Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo
Avatar
Added by johanlefourbe on 20 Dec 2019 08:42
699 Views
5
vote

1001 Movies ... my own version (1940's)

Sort by: Showing 1-50 of 79
Decade: Rating: List Type:
People who added this item 639 Average listal rating (389 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.9


Notes: To be honest, I always had a hard time to care for these old comedies, even the supposedly great ones, and this one was not an exception, I’m afraid. The point is that the plot was so fluffy, so unsubstantial, I really had a hard time to care about the whole thing. Somehow, this movie and the other classics in this genre are still considered as hilarious even today but, personally, I thought it was just amusing at best. Obviously, it is still a solid comedy though. Indeed, Cary Grant was one of the best actors at the time (at least, one of the most popular ones but I still think the guy was also great), he was very good here and he had some very good chemistry with the charming Rosalind Russell. Furthermore, even though nothing much happened during the whole thing, the dialogues were really witty and funny and they were definitely the biggest asset in this flick.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 3139 Average listal rating (1949 ratings) 7 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: Even though I was pretty sure that I saw this movie when I was a kid, when I finally re-watched it with my own children, I didn't remember much of it. For example, I was actually surprised that the most iconic trademark of Pinocchio, the fact that his nose is growing when he lies, actually shows up just once in the movie. It actually shows how powerful this tale is and how it will be forever linked to this Disney version. Indeed, after the tremendous success of 'Snow White', Disney decided to go for another well known tale and it became another major classic. What I personally enjoy the most about the whole thing, except for the amazing animation even after more than 80 years, was actually how dark the whole thing was. Indeed, back then, they were still pretty much experimenting, testing how far they could go, and they didn't develop yet their traditional formula of avoiding anything that could be possibly challenging in order to always reach the lowest common denominator. Here, you get a rather complex main character who makes some terrible decisions but this little guy was much more fascinating than the perfect princes and heroes that they would give us afterwards.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 263 Average listal rating (162 ratings) 7.4 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: Eventually, it wasn’t one of Alfred Hitchock’s most famous movies and it was definitely not one of my favorite but it was still a pretty good picture. In fact, even though the plot was taking place in Great Britain, it was Hitchock’s 2nd Hollywood feature after ‘Rebecca’ and it was in fact entirely shot in the USA. Anyway, the directing, as usual with Alfred Hitchock, was really solid and the story was entertaining enough but, to be honest, I thought it was just another spy feature, something he used to make rather often back in those days. I mean, sure, it was entertaining but it was nothing I hadn’t seen before. Maybe the fact that no big star was linked to this feature didn’t help either (in fact, Hitchcock wanted Gary Cooper to play the lead but Cooper turned down the offer) but I doubt it would have made a big difference. Anyway, even if it is not really a masterpiece, it is still a pretty good vintage spy feature though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 804 Average listal rating (506 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.9


Notes: In my opinion, there are two kinds of classics, some of them which remain untouched by time and which will always be great and amazing like ‘Citizen Kane’ , ‘M’, ‘ Rashomon’ or ‘A bout de souffle’ and the other sort which are still very well regarded but which seems rather dated like ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s’ , ‘The Wizard of Oz’ or ‘Gone with the Wind’ (Of course, it all depends what your taste is. You might find those movies still amazing and much better than the ones I mentioned before). Anyway, in my opinion, this movie belongs to the second category. Sure, it is a decent comedy with 3 amazing actors (Cary Grant, Katharine Hepburn, James Stewart) and it was quite fun but also terribly fluffy and I really had a hard time to care about the whole thing. I’ll give you that it was much better than all those inane romantic-comedies you get nowadays but I can’t say I was really blown away by this flick though. You could argue that the whole fluffiness is inherent to the genre but I don’t agree, a comedy always has to be funny but I don’t think it has to be shallow, at least, that’s my opinion. Still, it is a classic though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1511 Average listal rating (975 ratings) 8.3 IMDB Rating 8.4


Notes: To be honest, even though I enjoyed Chaplin’s later work like ‘Monsieur Verdoux’ and ‘Limelight’, I wasn’t exactly blown away by these movies. On the other hand, you won't hear me complaining about this amazing and timeless masterpiece. Where should I start? Even though it was released 13 years after the end of the silent era, this was Charles Chaplin's first all-talking, all-sound film so, in the contrary to some of his contemporaries, he didn't have much trouble with sound, that's for sure. But that's just a technicality, the damned thing is more almost 80 years old but it is still bright and shinning. I mean, the guy made this right in the middle of the WWII, making a parody of Hitler when the guy was still out there bringing his terror throughout Europe. Even the great Kubrick who made some of the most amazing features didn't ever do something similar. The only minor flaw was that there was no real plot and the whole thing was really episodic but it wasn’t a big deal. I especially loved the final scene when the barber gives his heartbreaking speech and it is easily one of my favorite scenes ever made.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1202 Average listal rating (724 ratings) 8 IMDB Rating 8.1
Rebecca (1940)


Notes: In my opinion, it is not one of Alfred Hitchcock's great masterpieces like ‘Psycho’, ‘North by Northwest’ or ‘Vertigo’ but it is still a very solid thriller nonetheless. It was actually a rather important movie in his career. Indeed, it was the first film he made in Hollywood and the only one that managed to win the Best Picture Oscar (that the guy never managed to win a Best Director Academy Award is quite mind-blowing). To be frank, I don’t think it is one of the strongest stories developed by the great master but it was greatly compensated by the awesome mood created and the very good cast. Honestly, I haven’t seen many movies starring Laurence Olivier but the guy was sure a fine actor and I will definitely check his other movies whenever I get the opportunity. Against him, you had Joan Fontaine, one of the many female stars we have seen in Hitchcock’s spellbinding thrillers. Fontaine was pretty good as well and together they had some great chemistry. Anyway, this first American feature was a success and Hitchcock's career which was doing already pretty well became even bigger, much bigger in the following years.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 2222 Average listal rating (1373 ratings) 7.5 IMDB Rating 7.8
Fantasia (1941)


