Citizen Kane , The Third Man , The Maltese Falcon , Apocalypse Now - these would all be on my list too. In fact, the main problem I have with Norman's list is its predictability. In his introductory history of film he reveals an attitude entirely in line with the critical establishment. With regard to the contemporary scene he champions independent filmmakers who dare to make art while Hollywood pumps out hi-tech industrial products based on comic strips. It sounds very noble, but I can't help but feel it misses the point.
Popular films are better today than they have ever been.
Movies like Godzilla , Independence Day , and yes, even The Waterboy will always be with us, and for the most part they deliver on their promises. That is to say, they aren't very good, but they do provide some entertainment without making any great claims for art. It is our serious cinema that more often insults our intelligence with pretentious and self-indulgent bores. And it is this situation that critics like Norman perpetuate. A good example of the kind of thing I am talking about can be seen in Norman's reaction to two recent movies.