Which Movie Poster Has the Biggest Spoiler?

 

Posters That Spoil the Movie

 

The art of the movie poster seems to be in decline, because now they’re all just collections of floating heads, or familiar imagery from stuff we’ve seen over and over, or simplistic images that don’t do more than let you know the movie exists. I can’t recall the last new movie poster I thought was worthy of hanging on my wall, but I will give credit to the simplistic posters that avoid revealing too much about the film. Let’s examine a collection of movie posters, both good and bad, that reveal a little too much about the film they’re trying to advertise. I think this is a good spot to issue the SPOILER ALERT!

Which movie poster spoils the film worse than any other? A few came to mind right away, but as I delved into the long, storied history of movie posters, I discovered some pretty surprising ones. I’m only going to look at North American advertisements, so international posters where some instructions were maybe lost in translation aren’t going to count. Whether the marketing department or the studio or whoever was responsible intended to spoil any of these films we may never know, but let’s begin with one of the oldest examples, for one of my all-time favourite films: the original King Kong.

 

CONTENDERS

 

King Kong (1933)

I believe one of the reasons everyone just seems to know that King Kong climbs the Empire State Building even if they’ve never seen the movie is because of this poster. Kong himself is an obvious choice to help sell it on the spectacle of seeing a giant ape monster, but why not just show him on Skull Island? You can’t blame any of the subsequent Kong remakes and reboots for spoiling big moments after the original did it first, except we can blame the 1976 remake’s poster for spoiling that Kong doesn’t climb the Empire State Building but rather the World Trade Center. While not every piece of ancient promotional material is like this (one of the original posters shows Kong front and center with only a couple generic buildings in the very distant background), most other posters at least spoil the fact that Kong is taken off Skull Island and brought back to New York before the finale. It’s not a spoiler worth getting upset about anymore, but it’s still one of the earliest and most famous examples of giving away the ending in a poster, and it certainly wasn’t the last.

 

Planet of the Apes (1968)

I’ll give credit where credit is due: as far as I can tell, none of the initial theatrical posters for the original film in the long-running franchise gave the ending away. It was in later posters and on home video covers in particular that the marketing “experts” said to hell with keeping one of the best twist endings in any sci-fi film a secret! Maybe they just figured since it was so well known after a while and subsequent sequels had been released that it was fair game to help advertise it to the home video market. If you were to watch Planet of the Apes for the first time having already seen that cover with Charlton Heston kneeling in front of a partially buried Statue of Liberty, you would probably be pretty frustrated watching it as he repeatedly thinks he’s on a planet other than Earth.

 

Carrie (1976)

Stephen King’s career was launched with the success of his first published novel, Carrie, and the subsequent film adaptation directed by Brian De Palma also stands as the first of many of his stories to get the big screen treatment. The pivotal moment that sets the film’s most horrifying sequence into motion was too good to pass up for the poster, apparently, because it’s hard to find any posters for Carrie that don’t at least show her covered in pig’s blood. It’s the before and after images side by side that really get me; sure, it’s intriguing, but once you sit down to watch the movie, the setup makes it pretty clear that the image you saw on the poster is going to happen and you have to wait quite a while until it does. I think the posters and DVD covers with just her mostly in silhouette and flames behind her are even a little less specific in spoiling the film’s most famous scene, but still reveal too much.

 

The Shining (1980)

There have been so many posters for Stanley Kubrick’s version of Stephen King’s famous third-published novel, especially with re-releases and anniversary editions, but some early versions show Jack Nicholson peeking through the shattered bathroom door at a terrified Shelley Duvall, and while it’s obviously one of the most famous moments from the film (sense a pattern emerging?), at the time it ruined the mystery of who the threat was going to be and to what length he would inflict pain on his family. King famously complained that the casting of Nicholson as Jack Torrance gave away that he would go insane by the end, but this poster only reinforced the spoiler. It even shows the axe right in the center, though he doesn’t even pick up the axe until over an hour in.

