Movies are so dependent on context: time relavent to the state of the art, relvant to personal life experiences, relevant to the world state of affairs. In my life half odf these movies were earth shattering and molded certain likes and directions I took. Without personal context they may seem laughable, but films are the dominant art form of the 20th century and like all art, are intended to produce very personal reactions.

Obviously not a movie-watching crowd here. Not only have I seen 8 of these films, half of those are actually some of my favorites. Stick to “Dirty Dancing” and reality TV, it’s not too taxing on your brain.

I can get behind most of these, but “Blade Runner?” Really? Really really? No way. That’s a must see.

i suspect a lot of “how could you!” and “but why!?” in these comments. Articles like this anger up the blood of the internets. And kudos to you all for having the stones to post this.

I can recognize the brilliance in Space Odyssey and Blade Runner but I also fell asleep to them both. That tracking shot from Weekend is the bomb tho.

I think there could have been much better choices on this list. A few of these (Fantasia especially) are still interesting for audiences with specific tastes. Abstract and/or dynamic animation set to great classical music? Yes please. For other good suggestions, here’s a list where about 30 of the listed films are hard to get through: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFI's_100_Years…100_Movies_(10th_Anniversary_Edition)

I first discovered Seventh Seal on public TV when I was 18 or so (I’m 50 now). Far from its somber reputation, it’s a surprisingly funny mix of drama (the knight’s attempts to do one last meaningful thing before he dies) and comedy (the subplot of the blacksmith and his randy wife, and Jons’s sardonic asides throughout the movie). Any reviewer who can’t follow the plot or tell Jons (pronounced ‘Yons’) from Jof (pronounced (‘Yofe’) is a dimbulb.

I’d say Blade Runner is still amazing – Rutger Hauer, Vangelis, and those beautiful landscapes – it’s a must see. The movie actually tops Philip K. Dick’s book, which is something that rarely happens. So is 2001 – though Arthur C. Clarke’s novel is a bit more engaging than Kubrick’s movie. I wouldn’t have put them on the list.

Tarkovsky’s Stalker, though…

This simply appears to be a list written by someone with a very short attention span who is desperate to appear controversial. Sad really.

I agree with most of your picks (except for Seventh Seal – death plays chess! genius). I’m a film student who has had Citizen Kane shoved down my throat for years. Blasphemous as it may be, I agree visually it was a masterpiece but story wise, I snoozed. Films are made in context but some that are great bypass the times and are still great.

I agree with all the pans except Bladerunner, which is fun and sexy.Come on. And I have seen all these pics so I get to have an opinion.

I can appreciate this list and agree on some points. I disagree, however, that this makes viewing these films not worth one’s while. Should we not appreciate paint and canvas art because we can create far more advanced renderings using CGI? Of course not. Watch the films and make your own conclusions instead of reading someone’s list and quoting it to sound smart.

Every movie on this list except A BIRTH OF A NATION is shorter than a football game. So complaining about movie length is false.
Some of your points are valid, but BLADE RUNNER? Your analysis was way off. Not only do the effects stand up, they’re generally accepted as the best special effects in the history of cinema. Its tinkering has everything to do with the studio pressure and not Ridley Scott, the story is as easy to follow as any detective crime movie, and the acting is great. The fact that its influence is felt in EVERY sci-fi movie made since demands that one has to see it.
The fact that you were turned off by this movie says more about you than it says about the movie.

You shoot yourself in the foot with the opening sentence of the 2001 paragraph. If the villain is truly unforgettable why would it be a movie you don’t really have to see? That’s like saying you don’t really need to see the Dark Knight but Heath Ledger is one of the greatest comic book villains ever. And that’s a pretty bold claim that after Strangelove Kubrick forgot how to tell a story. I’d say A Clockwork Orange tells a pretty good story. As does the Shining.

In defense of Easy Rider. Still brilliant and entertaining.Narrow minded for you to say otherwise. There goes the golden age.

