRESENT)

 

“Bond, James Bond”

A spy action film franchise that needs little more than its iconic protagonist’s own signature introduction.

Well, perhaps a little more introduction – James Bond codenamed 007 as British special agent of the 00 section of MI-6 (the 00 signifying licence to kill), created by Ian Fleming as protagonist of the books (and stories) that were the origin of the franchise.

There’s enough in the franchise not only for a top ten Bond films and special mentions (or alternatively a top ten worst Bond films) – twenty-seven films and counting as at 2024 – but also easily for a top ten elements or motifs of Bond mythos.

The Bond girls. The Bond villains – and their infamous flaws of monologuing (to Bond) or just not shooting Bond as opposed to convoluted death traps or schemes. (To borrow a quote from Family Guy – “Sure, you could kill me with your gun but are you willing to try something much more elaborate and unnecessary?”)

The Bond gadgets. The Bond cars. The Bond one-liners. The Bond action prologue – introduced with the Bond gun barrel sequence and concluding with the Bond title sequence (and song). The exotic Bond globetrotting. Shaken not stirred – Bond’s drinking habits and games of chance or skill. (I seem to recall that Fleming was also fond of sumptuous descriptions of Bond’s dining or food although that hasn’t been adapted as much into film).

The Bond secondary cast from MI-6 – M, Q and Moneypenny. Recurring Bond characters (or actors) in general. Bond’s allies – perhaps foremost among them his CIA contact Felix Leiter. For that matter, typically a climactic Bond action sequence with special forces allied to Bond assaulting the villain’s forces or lair – even IN SPACE!

Heck – you could just squeeze out enough James Bonds for a top ten James Bonds, with six actors having official portrayed the character and a seventh signed up. Yes – I know that leaves three short but in addition to counting Sean Connery at least twice (at least once more in addition to his original run for the unofficial Never Say Never and arguably also for Diamonds are Forever as yet another separate incarnation in the role), there’s also Barry Nelson and David Niven in different adaptations of Casino Royale.

At very least you could compile a top ten of his incredibly versatile proficiencies or skills, and for that matter his character traits or types. As per TV Tropes – “the Ace, the Charmer, the Deadpan Snarker, the Renaissance Man, the Man of Wealth and Taste, the One-Man Army, the Professional Killer, the Sociopathic Hero, the Alcoholic, the Orphan, and the man who can always find women but can never find love. Which of these traits are pushed to the forefront will depend on the tone of the movie in question.”

And that’s not to mention all the inspirations for and adaptations, imitations or parodies of the character, enough for their own top ten (and more) – in turn reflecting Bond himself “having become one of the most iconic and quintessential action heroes in fiction”, founding the “tuxedo and martini subgenre” while defining “most of modern spy fiction and much of the action genre”.

Dare I describe the Bond film franchise as the Roman Empire of film franchises, with its various rises and resurgences or declines and falls?

Playing with that, the first Sean Connery films would be the classical empire of the first and second centuries – at its archetypal height but not without its excesses.

George Lazenby (and Diamonds are Forever) might be likened to Rome in crisis after its classical zenith, although this is unfair not only to Lazenby’s performance but even more so his film On His Majesty’s Secret Service – which is a fine Bond film, with some of the finest elements of any Bond film. (Its Bond girl for one thing and its banging theme tune for another).

The early Roger Moore films would be the resurgent later empire after the crisis of the third century, before devolving into the campy later Roger Moore films in the decline and fall of that half of the franchise. Timothy Dalton and the early Pierce Brosnan films might be likened to the eastern empire, a little rough around the edges to start after the fall of the Moore franchise before their own resurgence – but collapsing with the later Brosnan films on a camp scale almost to the point of the later Moore films.

The Daniel Craig films would be the eastern empire bouncing back to its medieval heights, with a blunter and tougher protagonist (Bond the Bulgar Slayer, anyone?) before crumbling in turn.

Which brings me to the question of which Bond film to choose, if I have to choose one film above all others in this entry – it was a close call with Casino Royale, but I’d have to go with Goldfinger as the archetypal or definitive Bond film. Even if, much like Indiana Jones in the Raiders of the Lost Ark film, Bond doesn’t actually do anything in it to achieve the final result.