Notes: I always had a weak spot for this feature. Indeed, there is one thing that always bothered me with Disney’s animated features and it is their terrible lack of originality. Basically, all their movies tend to follow the very same formulas and set of rules and even though it was fine when ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’ was released, 80 years later, it has become seriously tedious. For this reason, I always had a weak spot for this flick because, even though it is flawed, it remains one of their most original productions and only for this, it should get much more credit. Take for example the ‘Night on Bald Mountain’ sequence, it is probably one of the creepiest things ever produced by Disney and, even though parents have been complaining about this sequence for decades, I wish Disney would go more often in this direction. Still, while I was rewatching the damned thing, I was actually surprised by how little I actually remember it. Of course, you could argue that it had been more than 20 years since I saw it but I'm afraid that most of these sequences, while they were all interesting and valuable just based on their pure experimental value, were not really remarkable after all. Anyway, even though it might not be Disney’s most heralded feature, it remains a fascinating blend of classic tunes with some top-notch animation.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 85 Average listal rating (49 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.5
Hellzapoppin' (1941)


Notes: It was definitely one of the coolest movie names I have ever come across and, eventually, the damned thing turned out to be a really nice surprise after all. Indeed, it is probably one of the craziest and most freewheeling movies I have ever seen. It was apparently based on a very successful Broadway show and I can imagine how wild it must have been on stage back then. Obviously, they probably had to vastly modify this show to adapt it as a motion picture but I’m pretty sure this transition also allowed them to be really creative, at least, that’s what I would expect considering the end-result. Of course, the whole thing was really random and the endless succession of gags was also quite relentless but I was mostly entertained and even fairly impressed by the creativity displayed. In fact, they actually did include a plot involving a pretty basic love triangle. Well, to be honest, I have seen my share of classic vintage romantic-comedies with a similar plot and while many would argue that these movies are amazing, I always had a hard time to really care for them. Eventually, as far as I was concerned, I really did appreciate how they took such a typical romantic-comedy gimmick (especially back then in the 30’s and 40’s) and turned it completely upside down.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 477 Average listal rating (306 ratings) 7.3 IMDB Rating 7.4
Suspicion (1941)


Notes: Honestly, it is not one of the most famous movies directed by Hitchcock but I still enjoyed it anyway. Basically, it is one of those very old Hitchcock thrillers which still feel very modern somehow and they always keep you on the edge of your seat from the beginning until the end, at least in my case. The major attraction in my opinion was that, for once, Cary Grant played against type and he portrayed the bad guy. I mean, not only it was really unexpected but I also thought that he was just amazing, at the same time, very charming and suave as usual, but also menacing and potentially lethal. After watching this, you see that Cary Grant really had some skills and it is rather too bad that he spent most of his career usually playing the same characters (on the other hand, I’m not a huge expert on his work, so I might be mistaken). Still, aside Grant’s intriguing performance, the rest of the movie was a little too pedestrian to become truly remarkable but it was still quite enjoyable.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 2924 Average listal rating (1825 ratings) 6.9 IMDB Rating 7.2
Dumbo (1941)


Notes: This is the very first movie I have shown to my daughter, I have seen it countless times when she was just 2 or 3 years old. The funny thing about this production is that, even though 'Pinocchio' and 'Fantasia' were both critically heralded, they were also some really ambitious projects that had cost Disney a lot and they didn't turn out to be some huge box-office success like 'Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs'. So, back then, they decided to come up with something smaller and cheaper and, surprisingly, it turned out to be a hit. To be honest, I think that the scope was too limited to make it one of my favorites and, with a running time of barely 60 minutes, and the fact that Timothy Q. Mouse was just a recycled version of Jiminy Cricket, it did feel a little bit cheap. And yet, this Dumbo character was really awesome. Indeed, it showed some guts to have a title character who didn’t say a word during the whole thing and there were a couple of scenes involving him and his mother that were just amazing and quite heartbreaking to behold. Also, you won't see any time soon in a Disney feature an infant getting drunk and hallucinating afterwards and a bunch of black crowns smoking some huge cigars. On top of that, they gave us their weirdest (also one of their most awesome) musical sequence with the legendary 'pink elephants on parade'.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1216 Average listal rating (778 ratings) 8 IMDB Rating 8


Notes: To be honest, the circumstances I watched the damned thing were far from being ideal (I was really tired and the recording was seriously messed up). On top of that, this movie has the disadvantage of being already 80 years old and, by that time, I had already watched many other film noirs with or without Humphrey Bogart so I wasn’t completely blown away by the whole thing. Furthermore, it is always the same issue with this genre, the plot is terribly murky and, in fact, it never really matters which is always something that bother me a little. And, yet, it is still an awesome flick though. Indeed, it is historically quite priceless as it started the directing career of John Huston, the career of Humphrey Bogart and it pretty much launched the genre at the time. Indeed, even though Sam Spade might be the main character, he is not actually a hero, he is definitely not a nice guy and he pretty much dumps the female lead at the end without shedding a single tear. That’s the difficult thing with this flick, I have been accustomed with this archetype from the movies that came afterwards and while watching this movie, it is almost impossible to handle it as something new. Still, it is a huge classic.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 2817 Average listal rating (1737 ratings) 8.2 IMDB Rating 8.3


Notes: There always will be a debate about this movie. Some think it is indeed the best movie ever made and some will tell you it is the most overrated movie ever made. It is always the risk with such a huge classic that, if you watch it at a very young age (like I did the first time around) after building up some huge expectations, you might wonder what was the fuss all about. In my opinion, this movie is great because it is really subtle and also because it was much ahead of its time. I think it is something you can appreciate most of all if you have seen a lot of movies. Anyway, the second time I watched it, I was then able to see how modern and so well put together the whole thing was. It was simply mesmerizing. And think about it, Orson Welles was only 26 when he directed it... That's rather insane. To think that, at such a young age, this man who was much younger than me, managed to make possibly the best movie of all time. The thought is rather mind-blowing and it was also a curse for Orson Welles who always struggled as a director ever since, even though some of his following directing efforts were more than decent.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 342 Average listal rating (213 ratings) 7.5 IMDB Rating 7.7