I would also say that these are films that are very important to see. This set of classifications is about as imaginative as Flavorpill’s assertion that Kerouac’s bald-spot was noteworthy literary coif (5/10/11). Some of the best film-going experiences I’ve had, watching films from the above list in a theater and on celluloid. Then again, the HD projection of Blade Runner at the Ziegfeld blew my mind; was far better than the film print at Sunshine that I saw.

This writer is a truly disappointing picture of what is wrong with many Gen X and Y-ers today. To truly understand a classic, you should learn to enjoy or at least appreciate it in full.

I would argue that a list of this type belongs on TMZ or PopEater, rather than on a site that purports “Cultural News and Critique.” You make me feel as though I were a snob for liking most of these movies, not to mention, my favorite director. It’s preposterous that you are promoting that people not watch certain movies. It would be acceptable for you to say that ignoring these movies because you are not interested in them doesn’t make you an idiot. Because that is a fact. Lying about seeing movies is stupid because it is apparent when people do that and it makes discussion a pointless and masturbatory exercise.

It would also be acceptable that you argue that these movies are not influential, or important, etc; that would be critique. Instead, you are actually pointing out their relevance, why they are culturally significant, and how influential they have been on subsequent films. This doesn’t make any sense to me, then, why you are advocating not watching the movies. If I hadn’t seen these, I would want to go watch them because you are reinforcing their significance as per the title of the article. Fact is that you don’t really have to see any movies at all.

You should be promoting and/or critiqueing cultural production, like films. Ignorance is doing pretty well for itself and doesn’t need you to spread its seed. I suppose this means I’m not your target audience.

Ah, the 21st century, welcome to short-attention span theatre. I have been teaching film production, history and criticism for over 30 years and yes, there are some films that can become tedious. The major syndrome I have noticed over the past 10 years or so is that too many students can’t stand to watch anything over what a music video runs and forget black and white. Something else that has been bothering me is so many people watching film on portable devices, there is no way one can experience a film on an iphone or ipad. Even when I watch them at home on a 100 inch screen, I feel cheated from enjoying the full cinema experience. I love technology, but small screens are just stupid and not in a good way!

Blade Runner is one of the best films of all time, period. It’s gorgeous, endlessly watchable and endlessly mine-able for fashion tips, I mean come on.

EVERYBODY must see Blade Runner!!!!

This article treats films like reality TV. The reality is that if people took the time to see these films they might learn something about the world and themselves.

Terrible article – Is there no editor on duty? Where’s quality control – out to lunch? The premis of this piece makes no sense… People, go watch these movies and decide for yourselves… I’m sure a few I haven’t seen are boring but I just can’t take this author seriously enough to follow ANY of his recommendations… Sorry, dude – Try again…

Wow, really?! ‘Blade runner’, ‘The seventh seal’, ‘Easy rider’, ’2001: Space odyssey’ significantly influenced my taste in movies when I was an art student. ‘Triumph of the will’ and ‘The birth of a nation’ are controversial but very interesting to see not only for those who are interested in history. Not all movies should be easy and sexy. I understand that the author of the post expresses his own opinion but it would be a waste not to see movies he listed.

largely, i agree that many of these films are more “medicinal” than “pleasurable” experiences, i.e. good for you to see, though not necessarily fun to sit thru. certainly that is true of “triumph of the will” and, for my money, “easy rider” too. i would agree with you about “blade runner” if you limited yrself to the original theatrical release: ford’s voice over all but ruins the movie. the director’s cut, sans voice over, that i saw year’s later is just great, however.
i would add “gone with the wind”: what a hokey bore. without vivian leigh’s face, the movie would be unwatchable, and while every bit as racist as “birth” it lacks the latter’s sheer cinematic audacity. other add-ons: i am curious yellow, fellini’s satyricon, jules et jim, the departed

This list looks like it was put together by a 13-year with ADD.

It is true, of course, that most of these movies unfold at a pace that seems quite slow for those who are slaves to the rhythms of technology and current media. If you are the kind of person who needs to check your iPhone every 10 seconds, and can’t watch anything longer than a 12 minute Adult Swim cartoon, I’m not surprised that you would hate good films. In fact, I’m hard pressed to recall a single truly great film that doesn’t unfold rather slowly.