 

FANTASY & SF

 

No fantasy in Bond – other than the obvious lifestyle or wish fulfilment fantasy of its protagonist for Fleming and countless male fans since.

However, it does verge into SF territory in its technothriller edges – perhaps most notably in the Bond space adventures of You Only Live Twice and Moonraker

 

COMEDY

 

Do I need to mention those Bond one-liners again? Although the James Bond film franchise has always walked the line between its more serious dramatic elements and tendencies to camp humor bordering on self-parody – falling over that line in the later Moore and later Brosnan films.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

 

Bruce Lee in his iconic pose from Enter the Dragon

 

(5) BRUCE LEE –

ENTER THE DRAGON (1973)

 

“Don’t think. Feel.”

The iconic martial arts action film by the iconic martial arts action film star.

And yes – the film may be somewhat cheesy at points, albeit not more so than other films in the 70s and which may also owe something to how much this film has blurred together with its superb parody A Fistful of Yen in the 1977 comedy sketch film Kentucky Fried Movie deep within my psyche. (The other thing deeply embedded in my psyche from that film is the sketch Catholic High School Girls in Trouble – “never has the beauty of the sexual act been so crassly exploited”).

But it is glorious, showcasing Bruce Lee – “the quintessential martial arts film star, particularly for action films set in contemporary times, a breakthrough star for Asian actors in Hollywood and widely considered one of the most influential martial artists of the 20th century”.

So deeply has it embedded itself in my psyche that it has fostered a love of martial arts action films ever since – which I then consciously or subconsciously compare to Enter the Dragon. And for that matter a love of martial arts film stars ever since, particularly east Asian martial arts film stars. Indeed, this entry is intended to be representative of martial arts action films (and film stars) in general.

As per TV Tropes, it is the martial arts action trope codifier – “since this movie, almost every other work of martial arts tournament fiction has borrowed from Enter The Dragon, particularly its usage of the main hero seeking revenge against the Big Bad in a fighting tournament in a faraway exotic location full of colorful villains and other supporting heroes with their own personal motives for entering”.

Of course, the whole concept of the martial arts tournament doesn’t hold up too well as a vanity project by a criminal organization – given the potential for exposing and jeopardizing the organization, at least to the very infiltration that is the plot of the film.

Nor for that matter does a criminal organization relying on training masses of minions in martial arts – another visually iconic element of martial arts films, moving and shouting in unison – instead of, you know, guns.

Finally, I have to give a chef’s kiss to yet another iconic element of martial arts films codified – the climactic showdown between protagonist and antagonist, strikingly displayed here in a mirrored maze.

 

FANTASY & SF

Not really here, but there’s always been a fine line between martial arts action films and fantasy in the mystical skill (or visions) of combatants – something which things like wuxia films and animated or anime series cross over. Not to mention the space Shaolin monks of Star Wars…

 

COMEDY

It has its comedic elements, albeit not as prominent as other martial arts action films – notably those of Jackie Chan (who had a minor role in Enter the Dragon). It certainly has its comedic elements after you’ve seen A Fistful of Yen – such that you’ll never watch it in quite the same straight-faced fashion again – and it has been repeatedly parodied elsewhere.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

 

Perhaps the most iconic image of Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry

 

(4) CLINT EASTWOOD –

THE MAN WITH NO NAME & DIRTY HARRY (1961-1966 & 1971-1988)

 

Ask yourself a question: “do I feel lucky?” Well, do you, punk?

You had me at Clint Eastwood.

No, seriously – I could just stop there, with one of the foremost icons of screen masculinity.

As per TV Tropes in rating him the trope Rated M for Manly – “The 6’4, gravel-voiced, ultra-macho action star Clint Eastwood is one of the most enduring cultural icons of masculinity in the history of American cinema and beyond.”

Although my quip for his vocal delivery is one of whispered menace. The above description also omits his signature steely gaze or glare – the latter lending itself to TV Tropes coining the trope Clint squint. Not to mention a certain wiry quality to him, even grizzled, if not both.

However, it doesn’t stop there. There are his two most iconic characters, who also happen to be two of the most iconic characters in cinema – the Man with No Name from the so-called Dollars Trilogy or even The Man with No Name Trilogy, most famously the third film of the trilogy, and Dirty Harry.