Notes: Eventually, this movie will be mostly remembered for winning the Best Picture Academy Award at the expense of 'Citizen Kane' but I was still eager to check it out to see if it was actually any good. Well, while the reputation of 'Citizen Kane' has only increased through the years and it is usually considered by most as one of the greatest movies ever made, this movie on the other hand didn't grow old very well, I'm afraid. I can imagine that it had been a big commercial and critical success at the time when it was released but, nowadays, it seems terribly cheesy, at least, that's what I felt watching the damned thing. I mean, I have to admit that it was well made with some solid performances so it turned out to be OK but not much more than that. Sure, it was dealing with some nice and decent people but, as far as I'm concerned, I would rather have instead the complexity displayed in 'Citizen Kane'. At least, it was very neat to see the lovely Maureen O'Hara who must have been one of the most gorgeous actress ever.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 176 Average listal rating (102 ratings) 7.3 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: First of all, to be honest, I’m usually not a huge fan of such classic screwball comedies. In this case, there was also the issue that they developed the idea that, for a pretty woman like Gerry Jeffers, the best prospect was not to find an actual job to support herself but finding some rich guy who would support her. Sure, you might argue that I shouldn’t take this movie too seriously but it did make the damned thing look rather dated. And, yet, I have to admit that this movie actually worked for me. For starters, the intro was just so weird, I had no idea what this movie was actually about and I thought they were showing that would actually happen afterwards. However, the story was not about how this couple fell in love and got married. Indeed, instead, it was about how she tried to escape this marriage, not because they didn’t care for each other anymore but mostly because their marriage was a failure considering their financial and social status. Well, I have to admit that this approach was actually quite refreshing and I really enjoyed most of the jokes and most of the dialogues were just so fun and witty.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 272 Average listal rating (163 ratings) 8.1 IMDB Rating 8


Notes: To be honest, I’m usually not a huge fan of such vintage Westerns but this one actually really grabbed me. Indeed, it might seem to be a short and simple Western without much action and lots of dialogues instead. It’s too bad I saw it on YouTube without subtitles and I did struggle to follow the dialogues so I will probably re-watch it at some point. Anyway, it turned out to be some kind of Western version of ‘12 Angry Men’ and even though it probably didn’t go so deep, it was still really effective and often quite fascinating to watch. Back then, it was actually quite a controversial movie, it was even a flop when it was released but I was amazed by how relevant it still is nowadays. Indeed, our digital world is dominated by fake news which did result, in the US, with the storming of the Capitol back in 2021. Sure, we don’t lynch people anymore (at least, I hope so) but, deep inside, we are apparently still the same. At least, in this movie, at the end, they all seemed to deeply regret their actions but I think, in reality, most people always find some excuse or some way to rationalize what they do or did. Concerning Henry Fonda, I should definitely watch more of his old movies because the guy was back then so charismatic and fascinating to behold. Unsurprisingly, it was one of his favorite movies.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 374 Average listal rating (246 ratings) 7.2 IMDB Rating 7.2
Saboteur (1942)


Notes: I thought I already saw this movie but I actually got it confused with ‘Sabotage’, another thriller that Alfred Hitchcock did direct 6 years before this movie. Well, basically, it is one of his typical thrillers involving an average guy wrongfully accused of some crime and that was probably the first issue I had with this movie. Indeed, Hitchcock has done this kind of stories too many times and often way better than in this movie. Furthermore, even though Robert Cummings was not bad, he wasn’t really a strong lead either and, to be honest, I thought he was rather boring. Concerning Priscilla Lane, I just saw her a couple of days ago in ‘Arsenic and Old Lace’ and it was really neat to see this lovely actress again but, unfortunately, she didn’t have much chemistry with Robert Cummings. Eventually, I liked more the supporting characters, especially Otto Kruger who was one of the best villains I have seen in a Hitchcock picture. I was rather surprised to find out that Hitchcock was actually never really pleased with this villain though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 188 Average listal rating (104 ratings) 7.5 IMDB Rating 7.6
Mrs. Miniver (1942)


Notes: Even though it was a big critical and commercial success when it was released, to be honest, I really had a hard time to care about the damned thing after all. Indeed, even though the beginning scenes were supposed to be sweet and gentle, I thought there were just too fluffy and even borderline silly, to be honest. For example, you had this deal with the roses competition which was seriously tedious. Then, the main plot was not bad but still nothing really amazing and, on top of that, it turned out to be some massive propaganda which was rather disappointing. In my opinion, the whole thing feels terribly dated and I’m rather amazed it is still getting so much credit nowadays. At least, I have to admit it, Greer Garson and Teresa Wright were both really lovely but it was certainly not enough. Anyway, in spite of its flaws, I have to admit it, it was still a decent watch.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 2983 Average listal rating (1862 ratings) 6.9 IMDB Rating 7.3
Bambi (1942)


Notes: Back then, they spent years and a fortune to get it right. Basically, Walt Disney really wanted to make the animals look realistic but he still wanted to keep the cartoony feeling at the same time which was pretty tricky. Eventually, the end result was quite gorgeous and it is to this day still one of their most beautiful productions. Furthermore, they also managed to seamlessly combine drama and humor. Also, back in those days, they were still willing to take some risks and the iconic scene involving the death of Bambi's mother must be one of the most heartbreaking animated moments ever produced. It's too bad that this tragic event seemed to be rather quickly forgotten and the rest of the movie with a teen-aged Bambi didn’t work as well as when he was just an infant which was just pretty much enchanting. Furthermore, this movie also introduced one of their most enduring and annoying trademarks, the talking animals. To be honest, with this movie, it was ok but I still think it made the whole thing rather childish and condescending. On top of that, they would keep using this gimmick over and over again with their following production and the results would be always disappointing. However, in spite of its flaws, it is still pretty much a great achievement and another timeless classic from Disney though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 484 Average listal rating (269 ratings) 7.4 IMDB Rating 7.3
Cat People (1942)