 

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)

I guess this one is pretty minor overall, but it was one of my inspirations for exploring this topic in the first place. I had never really thought about how Elliot and friends riding their bikes through the night sky was spoiled by the E.T. poster as a kid, because I had only seen the VHS cover in the video store before watching it for the first time, and it emphasized Elliot reaching out to E.T’s glowing fingertip, with the earth below. As an adult, though, I realized this magical sequence is spoiled not only by the original poster, but by Steven Spielberg’s Amblin Entertainment logo, which plays before many other films. Does it ruin the whole movie? Not really, but as soon as they get on those bikes and stick E.T. in the basket you know what’s coming next, and the wonder of the effect doesn’t hit the same when you’re already expecting it.

 

Rocky IV (1985)

The first three Rocky movies are great, and the first time I saw them, I didn’t know how they were going to end. While Rocky IV is also pretty good, I was not at all surprised when Rocky beat Ivan Drago at the end of the final match, but that’s because I had seen the poster, in which Rocky is draped with an American flag, looking beat up but victorious. At least out of six Rocky movies and three Creed movies only one of them was spoiled by a poster.

 

Platoon (1986)

I remember being unnerved by the VHS cover of Platoon in the video store when I was a kid, not understanding anything about it, but sensing the film’s violent, gritty nature based on the image of a soldier kneeling and looking up into the sky in despair. When I eventually watched it as an adult, I realized that image wasn’t just some random solider or a promotional image that didn’t appear in the film, it was Willem Dafoe’s character! I also realized he wasn’t going to make it to the end, long before the scene in which he meets his demise: the iconic shot of him kneeling.

 

Free Willy (1993)

This one is actually more egregious than I first realized. Does the image of an orca leaping over a kid taking a heroic stance at a breakwater sell it as an exciting adventure film for the whole family to enjoy? You bet it does. Is this image also from the very end of the movie? You bet it is! The shots in the actual movie of this triumphant moment also look terrible compared to the genuine splendour of the poster. The title suggests the goal is to make sure Willy is set free, but after a point early on, anyone who saw the poster will realize that unless it’s a case of blatant false advertising (which it isn't), Willy will be set free by the end, and sure enough, he is.

 

The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

Who could have predicted I would uncover three Stephen King adaptations spoiled by their posters? I think an argument could be made that the poster for The Shawshank Redemption isn’t really a spoiler for anyone who knows nothing about the story. It’s a moody image of a guy we can presume is the protagonist standing triumphant in the rain, and that’s it. If you do know the story, whether it’s because you read the novella or have seen clips or scenes out of context discussing how the film is one of the greatest of all-time, then you can piece it together that Andy Dufresne will escape from prison before the end and stand triumphantly in the rain with his shirt open. The nature of the prison break and what he actually goes through to get to that moment isn’t spoiled in any way, so I would call this one a minor spoiler, but still, it’s something from very late in the movie that, while striking in its imagery, didn’t need to be the primary way of marketing the film.

 

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

The spoiler in this one is only obvious once you’ve seen the first installment in the award-winning fantasy trilogy. Gandalf the Grey dies fighting the Balrog in Fellowship of the Ring, and the other members of the fellowship are very sad, but must push on. Wait a minute, why is Gandalf on the poster for the next one, then? And why is he all white? Arguments are made all the time that you can’t spoil stuff once it reaches a certain age, and considering there were forty-eight years between the release of the film and the publication of the source material upon which it was based, yeah, okay, book readers already knew that was coming. Still, they could have left him off the poster and I would have been genuinely surprised and delighted to have seen him return, instead of just waiting for the moment to come and then not being surprised at all with the swell of music and close up on Ian McKellan.

