Top 5 Action Films of All Time
Enough blabbering about the disappointing Indiana Jones film. What are the top 5 action films?
1. Raiders of the Lost Ark. I don’t care how much noir is actually in it. It’s a perfect film.
2. Die Hard. One or two eye rolling parts that you only notice in repeated viewings. A great film.
3. T2. Admit it. From when the semi starts barreling down the road after the kid on the dirt bike you were sold.
4. Bourne Supremacy. Yeah. The 2cd film. The best of the bunch but the others deserve at least an honorable mention.
5. Casino Royal. I never thought anyone would best Connery. Connery’s still the ultimate Bond but this was the ultimate Bond movie.
Honorable Mentions
Batman Begins, the other Bourne films, the Matrix (if there weren’t so much competition and if the sequels didn’t such so much it’d have been higher), Aliens, Star Wars, Ronan.
Posted on June 3, 2008, in Pop Culture. Bookmark the permalink. 77 Comments.
Steve Evans
RJH
Scott B.
John C.
Susan M
Aaron Brown
ninemoons
arandomjohn
kulturblogadmin
Kyle M
Brad
KulturBlogGuest
MCQ
Wm
Rebecca
Ivan
Geoff J
btdgreg
Clark Goble
Aaron R.
Tim J
Ben
Ronan?
1. Seven Samurai
2. Kill Bill vol. 2
3. Pulp Fiction
4. Oldboy
5. The Matrix
Five isn’t enough.
6. Raiders
7. Kill Bill vol. 1
8. Terminator 2
9. Kung Fu Hustle
10. Harakiri
Not sure if they count as action movies, but The Dirty Dozen and Kelly’s Heroes would both make my list.
Good choices.
I was really let down by the last Bourne film – it nearly soured my feeling for the first two.
kuri, does Pulp Fiction count as an action flick? I think of it as mostly conversation. Also – Seven Samurai is a great movie. I recently watched the Magnificent Seven, the old western take on SS, with Yul Brenner as a cowboy in a black hat. Really great stuff – but without enough action to make it into a list of great action movies.
I haven’t been overly impressed with too many of the colorful CGI kung-fu movies, but I did really love Crouching Tiger. It was certainly very fluid, even emotional in its action – but action it was. That would get into my top ten.
Dirty Dozen is another great choice.
~
Bourne Supremacy doesn’t hold up very well after further viewing. The entire plot is just a huge MacGuffin and the only action is him fighting the other agent and the climactic car chase, which was cool. Other than that, there’s not a whole lot to it. I actually preferred the final film until the last act. The opening scenes in the train station and the chase in Morrocco(?) were fantastic.
I kind of make a distinction between “Action” and “Adventure” movies. I’m not sure how to define the two in order to separate them, but the Indiana Jones, Star Wars, and LoTR movies seem to be more adventure than action. Not sure if I make any sense.
Great post – I agree with all of them, although I like the first Bourne film the most of the three.
And I’m probably the only guy on the planet that thought the Matrix got better each round, as far as story goes.
Aliens – if any of you are devout Alien franchise fans, the “Quadrilogy” [sic. - should be "tetralogy" but whatever] has some awesome extended cut scenes, and the whole pack is beautiful, other than its eponymous misnomer.
The first Die Hard all the way!
What David J. said, and also what Tim J said. Swap Aliens for Bourne and I think you’ve got a solid list, but the best pure action movie of all time is Die Hard. Casino Royale was a good mention, though. The opening chase scene was GREAT.
p.s. Ronin, not Ronan, and Ronin absolutely ruled. In terms of repeat viewings Ronin holds my interest far more than T2.
Well, I have to agree that Die Hard is Numero Uno, but I do like T2 better than Ronin.
Actually, the only 2 that came to me right away were Die Hard and T2. I’m sure I’ll think of more as I start mulling it over.
Ronin is a great underrated movie. Frankenheimer has always been one of my favorite directors. It’s one of those movies that I always wonder why it doesn’t get more play on cable. Totally rewatchable.
The usual promos for Die Hard are correct. The movie that did it first and did best.
Surely there are some quality action movies that were made before 1980. I can’t help but think that we’re all overlooking some really great movies.