Notes: First of all, when you watch this flick, you have to keep in mind that you are actually watching one of the first ancestors of our contemporary horror movies and it was pretty neat to see how much have changed in 70 years. Back then, there was basically no sex, no blood, in fact, to be honest, nothing much happened during the whole thing when you think about it. Pretty muck like today, they made this choice mostly because they basically had no money but it made the whole thing even more effective. There was indeed constantly this eerie atmosphere which was not really frightening but it still made me uneasy throughout the whole duration. To show the impact of this flick, you should know that the horror movie technique of slowly building tension to a jarring shock which turns out to be something completely harmless is actually called a ‘Lewton bus’ after a famous scene from this movie. How amazing is that? Anyway, even if it didn’t grow old very well, it is still a decent watch though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 370 Average listal rating (234 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.7


Notes: To be honest, it has been ages since I have seen this flick and I should definitely re-watch it at some point. Well, even though Orson Welles will always be remembered for ‘Citizen Kane’, this follow-up was actually more representative of his career. Indeed, following the tremendous success of ‘Citizen Kane’, there was a huge buzz about his next directing effort and you would have expected that the guy would receive pretty much ‘carte blanche’ but, instead, his movie was famously butchered by the studio. From then on, Welles would struggle through his whole career to get his directing projects from the ground. It was especially sad with this movie because, in spite of the studio meddling, it was actually still a very good movie and Welles for example really loved the damned thing. Eventually, it could have been a great masterpiece and you can only wonder what his career could have turned out to be if this movie had been released intact. Anyway, even in this form, I still liked this movie a lot and it is definitely worth a look.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 389 Average listal rating (246 ratings) 8.3 IMDB Rating 8.2


Notes: To be honest, usually, even though I have a lot of respect for such old classic comedies, I find most of them rather dated and they never really blow me away (a notable exception would be the greatest masterpieces directed by Charles Chaplin which are just amazing and hilarious). This movie was however an exception and I seriously enjoyed it a lot. First of all, the whole thing was actually slightly weird as the makers tried to combined seamlessly a comedy and a thriller. It was a really tricky mix but I was really amazed about how well it worked. Indeed, as a result, half of the time, I was laughing my ass off and, the rest of time, I was actually wondering if the characters were actually going to make it. The whole thing is even more impressive when you think that it was made in the middle of WWII and released just a few months after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Anyway, to conclude, even though I have usually a hard time to care about such old comedies, I thought this one was very good.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 3337 Average listal rating (2043 ratings) 8.2 IMDB Rating 8.5
Casablanca (1942)


Notes: I have actually seen this one when I was younger but I can’t say I was really blown away so I thought it was time for a re-watch, to make up my mind for good. And, indeed, I now understand why it is so loved. I mean, it still is not one of my favorites but it is sure a really solid feature which completely deserves its reputation. It is interesting to notice that nobody involved, the director, the actors, the producers thought it would be a success and it was just yet another small production which was supposed to disappear pretty quickly at the box-office. Of course, it turned out to be a huge blockbuster. Personally, I really enjoyed the look of the whole thing. Some people don’t like black and white pictures but they really don’t know what they are missing, especially these everlasting gorgeous masterpieces. Furthermore, there was this tremendous chemistry between Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman which has become a blueprint for many doomed love stories that came afterwards. The story was also pretty good, some typical film noir / spy intrigue with those always reliable bad guys, the Nazis.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: Even though it might not belong to Henri-Georges Clouzot's most prestigious movies, it was still a really solid directorial debut from the French master and I really loved the damned thing. Indeed, right from the start of his career, Clouzot became of a Master of Suspense and m, in fact, Hitchcock himself considered Clouzot to bea very serious rival. Anyway, the guy definitely displayed his thriller skills already with his first movie. Basically, it is a rather straightforward but the realistic approach and really dark tone made the damned thing quite spellbinding to behold. It's also quite impressive that he managed to make this movie during WWII when France was occupied by Nazi Germany.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 147 Average listal rating (82 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.9


Notes: To be honest, it is another movie I have seen ages ago and I should definitely re-watch at some point. Well, following his directorial debut, 'L'assassin habite au 21', Clouzot didn't waste any time and delivered another classic film noir only a year later. In fact, the damned thing was so dark, it gave such a negative of French people, that the director was initially banned for life from directing in France after WWII (Fortunately, this ban was lifted a few years later). Anyway, because it was so dark, it was actually quite spellbinding to behold, especially from a Frenchman like me. Indeed, the fact that it was made right in the middle of the WWII and that it was dealing with denunciation, something which many French people were guilty of during WWII, made the whole thing even more intriguing to behold.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: At some point, I started to watch the classics directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, especially since their movies were considered as the Golden Age of British cinema. This one was the 2nd movie they directed together and it would be their first critical and commercial hit. Well, to be honest, it actually took me a while to get into this story but it was eventually really worth it. Indeed, the whole thing turned out to be some rather fascinating study of a character with a 40 years span. I was first of all blown away by the make-up but it was also a very nuanced movie. The directing was also quite impressive and the actors were top notch. It was also rather amazing that they dared portray a German character in a postive light (It seems that Churchill hated this flick). And, yet, like most of the movies directed by these guys, even though I was able to admit the work done, I still had a hard time to connect with the damned thing. At the end of day, it is all a matter of taste and, if you are into this kind of movies, you will love it, otherwise, it might actually bore you.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 296 Average listal rating (179 ratings) 7.1 IMDB Rating 7.1


Notes: With such a title, you would get nowadays something really cheesy but more than 70 years ago, it was a really different kind of ball game. Indeed, with this movie, they gave a completely different approach to the zombie concept than the bloodsuckers we are used to get today. To be honest, the story was rather unfocused from time to time but, even so, the whole thing was usually quite mesmerizing to watch. In my opinion, it was above all thanks to the eerie directing with some great use of black and white and the shadows and lights. I have to admit it, it was also sometimes borderline discriminating (for example, the natives were either some obedient servants or some primitive savages) but it was tolerable and it was not surprising for a movie produced back in the 40's.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 797 Average listal rating (494 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.8


