MO Top 100 Thrillers – Part IX: The Top 10

…And we’ve reached the top 10. What a journey. If my only reader has made it this far, thank you for hanging in! I’ve immensely enjoyed compiling and writing about this list.

I wanted to note a few statistics about the composition of my top 100 list that might add a little perspective. As noted, the AFI Top 100 Thrillers list came out 20 years ago…June 12, 2001. With that in mind I wanted to note:

-The average age of the movies on the AFI list is 54 years old (1967). The average age of my list is ~28 (1992).

-Over one third of the movies on my list (36) came out from 2001-or onward, rendering them ineligible for the AFI’s original list.

-There are 42 movies on both the AFI list and my list.

-This means that there are 22 movies on my list that were eligible for their list, but were not selected.

-Movies on the AFI list ranged from 1923 – 1999. For my list, 1943 – 2019, so literally 20 years later on both the start date and the end date. I expect that the AFI has a much greater sense of history and context than I do, which is why my list skews newer.

-Alfred Hitchcock was the AFI’s most represented director with 9 movies on their list. Not surprising for the “master of suspense”. Followed by Steven Spielberg (6), Stanley Kubrick (5), James Cameron (3), and Ridley Scott (3).

-My most represented director was…Alfred Hitchcock, with 5 movies. Followed by David Fincher (4), Stanley Kubrick (4), Martin Scorsese (4), Ridley Scott (4), Steven Spielberg (4), Christopher Nolan (3), and Quentin Tarantino (3).

To borrow from Bill Simmons, as I often do, this top 10 list would be my answer for when the aliens inevitably invade the earth, and stake the future of humanity on whether or not we can make them feel unease and shock, and keep them on the edge of their seat.

One area where I diverge a bit from Simmons’ “wine cellar” concept, and likely from the AFI list as well, is that I don’t quite put the same value on the movie’s place in history. All of the movies I’m about to lay out are all-time greats, but I just mean critical and audience reception in the year the movie came out isn’t always a deciding factor. I’m planning on an alien invasion in 2021, and I need to provide what I believe the most thrilling, regardless of sub-genre or historical context.

SPOILERS AHEAD

To the list!

10). Die Hard (1988, John McTiernan) – AFI Ranking: 39th

Until technology renders our old way of life un-recognizable to future generations, Die Hard is, and likely will remain, my pick for the best pure action movie of all-time. There are a laundry list of reasons for this, but I think Chris Ryan, of theringer.com, phrased it best when he said something to the effect of, “…They really almost break this guy.”

The 80’s were a huge development period for action movie tropes. The decade started with Raiders of the Lost Ark, but the movies started morphing, specifically the heroes all became brawnier, Special Forces-types with cute one-liners and a propensity for destruction. They were basically Marvel superheroes.

The problem with this approach, which is the same issue with most Marvel movies nowadays, is that the movies lose their stakes. The protagonists are basically superheroes that can overcome any situation, and they figure out a way to take on all comers and get the girl at the end. They’re Goliath.

Die Hard zigged, while every other action movie was zagging, and that’s why it’s thrilling. Our hero is John McClane; an average joe, with an average build, marital problems, a receding hairline, who’s in way over his head. His one-liners aren’t cute, they’re wisecracks from a tired, scared wiseass. He’s got glass in his feet, he’s bleeding everywhere, his shirt gets progressively dirtier throughout the course of the movie. All he’s got are his wits, and he barely makes it out alive.

Of course, we have to talk about Hans Gruber, the greatest action movie villain of all-time. McClane was the perfect hero because he was a flawed man who was able to overcome when he was on the brink of disaster. But he had to get pushed to the brink. Hans Gruber was able to push him to the brink because he was highly intelligent, ruthless, and adaptable. This led to a perfect cause and effect relationship. The terrorists took the building, so McClane tried to radio the police. Hans sent a man after McClane, McClane killed him and stole his detonators. And it keeps going as the stakes up.