Thomas, I’m not real sure how to define “action movie,” but I think Pulp Fiction has plenty of action. Anyway, my top two are set in stone, but I’m pretty flexible on the rest. It’s hard to leave out Terminator 1, Die Hard, Predator, Yojimbo, Sanjuro, and For a Few Dollars More as well.
After the first Die Hard, the first one rules, I liked the fourth one next, then the third one, and then the second one (which is still better than most films anyway).
T2 is cool, I have the extended version from Target for $6 or whatever. It gets a little slow, but the additional scenes are neat – especially the one with Kyle from T1.
Totally agree on Daniel Craig. It’s almost Bond blasphemy to say that anyone is better than Connery, and although Brosnan got close (for me), Craig trumps them all. And that opening foot race was awesome. Yes, a foot race in a Bond film! Whodathunkit?
BTD (#11), I like Bullet, even though there’s really only one scene (the car chase) that I like to watch over and over.
BTD,I like these older films:
Wages of Fear (more “suspense” than “action,” or it would easily crack my top 10)
Butch Cassidy
The Dirty Dozen
The Three Musketeers (1973 version, more “adventure” than “action,” I guess)
Sword of the Beast
Sergeant York
Tokyo Drifter
I always enjoyed the Dirty Harry movies.
I think it would be easier to break it down by decade.
00′s – totally agree with Casino Royale and all that has been said about Daniel Craig. Can’t wait for Quantum of Solace, Incredibles (it may be a animation, but it’s still action.)
90′s – Matrix, Lock Stock @ Two Smoking Barrels, Usual Suspects (questionable if really “action”, Heat, Rock, Three Kings
80′s – Die Hard I, Raiders of The Lost Ark, Terminator I.
Abby, of the 90s movies your mention only two are action movies: the Matrix and The Rock. The others are crime genres.
But there is lots of action in the movies! Can’t they be both?!!!
kuri’s list is really good — closer to what mine would be than any others in this thread. I think I’d swap 2 and 3, and demote The Matrix to the second list to incorporate Aliens (the first film is better but isn’t an action film).
For what it’s worth, the genre-definition debates here are probably impossible to resolve. A way of seeing this that has some semblance of sanity, though, would be to propose action as an overarching genre, with adventure, crime, and war (for example) as sub-genres.
Heat is close if only because of that middle part which is amazing.
I can’t believe there’s someone who loves the third Die Hard.
The second Bourne movie is pretty good for me. Yeah the plot is slim. But it was slim in the other two as well. Arguably there’s at least as much plot in the second as in the first. (The third, to me, has near zero plot) I was pretty disappointed in the third film also but it does have two good action sequences (the mall and the car chase).
Oh, Blade the first should be an honorable mention as well.
Here, here. The Guns of Navarone is an action movie, as are most Westerns.
unmentioned, but worth considering:
Ghost in the Shell
RoboCop
Iron Monkey
and of course the upcoming Cockpuncher is sure to make the list
I’d count Guns of Navarone. I don’t think it comes close to the top 5 or even honorable mention. But it is a great movie.
The problem with most Westerns is that there’s not a ton of action in them. I mean I love my Clint Eastwood westerns. But action rollercoasters they just aren’t.
The Sergio Leone movies aren’t action movies? How do you figure?
Does Xaolin Soccer count as an action movie?
Clark (#22), I love the third Die Hard. Samuel Jackson is so spot on as Zeus Carver. And you gotta admit that chase scene in the cab through Central Park (which was real, BTW) is great, along with a lot of the other sequences (like the pay phone scene, etc.). The second one was a flop for me and I was afraid when 3 came out, but 3 turned out to be great. Part 1 still rules though.
die hard and the second bourne movie in the same league? blasphemy.. definitely the first or third, but the second? yuck :p
Oh yeah. I really like Mission Impossible as well.
And even though it’s really cheesy, I like that Steven Seagal film, Under Seige. I know it’s pretty stupid.
Speed?
Obviously the original Star Wars trilogy and Raiders.
Take out the bus jump and the repetitive ending and Speed is a pretty good action flick. Definitely rewatchable.
