@Wolfshanze:
I think you’ve lost all objectivity here…
I disagree entirely. I am at least trying to evaluate these films in some sort of scientific method. There are multiple standards involved and some deserve more weight than others, given how this list is specifically defined, yet given vague parameters for measurement. You are the one who is completely writing off Battle of the Bulge in a decidedly un-objective manner, predominantly because you just think it is a poor film. You have emphasized all the negative elements but not discussed any of the positives about it or how it fits in under the Action category. That is where the lack of objectivity is here.
@Wolfshanze:
you’ve become so focused on one word, you’ve forgotten what else is the whole point of the thread… “action, Action, ACTION” is all you see, its all you talk about, it’s all you focus on… but you have COMPLETELY FORGOTTEN, this is a TOP 10 list…
Quite the contrary, you seem to be the one focused on it and it is clearly setting you precariously close to a fit of rage. I have tried to emphasize the action aspect, because that is what the topic is: Top 10 World War II Action Films of All Time. It is not the Top 10 most critically acclaimed WWII action films of all time. Or the Top 10 most realistic WWII action films of all time. Etc…
@Wolfshanze:
Top 10 generally refers to a GOOD MOVIE… sorry, but as many have pointed out quite correctly, Battle of the Bulge just isn’t good, and when people talk about other movies, they are trying to meet ALL the criteria, not just one. Realism, believability, acting, pacing, storyline all go into making a top-10 list.
Again, I refer you to a couple other movies listed in the current Top 10 here:
Battle of Britain - great movie for many reasons, but poor on pacing, storyline and contains historical generalization. Even fewer people like it than like Battle of the Bulge according to Rotten Tomatoes (63% vs 67%). You have conveniently not addressed this example.
A Bridge Too Far - very well made film overall with lots of action but the pacing and length bring it down. Rotten Tomatoes gives 73% approval, which is only 6 points above BotB.
Stalingrad (2014) - Good heavens, only 48% rating from Rotten Tomatoes. That is abysmal. I haven’t seen this movie, but from what I have read and heard it is just not very good. Supposedly has a lot of action though.
Tora Tora Tora - very authentic and respectful production with a good amount of action, but only a 57% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Again, pacing and lack of storylines probably hinder it.
… these are just the ones I could analyze in 5 minutes. They all have issues, some are even rated less than Battle of the Bulge. Since you seem to hold these ratings in some regard, wouldn’t it be the objective thing to compare them all on that scale?
@Wolfshanze:
Bad movies are just that… bad movies, no matter how much action is in them. Once again, I didn’t invent this thread, but pretty sure the ONLY criteria isn’t how much action is in the film… I think quality of the film has a little something to do with it to… all you have spoken about post after post is “does it have action? how much action does it have? Is there enough action to call it an action film? What if there’s not enough action in our action film, I think there’s not enough action to call it action, so its not actiony-enough for me, it needs more action.”
You’ve really lost all focus on the fact it’s STILL a TOP-10 list… Top-10 infers more than just crossing an action threshold, as arbitrary as that is. When people say they like or don’t like a movie for this or that reason, they’re referring to the Top-10 threshold… not the % of action that is in the film.
Well bad movies are bad movies regardless, but when you are including them in a “Top (whatever) List”, the implication (not the inference) is not that they are critically well received or even that great. Their inclusion is predicated on whatever limiting factors are imposed when defining the list. I refer you back to this list (http://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-best-world-war-ii-movies-of-all-time?var=4&utm_expid=16418821-179.vk2gM_coRrOMcxn9T2riGQ.3&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F) which was posted earlier. How is The Dirty Dozen ranked number 5? Short answer: they had people vote on their favorites and the only criteria was that it had to take place during WWII. That is damn broad and essentially meaningless. Yet how Dirty Dozen, a completely fictional and inane story, can be above Band of Brothers, Das Boat, Bridge Too Far, etc… is beyond me.
Want another example? Here is something a little more focused than just a poll: 25 Best Space Movies of All Time (LA Weekly) http://www.laweekly.com/slideshow/the-25-best-space-movies-of-all-time-5199443/23
According to your assumptions, we should probably be looking to see the really (objectively) good movies towards the top. Suffice to say, even I was shocked at this one.
First off… Galaxy Quest (#7) is ahead of Apollo 13 (#19) - Does that tell you that Galaxy Quest is actually somehow better than Apollo 13? Objectively so?
Secondly, the sci-fi/space film with the general consensus as being the greatest and grandest of them all is 2001: A Space Odyssey. You would expect it to be number one, maybe two… No, it is #4. Ahead of it is Star Wars: ESB, The Right Stuff and at #1 Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan.
Those are all good films but who is judging them and how? 2001 blows everything away with originality and innovation and is darn near objectively the spacey-est space movie ever; containing just about every element of science fiction iconography in the modern lexicon… partly because it made the modern lexicon.
Again… my point being that your inference/assumption of Top 10 = Good is not accurate. First we need to define what “good” even means, but before that we need to pay attention to what the list is even about. If it is about Space movies, it should have a lot to do with space in it. Star Trek IV: The Voyage home may technically be a space movie, but 95% of the film takes place on Earth in San Francisco. Should it be worthy of Top 10 status then? Is that what most people think of when they hear “space movie”. Same thing with our WWII Action list… Letters from Iwo Jima is a great film, but do people think of Letters when someone says, give me a WWII action film? My contention is maybe, but not likely.
@Wolfshanze:
Maybe you should make a new thread and call it “LHoffman’s WWII Actionyist Action Films of all Actiony Time”
I’d rather not. YG is better at starting threads and getting people to talk about stuff than I am.