However, if you don’t have the attention span to appreciate good movies, why don’t you just admit the fact instead of trying to deprive viewers of some of the greatest cinematic experiences ever.

For adults with age-appropriate attention spans, Easy Rider, the Seventh Seal, Blade Runner, and 2001 are not only “must see” masterpieces, but quite entertaining to watch if you can adjust to the pacing and take your finger off the remote for a couple hours.

Also, while not “must see” films, I think both Rocky Horror and Fantasia are quite entertaining. I’ve never met anyone who didn’t find Rocky Horror entertaining. Fantasia would probably be hard to watch if you hate classical music, of course, but getting into why seemingly intelligent people have lost the ability to listen to serious music is a whole separate issue (though attention span is once again highly relevant).

The worst part of Birth of A Nation, as I understand it, is that leading up to it’s release the KKK had been on the wane. Since reconstruction these groups had been on the verge of dying out. D.W. Griffith’s magnum opus inspired and re-invigorated a whole new generation to destroy their mother’s bed sheets.

This is as self important, pretentious and unsubstantiated as any Pitchfork review I’ve ever read. Tweet that.

Suggesting that people avoid watching movies that are considered “important” because they are long or take their time to get to a perceived point; or because their visual influence having so thoroughly permeated contemporary culture now annoys you; or because you struggled to personally reconcile the political elements in a film by an overtly political filmmaker: all of these points are flimsy and dubious.

Others have already commented on the greatness of 2001, Blade Runner, and Weekend, so I won’t bother, except to encourage anyone to watch them. I would further encourage anyone who hasn’t yet seen 2001 (or those who have, and the same might as well be said for Blade Runner) to wait for any opportunity to see it on a big screen, where they can fully understand, in a larger-than-life way (versus on a small TV, computer, or iPhone screen) that brilliant filmmaking is about more than just getting from point A to B as quickly as possible.

Wow. That is one offensive little article you got there. Your “insights” into these films are narrow enough to keep me from the pages of this site forever. If you represent the tastes and attitudes of the world at large, than cinema is truly in dire straights. Shallow, narrow-minded article. It reveals far more about its author than any of the films mentioned. If anyone reading this article cares one iota about film, actually enjoys film, than go to this guy’s “Movies You Don’t Have To See” list and watch them all. Immediately. And please, enjoy.

This list reveals the ugly truth about why good movies have such a hard time getting made now. This is about as painfully (and not charmingly or ironically) philistine as it gets.

Who cares about stories? Stories are boring and overrated.

I generally love these lists, but this awful.

bladerunner but not citizen kane? which end of the crack pipe are you smoking! bladrunner is still amazing…

sometime going back and looking at a film, though painful and slow, can reveal where subsequent generations of directors and actors got there material and insider references… if you see film as a babysitting device then some of the films in your line up are tough things to sit and watch.. but blade runner… really.. I could name at least 8 woody allen films that are far more painful and idiotic to watch.

They got my attention with the comment about Fantasia, “Try sitting through the parade of abstract imagery and classical music with a kid”

My oldest was three when Fantasia was reissued and already certified hyperactive. I had never seen him sit still for more than 10 minutes at a time.

He sat there and watched the entire movie with barely a wiggle.

Note: I’ve deleted a few comments on this post that contained profanity or attacked the writer without offering anything to the conversation. If you’re offended by a movie that Jason included on his list, why not use this space to explain why you think it’s definitely worth watching as opposed to ranting?

Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie. Better in theory than actual practice.

Sorry, but Fantasia was one of my favorite movies growing up, and the scene with Mickey was always my least favorite. The best part of the movie? A Night on Bald Mountain. Gorgeous imagery and haunting music. I even got a tattoo on my arm in honor of Bald Mountain.

If I loved it as a kid I have no idea why you think it would be unpalatable to adults. It’s still easily one of my favorite films and makes for great background entertainment when I’m having guests over. You should give it another chance before labeling it the way you did.

Fantasia is epic and was way ahead of its time. The part that explains the big bang and evolution? You think Disney would be apt to make a movie like that again???

Tim Curry’s Dr. Frankenfurter fucks EVERYONE and changes the world! Great flick. Great message. Multiple thumbs up. The hole is your choice.