I also like Face-Off a lot. John Woo’s tendency to have characters firing two pistols – one in each hand – is just cool. Even when Tom Cruise did it in M:I2 it was cool. And I like his use of slow-motion. Not so much the white dove crap though (except in Face-Off when Travolta enters the chapel).
Face-Off? Wow. I’ve never been tempted to moderate comments as much as I am now.
Great action, weak plot, I know. I also like Starship Troopers. So sue me. They’re not top 5, but I do like their action sequences.
No shame necessary, David J.
John Woo is a God among action directors, but his Hong Kong films like THE KILLER, HARDBOILED, and A BETTER TOMORROW are all better than FACE/OFF.
THE KILLER is a fantastic film by any standard.
When I watch a movie, I certainly remove a bit of realistic expectations, but Face/Off took it to a new level. I love how Travolta walks home at the end of the movie and his wife and kid are elated, “Dad’s home!” What, you had no idea he was getting out of the hospital today after having his face re-transplaned?
Seems like a stretch to call Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid an action movie. More like an in-action movie.
“Who ARE those guys?”
Who cares! Just move on!
Love the first Matrix movie for action. So many scenes that I could watch over and over.
From memory, I’d nominate The Perfect Weapon:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102655/
although I haven’t seen it recently, not sure if I’d still like it as much as I used to.
Brian G.’s definitely right about the older Woo films.
David J., liking Starship Troopers isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It’s goofy in the extreme, but fun goofy. Not a movie I’d put in spitting distance of a top 5 list, but nonetheless a fun thing to watch.
I vote we ban David J!
I like Under Seige also. Above the Law is fun as well. The rest? Well more as unintentional comedy.
I like the 2cd Die Hard once you can get past the complete implausibility of no one being able to get a radio to work to talk to planes anywhere in the DC area.
I must confess that Face Off I like. It’s the best of the American John Woo movies. (And I think his Hong Kong stuff is overrated)
Mission Impossible III is good and only did poorly due to the insanity that is Tom Cruise in interviews.
Greg, I absolutely love the Sergio Leone films. But they are very, very slow paced – too slow to be an action film.
Ah, ARJ, it’s all in good fun, mate. I’m simply opening up to see if anybody else likes some of the quirkiness that I myself enjoy. Call them secret desires/passions if you will. Again, I’m in total agreement with the top 5, but I do own some DVDs that I consider good action fun that are definitely not widely accepted as desireable like Face-Off and Starship Troopers. We should have the same discussion with comedies – I’m all over the board there as well. I’m just throwing it out there is all.
Another vote for Face/Off!?! I need to find a new blog to hang out at. I can feel a vote for Speed 2 coming.
Under Siege isn’t bad. I had heard that it forced a change of plans for Die Hard 2 as they had originally slated it to take place aboard a ship.
Snatch?
I’m not sure what’s with all the hate for Face/Off. It’s not a great film by any means but I’ll stick with it being Woo’s best. (Woo is a very overrated director in my book)
I love Snatch but there’s not really an action scene in the whole movie, is there? Ditto with Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Both are great movies. Too bad his career went all to hell after those two.
Just one more reason to resent Madonna.
Clark, pretty good list. Choosing ONLY from your list, I’d rank them as follows:
1.) Raiders
2.) Die Hard
3.) Aliens
4.) The Matrix
5.) Star Wars
5.) Casino Royale
6.) Bourne 2
7.) Bourne 3
8.) Ronan
9.) Batman Begins
10.) Bourne 1
11.) T2
No love for Predator or Robocop??? Both are brilliant, especially Robocop.
What about The Incredibles?
Ditto the need for The Killer.
Also need to reserve a spot for the collected early work of Jackie Chan. Love Police Story 2.
How can Speed and Point Break not merit mention?
Is The Fugitive an action movie?
And you forgot the greatest action film of all-time: The Road Warrior?
The Road Warrior is truly an awesome movie. Good call Matt. I think some of the others were already mentioned. The fugitive is good, and I think it qualifies as action/suspense/crime.
Snatch and Lock Stock are fantastic movies whatever genre they’re in. Let’s say they’re their own genre, but closely enough related to action to garner an honorable mention in the cockney rhyming slang subcategory. And yes, there are action scenes in them: The boxing scenes and the shooting scenes qualify as action.