Again as per TV Tropes, Eastwood is “most famous for portraying tough-as-nails gunslingers who speak very little, and make each word (and bullet) count. The two most famous roles of this kind are Dirty Harry, and the Man With No Name in Sergio Leone’s Dollar’s Trilogy.”

The Man with No Name came first – in the cinematic trilogy of Westerns directed by Sergio Leone, labelled as the subgenre of Spaghetti Westerns because they were produced by Italian film studios and Italian directors in the case of Leone. The trilogy itself consists of A Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More, and the best (as well as most famous) of them, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

Of course, the Man with No Name has a name in each film – Joe, Manco, and Blondie respectively – but they are nicknames given him by other characters. There is only a loose continuity, if any, between each film, such that it’s not clear that he’s even the same character. I prefer to think of each film as more within a mythology than a continuity – and the Man with No Name a different incarnation of a mythic character in each film.

And that mythic character – the lone gunman, with “his aloof nature, questionable motives, and his mysterious past”, not to mention his laconic persona.

“There are two kinds of people in this world – those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig”.

Personally, I’d say that Eastwood played the type in almost all his Western roles – he was the Man with No Name even when his character was named, from Pale Rider through to Unforgiven. And I am here for each and every one of them.

But I am here for his Dirty Harry over and above his Man with No Name. In part, that is due to the eclipse of the Western as a film genre, although I would argue that most films are essentially Westerns in all but setting, as reflected by the Dirty Harry films themselves with its anti-hero gunslinger protagonist transferred from the Wild West to the urban landscape (which, being San Francisco is still in the geographic American West).

Or as TV Tropes labels the character type, the Cowboy Cop – “a blunt, cynical, “the buck stops here” kind of law enforcer who’s constantly at odds with his indifferent, incompetent, strictly-by-the-book superiors”.

And, I would argue, an instinct for justice as an essential character type – and one that is often at odds with (and usually played as superior to) the letter of the law.

Not to mention his most iconic character trait – well, apart from his Smith & Wesson Model 29 .44 magnum revolver (“We’re not just going to let you walk out of here.” “Who’s we, sucker?” “Smith, Wesson and me”) – his one-liners, “(like the Pre Ass Kicking One-Liner, Pre-Mortem One-Liner, or just the generic “I’m so badass”-One-Liner).” They’re so good I’m fond of adapting them to my work.

Hence TV Tropes attributes to Eastwood that “his Influence on the movie industry was such that without him (or his Dirty Harry library, to be more specific) the ‘80s would have seen about a mere fourth of the action movies it actually did see.”

Some of you may also recognize the “thematically similar'” influence of Eastwood in general and Dirty Harry in particular on someone who just happens to be my favorite comics character and protagonist of my favorite comic – Judge Dredd. Judge Dredd is essentially a futuristic Dirty Harry in a dystopian SF satire. The character was also directly modelled on Eastwood – something to which we see paid tribute in the name of Judge Dredd’s block from Eastwood’s character in the Western TV series, Rawhide – Rowdy Yates.

Which makes Dredd one of two characters from the 2000AD anthology comic modelled on Eastwood and his two iconic characters – with Strontium Dog’s Johnny Alpha as the Man with No Name to Dredd’s Dirty Harry.

So yes – if I had to choose, I would pick Dirty Harry over The Man with No Name. And if I had to choose which Dirty Harry, well the first one with that title obviously – not just for the title but also for the most compelling presentation of Dirty Harry having to break the rules to apprehend the antagonist serial killer Scorpio.

 

FANTASY & SF

Yeah – The Man with No Name and Dirty Harry are pretty solidly grounded outside fantasy or SF, although some of his Western incarnations of the type border on fantasy, particularly Pale Rider with its revenant protagonist.