Allright, I completely agree on Godard’s and totally subscribe on the Rocky Horror Picture show…but with Kubrik and Ridley Scott i think you want a little off: not only the two flicks are utterly poetic in their imagery and deeply philosophical in their contents, they are also two founding pieces for modern science fiction…probably that’s not your genre, but please don’t make that blind your judgement: those two movies are just masterpieces, people like’em, and there’s nothing wrong with a dated 80s aestethic, as much as getting to tell a story without characters is a sign of talent and not a miss

Saw almost everyone of these in one of my all time favorite classes at Pratt. The only pick I agree with is “weekend”….pure torture!

Any list of movies you don’t need go see which DOESN’T include a Michelangelo Antonioni film (there are several candidates) is suspect. Clearly you haven’t done enough research.

Someone above mentioned “Fellini’s Satyricon” as a movie which should be on this list. I heartily agree. I remember that I saw it but I remember little else except that it wasn’t as interesting or sexy as I imagined. “Juliet of the Spirits” was sexier, for pete’s sake.

If you’re not brain-dead or addicted to the idea that meaningful life needs twitter and text messaging, you could find “The Seventh Seal” very engrossing. Does it require audience participation, as in sitting still and opening your mind and paying attention? Yes, but it is highly entertaining in the best sense of the word.

Others have already risen to the defense of “Blade Runner” so I won’t say more except that whoever put this movie on the list is a cretin.

This article would be laughable if it weren’t so sad. Sometimes art isn’t about “entertainment;” it’s after something deeper. On the other hand, judge for yourself whether these movies are actually entertaining–taking the author’s monosyllabic word for it is a bad idea.
Coming up next–Flavorpill’s list of classic literature that isn’t fun enough.

Blade Runner holds up today – possibly more than ever. I love showing it to people and asking them what year it came out and having them be unable to guess. And Ridley Scott’s edits were necessary to undo the damage the studio did with the ‘voice-over’ they mandated. Flavorwire articles are just one person’s opinion, no better than yours.

Oh Jason Bailey, you’ve single-handedly discredited your own list with the inclusion of Bladerunner and Easy Rider… you could not be more wrong

What were you thinking? Blade Runner should NOT be included in your lineup! It is entertaining, no matter which version you watch. It has all the elements of good drama, plenty of action, romance, and atmosphere in boatloads. Visually, it offers a stunning portrayal of a noir future. Scott’s inimitable style is tied to a very good plot, which deals with the fascinating idea of artificial intelligence. Sure, you can fault the music. But you could take any film out of its context and do the same (many people find Bernard Hermann’s scores for Hitchcock’s films overblown).

Blade Runner and 2001 are incredible movies that still hold up. For me, they even improve with age. Those two should not be on this list.

Every day I hate the world just a little bit more. Thank you, Jason Bailey, for bring me another increment closer to total bilious loathing for this brainless, ADHD corner of the planet we live on. I was feeling a little too upbeat and optimistic until I saw this list today. That was a needed corrective.

Lists designed exclusively to incite controversy (yes, like this one) are fine, I suppose, but I especially dislike ‘should’ lists — the lists that proscribe what we, the unenlightened and time-constrained, should or should not do before we drop dead. It’s often interesting to see what people’s favorite and least favorite movies are, but it’s irritating when a snarky, self-appointed expert tells you what you (the amateur) should do based on his inflated opinion.

How about this? If someone reads/hears about any one of these films and they sound appealing, then the films should be watched. If they don’t sound appealing, the shouldn’t be watched.

It’s what, in the old days, we used to call having a mind of our own, rather than merely serving as a repository for cultural detritus.

I would add a few more to this list.

Psycho – Yes, the shower scene is great, but it peaks there, the rest of the movie is pretty slow.

Aguirre, Wrath of God – I had to watch it in film school on European cinema, and it marks an important milestone in E.German cinema, but the acting is so dated, staged, and pompous that it’s distracting. The backstory behind the movie is far more interesting.