 

Quarantine (2008)

Does anyone remember this found footage remake? I reviewed it over a decade ago and I barely remember anything distinct about it (I do remember how much it copied from the original Spanish film, REC), but I do recall that poster—fairly simple, though effective enough. This is yet another case of the final shot of the movie being used; there really isn’t much to spoil here, but it’s pretty telling when the most marketable shot of the film is the last one, meaning everything preceding it isn’t as impactful or memorable.

 

The Impossible (2012)

This survival film from Spanish director J.A. Bayona was based on true events surrounding the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. I’ve never seen it but have heard it’s great—it got pretty good reviews, Naomi Watts was nominated for an Oscar, and it made money at the box office—and one big reason I didn’t feel like I needed to see it was because of the damn poster. There they are, the family reunited! If your entire premise hinges on whether or not the family will survive the ordeal and reunite, maybe don’t reveal the outcome before people are even in the theatre seats? Some claim it helped make it a less distressing experience to watch, but I think that’s a lame excuse, because it proves the whole thing was, indeed, possible.  

 

Terminator Genisys (2015)

Last and, in this case, certainly least, is the fifth Terminator film which was so bankrupt of interesting new ideas that the marketing team decided to utilize the film’s one and only twist as part of the effort to get fans to see it. No, it’s not the reveal that Arnold Schwarzenegger is back as an aged T-800, which is revealed pretty early in the movie, nor is it the return of the liquid metal T-1000. John Connor, the guy Skynet has been trying to take out since the first movie, is actually a Terminator in this one! It’s a stupid twist, but even stupider is having the big reveal plastered right across the center of the poster (and it was in the trailer, too) so there is absolutely no narrative weight or impact when the twist comes to light in the actual film. I had forgotten about this even happening, actually, but thanks to the poster I was instantly reminded.

 

VERDICT

I could have included even more movie posters here (several Marvel movies, Phone Booth, Lone Survivor [although that one’s spoiled just by the title alone], The Wicker Man) but I think these ones are the most spoiler filled. Which one has the biggest spoilers of all? I’m tempted to say Terminator Genisys, if only the spoiler meant anything. It’s a lame twist in a lame sequel that has since been retconned, so who cares anymore? King Kong is such an old spoiler it also doesn’t seem so significant today. The frontrunners are Carrie, Planet of the Apes, and Free Willy. I’ll give some of these other ones a pass—E.T. for example I can see being a way of intriguing audiences without giving away any key plot points—but of the frontrunners, I will also give Planet of the Apes a pass because it wasn’t the original poster that spoiled the ending, just later marketing material. Who really cares about the ending of Free Willy anymore? It’s so of the 90’s and so less significant compared to most of the other films I’ve covered here that I wouldn’t call it the biggest spoiler poster.

Carrie, for having remained as a 70’s horror classic since its release, has always been marketed on that shot of her drenched in blood. I understand the shock and intrigue of seeing her like that, but c’mon, it’s one of the key moments that I would certainly leave out of my explanation to someone as to why they should see it. A girl with telekinetic powers gets taken to the prom and something terrible happens to her is all you need to say! I think I have to give it to the Carrie poster for being the biggest spoiler for a great film. It’s like if they had put Norman Bates in a wig on the poster for Psycho or the chestburster coming out of John Hurt on the poster for Alien. It’s always been a curious choice to me, but thankfully, I have seen less and less spoiler-filled movie posters in recent years. If only we could start to see some more interesting posters that still refrain from spoiling too much…

 

Related: Bad Movie Posters

https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2024/04/just-stop-already-issue-4-bad-movie.html

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004): Favourite Films Series

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004): Favourite Films Series

 

Everything has its moment. The first decade of this century was Will Ferrell’s heyday, and if we had to narrow it down, through retrospection, it’s easy to look at Anchorman as his moment, as well as the crowning achievement in a very particular era of comedy filmmaking. When I look back on Anchorman, I fondly remember renting it from the video store with my best friend simply because it starred “that guy” who was “pretty funny” and knowing nothing else about it. Part of what makes comedy work is being caught off guard, with setups and payoffs you don’t expect which instigate laughter, or, alternatively, simply seeing or hearing something you don’t anticipate completely out of the blue without any setup. Anchorman does both of these things extremely well, but there’s so much more to it that makes it one of the enduring comedies from the golden age of Ferrell. “I don’t know how to put this, but…I’m kind of a big deal.”