 

COMEDY

Well there’s those one-liners, although I wouldn’t really describe them or the films as comedic, even if they have their dry and wry moments of black humor.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

 

Uma Thurman as the Bride in her most iconic appearance in Kill Bill – that yellow tracksuit (as well as motorcycle and helmet) a homage to that worn by Bruce Lee in his 1972 film Game of Death

 

(3) QUENTIN TARANTINO –

KILL BILL (2003-2004)

 

“When I woke up, I went on what the movie advertisements referred to as a roaring rampage of revenge. I roared. I rampaged. And I got bloody satisfaction. I’ve killed a hell of a lot of people to get to this point, but I have only one more. The last one. The one I’m driving to right now. The only one left. And when I arrive at my destination… I am gonna KILL BILL”.

Quentin Tarantino – “his films are characterized by elements including recurring actors, non-linear storylines, stylized violence, black comedy, witty dialogue oft laced with pop culture references, trunk shots, close-ups on feet, especially women’s bare feet (don’t ask), and a volume of homages and shout-outs to other movies only attainable with an absurdly encyclopedic knowledge of film history”.

In fairness to the foot fetish thing, who wouldn’t cast themselves to drink off Salma Hayek’s feet?

Also a director whom I have to love for his dedication to a top ten in his own films, having famously declared his intention to retire after ten films, although we’re still awaiting that tenth film as of 2024.

As for which Tarantino film to choose for this entry, it was a close call – particularly with the film that brought him widespread acclaim, Pulp Fiction – but as my featured quote indicates, I have to go with Kill Bill.

“Kill Bill is the fourth (and fifth) film written and directed by Quentin Tarantino, taking all his favorite things at that point in his career – westerns, samurai movies, martial arts, pop-culture references, actions girls, and bare feet – and combining them into one hell of a revenge drama”.

Or as the female protagonist best known simply as the Bride (or Black Mamba as a former member of the Deadly Viper Assassination Squad) – although her name Beatrix Kiddo is dropped in the second film – played by Uma Thurman puts it in my featured quote, a roaring rampage of revenge. Indeed, one of the finest roaring rampages of revenge – and certainly top of my top ten roaring rampages of revenge.

Also it has one of my all-time favorite lines of cinema (note to self – compile a top ten lines of cinema) from legendary sword-maker Hattori Hanzo, played by Sonny Chiba, referring to the blade he made for the Bride – “If on your journey you should encounter God, God will be cut”.

(And how! From what we see her do with it, I’d say he was right about that).

It consists of two films although I tend to follow Tarantino in his own classification of it as one film, given that it was conceived by him as such although the studio split it in two for length. Although if I had to choose between them, I’d have to go with the first film or Volume 1 for the sheer glorious frenzied action of the Bride’s fight with O-Ren Ishii and the Crazy 88 Gang. (Although you’d think that at some point, maybe just one of those Yakuza gangsters would, you know, pull a gun on the Bride).

And of course Gogo Yubari, etched deep in my psyche ever since with her portrayal by Japanese actress Chiaki Kuriyama – who also starred in cult classic Battle Royale, one of Tarantino’s favorite films.

 

FANTASY & SF

Interestingly, Tarantino has said that his films fall into one of two cinematic universes – “one being the more realistically grounded of them…and the other being a meta-fictional narrative which Tarantino says represents the kind of films the characters in his main cinematic universe would watch”, arguably with more fantastic or at least cinematic rule of cool elements. Kill Bill falls in the latter.

 

COMEDY

That signature Tarantino black comedy.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

 

“Yeah well, you know, that’s just like, uh, your opinion, man”

 

(2) COEN BROS –

THE BIG LEBOWSKI (1998)

 

The Dude abides.

Indeed, he abides in second place.  The Coen brothers – Joel and Ethan Coen – also abide as my favorite directors of film (albeit obviously not of my favorite film in top spot).

And yes – they have enough of a filmography for their own top ten films, but one that is impossible to categorize by genre or style apart from a blackly comedic and idiosyncratic quirky flair. “Their films span many genres and styles, which they frequently subvert or parody”.

While I enjoy all their films I’ve seen – even the weirder ones like Barton Fink and weaker ones like The Ladykillers – the holy trinity of their filmography for me would be The Big Lebowksi, O Brother Where Art Thou, and Intolerable Cruelty (although Fargo – film and television series – comes close).

And of these, the greatest is The Big Lebowksi – which despite a mixed reception and box office return at the time of its release – rose to cult classic status.

