"2000 films X 20 genres X 100 years."

November 14, 2012 10:29 AM

The History of Film in one convenient, zoomable graphic. 2000 "important" American, British, and a few other European films, grouped by genre and year.

You can buy a large print version for your cubicle wall for $36 - guaranteed to keep you and your co-workers busy for hours. Or, just click and zoom around online.

Criteria for inclusion per the site: box office success, critical acclaim, awards won, artistic or technical innovation/merit.

Let the game of chronicling omissions and seemingly unjustified inclusions begin. (Here's one to kick things off: where the hell is "Zodiac"?)

posted by Currer Belfry (33 comments total)

Look! I can pin point the exact moment Musicals began to wither and die!
posted by The Whelk at 10:33 AM on November 14, 2012

[American]
posted by MCMikeNamara at 10:33 AM on November 14, 2012 [1 favorite]

(perhaps not, I think I saw "Seven Up" in there somewhere"... but it's certainly got a slant)
posted by MCMikeNamara at 10:35 AM on November 14, 2012

Wow, was Annie really that bad?
posted by DU at 10:35 AM on November 14, 2012

Yeah, I found the musicals thing fascinating and sad. Such a great artform that was just bustling for so many years ... then just tapering out into almost nothing. (I also find it problematic that "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" isn't included under musicals.)
posted by jbickers at 10:35 AM on November 14, 2012

The animation lump (probably prompted by pixar, particularly) is neat.
posted by poe at 10:38 AM on November 14, 2012

I'm reassured to see Enter the Dragon and the Studio Ghibli movies on there. Never mind that Pokemon:The First Movie is on there but not some of the Hong Kong action movies I'd have preferred.
posted by dragonplayer at 10:39 AM on November 14, 2012

Wow, that is surprisingly consistent. This is going to be absolutely perfect for the next GOD THEY ONLY MAKE SHITTY ACTION MOVIES THESE DAYS argument.
posted by griphus at 10:43 AM on November 14, 2012

...with a nod to MCMikeNamara:

[American] + [studio productions] + [Hollywood narrative style]
posted by trackofalljades at 10:46 AM on November 14, 2012

Well, as a film historian, I think this is crappy.
It's really just a "greatest hits" list in lumpy, graphical form.

And why privilege genre as a way to parse film history? Genre is very important, sure, but not every film is a genre film.
posted by Dr. Wu at 10:54 AM on November 14, 2012 [2 favorites]

This could have been good but is extremely disappointing. This isn't the history of film. It is the history of American blockbusters.
posted by vacapinta at 10:56 AM on November 14, 2012 [2 favorites]

a few other European films

Not really a "History of Film" then, is it? More like a big chunky list of films someone cobbled together without a lot of thought.

Then again, I'm now pondering the possibility of a double-feature with "Darby O'Gill and the Little People" followed by "Last Year at Marienbad".
posted by gimonca at 10:59 AM on November 14, 2012

The history of film started in 1910?
News to me. Hell, The Great Train Robbery was 1903, and it was far from the first film.
posted by Thorzdad at 11:07 AM on November 14, 2012

I love Last Year At Marienbad but putting it on a double-bill is sadistic.
posted by griphus at 11:09 AM on November 14, 2012

Well, I see they put South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut in 'animation' and not 'musical'.

That explains that.
posted by mazola at 11:09 AM on November 14, 2012

Good grief! They only included two out of the five Planet of the Apes movies from the original franchise.
posted by snofoam at 11:10 AM on November 14, 2012

not every film is a genre film

Actually they are, if you include "depressing", "snoozefest" and "popular with idiots" as genres.
posted by DU at 11:10 AM on November 14, 2012

In forty-five years, only thirteen notable animated films were made? Huh. Okay.
posted by Sys Rq at 11:17 AM on November 14, 2012

Instead of genres, they should have done interesting categories, like: Movies Based on Toys, Claymation, American Remakes of Soviet Films, Films Starring Bill Murray, Danny Elfman Scores, etc.
posted by snofoam at 11:18 AM on November 14, 2012

MCMikeNamara: "[American]"

Seems to have been created by a Brit since it has the "Sport" genre.
posted by octothorpe at 11:29 AM on November 14, 2012

I didn't see Hitchcock's Blackmail, which aside from being notable on its own merits was also the first British talking picture.

I found Pandora's Box under Crime. Calling Pandora's Box a crime flick is like calling Oedipus Rex a detective story.
posted by ubiquity at 11:58 AM on November 14, 2012

Regardless of the merit of these films (Hugo??), this just isn't a particularly compelling graphic. It doesn't highlight the information in a useful or surprising way.
posted by colorblindrg at 12:13 PM on November 14, 2012

I'm glad he went with the chronology/bubble/flow/timeline design. Is there a word for this design? Because I love it visually and it would make googling it much easier.

I am disappointed that it's not a more colorful rendition like Ward Shelley's artistic timelines.
posted by subject_verb_remainder at 12:19 PM on November 14, 2012

mazola: "Well, I see they put South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut in 'animation' and not 'musical'."

Oscar-Nominated South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut, something I like to remind people of when discussing its merits as a musical.
posted by radwolf76 at 12:21 PM on November 14, 2012

It's just your typical Top 2000 film list, in an unusual format. Which is both a defense and a criticism.
posted by dhartung at 12:29 PM on November 14, 2012

yooooooooooooou foooooooooorgooooooot juuuuuuuunnnnnneeebug
posted by nathancaswell at 12:33 PM on November 14, 2012

I hope that this would be a zoomable graphic relating to Mark Cousins' The Story of Film. Anything else would feel like a let-down. This feels like a double let-down.
posted by kariebookish at 12:36 PM on November 14, 2012

He puts Sunrise, Blow Up and Chungking Express under suspense. I don't agree with that.
He puts Rashomon, Vertigo and Breathless under crime – that’s only half true for these films.
It's also not consistent. Annie Hall is under comedy but Midnight in Paris is under romance.
Rushmore is under comedy but Moonrise Kingdom is under drama.

They should have worked a bit to make more subcategories.
posted by Rashomon at 12:47 PM on November 14, 2012

Typo on thumbnail #1 if my eyes aren't going bad: "Cinderalla?"
posted by rahnefan at 1:00 PM on November 14, 2012

It's amusing to see Last year in Marienbad next to Jason and the Argonauts in the Fantasy category. Someone should tell Resnais (who loves pop culture). But no Wings of Desire and the remake City of Angels instead, huh.
posted by elgilito at 4:17 PM on November 14, 2012

I never did bring myself to watch City of Angels, is it as bad as it looked in the previews?
posted by octothorpe at 4:39 PM on November 14, 2012

I never did bring myself to watch City of Angels, is it as bad as it looked in the previews?
I barely remember it so it may not have been that bad, but it was certainly one of the most pointless remakes ever.
posted by elgilito at 4:55 PM on November 14, 2012

I never did bring myself to watch City of Angels, is it as bad as it looked in the previews?

It's fucking terrible and the biggest reason for that is the different ending.
posted by crossoverman at 10:01 PM on November 14, 2012