Notes: It was apparently Hitchcock’s favorite movies so I was expecting a lot from the damned thing. Well, to be honest, I was rather amazed by how little I actually cared about this movie. I mean, sure, it was still a decent thriller but I really couldn’t see what was supposed to be so amazing about this feature. Indeed, during the first half, nothing much really interesting happened and it took the damned thing forever to take off. Then, in the second half, it started to become slightly more entertaining but it was too little, too late. Basically, the main idea is that the ominous Uncle Charlie goes to his relatives and the viewers are supposed to be charmed by this sweet family living in this nice little town. Well, to be honest, I didn’t care much for them. Furthermore, I never really understood their fascination and obsession towards this Uncle Charlie. I mean, they haven’t seen him for years, they have no idea what he has been up to and it doesn’t seem that he has done anything really amazing for them in the past. At least, I have to admit it, Joseph Cotten gave a strong performance and he had some very nice chemistry with the lovely Teresa Wright. Anyway, even if it didn’t really work for me, it still a classic.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 720 Average listal rating (467 ratings) 8 IMDB Rating 8


Notes: To be honest, I have to admit that I always had a hard time with the screwball comedies and, even though this movie is probably one of the most famous in this genre, I still had a hard time to really care for it. I mean, it's not that the damned thing didn’t have some potential, in the contrary. Indeed, it was dealing with a rather lugubrious concept and it could have been an awesome dark comedy. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the tone was just too whimsical for my taste. As a result, the whole insanity angle which was quite fascinating was in fact rather poorly developed. Furthermore, even though Cary Grant was a great choice to play the main character, he didn’t deliver one of his best performances (in fact, Grant himself often called it his least favorite of all his movies). On the other hand, Peter Lorre was basically born to play such characters and even though Priscilla Lane didn’t have much to do, she looked really lovely.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 320 Average listal rating (194 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.9


Notes: What a strange and beautiful movie. First of all, I have seen my share of silent movies (probably not enough though) but it was the first time I saw a movie without even some background music added afterwards, as it was apparently intended to be watched this way. To be honest, I thought it was incredibly difficult to focus without any sound or music whatsoever. Still, the damned thing was really neat. Indeed, I was above all impressed how it was visually completely different than anything produced back then in the 40's. Seriously, it felt so modern that it reminded me of many surreal videoclips that come out on a regular basis, except that this movie was made almost 80 years ago. I have to admit that this movie was rather hard to grasp, I'm grateful that it was so short as it would probably not work with a longer format. Anyway, maybe I should re-watch it at some point because the damned thing was so intriguing.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 67 Average listal rating (45 ratings) 7.2 IMDB Rating 7.4


Notes: To be honest, it turned out to be rather hard to judge this movie after all. Indeed, the first issue was that I saw a very nasty version on YouTube (seriously, the first scenes taking place during the night were borderline unwatchable). The other issue was that I wasn’t familiar with Canterbury’s pilgrimage and, even though I heard about the Tales of Caunterbury written by Chaucer, I knew pretty much nothing about it either. Apparently, Powell and Pressburger thought it would be a great idea to combine this material with a contemporary story taking place during WWII but this mix was rather bewildering, at least, to me. Eventually, as a result, it was probably their most complicated movie to decipher and I might have to re-watch it at some point to really make up my mind about the damned thing. However, even if this movie, like most of the movies delivered by these two masters, seem to have a strong reputation, I still think that the plot was rather weak though. Basically, for about 2 hours, you have the main characters chasing some mysterious ‘glue man’ which wasn’t exactly fascinating. The fact that this ‘glue man’ was so easy to spot right from the start probably didn’t help but, all in all, it was a rather lame story going at a terribly sluggish pace. Concerning the characters, at least, it was a nice time bubble showing the British people living in Kent around WWII but, even if it was interesting, none of these characters was really charismatic or entertaining enough.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 153 Average listal rating (77 ratings) 7 IMDB Rating 7.1
Henry V (1944)


Notes: Nowadays, they usually adapt the classic Shakespeare plays with a modern setting but I really did appreciate that Laurence Olivier set the story in the 15th century like it was in Shakespeare’s original work. I was also impressed to discover that it was actually Olivier’s directorial debut as this lavish production was quite ambitious for a first time effort. Still, to be honest, it has been a while since I have seen such a challenging movie though. Indeed, even if I did watch it with some English subtitles, I still struggled with these 2 hours of non-stop vintage Shakespearean dialogues. Furthermore, is it me or was the story actually super simple? In fact, I actually saw Kenneth Branagh’s version but it was ages ago and I can’t say I remember much about it though. Anyway, it seemed that Henry V, for some rather dubious reasons at least to me, went to France, kicked their ass, and married the daughter of the French king, Charles VI, but I thought it all seemed rather thin for more than 2 hours of running time. Eventually, the whole point was obviously not the plot but the intricate but still marvelous dialogues written by the Bard. On top of that, it was probably the most faithful adaptation of a Shakespeare’s play I have seen so far. Indeed, Olivier went as far as having the first scenes taking place as an actual play in some theater in 1600 and this approach was unexpected but really neat. The rest of the story was then handled in a much more straightforward way but it still worked though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1023 Average listal rating (678 ratings) 8.3 IMDB Rating 8.3


Notes: It turned out to be a spellbinding film noir, easily one of the best movies in this genre, and it completely deserved its stellar reputation. What I loved the most was the simple and minimalistic way this story was told. Indeed, most of the movie was just about Fred MacMurray and Barbara Stanwyck only together in one room talking with each other and giving us some of the best dialogues ever written for a movie. Nowadays, they would give us some boring climax with some huge action scene and, of course, the usual tedious twist at the end but, here, the whole thing remained focused and sharp from the beginning and until the end. It was like the plan they came up with, it was not so far-fetched at all and it made the whole thing even more spellbinding to behold. I also loved the fact that the main character was not fooled by this girl and at first simply walked away when he found out what she was up to, even if he felt terribly attracted to her. That's another great thing about this movie, the characters were all rather shaddy and you could never be sure what they were actually thinking.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 433 Average listal rating (263 ratings) 7.7 IMDB Rating 7.8