As TV Tropes describes, “it’s a bit hard to describe but let’s just call it a film noir parody”, albeit an affectionate one – particularly of Raymond Chandleresque noir detective stories set in L.A., with the title itself a nod to The Big Sleep.

Except of course for its Philip Marlowe protagonist, it’s slacker Jeff Lebowski – although he prefers to go by the Dude – played to perfection by Jeff Bridges. He’s not the titular Big Lebowksi however – and it’s the mix-up in identity between them that effectively gets the ball rolling on the plot. Well – that and also the Dude’s rug really tied the room together.

Again as per TV Tropes, “this being a Coen Brothers movie, though, the plot isn’t important. The driving force within the movie is the collection of various, bizarre, main and secondary (and tertiary!) characters, almost all of whom seem to come from completely different movies.”

Not least the film’s cowboy narrator, styled as The Stranger, played by Sam Elliott – giving us my featured quote, although the Dude himself takes a shine to it.

Oh – and of course, the Jesus.

But yeah well, you know, that’s just like, uh, your opinion, man.

 

FANTASY & SF

The filmography of the Coen brothers definitely dips into the fantasy genre with some of their more fantastic elements, although not enough that any of their films would be described as fantasy – particularly as those fantastic elements are more in the nature of dreams or trips, as in The Big Lebowksi

 

COMEDY

The kings of black comedy, dryly delivered.

The Big Lebowksi in particular could be outright classified as comedy.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

 

One of the most iconic scenes in the film – and in film

 

(1) APOCALYPSE NOW (1979)

 

“I love the smell of napalm in the morning…smells like victory.”

Yeah – this is the big one, the cinematic equivalent of Catch-22, lodged next to it deep within my psyche ever since seeing it (by happenstance at about the same time as reading Catch-22).

And not coincidentally, like Catch-22 also set in a war, except of course in the Vietnam war as opposed to the former’s Second World War, and similarly using the war as a backdrop for a story beyond the war itself – a satire of modern society in Catch-22 and an exploration of the human psyche on the edges of madness and beyond in Apocalypse Now.

While it is usually (and accurately) considered a war film, it is a psychological war film which could well have been set elsewhere – and indeed originally was, given that it is a very loose adaptation of Joseph Conrad’s novella Heart of Darkness from nineteenth century Africa to the Vietnam War. One might well quip that it was also a loose adaptation of the Vietnam War itself (to the American or human psyche).

Hence some of those who watch it expecting a more straightforward war or action film might be disappointed, particularly with its pacing – although I was entranced by it throughout when I first watched it, even in my adolescent days. Don’t get me wrong – it absolutely does have action scenes, indeed some of the most visually striking and iconic action scenes, hence my entrancement, but not quite in the pace or style of a contemporary action film blockbuster.

As per TV Tropes – “packed to the gills with now-iconic scenes and quotes, it is a common choice for not only the definitive anti-war movie but the definitive cinematic depiction of war not as battle, or even as purgatory but as an illogical fever dream”.

Illogical fever dream is overstating it – it has a coherent plot – but things definitely get wilder and trippier the further the protagonist and his squad go.

As for that protagonist and squad – again as per TV Tropes, “”special operations Captain Benjamin Willard (Martin Sheen) is sent to kill Walter E Kurtz (Marlon Brando), a Green Beret colonel who has gone mad and formed a personality cult in Cambodia”…Willard and his crew including George “Chief” Phillips (Albert Hall), Jay “Chef” Hicks (Frederic Forrest), Lance Johnson (Sam Bottoms) and Tryone “Mr Clean” Miller (a 14-year-old Laurence Fishburne) — go up a river and into the recesses of humanity.”

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola at the height of his career, it’s a miracle the film was even made, let alone be this good, given a trouble production that’s almost as legendarily epic as the film itself. On that point – and perhaps not surprisingly given that production history – the original cinematic edit is definitely the best. While the ‘redux’ director’s cut has points of interest, Coppola definitely got it right for its original cinematic release.