The movie is put together extremely well. It’s a typical 3-act structure, which is how most movies are formatted, but Die Hard stands out because it creates progressive complications. Each scene builds on the scenes before it, and each scene can only happen because of the scenes before it.

Bill Simmons noted on The Rewatchables podcast that Die Hard was the start of an archetype. In an effort to replicate its success, movie studios would pitch their “new ideas” as ‘Die Hard on a (fill in the blank)’; a boat (Under Siege), a hockey game’ (Sudden Death), etc.

Often imitated, never equaled. The G.O.A.T of action movies.

9). Parasite (2019, Bong Joon Ho) – AFI Ranking: N/A

Recency bias? Maybe. I only just saw this movie in the last two months or so, but was blown away. I think this will be a movie we’re talking about in ten years.

The premise is highly engaging; a poor family (The Kims) cons their way into working in the home of a rich family (The Parks). Yes, the movie has higher level themes about social class structure, but the reason the movie is a thriller is because of that premise. It’s a highly combustible situation. How long can the four of them keep this up? Will the Parks figure them out? What will happen if they’re figured out?

What makes the movie an all-time great is the midpoint. SPOILERS AHEAD. I mean, what an insane revelation. It perfectly rides the line of being completely shocking, but not completely out of left field. In addition to its shock value, the revelation of the basement bunker changes the story completely. As noted in this breakdown by Tyler Mowery, the twist changes the story in three ways: the Kims’ lose control of the house, they go from celebrating to panic, and it changes the conflict from the Kims vs the Parks to the Kims vs the poorer family in the basement.

Of course, the ending is crazy as well. It’s a bit further out there than the midpoint, but we can see the cracks forming, particularly with Ki Taek (Kang-ho Song), who was distraught about Mr. Park’s comments about his scent, as well as the flooding of their home.

I have this movie replacing Rebecca (AFI #80) as a thriller whose story revolves around a sinister secret in a mansion. All in all, a good thriller should keep the viewer guessing and this movie does that about as well as any movie I’ve seen in the last ten years. I may be overrating it slightly, but I think this movie will age like a fine wine.

8). Inglourious Basterds (2009, Quentin Tarantino) – AFI Ranking: N/A

I have Inglourious Basterds replacing the movie it most directly resembles, The Dirty Dozen (AFI #65). It’s arguable whether or not it’s Tarantino’s best movie, but it’s definitely his most thrilling. There are several fantastic sequences that thrill and/or excite.

a). The opening scene on the farm. It’s one of the greatest opening scenes in movie history, and an exercise in tension. Tarantino allows the historical context of the movie to create the initial unease. The farmer is clearly worried as the car approaches, and once they pull up, it’s clear that they’re with the SS. The audience already understands what this is about. Landa, an all-time great villain, begins to casually, and at times goofily, question the farmer about Jews that lived in the area. This is proceeds uneasily, but seems like it will be okay until it’s revealed that the farmer is hiding Jews under his house. Now it’s life or death. And we hope the Landa will not figure it out.

b). The Basterds introduction and interrogation of the hostages. This is what I was waiting for when I saw the movie in the theater. The trailer came out my senior year of college, and made this movie look like an uptempo revenge movie. I was jacked up to see it that summer.

c). Within that scene, the Hugo Stiglitz introduction was a whimsical and badass way to introduce a soldier made famous for killing Nazis. I didn’t know about Hugo Stiglitz ahead of time, but that short clip was basically a microcosm of why I wanted to see this movie so badly.

d). Even further, I loved the introduction of The Bear Jew. Tarantino builds suspense for the interaction, referencing The Bear Jew, and his exploits. He sounds like a hero I should’ve learned about at Hebrew School. We can’t see The Bear Jew. He’s slowly walking out of a dark tunnel, tapping the wall with his baseball bat, until the music crescendos and he appears. In terms of sheer joy, few scenes provide that kind of excitement, another form of thrilling that is often overlooked in this category.