The premise of Anchorman—news anchors in 1970s San Diego threatened and lovestruck by a female anchor cutting in on their boys club—is perfect to showcase Will Ferrell’s strengths as a comedic actor, but I will say right out of the gate that if you don’t like Will Ferrell, it’s unlikely this film will place among your own favourites, or even be enjoyable at all. Unlike some of my other favourite movies, I can’t defend this one as being something anyone who likes movies should watch. The comedic timing is incredible, there are numerous setups and payoffs in terms of both jokes and plot points, and it is endlessly quotable (as you shall see), but it is also all so, so dumb. Veronica Corningstone, played by Christina Applegate, is one of only a handful of characters with any shred of common sense, self awareness, or intelligence, but even she can’t resist the ridiculous charm and allure of Ron Burgundy. Ron and his cronies are blatantly silly, stupid, and sexist, but they are all part of a hilarious tapestry of a skewed world where logic is unimportant and absurdism rules supreme.

Ron Burgundy is considered by many to be Will Ferrell’s greatest comedic role. Anchorman came at a time when he had already been in some great supporting roles and was most well known from Saturday Night Live, but this was only a year after his first lead role in Elf and a year before one of the busiest year’s of his career, starring in Bewitched, Kicking and Screaming, and Wedding Crashers, among others. Anchorman also acts as a showcase for many other comic actors who were about to go on to bigger and better roles in movies and TV, and as great as Ferrell is through and through, the supporting cast generates just about as many laughs as the lead.

Steve Carrell had a very memorable supporting role in Bruce Almighty the year before this, and debuted as Michael Scott in The Office the next year. His supreme idiocy as Brick Tamland makes him the most quotable next to Ferrell. “Where'd you get your clothes... from the... toilet store?” Paul Rudd had already been working pretty regularly, but this started a recurring collaboration with producer Judd Apatow, with the two going on to work together on The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Knocked Up, and This is 40. I don’t know if I’ve ever disliked Paul Rudd in a movie, and while Brian Fantana is not quite as consistently quotable as Brick, the Sex Panther cologne joke is one I’ve personally quoted the most. “60 percent of the time it works…every time.”

A couple smaller supporting roles were played by actors many know by name today, Seth Rogen and Kathryn Hahn, but I have to talk about one of the film’s most iconic scenes: the battle between the rival news stations. The first time I saw it my jaw literally dropped with how many recognizable actors showed up. Apatow and Ferrell and director Adam McKay made an Avengers-level comedic crossover before The Avengers was even a thing. It’s great that a couple of them like Luke Wilson and Tim Robbins come back again later for the film’s climax. Some of the jokes that I found the funniest as a kid/teen are in this scene and the one immediately after, like when Brick is just screaming and holding out a grenade or when Ron recommends he lay low afterward because he’s “probably wanted for murder.” After seeing the movie so many times and having grown up (somewhat) since my first viewing, I do find some jokes a little less funny after hearing them so many times over, but other comedic aspects stand out as even better with the passage of time.

In early Anchorman viewings, the parts my friend and I laughed at the hardest were any of Brick’s lines and another unexpected comic cameo. Ron accidentally throws a burrito at a biker played by Jack Black, causing him to crash, and when the biker punted Ron’s beloved dog Baxter off the bridge, we were in pain from laughter—then backed it up to watch it over again, just to laugh even harder. Now, some of the more underrated jokes and running gags stand out to me more than they used to, like with Fred Willard’s Ed Harken constantly on the phone about his delinquent son, or the fact it’s setup that Ron and his friends deliberately throw their food and garbage away carelessly, which results in the incident with the biker later. That said, Anchorman is considered one of the most quotable comedies for a reason. The dialogue is stupidly perfect—“It’s so damn hot! Milk was a bad choice!”—and there isn’t a single scene without a laugh-out-loud moment, for me.