I’ll conclude with Roger Ebert’s thoughts when adding it to his list of great movies – ” “What’s great in the film, and what will make it live for many years and speak to many audiences, is what Coppola achieves on the levels Truffaut was discussing: the moments of agony and joy in making cinema. Some of those moments occur at the same time; remember again the helicopter assault and its unsettling juxtaposition of horror and exhilaration. Remember the weird beauty of the massed helicopters lifting above the trees in the long shot, and the insane power of Wagner’s music, played loudly during the attack, and you feel what Coppola was getting at: Those moments as common in life as art, when the whole huge grand mystery of the world, so terrible, so beautiful, seems to hang in the balance,,,Apocalypse Now is the best Vietnam film, one of the greatest of all films, because it pushes beyond the others, into the dark places of the soul. It is not about war so much as about how war reveals truths we would be happy never to discover.”

 

FANTASY & SF

It’s trippier moments border on some dark fantasy but no – it remains grounded in the mundane reality of our world. Or at least as mundane as the Vietnam War got.

Although it is tempting to conflate, as Kim Newman did in a short story, Coppola’s Apocalypse Now and Coppola’s Dracula film – with Harker as Willard and his crew of vampire hunters on a gunboat upriver into Transylvania…

 

COMEDY

It has its comedic elements – some of the blackest and driest in film perhaps but they are there, at least according to my sense of humor. Definitely not a comedy though.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

 

 

FILM: TOP 10 (TIER LIST)

 

S-TIER (GOD-TIER)

 

(1) APOCALYPSE NOW (1979)

(2) COEN BROS – THE BIG LEBOWSKI (1998)

(3) QUENTIN TARANTINO – KILL BILL (2003-2004)

Like Tarantino, I regard the two volumes as one film but if I have to choose – Vol1.

 

If Apocalypse Now is my Old Testament of film, The Big Lebowski and Kill Bill is my New Testament.

 

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

 

(4) CLINT EASTWOOD – THE MAN WITH NO NAME & DIRTY HARRY (1961-1966 & 1971-1988)

His two iconic roles – if I have to choose between them, I’ll go with Dirty Harry (and the first film). After all, he’s the model for Judge Dredd.

(5) BRUCE LEE – ENTER THE DRAGON (1973)

(6) JAMES BOND (1962-PRESENT)

As for which film – Goldfinger as the film that defines the franchise.

(7) JOHN WICK (2014-present)

Yes – all four films (and counting). As for which is the best among them, the fourth film comes close but the first film remains the definitive film for me.

 

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

 

(8) GARETH EVANS – THE RAID (2011-2014)

Obviously the first film is the best but I like both.

(9) ROBERT EGGERS – THE NORTHMAN (2022)

 

X-TIER (WILD TIER) – AS BEST NON-GENRE FILM OF 2024

 

(10) THE FALL GUY (2024)

 

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Films (1) Francis Ford Coppola – Apocalypse Now

Posted on by

One of the most iconic scenes in the film – and in film

 

(1) FRANCIS FORD COPPOLA –

APOCALYPSE NOW (1979)

 

“I love the smell of napalm in the morning…smells like victory.”

Yeah – this is the big one, the cinematic equivalent of Catch-22, lodged next to it deep within my psyche ever since seeing it (by happenstance at about the same time as reading Catch-22).

And not coincidentally, like Catch-22 also set in a war, except of course in the Vietnam war as opposed to the former’s Second World War, and similarly using the war as a backdrop for a story beyond the war itself – a satire of modern society in Catch-22 and an exploration of the human psyche on the edges of madness and beyond in Apocalypse Now.

While it is usually (and accurately) considered a war film, it is a psychological war film which could well have been set elsewhere – and indeed originally was, given that it is a very loose adaptation of Joseph Conrad’s novella Heart of Darkness from nineteenth century Africa to the Vietnam War. One might well quip that it was also a loose adaptation of the Vietnam War itself (to the American or human psyche).

Hence some of those who watch it expecting a more straightforward war or action film might be disappointed, particularly with its pacing – although I was entranced by it throughout when I first watched it, even in my adolescent days. Don’t get me wrong – it absolutely does have action scenes, indeed some of the most visually striking and iconic action scenes, hence my entrancement, but not quite in the pace or style of a contemporary action film blockbuster.

As per TV Tropes – “packed to the gills with now-iconic scenes and quotes, it is a common choice for not only the definitive anti-war movie but the definitive cinematic depiction of war not as battle, or even as purgatory but as an illogical fever dream”.