RT, I can’t believe you’re restarting the whole “goofy” debate again. Can’t you find a new adjective?
Actually, I’d agree with RT on this one. Starship Troopers is definitely goofy.
Yeah, I can’t believe I missed Road Warrior and Predator.
MCQ: how about cheesy? Campy? Deliberately schlocky?
Clark, I’m dubious about your requirements for fast pacing and “action scenes.” Action movies come in all different pacings; they aren’t all Bruckheimer/Bay productions. There’s no contradiction in terms in discussing a slow action movie; if the movie is about action, even in a ponderously filmed way, it’s an action movie. And if Snatch and Lock Stock don’t have action scenes, it must be because you define “action scenes” as somehow equivalent to big FX setpieces, because both films have plenty of scenes where people fight, deal with traps, etc. But this is tricky, and comes close to restricting attention to the subgenre of summer movie action blockbusters.
Campy, maybe. But it sounds like you’re describing a comedy. The word you’re after should be non-pejorative and describe an intentional toungue-in-cheek, nudge-and-wink homage. When it’s done right, as in Raiders, or maybe Big Trouble in Little China, it’s awesome. But it’s not “goofy.”
The spousal unit and I just watched Robocop just a couple nights ago. We mocked it mercilessly all the way through, then, at the end, I turned to her and said “hey, that was a pretty good movie.” And she agreed.
The year Robocop came out a friend and I saw every movie that played at that cineplex from June through August. So that I can still hear this in the head …
Welcome to a Festival Enterprises Cinema!
For the comfort and enjoyment of everyone, please, smoking is permitted in the outer lobby only!
We ask your cooperation in helping keep our theatres clean. Please deposit all containers and litter in trash recepticles located in the theatre. Thank you!
Are you looking for the perfect gift that everyone will enjoy? Try a Festival Enterprises gift certificate! It’s perfect for birthdays, holidays, or whenever you need that certain gift for someone special.
And now, a Festival Enterprises Feature Presentation!
~
RT, I think an action movie focuses in on the action. Most of the slower paced ones don’t.
Clark, fair enough; arguing about definitions is pointless.
MCQ, I was interested by your comment, and wanted to see if I was alone in not regarding the word “goofy” as pejorative. So I looked it up in the OED. The main definition is “Stupid, silly, daft.” This might be negative in tone, clearly, but it also might not — in the way that people sometimes refer to “dumb comedy” as a genre of film that they like. Indeed, the examples provided by the OED indicate that “goofy” is sometimes used by people other than me as a term laden with endearment and affection. Consider this usage from a 1951 novel: “Your dear little goofy face.” Clearly, “goofy” can’t have been purely, or even primarily, pejorative to the writer of that phrase. Consider, for example, how jarring this line is: “Your dear little horrible face.”
In any case, for anyone interested in this little linguistic drama, let’s just stipulate something right now. When I use the term, “goofy” implies something which is a bit clumsy, perhaps intentionally so, but nonetheless warmly-regarded. This will save trouble, as I am likely to use the word this way once in a while without noticing.
RT, I think you should change your online handle to “goofy face” since you regard that term as being so warm and endearing. For the rest of us, please paste the final three lines of your last comment at the bottom of every comment you make from now on, just so everyone is on notice as to your linguistic eccentricities. Thanks, goofy face.
Uh, yeah, MCQ, your thoughts have been taken on board.
The Transporter is unquestionably goofy and it definitely belongs on this list.
Some of these “great” action flicks have awesome action while everything else about them is crap. “Aliens” comes to mind–aside from the action it’s really lacking in every other way imaginable–except for some of the production art–maybe. While “Raiders” works as a film–beyond the action. It has all of it’s ducks in a row: great action, great characterization, great story/plot, great score, great editing, great sound, great production art, etc., etc. It’s a great, albeit cheesy, movie.
I think we ought to have a more comprehensive criteria when trying to discover “great” movies of whatever genre–and if that genre is “action” then it must have great action along with great everything else.
…or at least great *most* everything else. Something like “Road Warrior” for example–though it’s low budget compared to “Aliens”–is ten times better.
Aliens compared to most films was pretty low budget. I think Cameron only started doing budget killing films with The Abyss.