Just like with The Naked Gun, Anchorman is a comedy that I can watch endlessly because there are just so many jokes and so many layers to what makes it funny. I could go on and on about all the parts that make me laugh, but what it comes down to is Anchorman just happened to be something that came along at the right time with the right combination of talented people. It may not be the most clever comedy I’ve ever seen, but it’s extremely effective, and makes me laugh right from the first moment with the title card that claims it’s based on a true story (just names, locations and events have been changed) to the end credit bloopers, which help emphasize how much comedy gold there was to mine with these actors working within this premise. “You stay classy, San Diego. I'm Ron Burgundy?”

“Dammit. Who typed a question mark on the Teleprompter?”

Anatomy of a Favourite Film

 

Anatomy of a Favourite Film

 

What, exactly, makes a film qualify as one of my coveted “favourites” and thus get the special Favourite Films Series treatment? Obviously every film fanatic has a list of films they deem superior, but the exact criteria differs from one fanatic to the next. Since I have now done nearly 40 entries in this ongoing series (with many more still to come), I thought it would be an interesting process to reflect on the specific qualities that put certain films onto my favourites list, and to perhaps shed some light on why certain films are not on my list.

 

Genre & Subject Matter

Most film critics are beholden to watch as many movies as possible and provide a critical analysis of all films. This is one reason why I don’t think of myself as a critic, although you could say I’m particularly critical of certain types of films. I am not the type of movie fan who loves all movies just for the sake of the medium of film, either. I like what I like, and while my movie tastes may still be broader than many, the primary criterion for a favourite film lies mainly in the subject matter, but often it’s the genre that comes first.

A quick glance at the entries in my Favourite Films Series thus far reveals my preference for the science fiction, horror, action, adventure, thriller, and comedy genres, but there are a few exceptions where certain films transcend their genre. I’m not opposed to westerns, but the genre isn’t one of my preeminent favourites, so something like Once Upon a Time in the West (1968), which is considered one of the best movies ever made by some, is one I have seen, do think is great, but it’s not among my personal favourites. That being said, The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly (1966) is definitely a western that, to me, is more than just a great western—it’s a great movie, period—and it’s on my list of all-time favourites.

Some specific sub-genres I am uniquely interested in are dinosaur films, animal attack films, and survival films, which is why you won’t find Dinosaur (2000) or The Edge (1997) on as many people’s favourites list as more well known or generally well-respected movies like Jaws (1975) or Jurassic Park (1993). If the subject matter of a film doesn’t grab my interest, it’s unlikely to be something I seek out at all. A couple genres I’ve grown more accepting of as I’ve gotten older are musicals and historical dramas, but my tastes haven’t changed all that much since I first started collecting DVDs over twenty years ago. When I look at new movies coming out, I tend to gravitate toward the aforementioned favourite genres, but when something outside of these comes along, it needs to have a subject that I care about in order for me to care at all, though this isn’t always strictly true, obviously. For a recent example, I very much enjoyed the film Conclave (2024), despite the subject matter not interesting me very much at first. There were still elements that intrigued me, though—the cast (not usually an essential for me, but at times, certainly a factor), the cinematography, and the awards attention it was getting, but in the case of Anora (2024) (which ended up winning Best Picture over Conclave) it was mainly the director and his previous work that had me interested, and the subject matter also sounded more interesting. As it would end up, I enjoyed Conclave far more than Anora.