Illogical fever dream is overstating it – it has a coherent plot – but things definitely get wilder and trippier the further the protagonist and his squad go.

As for that protagonist and squad – again as per TV Tropes, “”special operations Captain Benjamin Willard (Martin Sheen) is sent to kill Walter E Kurtz (Marlon Brando), a Green Beret colonel who has gone mad and formed a personality cult in Cambodia”…Willard and his crew including George “Chief” Phillips (Albert Hall), Jay “Chef” Hicks (Frederic Forrest), Lance Johnson (Sam Bottoms) and Tryone “Mr Clean” Miller (a 14-year-old Laurence Fishburne) — go up a river and into the recesses of humanity.”

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola at the height of his career, it’s a miracle the film was even made, let alone be this good, given a trouble production that’s almost as legendarily epic as the film itself. On that point – and perhaps not surprisingly given that production history – the original cinematic edit is definitely the best. While the ‘redux’ director’s cut has points of interest, Coppola definitely got it right for its original cinematic release.

I’ll conclude with Roger Ebert’s thoughts when adding it to his list of great movies – ” “What’s great in the film, and what will make it live for many years and speak to many audiences, is what Coppola achieves on the levels Truffaut was discussing: the moments of agony and joy in making cinema. Some of those moments occur at the same time; remember again the helicopter assault and its unsettling juxtaposition of horror and exhilaration. Remember the weird beauty of the massed helicopters lifting above the trees in the long shot, and the insane power of Wagner’s music, played loudly during the attack, and you feel what Coppola was getting at: Those moments as common in life as art, when the whole huge grand mystery of the world, so terrible, so beautiful, seems to hang in the balance,,,Apocalypse Now is the best Vietnam film, one of the greatest of all films, because it pushes beyond the others, into the dark places of the soul. It is not about war so much as about how war reveals truths we would be happy never to discover.”

 

FANTASY & SF

It’s trippier moments border on some dark fantasy but no – it remains grounded in the mundane reality of our world. Or at least as mundane as the Vietnam War got.

Although it is tempting to conflate, as Kim Newman did in a short story, Coppola’s Apocalypse Now and Coppola’s Dracula film – with Harker as Willard and his crew of vampire hunters on a gunboat upriver into Transylvania…

 

COMEDY

It has its comedic elements – some of the blackest and driest in film perhaps but they are there, at least according to my sense of humor. Definitely not a comedy though.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

 

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Films (2) Coen Brothers – The Big Lebowski

Posted on by

“Yeah well, you know, that’s just like, uh, your opinion, man”

 

(2) COEN BROS –

THE BIG LEBOWSKI (1998)

 

The Dude abides.

Indeed, he abides in second place.  The Coen brothers – Joel and Ethan Coen – also abide as my favorite directors of film (albeit obviously not of my favorite film in top spot).

And yes – they have enough of a filmography for their own top ten films, but one that is impossible to categorize by genre or style apart from a blackly comedic and idiosyncratic quirky flair. “Their films span many genres and styles, which they frequently subvert or parody”.

While I enjoy all their films I’ve seen – even the weirder ones like Barton Fink and weaker ones like The Ladykillers – the holy trinity of their filmography for me would be The Big Lebowksi, O Brother Where Art Thou, and Intolerable Cruelty (although Fargo – film and television series – comes close).

And of these, the greatest is The Big Lebowksi – which despite a mixed reception and box office return at the time of its release – rose to cult classic status.

As TV Tropes describes, “it’s a bit hard to describe but let’s just call it a film noir parody”, albeit an affectionate one – particularly of Raymond Chandleresque noir detective stories set in L.A., with the title itself a nod to The Big Sleep.

Except of course for its Philip Marlowe protagonist, it’s slacker Jeff Lebowski – although he prefers to go by the Dude – played to perfection by Jeff Bridges. He’s not the titular Big Lebowksi however – and it’s the mix-up in identity between them that effectively gets the ball rolling on the plot. Well – that and also the Dude’s rug really tied the room together.

Again as per TV Tropes, “this being a Coen Brothers movie, though, the plot isn’t important. The driving force within the movie is the collection of various, bizarre, main and secondary (and tertiary!) characters, almost all of whom seem to come from completely different movies.”