Notes: To be honest, even though I’m a huge movie buff, I'm not really familiar with Humphrey Bogart. I mean, I have seen a couple of his movies but not that many. Anyway, I try to catch his movies every time I get the chance and this time, I was really not disappointed. Indeed, this movie is really the stuff of legend. First of all, it was the first movie starring Lauren Bacall. Back in those days, she was only 20 years old when she made it and it was also the first movie she made with her future husband, Humphrey Bogart. Furthermore, it was directed by the great Howard Hawks and it is an adaptation of a novel written by Ernest Hemingway. Basically, it doesn't get more prestigious than this, does it? Anyway, the acting was really solid, the directing was very good and I just really enjoyed the story, basically one of those typical film noir they used to make back then. I mean, it was a rather typical film noir but it was full of awesome one-liners and the tone was just really well set and I thought it was completely entertaining.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 535 Average listal rating (354 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 8
Laura (1944)


Notes: In fact, the first time I saw the damned thing, it was at school when I was a teenager. Basically, like anyone else, I got to watch some movies with my teachers but, most of these attempts were rather disastrous. Indeed, instead of making us watch such modern classics like ‘Pulp Fiction’ or ‘Fight Club’, they would make us watch some old movies which were usually very poorly received. For example, one teacher made us watch ‘Johnny Got His Gun’ and even though it is in fact a great classic, can you imagine watching this with a classroom filled with 30 brainless teenagers? However, there was this one English teacher who actually did manage to show us some very old flicks and, surprisingly, those old classics turned out to be really interesting and entertaining. This movie turned out to be the best of the bunch. Indeed, for each class, we would watch like 15-20 minutes and then we would have a discussion about what actually happened and what could happen next. Eventually, the damned thing was so spellbinding that we would still talk about it even after the class during the break. On top of that, Gene Tierney was easily one of the best femmes fatal I had ever seen.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 69 Average listal rating (34 ratings) 6.2 IMDB Rating 6.7


Notes: To be honest, I had a rather hard time to connect with this movie. First of all, I saw it a little bit late so I wasn't really focused. On top of that, it didn't help that John Huston's voice was terribly monotonous and, even though what he told the viewers was quite informative, I don't think it always matched the action on the screen. As a result, while I was constantly trying to follow his narration, I was also struggling to follow at the same time what was actually going on on the battlefield. Seriously, I wish he did shut up for a few mins and just let the images actually handle the narrative, that's what movies are about, otherwise, we can just as well listen to the radio. Anyway, I thought it was some rather basic US propaganda but this movie is usually considered as a fairly accurate and above all rather bleak depiction of warfare during WWII. In fact, the damned thing was even considered to be too blunt by the US Army who refused to show it as a result. Anyway, even if the damned thing didn't really work for, it was still an interesting watch and it is definitely worth a look.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 516 Average listal rating (330 ratings) 8 IMDB Rating 8


Notes: I have to admit that I'm more familiar with David Lean's later work, composed of great epic adventures such as 'Doctor Zhivago', 'Lawrence of Arabia' or 'The Bridge on the River Kwai'. Here, it was something quite different entirely, in fact, it was the complete opposite. Indeed, it was in black and white and it was dealing only with two characters, a man and a woman dealing with some rather mundane predicament. However, if the scale was smaller, the whole thing was nonetheless quite fascinating. Indeed, basically, it was a very simple story about love and adultery but so human, so recognizable, so relevant which is something quite amazing considering the fact that this movie is now more than 70 years old! Honestly, I can't pretend I was really familiar with the actors portraying the two main characters but they both did a really good job. Above all, I was really impressed by the directing by David Lean. Indeed, like I said before, we were here far from his epic work but he still managed to share with us the tormented life of those two lost souls and it was quite impressive to behold.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 425 Average listal rating (244 ratings) 7.5 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: Well, I have to admit that the whole thing looked really nice and the production value was quite impressive. Judy Garland, who was only 21 years old at the time, was also at the top of her game. Indeed, she was really quite charming and, even if I didn’t care much about the songs in this movie, her voice was still quite marvellous. Unfortunately, those were pretty much the only things I did enjoy in this flick. Sure, Margaret O'Brien did give a decent performance as Tootie Smith but I still didn’t care much about her character and the rest of the characters were even more tedious, at least, to me. Above all, the story was just so flimsy and shallow. Seriously, what did really happen during this movie after all? Not much. Nobody loses his job, Nobody gets sick, nobodies dies,… I mean, the most and only dramatic event was for the family to move from St Louis to New York but even this ‘tragic’ event didn't occur after all. Sure, I’m well aware it is inherent to the genre to give 2 hours of entertainment with songs and dance with very little drama or without even a basic plot. However, in my opinion, the best movies in this genre still manage to do something original or at least interesting with this formula but it wasn't the case here.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but since it was directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, I was quite eager to check it out. Indeed, those guys are some of the most highly regarded directors ever and they are usually considered responsible for what many calls ‘The Golden Age of British Cinema’. By now, I have seen 4 movies directed by them and, from all those movies I have seen, this is the only one I didn't really enjoy. I mean, the title was pretty good but the scope was rather small this time, compared to their other productions which were much more ambitious and, to be honest, I didn't care much about the story and the characters involved. I mean, the whole thing was well directed and it was not bad at all but I didn't really enjoyed it probably because it was not my cup of tea, I guess. Still, it is a real classic though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 674 Average listal rating (407 ratings) 7.4 IMDB Rating 7.5
Spellbound (1945)