What I’m trying to emphasize here: while the subject matter is not the be all end all of what makes a film my favourite, it’s definitely one of the most important factors. I can appreciate a film like Conclave on many levels—the production, the performances, the way the story is told—but at the end of the day, it’s just not about something I care enough about for it to take root in my brain as a new favourite. Something like Sing Street (2016), though, which is in the coming-of-age genre (another favourite genre of mine) had characters I could instantly relate to, compelled by all-too-relatable forces, in a story I cared deeply about because of those characters and the actors portraying them, and it only got better every time I watched it again.

 

Directors & Directing Styles

Going back to Anora for a second, the director, Sean Baker, previously made a film called The Florida Project (2017), which I originally chose to watch based on 1) The subject matter, 2) starring Willem Dafoe, and 3) recommendations from film critics whose opinions I value. While I did not enjoy Anora as much as The Florida Project, I enjoy how Sean Baker’s directs, and the way a film is directed is important to me, but I also seek out films based on who the director is more than just occasionally. A film might be about a subject I don’t care about or in a genre that isn’t a favourite, but if I’ve previously loved a director’s work, I’ll be more willing to check out something outside of my interests if they are behind it. Case in point: Quentin Tarantino. Had Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) been just some guy’s movie, I doubt I would have had much interest in it, even with it starring one of the few actors who will sometimes be enough alone to draw me to a project, Leonardo DiCaprio. Actually, that goes for the two films Tarantino made before that, too: the westerns The Hateful Eight (2015) and Django Unchained (2012).

If we take a quick look at CCC Lists #49 & #50, only three of the directors in my (then) Top 20 Favourite Directors don’t have films I consider among my all-time favourites. There are some directors who might not be my favourites because their overall filmography isn’t consistently great, but their directing style still consistently works for me, and they may have at least one film that’s among my favourites, such as Gore Verbinski with Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003). A director who I feel like I’ve made concessions for with his last three movies even when other elements haven’t been as good is James Cameron, and the Avatar franchise leads me nicely to the next important element of my favourite films.  

 

Screenplay

I’m a writer, so of course the written part of the film matters a lot to me. The reason it isn’t the first topic on here is because a movie does not need to have flawless writing above all else for it to be a favourite. I think some of the best examples of this are The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997), Godzilla 2000 (1999), and Predator (1987). The screenwriting in The Lost World is a far cry from the original Jurassic Park, but compared to later Jurassic World movies? You can’t tell me the story in The Lost World is worse than that of Jurassic World Dominion (2022), which might be the worst screenplay for any movie containing the word “Jurassic” ever written. To compare the screenplay for Godzilla 2000 with, say, the screenplay for Godzilla Minus One (2023) or even Godzilla vs. Destoroyah (1995), it is objectively worse, but I just love Godzilla 2000 for its combination of a traditional Godzilla story with peak miniature effects and the best-looking Godzilla of them all. Even Predator, a movie I never get tired of, has what I would call a very simple plot. Writing does not have to be a movie’s primary strength to be a favourite, but I can only take so much weakness when it comes to anything outside of my preferred genres. Godzilla isn’t over here winning any Oscars (Minus One notwithstanding), but it has plenty else going on for me to love it.

Even other films I consider my favourites like The Fox and the Hound (1981) or Back to the Future Part II (1989) or Planet Terror (2007) do not always excel at a successful three-act structure, or convincing dialogue, or innovative storytelling techniques, but I can see how screenwriting does impact the way I rank my favourites against one another. Back to the Future (1985) is up there as an all-time favourite primarily for that sound screenplay by Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis. As fun as Back to the Future Part II and Part III are, neither are as well written, in my opinion. Planet Terror may be an odd favourite of mine, but I wouldn’t rank it anywhere close to Back to the Future.

Sometimes the way the story is told makes all the difference to me. Rear Window (1954) may not be as iconic of an Alfred Hitchcock thriller as Vertigo (1958), but I just prefer the story in Rear Window more. As I got older and watched more and more movies, I learned that the next two topics only really matter when they are in service of a good story, and as movies continue to get more expensive, more visually frenetic/cluttered/busy, and more special-effects-heavy, it gets truer all the time.