Not least the film’s cowboy narrator, styled as The Stranger, played by Sam Elliott – giving us my featured quote, although the Dude himself takes a shine to it.

Oh – and of course, the Jesus.

But yeah well, you know, that’s just like, uh, your opinion, man.

 

FANTASY & SF

The filmography of the Coen brothers definitely dips into the fantasy genre with some of their more fantastic elements, although not enough that any of their films would be described as fantasy – particularly as those fantastic elements are more in the nature of dreams or trips, as in The Big Lebowksi

 

COMEDY

The kings of black comedy, dryly delivered.

The Big Lebowksi in particular could be outright classified as comedy.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Films (3) Quentin Tarantino – Kill Bill

Posted on by

Uma Thurman as the Bride in her most iconic appearance in Kill Bill – that yellow tracksuit (as well as motorcycle and helmet) a homage to that worn by Bruce Lee in his 1972 film Game of Death

 

(3) QUENTIN TARANTINO –

KILL BILL (2003-2004)

 

“When I woke up, I went on what the movie advertisements referred to as a roaring rampage of revenge. I roared. I rampaged. And I got bloody satisfaction. I’ve killed a hell of a lot of people to get to this point, but I have only one more. The last one. The one I’m driving to right now. The only one left. And when I arrive at my destination… I am gonna KILL BILL”.

Quentin Tarantino – “his films are characterized by elements including recurring actors, non-linear storylines, stylized violence, black comedy, witty dialogue oft laced with pop culture references, trunk shots, close-ups on feet, especially women’s bare feet (don’t ask), and a volume of homages and shout-outs to other movies only attainable with an absurdly encyclopedic knowledge of film history”.

In fairness to the foot fetish thing, who wouldn’t cast themselves to drink off Salma Hayek’s feet?

Also a director whom I have to love for his dedication to a top ten in his own films, having famously declared his intention to retire after ten films, although we’re still awaiting that tenth film as of 2024.

As for which Tarantino film to choose for this entry, it was a close call – particularly with the film that brought him widespread acclaim, Pulp Fiction – but as my featured quote indicates, I have to go with Kill Bill.

“Kill Bill is the fourth (and fifth) film written and directed by Quentin Tarantino, taking all his favorite things at that point in his career – westerns, samurai movies, martial arts, pop-culture references, actions girls, and bare feet – and combining them into one hell of a revenge drama”.

Or as the female protagonist best known simply as the Bride (or Black Mamba as a former member of the Deadly Viper Assassination Squad) – although her name Beatrix Kiddo is dropped in the second film – played by Uma Thurman puts it in my featured quote, a roaring rampage of revenge. Indeed, one of the finest roaring rampages of revenge – and certainly top of my top ten roaring rampages of revenge.

Also it has one of my all-time favorite lines of cinema (note to self – compile a top ten lines of cinema) from legendary sword-maker Hattori Hanzo, played by Sonny Chiba, referring to the blade he made for the Bride – “If on your journey you should encounter God, God will be cut”.

(And how! From what we see her do with it, I’d say he was right about that).

It consists of two films although I tend to follow Tarantino in his own classification of it as one film, given that it was conceived by him as such although the studio split it in two for length. Although if I had to choose between them, I’d have to go with the first film or Volume 1 for the sheer glorious frenzied action of the Bride’s fight with O-Ren Ishii and the Crazy 88 Gang. (Although you’d think that at some point, maybe just one of those Yakuza gangsters would, you know, pull a gun on the Bride).

And of course Gogo Yubari, etched deep in my psyche ever since with her portrayal by Japanese actress Chiaki Kuriyama – who also starred in cult classic Battle Royale, one of Tarantino’s favorite films.

 

FANTASY & SF

Interestingly, Tarantino has said that his films fall into one of two cinematic universes – “one being the more realistically grounded of them…and the other being a meta-fictional narrative which Tarantino says represents the kind of films the characters in his main cinematic universe would watch”, arguably with more fantastic or at least cinematic rule of cool elements. Kill Bill falls in the latter.

 

COMEDY

That signature Tarantino black comedy.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)