e). One thing I didn’t mention about the opening scene is that one of the Jews hiding under the farmer’s house gets aways, Shoshana Dreyfuss. Shoshana now lives in Paris under a new identity and owns a movie theater. A Nazi war hero, Fredrick Zoller takes a liking to her and has to meet with Joseph Goebbels to discuss hosting the premiere of his new Nazi propaganda movie about Zoller’s exploits. The meeting is a little goofy, but of course, still a bit uneasy, when Landa shows up. Now, it’s life or death. Not to mention her trauma. Everyone else leaves the table and Shoshana has to keep it together for a 1-on-1 with Landa. As in the opener, Landa’s silliness belies whether or not he will be able to figure out her real identity.

f). The Pub scene. This is a top-2 scene in an all-time great movie. The Basterds are meeting with their contact, famous movie star, Bridgette von Hammersmark, in a small, out of the way pub filled with German soldiers. Things are going fine until a German major, out of view in a little nook, makes himself known and sits down at their table. The tension ratchets up to eleven.

g). Basically, the last hour of the movie where the two different plots to take out the German high command come together. 1) Shoshana is planning to lock her theater and burn it to the ground, killing everyone inside. 2)The Basterds are crashing the premiere with von Hammersmark and planning to kill the high command themselves. Much of the tension comes because Landa figures out that von Hammersmark is a spy after the shootout at the pub. We know he’ll likely thwart that attempt, but of course, Tarantino draws this out. Including a humorous scene where Landa makes von Hammersmark’s three Basterd escorts, who are supposedly Italian, try and pronounce their own names. Shoshana’s routine is repeatedly interrupted by Fredrick Zoller. This not being a “true story” type of movie, there is definite suspense over whether or not these attacks will be successful.

Fantastic movie. I’m ashamed to say I when I saw it in theaters I was a little disappointed it wasn’t purely about the Basterds killing Nazis. Of course, that opinion quickly dissipated upon my second viewing, and now I get to enjoy the suspense, creativity and humor of this movie for the rest of my life.

7). The Shining (1980, Stanley Kubrick) – AFI Ranking: 29th

What can be said about The Shining at this point that hasn’t already been said? The crazy thing with The Shining, besides Jack Torrance, is that we know where the movie is going. I knew about it the first time that I saw it, but also, the movie tells you multiple times in the beginning. When Jack interviews with the hotel people about the job, they tell him (and us) that the last guy who had the job savagely murdered his family. We know that he’s had issues with alcoholism, including an incident when he dislocated his son, Danny’s shoulder. Danny has what’s called “The Shine”, where he can see what’s going to happen, and it’s shown to us a few times, briefly. The whole conceit of the movie isn’t if Jack goes crazy, it’s when.

So, how is this movie suspenseful? If we know it’s going to happen, doesn’t that take the suspense out of the movie? Nope! The movie presents a slow descent into madness, and even though we know it’s coming, each step in that direction is unsettling because we know where it’s headed and we don’t know when it will escalate. The music is offbeat, not always fitting the scene, which throws off the viewer. The cinematography shows the vastness of the hotel and how isolated they are. Occasionally, odd things happen. Danny can see the twins who were murdered. There’s bloodshed.

It’s almost as if Stanley Kubrick took this on as a challenge: Okay, we’re going to tell the audience where the story is going. There won’t really be any monsters, it’ll mostly be well-lit, and though you can use hallucinations, 95% of the movie should just be husband, wife and son. Good luck making it scary.

I shouldn’t complain about the AFI since they had this 29th on their list. But it also seems crazy it wasn’t higher. It’s just an unsettling journey.

6). The Exorcist (1973, William Friedkin) – AFI Ranking: 3rd

Just a wild movie, and a top 10 pick in the “I wish I could’ve seen this in the theater” draft. It’s also on my horror movie Mount Rushmore. By the time I got to it, I knew what the plot was about. I knew about the head-spin, the vomiting, the deep voice, etc. That’s probably why I have it ranked slightly lower than the AFI.