Notes: Honestly, a movie about mental diseases and the psychiatric world directed by Alfred Hitchcock sounded great but, unfortunately, the whole thing was rather disappointing and it is not a match to the great flicks made by the master. The main issue is that even though the psychoanalysis elements were really intriguing (as a matter of fact, it was one of the first Hollywood films to deal with this subject), they felt compelled to add a crime story and a romance on top of that. Those plots were really far-fetched and hardly convincing which was disappointing, especially coming from Hitchcock who was responsible for some of the smartest thrillers I have ever seen. It seems that he didn’t take the story really seriously as himself referred to it as "just another manhunt wrapped up in pseudo-psychoanalysis". Still, I liked it because there were definitely some touches of greatness. Indeed, I loved the directing and the mood was created. Furthermore even though their love story was far from being convincing, I thought that Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck both gave some solid performances. Finally, there was this marvelous dream sequence based on Salvador Dali’s designs. Even though this scene was only 2 minutes (it was scheduled to last about 20 minutes originally), it was really impressive and makes worth it to watch the movie.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 378 Average listal rating (218 ratings) 8.1 IMDB Rating 7.9


Notes: Even though it was indeed pretty good, to be honest, it didn't completely blow me away. First of all, even though Joan Crawford delivered a solid performance and won at the time the Academy Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role, in my opinion, her character should have been more complex. Indeed, even though Mildred Pierce was first presented as a possible murderer, Crawford slowly removed any evidence that this woman was anything else than perfect and it backfired as it made this woman much lesser interesting then when the movie started. Eventually, the more complex character turned out to be actually Veda Pierce thanks to a really strong performance by Ann Blyth but even this character didn't really work after all. Basically, all what Mildred Pierce did was to give a better life to her children, especially Veda. However, at some point, she managed to become really rich which should have been more than sufficient but Veda kept on being impossible to deal with with no real explanation whatsoever except to provide some conflict to move the story forward. Anyway, even though it didn't completely work for me, i have to admit that it was still a solid film noir though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 310 Average listal rating (154 ratings) 8.4 IMDB Rating 8.4


Notes: Since it is considered one of the greatest classics of the French cinema, of course, I was really eager to check it out and eventually, I wasn’t disappointed, that’s for sure. Indeed, first of all, you have to check the great people who were involved in this production (it was directed by Marcel Carné and written by French poet Jacques Prévert). When you dig into its history, it is even more amazing as you have to think that they managed to make this flick during the height of the Nazi occupation and, apparently, it seems that many members of the resistance were actually involved in this production. I have to admit it, it is a rather long feature but, with some gorgeous black and white cinematography, some really impressive actors, the whole thing was still pretty damned mesmerizing. By now, I have seen my share of movies directed by Marcel Carné and this must be the most prestigious one, not sure if it is my favorite though but it is still pretty amazing.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 211 Average listal rating (120 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.7
Paisan (1946)


Notes: To be honest, I have to admit that I was slightly worried while watching the 1st episode. Indeed, even though the girl playing Carmela, apparently a non-professional and illiterate actress, was fine, the actors playing the American soldiers were just really weak. Fortunately, it didn’t bother me much during the rest of the movie which turned out to be really strong after all. Indeed, I really liked the approach chosen by Roberto Rossellini. Basically, instead of a having a main character, a hero, he gave various episodes, each time focusing on different people involved in various situations but it actually gave a much more accurate depiction on how war actually works. Indeed, war impacts everyone and it’s never really about the acts of one courageous individual. On top of that, It’s interesting that, even though this episodic approach might make the whole thing seem random, it was actually surprisingly effective. Indeed, there was a clever narrative thread as each parts chronologically followed the historical events that took place during the war (the arrival of the Allies in Sicily, how they progressed in the main land through Naples, Rome and Florence and the final battle in the Po delta a few months before the end of the war). It was also impressive that Rossellini managed to deliver this movie only a few years after the war ended, especially since it was quite ambitious with many characters coming from various countries, with many locations and plenty of army gear and equipment involved.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 459 Average listal rating (257 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.9


Notes: Even though I have to admit that it is indeed probably the best version of this tale I have seen, well, I still think that the story is/was rather boring though. Concerning the characters, it was pretty much the same. Sure, I have to admit that Jean Marais did manage to do a lot with the Beast but all the characters were, in my opinion, rather tedious. However, there is no denying that it was such a masterstroke to have a surrealist poet like Jean Cocteau to direct this classic fairy tale. Indeed, can you imagine if someone like David Lynch or Luis Buñuel would have been allowed to direct ‘Snow White’ or ‘Cinderella’? Well, it could have been brilliant but that’s actually what happened here. Indeed, instead of the usual sappy children story, here, Cocteau went for a completely different vibe and the end-result was some kind of surreal gothic horror tale which was obviously really neat. Above all, the damned thing was visually quite amazing with some arms holding candelabras all over the place, some statues following you with their gaze and many other interesting visual stuff. Eventually, since everybody seemed to love the damned thing so much, I feel slightly bad that I didn’t care more about it, even if I really admired it. Maybe I should give it another try at some point.
johanlefourbe's rating:


Notes: To be honest, with such a title, I was actually expecting something rather cheesy. Well, I have to admit that the end-result turned to be not so corny after all and, eventually, I wonder what they actually meant with this title. Still, even though they did give an interesting look on what it meant, and probably still means, to go back home for many soldiers, they didn’t cut really deep into this sensitive subject though. Indeed, not one of these soldiers suffered from debilitating PTST, not one of them did beat up their wife or girlfriend, not one of them became an alcoholic or a drug addict and not one of them went on a shooting rampage. Still, I still have to admit that they didn’t complete sugarcoat what they went through and their portrayals did feel truthful and convincing. The fact that these 3 men were basically some average guys and not some kind of perfect super-beings also really helped. On top of that, it was definitely courageous to take some distance from all these movies displaying war as such a great and honorable endeavor for all involved, especially only a few years after WWII ended. It was also a master move to cast Harold Russell, an actual wounded soldier, to play Homer Parrish and you can imagine that, nowadays, they would hire instead a famous actor and use some CGI but this approach was obviously much more naturalistic and simply better.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 531 Average listal rating (310 ratings) 7.8 IMDB Rating 7.7
Gilda (1946)