 

 

 

 

Special Effects

I do love a special effects spectacle, because it reminds me of what got me interested in movies at such a young age: the wonder of how directors could make someone’s written ideas come to visual life in such a realistic way that you could actually believe what you were seeing was real. The preeminent examples of this have to be the original King Kong (1933) and Jurassic Park (1993). Both of those films made my brain go berserk when I saw them as a kid. I couldn’t take my eyes away from the stop motion spectacle of Skull Island and Kong’s rampage through New York, and I couldn’t get enough of Isla Nublar’s completely convincing cloned dinosaurs, watching it over and over just to get those glimpses of prehistoric creatures. I remain inspired by both films to this day.

Other visual masterpieces that I cannot deny a spot among my favourites are Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991), The Dark Knight (2008) and Gremlins (1984), among so many others. Visual effects fascinate me even when they appear dated or unconvincing, because they made (and still make) me curious about how special effects used to be achieved; there is far less wonder in modern movies now that everything is usually made in a computer. Not all of the special effects in Jaws (1975) are completely convincing today, but the screenplay, the direction by Steven Spielberg, the genre and subject matter are all so strong that a couple shots of a fake shark don’t displace it from the top of my list. As much as I love special effects in movies, they certainly aren’t a requirement for one to become a favourite. Films like The Breakfast Club (1985) or The Shawshank Redemption (1994) are on the list without any effects of note.

 

Music & Sound Effects

So, if a movie excels at everything I’ve covered up to this point, it certainly could be a favourite, but one element I find in common with the majority of my favourites is uniquely memorable sound. Not every movie needs to have a super distinct original score to be outstanding, but it certainly doesn’t hurt! All of my favourite Steven Spielberg films just so happen to be scored by his old buddy John Williams, which doesn’t seem like a coincidence. Similarly, two favourite films of mine directed by Christopher Nolan, Inception (2010) and The Dark Knight (2008), were both scored by Hans Zimmer, and perhaps they would have been favourites even without that collaboration, but the music for both of those films helped define the cinematic language that spoke to me at the right time in the right way to really affect me, stick with me, and keep me coming back for more.

I tried to pick out my favourite films that don’t have music I find memorable, and I only came up with a few, such as Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey (1993), Misery (1990), and Quest for Fire (1981). Even some like An American Werewolf in London (1981) or Stand by Me (1986), which don’t have original music I can hear in my head when I think of them, do have soundtracks with memorable needle drops that fit perfectly. Sound effects are less important than music when it comes to favourites, but as I thought about it, I realized many of my favourite films have some of the most iconic and recognizable original sound effects in all of cinema, whether I’m talking about Star Wars (1977) or Jurassic Park (1993) or even Iron Man (2008).

 

Nostalgia & Rewatchability

This last one might annoy some film purists, but I’ve kept it real on my blog since day one, and I have to keep it real right to the end here, so the last criterion for what makes a film my favourite has to be the combination of nostalgia I feel watching it and how likely I would be to watch it again. I acknowledge and respect the cinematic craftsmanship that went into the film Schindler’s List (1993), I do! That being said, I have not been compelled to watch it again since the one time I saw it, because it is a hard watch, and I am not a historian. Not every movie needs to be fun, but a movie needs to have at least some rewatchability to be a favourite of mine. I decided on many of the films in my Favourite Films Series so many years ago I have since rewatched certain ones like Jaws, Jurassic Park, and Gremlins so many times I couldn’t possibly keep count. A film like The Sandlot (1993) is perhaps one of the best examples of something I am deeply nostalgic for, but nostalgia isn’t enough. You won’t see Osmosis Jones (2001) on my favourites list, even though I have rewatched it as an adult and felt nostalgic. It just doesn’t have the right combo to hold up as something timeless for me, but many movies I saw at a young age do.