This movie does a great job of being shocking without going overboard. The supernatural elements allow for frights to happen that defy typical logic, but there’s a certain point where it could’ve just been too much. Rather than having her head spin around, she could’ve ripped her head off and started throwing it at people, etc, but that would’ve just been nonsensical. Instead, it’s a head-spin, something quick enough not to be over the top, but slow enough for us to digest that something is wrong.

I can’t imagine seeing this in 1973. It would’ve felt like anything could happen next.

5). The Silence of the Lambs (1991, Jonathan Demme) – AFI Ranking: 5th

Movie #2 in my holy triumvirate of serial killer movies. It’s hard for me to write about The Silence of the Lambs as it is one of my two or three favorite movies ever. I’ve seen it dozens of times, and while I always enjoy it immensely, the thrills maybe aren’t as sharp because of overexposure.

One thrilling attribute that stands out about The Silence of the Lambs that it uses Hannibal Lecter as the mentor character. Mentors are a very common inclusion in story because protagonists often need to learn new skills before they take on the antagonist. A criminal mentor is an interesting twist on this. At the end of Catch Me If You Can, Frank Abagnale avoided a prison sentence by helping the FBI catch check-forgers. This all seemed nice because we had just been charmed by Leonardo DiCaprio for two hours; we were impressed with his skill and he didn’t really hurt any individual people. With Hannibal Lecter…it’s different. We meet him in the 12th minute, and minutes 6-11 are spent talking about what a savage he is. He is a murdering psychopath who eats his victims. So…

There are individual scenes that are full of suspense. Clarice having to search the storage unit on a tip from Lecter certainly feels unsafe. Every conversation with Lecter feels dangerous, because even though he can’t physically hurt Clarice, her revelations about her childhood give him ample material to torture her. We’re also not sure if he’s going to help with the case, or whether the woman will die.

One excellent technique from Demme in this movie is how he takes us back and forth between two locations right in the middle of the action. SPOILER OF COURSE: Lecter’s escape is very thrilling. We have a bit of foresight when we find out that he stole Dr. Chilton’s pen. That is forgotten until we see that he’s holding a part of it while being handcuffed for his second dinner. It’s a foreboding dread since we know that the guards are in trouble. Once we see him break out of his cage, the camera takes us to the first floor where the other guards react to hearing shots fired. We can only imagine what he’s doing up there. Part of the thrill comes in thinking about the horrifying murders, but we’re also interested to see if and how he’ll escape. It appears Lecter is on the roof of the elevator, and the SWAT team comes to open the door from inside, it only to reveal it’s a corpse. This takes us to the inside of the ambulance. Lecter sits up, pulls someone else’s face off of his own face and now we know the EMT is in trouble. Brilliant back and forth revealing new information and raising the adrenaline of the scene.

The climax is another scene that sets this movie apart. It’s a race against time, as they have to get to Buffalo Bill before he kills the woman he currently has captive. The FBI believes they found him and storm a house outside of Chicago, only for it to be empty. Clarice is in Ohio and walks up to do a routine check when it becomes clear she’s at Buffalo Bill’s house. By herself. As an FBI trainee. She probably should call for backup, but there weren’t cellphones and she can’t risk him going back inside to kill the woman. Of course she ends up stuck in the disgusting maze that is Buffalo Bill’s house, and toward the end, he shuts off the lights. Maximum danger for her.

Then at the end, Hannibal calls Clarice at her FBI graduation. Just in case we forgot, he’s back out in the wild, about to kill and eat Dr. Chilton.

4). No Country For Old Men (2007, Coen brothers) – AFI Ranking: N/A

“Things happened…can’t take ’em back.” – Llewelyn Moss

No Country For Old Men replaces The Night of the Hunter (AFI #34) as a movie about a brutal criminal chasing after a stolen fortune. The circumstances are slightly different, but there’s a lot of similarities between Reverend Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum) and Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem).

There are so many tense moments in this movie. A lot of them center around Anton Chigurh. We first see him being apprehended by a police officer (perhaps a sign that he does illegal things). Once they’re back at the station, the officer is on the phone with his back to Chigurh, and we watch Chigurh approach him and brutally kill him by strangling him with the chain of his handcuffs. And once that happens, it’s pretty much pins and needles whenever he’s involved.