Bullitt – Made a big deal about the car chase scene and Steve McQueen as a bad-ass cop, but the movie is like a tv detective show. I kept waiting for Peter Falk to walk through.

Nooooooooooooo! 2001 and Seventh Seal are two of my favorite movies.

Yeah, this list is bogus.

[...] an outstanding mini-think piece on “boring” movies (which we totally agree with, while still standing behind this. We’re complicated!). GQ has an oral history of the making of Terrence Malick’s [...]

Woah, Blade Runner? You can’t sit through Blade Runner? I really thought Blade Runner was a much better display of Harrison Ford’s chops than Star Wars or any of his later offerings. Also, as proof that I’m not just feeling nostalgic for the film, I watched it again less than a month ago, and it still has the same punch even when you know exactly what’s going to happen next. I would call Blade Runner a “must watch” without hesitation.

As an addendum – I agree that the original theatrical release of Blade Runner is atrocious. It works much better without voiceover, and with the original-intent ambiguous ending. That’s the version I watch.

[...] or not you believe 2001: A Space Odyssey is essential viewing, it’s hard not to appreciate the [...]

[...] or not you believe 2001: A Space Odyssey is essential viewing, it’s hard not to appreciate the [...]

LOVE STORY, anyone?

BORING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you haven’t seen “2001″ in a theater rather than a home theater, you can’t imagine what all the fuss was about. See it the way it was meant to be seen, and you’ll understand why it’s regularly considered one of the greatest movies ever made, certainly the greatest and most influential SF ever. See it on a dinky little TV, and you’ll only spot glimmers of it.

And yes, the Dawn of Man sequence is carefully composed and tells a very specific story – it just does so wordlessly, and we just don’t have as much experience with movies that do this rather than “Hi, Bob! What’s news?” “Well, our tiny tribe of apeman is dying from hunger and predators, but this extraterrestrial artifact is suggesting that we learn to use tools and switch over to being carnivores.” “Oh, sounds great! Let me know how it works!”

This boils down to the age old argument that there is no accounting for taste. The problem here is that the critic fails to do his job; namely, to identify brilliance and acknowledge it as such. There’s a reason that you don’t find music critics who would argue that Mozart is someone you can pretend you’ve heard, but should really skip… it’s because time has proven that the vast majority of those who appreciate music can at least understand how fantastic and important Mozart is. If for some reason his music doesn’t resonate with you, that is squarely YOUR problem and not his, and discouraging people who look to you for advice from listening to him would make you incompetent.

The same goes for these films. I have to admit I haven’t seen Triumph of the Will, though everyone I know (whose opinion I care about) has told me it’s a must see. I have to admit that finding it on your list (with which I squarely disagree on all counts) only reinforces my desire to go see it.

You think you’re being clever here in panning these films? You think you’re a counter culturalist ?
You’re not. You’re just a self absorbed hack. Taking a page from Pacino in another film I’m sure you find boring, “You idiot! Whoever told you that you could work with men? … If you can’t think on your feet you oughta’ keep your mouth shut”

Ive seen the Seventh Seal in the past year, and it is very entertaining, not a bore. GenY viewers wont know the Cold War context for the film that informs its bleakness, but there is plenty of character development and suspense. I havent seen Triumph of the Will since college, but it is far from boring if you pause to think about what you are seeing. All those perfectly composed beautiful images unfolding in the service of Hitler’s regime. The revulsion that you feel is compounded by the realization that the same visual elements are used for every type of mass-political theatre. You might think that 21st-century society could do without such stuff, but recall how the 2008 election pivoted on a handful of Obama’s grand spectacles in Chicago and Berlin.

Like some people who’ve made comments, I agree that “Blade Runner” is an important movie, and you MUST see it. “The Seventh Seal” is another movie that I definitely think is worth watching, although I have problems with the ending. A movie doesn’t have to be entertaining, but it should be absorbing or intriguing in some way. Consequently, how can you make a list about boring movies you don’t need to see and not include “L’Avventura?”

[...] “painfully philistine,” and “a 13-year with ADD” (and that was all within one article’s comments), and last month’s anti-Eddie Murphy piece drove one reader to bypass comments altogether and [...]