>I don’t have any particular reason for posting these lists, other than curiosity. Personally I find these kinds of list interesting, even though they may not mean a lot. If they say anything, it is about the different reasons people vote for their top films. Although we cannot delve into the psychology of the voters, I believe directors pick films they wish they had directed, critics pick films they wish they had had the chance to write about when they first appeared, and the IMDb highlights the tendency to pick audience favorites and recent films. It would be interesting to have some demographics to go with these lists.
Assuming there is any level of objectivity in such lists, a question I have is, who might the better person be to create a top-ten list: the professional filmmaker, the professional critic, or the avid fan? Is this even a fair question?
Internet Movie Database top ten film – based on users’ votes
1. The Godfather
2. The Shawshank Redemption
3. The Godfather: Part II
4. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
5. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
6. Casablanca
7. Schindler’s List
8. Pulp Fiction
9. Seven samurai
10. Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back
Sight & Sound Critics Top Ten List
1. Citizen Kane
2. Vertigo
3. Rules of the Game
4. The Godfather & Godfather part 2
5. Tokyo Story
6. 2001: A Space Odyssey
7. Battleship Potemkin
8. Sunrise
9. 8 ½
10. Singing in the Rain
Sight & Sound Director’s Top Ten List
1. Citizen Kane
2. The Godfather & Godfather part 2
3. 8 ½
4. Lawrence of Arabia
5. Dr. Strangelove
6. Bicycle Thieves
7. Raging Bull
8. Vertigo
9. Rashomon
10. Rules of the Game
11. Seven Samurai
pilgrimakimbo 
>Assuming there is any level of objectivity in such lists, a question I have is, who might the better person be to create a top-ten list: the professional filmmaker, the professional critic, or the avid fan? Is this even a fair question?Absotively.But I think it depends on what one sees as the function of such lists. Personally I see them as a window into the sensibilities of the person creating them . . . and nothing else. Which is probably why I have so little interest in these lineups distilled from multiple sources, be it IMDb drifters or the All Stars who make up the S&S extravaganza once a decade. The less specific the source, the less insight you can achieve into the mind of its creator (even demographical data would be too general for me). These gang emanations are probably useful in tracking the currents of Group Think . . . and I’m always fascinated by what I see as a natural tendency on the part of cinephiles to cluster together, but I can’t imagine what else in the way of insight could be derived from it.But that’s just me.To make it more of a challenge, the statesmen at S&S should make a slight adjustment in the rules next time they do this (if they absolutely have to, that is): The next list should only include films that have never before appeared in a previous S&S Top Tenner.Terrific blog, by the way. You are linked!
>Tomre: The next list should only include films that have never before appeared in a previous S&S Top Tenner.I heartily agree. I find many of these “ultimate” lists to be repetitive and redundant. Of course Citizen Kane and Rules of the Game are great and important films (and I do love them), but there are other films that have had as much an influence on subsequent film history via their influence on later filmmakers as those two films – consider La Terra Trema or Paisan for example.I think these lists tend to gain a certain momentum and keep moving forward on their own accord, as it were.Thanks for your response and encouragement.