Chigurh takes the officer’s car and pulls someone else over. We know that isn’t going to end well. At one point, Chigurh goes to pay for gas (the above scene), and things get…uncomfortable. He meets a couple of cartel guys to go over the scene of the drug deal and we find out that he’ll find out who owns Llewelyn’s truck and then he has some type of tracker for the money; of course he kills the two cartel guys. If you see Chigurh, someone is probably going to die very soon.

Every scene is enjoyable, but if I had to pick the three most tense sequences, they would be: the above gas station scene, when Chigurh shows up at Llewelyn’s first motel and kills three cartel workers, and then when Chigurh shows up at Llewelyn’s second hotel and they have a shootout. Far from the only three scenes with tension, but they’re the three most masterful and memorable.

There’s no music in this movie, which feels very natural when we’re out on the Texas landscape and adds a different level of anticipation when a confrontation is set to take place. We see Chigurh walking up to a motel room with a shotgun and we don’t hear a sound until he kicks in the door. A little later, Llewelyn is at another hotel and figures out that there’s a tracker in the satchel of money. He discards the tracker and waits on his bed, facing the door with a shotgun. We see a shadow beneath the crack of the door indicating that someone is standing outside of the room. The shadow moves away and then the hall light goes out. Now we’re just waiting in the dark with Llewelyn for someone to come in the door. Fun times.

3). Se7en (1995, David Fincher) – AFI Ranking: N/A

Lovely. The third and final movie of holy triumvirate of serial killer movies. I also think Se7en is the best police procedural. Part of it is the hook – a serial killer killing based on the seven deadly sins. It’s hard to think of a serial killer movie with a more intriguing premise, save for The Silence of the Lambs.

Aside from the obvious benefits of easy marketing or creating intrigue, the genius of using the seven deadly sins is twofold:

1. Once the murders are connected to the seven deadly sins (after the second victim), we can now expect five more murders, which raises the (already very high) stakes to catch the killer before another person dies.
2. It allows each murder scene to be different, allowing for more ways to shock the audience while also providing some general variety. If the second victim was identical to the first one, morbidly obese and force-fed canned spaghetti until his stomach exploded, it would lose its edge.

The brutality of these killings also stands out. The slasher genre already had explored gore and creativity in killing. Although we see some blood, there isn’t a ton of gore on-screen. However, the acts themselves are so shocking and savage that we don’t really need to see the whole crime scene.

Waiting to hear what happened to each victim has the audience on edge. The Sloth victim creates the most suspense, with the cops and the SWAT team storming his apartment, only to find a disturbingly emaciated man tied to his bed.

There’s also a good foot chase scene when they (illegally) figure out who the killer is and go to his address to confront him. The killer ends up with a gun to Mills’ (Brad Pitt) head, but doesn’t pull the trigger. Why wouldn’t he do that?

Then there’s the last third of the movie. SPOILERS TO COME…I don’t want to give too much away, but there have been five brutal murders and we have no idea who this killer is going to be, and then he just shows up to the police station. Not something I ever recall seeing. Then he negotiates a deal to take Mills and Somerset (Morgan Freeman) to the bodies of the last two victims. Never seen this before either. Why would he do this? Should we be afraid? This builds a massive amount of intrigue and even though we know the answer is horrible, we’re constantly wondering what will happen next.

I can’t think of how this movie would’ve been left off the AFI’s list on the merits of a thriller. I can only imagine it was due to issues with the brutality of the subject matter. For my money, there isn’t a more thrilling police story, and the AFI included plenty of police stories on their list. For me, Se7en replaces High Noon (AFI #20) as another cop drama with a ticking clock where our protagonist is going to have to face the music.

2). Alien (1979, Ridley Scott) – AFI Ranking: 6th

Originally pitched as “Jaws in space”, Alien is another top ten draft pick in the “I wish I could’ve seen this in the theater” draft. I only saw it for the first time last year and no movie has filled me with more existential dread.