I can’t believe someone would say Cameron’s Aliens was crap though. Wow. Now every film there after in the series I’ll agree was crap.
Transporter I just can’t accept as a great film. It’s so bad I’ve yet to make it all the way through.
One I forgot that is fantastic that deserves an honorable mention is Desperado. The last 15 – 20 minutes is kind of mediocre (IMO) but the rest is great.
“I can’t believe someone would say Cameron’s Aliens was crap though.”
Well, remember it’s me who’s talking. ;>)
But still, a bunch of hot-headed doofus marines running around firing away automatic weapons in all directions at maximum testosterone is a better premise for a vaudeville.
Now “Alien” (the first of the series) was quite good–not an action flick though.
Jack, the marines in Aliens were satirical — did you notice how the story is careful to characterize all of that testosterone as totally ineffectual? The people who survive longest are the non-marines… And a young child. Really, you’ve missed a lot in that film. The performances are much better than you think, and Ripley’s characterization is rich and interesting. Aliens isn’t as good as Alien, certainly, but it’s nonetheless a much better film than you’re giving it credit for being.
Umm. One of the marines – a thoughtful one – lasts to the end. Also some of the marines such as the new captain grow and develop a lot.
I think Aliens is a better movie than Alien. I think there is much more character development, actually. Hicks, Hudson, Newt, Vasquez. I remember them all. There’s some great lines too. “I don’t know if you’ve been keeping up on current events, but we just got our asses kicked. Game over, man. Game over.”
Plus, as RT alluded to there is the theme of an overconfident military power going into a foreign situation without nearly enough forethought. Apparently, Cameron felt it was an allegory for Vietname, and obviously, it’s still timely today.
Don’t get me wrong, Alien is a great movie, but many of the characters are simply just victims.
It is a little bit like apples and oranges, however. Alien being a horror movie, and Aliens being a war film.
Good corrective, Clark. I think those details don’t change my basic point, though.
The fact that the marines are seen as almost wholly ineffectual with almost zero nuance and zero depth makes them more like keystone cops than real people in dangerous situations. It’s all fine and dandy for Cameron to work big themes into his movie–but lets get real here: Without the strangled action that movie doesn’t offer anything meaningful. We don’t come out of the theater thinking about how we might be like the marines–there’s no metaphorical connection at all. We see them merely as a bunch of idiots because we–the audience, the ones who a far less trained in military tactics than seasoned marines–are led through a bunch of irrational hoopla as we view the marines dying left and right because they’re not acting like real men/women of war. And the fact that the only one who survives happens to be the “sensitive” one only adds insult to injury–it’s a complete giving over of character to caricature in servitude of the big theme.
Hope that didn’t come across too harsh–nothing against you guys personally. Obviously, I’m not a big Cameron fan. T2 is probably his best film, IMO.
Jack,
The Aliens marines were based on a pretty common view of Vietnam-era US Army conscripts. They were supposed to be overconfident, poorly-trained, sloppy soldiers with poor morale and often incompetent leadership. They weren’t supposed to actually be very good at what they do, they were just supposed to think they were. I thought that came across pretty well.
I don’t know. It seems really strained to me–dripping with cliche. And I’m not convinced that such a portrayal has anything to do with an artistic vision. In fact it probably has more to do with a failure to achieve it. To me it boils down to an adolescent view of the world and it’s events.
Jack, they aren’t supposed to be top line troops. Rather they are troops stuck doing “bug hunts” where the aliens are considerably less lethal than our alien. Plus because the aliens are nested inside a nuclear power plant suddenly most of their training (and weapons) are rendered moot. They also have a Captain with zero experience.
So I think you have to excuse them a bit.
Yeah, they were modeled on Vietnam era guys. But it kind of fits in the context of the plot. And, as I said, folks aren’t really giving them much credit considering that half the problem is the plan they go in with.
We just saw Hot Fuzz over the weekend. While it probably doesn’t qualify on the all time list, it might belong on a list for just this decade.
I really, really liked Hot Fuzz but at the end I still felt like it could have been a lot more. So overall I didn’t like it nearly as much as Shaun of the Dead.
Re: Comment #74–
Yeah, I understand what Cameron was trying to portray. It’s just that it comes across as construct rather than character.