Notes: Since this movie had a really solid reputation, I was really eager to check it out. Eventually, to be honest, even though I thought it was a decent flick, I can’t say I was really blown away by the whole thing. Indeed, at the end of the day, it was pretty good but not really great either. I mean, it was well done but also rather predictable and the story was quite pedestrian. Sure, I have to admit it, Glenn Ford was a fine leading man and, above all, Rita Hayworth looked really stunning as the title character and this movie would be her best-known feature. In my opinion, it is one of these movies which are well known above all for one specific scene. In this case, it was when Rita Hayworth removed her glove while singing (in fact, she wasn't singing at all and was lip-synching throughout the whole thing which was something she remained bitter about for the rest of her life). The point is that, except for this famous scene, the movie was not really amazing. Anyway, even though I thought it was sligthly disappointing, it is still a decent film noir.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 292 Average listal rating (168 ratings) 8 IMDB Rating 8.1


Notes: First of all, I have to confess that I was actually really tired even before I started to watch the damned thing and I actually struggled not to fall asleep through most of the duration. It’s too bad because it was actually pretty good, in fact, it was easily one of the best movies I have seen so far directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger and I guess I should check it again at some point in the future. Anyway, it was probably their most ambitious and most surreal picture, some kind of surreal romantic take on the PTSD syndrom. That was probably the most interesting thing about this flick the fact you can watch it as something quite literal but also as something quite metaphorical but, on both levels, it actually worked fine. Furthermore, it was visually really striking and they definitely went all the way to deliver something really original, especially for the time period. Eventually, the only critic I might have was that since the concept was pretty far-out, the characters were barely developed but maybe that’s what the material needed. Anyway, the cast involved still delivered some solid performances.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 333 Average listal rating (194 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.5


Notes: I have already seen two other versions of this story ('Ossessione' (1943), 'The Postman Always Rings Twice' (1981)) and this version is best one I have seen so far. Indeed, even though you didn't have the explosive sex scenes from the Jack Nicholson-Jessica Lange version, John Garfiel and Lana Turner had together some very nice chemistry and they made one of the best doomed couples I have ever seen. Basically, they were not really good, they were not really bad either, they were both continuously fighting the feelings they had but they couldn't get rid off each other. Even though it was already the 3rd time around I watched this story, it was just spellbinding and it is definitely one of the best film noir I have seen so far. It tends to drag a little bit towards the end but it might have to do with the fact that I already knew the whole thing by heart at this point.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 1066 Average listal rating (653 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 8
Notorious (1946)


Notes: I actually already saw this movie but it was a long time ago, when I was a teenager but even though I enjoyed it, I didn't see what was so great about it. Indeed, I thought that the story was interesting but I didn't care much about the love story. However, since I kept hearing good things about this movie, I was really intrigued and needed to watch it again. Eventually, this time, I was able to realize how marvelous the love story was. Indeed, when I was young, I didn't see how subtle it was. Indeed, when those characters say something, their faces actually tell a different story, with some amazing performances by Ingrid Bergman and Cary Grant. I always had a weak spot for Cary Grant who always makes me think of Georges Clooney but his best work was always with Hitchcock who was the only director who really managed to use his charisma, going the extra mile to make his characters darker and more interesting than his usual suave womanizers. Not only was it one of the best love stories I have seen but it was also a very good spy thriller and the combination of those two was just lethal.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 884 Average listal rating (563 ratings) 7.9 IMDB Rating 7.9
The Big Sleep (1946)


Notes: Well, from the 4 movies involving Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall, it was probably the best one they made together. To be honest, it was a rather confusing story. As a matter of fact, while working on the script, the writers William Faulkner and Leigh Brackett couldn't figure out from the novel who murdered a particular character. So they phoned Raymond Chandler, who angrily told them the answer was right there in the book and they returned to their work. Later on, Chandler soon phoned them to say that he looked at the book himself and he himself couldn't figure out who killed the character, so he left it up to them to decide. So, it was indeed a rather complicated story with some smart characters and some really juicy dialogues. Another enjoyable aspect was that, during the whole thing, Bogart didn't have to face one femme fatale but 5 of them! Of course, this flick was all about the confrontation between Bogart and Bacall and they had some tremendous chemistry. Eventually, it was one of the best film noir I have seen and the whole thing was just spellbinding to watch.
johanlefourbe's rating:
People who added this item 253 Average listal rating (164 ratings) 7.6 IMDB Rating 7.3


Notes: Well, even though this movie has a very good reputation, it turned out to be a decent watch but, to be honest, not much more than that. I mean, sure, it was a solid film noir, no doubt about it, but there are some much better movies in this genre, at least, that's my opinion. Eventually, nothing much really happened through the whole thing and it was basically about the unluckiest main character I have ever seen or maybe, as it was argued by some critics, just a thief telling a bunch of lies to the audience but I think it would be giving this movie too much credit. Eventually, I was actually more interested in Vera thanks to Ann Savage who gave such a strong performance. In my opinion, she completely stole the show from the moment she got involved. Anyway, even if it didn't really blow me away, it was still pretty good though.
johanlefourbe's rating:
Load more items (29 more in this list)

Added to




Related lists

1001 Movies Chosen By Johanlefourbe
1001 item list by johanlefourbe
67 votes 1 comment
1001 Movies ... my own version (1990's)
119 item list by johanlefourbe
33 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (2000's)
119 item list by johanlefourbe
15 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1970's)
110 item list by johanlefourbe
4 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1950's)
99 item list by johanlefourbe
4 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1930's)
59 item list by johanlefourbe
3 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1980's)
110 item list by johanlefourbe
13 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (2010's)
120 item list by johanlefourbe
5 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1960's)
107 item list by johanlefourbe
5 votes
1001 Movies ... my own version (1920's)
40 item list by johanlefourbe
4 votes

View more top voted lists

People who voted for this also voted for


More lists from johanlefourbe