Should nostalgia determine favourite? I say yes, because that’s my own prerogative. It may be part of the reason there aren’t many newer films on my favourites list, but I have slowly added and re-evaluated my personal favourites list ever since I first drafted it. I can remember the first time I saw every single one of my favourite films, and I don’t have an exact number of required rewatches to determine if a new one becomes part of the list or gets knocked off. So, next time I post a new entry in my Favourite Films Series, you’ll have a better idea of what general criteria got it there in the first place, and some of the films I mentioned in here I have not covered yet, but I eventually will some day! For the record, here are the ones I have covered so far, in publication order (not any other order…that will also come along some day, too…)

An American Werewolf in London (1981): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/03/an-american-werewolf-in-london.html

Godzilla 2000 (1999): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/04/godzilla-2000-1999-favourite-films.html

Iron Man (2008): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/05/iron-man-2008-favourite-films-series.html

Tremors (1990): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/06/tremors-1990-favourite-films-series.html

King Kong (1933): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/07/king-kong-1933-favourite-films-series.html

Dinosaur (2000): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/08/dinosaur-2000-favourite-films-series.html

The Dark Knight (2008): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-dark-knight-2008-favourite-films.html

Misery (1990): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2016/10/misery-1990-favourite-films-series.html

Alien (1979): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2017/04/alien-1979-favourite-films-series.html

Aliens (1986) : https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2017/04/aliens-1986-favourite-films-series.html

Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (1986) : https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2017/06/ferris-beullers-day-off-1986-favourite.html

Jaws (1975): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2017/06/jaws-1975-favourite-films-series.html

Spider-Man 2 (2004): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2017/07/spider-man-2-2004-favourite-films-series.html

Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2017/08/terminator-2-judgment-day-1991.html

Predator (1987): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2018/10/predator-1987-review-favourite-films.html

The Silence of the Lambs (1991): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-silence-of-lambs-1991-review.html

The Shawshank Redemption (1994): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-shawshank-redemption-1994-favourite.html

The Edge (1997): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2020/10/the-edge-1997-review-favourite-films.html

Sing Street (2016): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/01/sing-street-2016-favourite-films-series.html

Inception (2010): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/02/inception-2010-favourite-films-series.html

Rear Window (1954) : https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/rear-window-1954-favourite-films-series.html

Jurassic Park (1993): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/06/jurassic-park-1993-favourite-films.html

The Sandlot (1993): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/07/the-sandlot-1993-favourite-films-series.html

Stand by Me (1986): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/09/stand-by-me-1986-favourite-films-series.html

The Thing (1982): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/10/the-thing-1982-review-favourite-films.html

The Fly (1986): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/10/the-fly-1986-review-favourite-films.html

Planet Terror (2007): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/10/planet-terror-2007-review-favourite.html

Ghostbusters (1984): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2021/10/ghostbusters-1984-review-favourite.html

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2022/04/fantastic-mr-fox-2009-favourite-films.html

Gremlins (1984): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2022/12/gremlins-1984-favourite-films-series.html

Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2023/06/raiders-of-lost-ark-1981-favourite.html

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2023/08/pirates-of-caribbean-curse-of-black.html

The Naked Gun (1988): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-naked-gun-1988-favourite-films.html

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2024/05/mad-max-fury-road-2015-favourite-films.html

The Breakfast Club (1985): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2024/07/the-breakfast-club-1985-favourite-films.html

The Terminator (1984): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2024/10/the-terminator-1984-favourite-films.html

Godzilla (1954): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2024/11/godzilla-1954-favourite-films-series.html

The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2025/06/the-lost-world-jurassic-park-1997.html

Back to the Future (1985): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2025/07/back-to-future-1985-favourite-films.html

Toy Story (1995): https://cccmovies.blogspot.com/2025/11/toy-story-1995-favourite-films-series.html