Similar to Jaws, the movie doesn’t show the monster until the second half. However, unlike Jaws the first attack doesn’t happen until the end of the first half of the movie. We see daily life on the Nostromo, and then there’s a disturbance S.O.S from a nearby planet. Three of them leave the ship to explore the situation, and it’s tense! Three people walking around, the titular alien could attack them at any moment. We see hundreds of gigantic eggs that look like they’ve hatched, which isn’t worrisome at all. Kane (John Hurt) touches an egg and something jumps out of it and attached to his face, for our first scare of the movie.

After a few days in quarantine, the alien object falls off Kane’s face and he’s back to normal. They’re eating a meal, when Kane starts to have chest pains. This was a scene I’d heard about ahead of time, but seeing this in the theater with no knowledge of it beforehand would’ve been nuts. Suffice it to say, something shocking happens and now an alien is loose on the ship.

They’re looking for an alien on a ship that is filled with dark, cavernous space. Needless to say, the alien is hard to find. When they go off searching by themselves, someone usually ends up in a bad spot, but these deaths are somewhat drawn out as well. It’s similar to Halloween where we see the different crew members go off alone, we know the alien is out there, but it doesn’t immediately attack, which would relieve all our tension. We’re forced to wait, for a bit long, which puts us more on edge.

One scene I’d like to spotlight is Dallas’ death. This is specifically important for two reasons, 1) Dallas is the last remaining officer ranked ahead of Ripley, and his death forces her along on her hero’s journey arc, and 2) because I think it’s the greatest jump scare I’ve ever seen. Unlike all of the other attacks, we know when this is coming. They’re able to tracking the alien in the air ducts, moving closer to Dallas, so we see that a confrontation is coming, and yet, even though we can mentally time it, and we know it’s coming, it’s so loud and full force that it scares the daylights out of me every time.

My favorite horror movies are Halloween and The Thing, in some order. I just enjoy them the most, subjectively. Alien, and, I don’t say this lightly, is a better movie than both of my favorites. I believe it to be the best horror movie of all-time.

Now You See Me…JUST KIDDING!!!!!

1). The Dark Knight (2008, Christopher Nolan) – AFI Ranking: N/A

Where to we…begin. No, it isn’t a pure thriller, like The Silence of the Lambs or a horror movie like Alien, but The Dark Knight is more thrilling than any movie I’ve seen. I’ve talked before about my experience seeing this movie at a midnight showing on opening day. For all the hype and anticipation surrounding this movie, it met and even exceeded the excitement.

Obviously, the Joker is electric. Whenever he’s on screen, there’s a thrilling air of unpredictability. This chaos sets the tone for the whole movie. The opening scene serves as a great prologue. It takes the crisp opening bank heist from Heat, but adds the unique twist of having each member of the team kill off another member of the team after their main task is completed. It’s exhilarating because it’s something we’ve never seen. The scene starts out with henchmen talking about the Joker, building him up, and then he’s surprisingly introduced as having been involved with the heist the whole time. This opening provides uncertainty and an element of danger that carry through the rest of the movie.

There are many superlative scenes:

-Arguably the best bank heist scene ever

-Arguably the best chase sequence (when the Joker’s trying to get to Dent)

-Arguably the best police interrogation scene ever…

-…and the subsequent race against time to save Rachel/Dent

-The Joker’s introduction to the mob

-Batman abducting Lao

Similar to Infinity War, The Dark Knight has the benefit of not being the first or last in the franchise, so we don’t need to spend as much time establishing the setting and characters, and it also allows the movie to end on a more dour note, not having to wrap everything up in a bow.

I have The Dark Knight replacing Braveheart (AFI #91). There isn’t a thematic reason for this, it’s just the way it fell. Some people think TDK is underrated, some think it’s overrated. Whatever point it’s in of its appreciate lifecycle, I can’t think of a more exciting movie. I’ve never been more anxious to find out what will happen next, or more thankful to be along for the ride.