Roger Ebert’s “Ten Greatest Films of All Time” is a personal selection, not a claim to an objective or final ranking. In his December 19, 2012 essay, Ebert says he chose films for the emotional force they had for him: cinema mattered because it could move him and hold his attention and feeling. His essay names Casablanca, Citizen Kane and 2001: A Space Odyssey, among other films.
What Ebert meant by “greatest”
Ebert framed the list as an act of personal criticism: “If I must make a list of the Ten Greatest Films of All Time, my first vow is to make the list for myself, not for anybody else.” He was not measuring popularity or declaring a universally correct order. His test was whether a film affected him deeply, reflecting his view that cinema’s distinctive power is its ability to generate emotion. Read Ebert’s “Ten Greatest Films of All Time” essay.
![The Alfred Hitchcock Classics Collection [Blu-ray]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51J-E+Lr25L._SL160_.jpg)
![Disney Classics: Ultimate Complete 62 Movie Collection Limited Edition Collector's Box Set [Blu-Ray]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41XBw7+VI1L._SL160_.jpg)
That distinction matters when using the title “10 best movies of all time.” The phrase is a convenient description of Ebert’s judgment, but his own title says “greatest,” and his argument resists treating any list as an objective verdict.
The personal essay is not Ebert’s Sight & Sound ballot
Ebert also submitted a separate ballot to the Sight & Sound poll. Its purpose and constraints differed from his personal essay: it was a poll ballot, while “Ten Greatest Films of All Time” explained a personally chosen group through his emotional response. The two lists should not be conflated or treated as competing answers to one question.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
| List | Date | Purpose and basis | Titles established here |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Ten Greatest Films of All Time” | December 19, 2012 | Personal essay centered on films’ emotional effect on Ebert. | Casablanca, Citizen Kane and 2001: A Space Odyssey are named in the essay; these are not the full list. |
| Sight & Sound ballot discussion | December 14, 2012 | Discussion of Ebert’s poll ballot and its revisions, under the ballot’s selection rules. | Aguirre, Wrath of God; Apocalypse Now; Citizen Kane; La Dolce Vita; The General; Raging Bull; 2001: A Space Odyssey; Tokyo Story; The Tree of Life; and Vertigo. |
Read Ebert’s Sight & Sound poll discussion. In explaining that ballot, he described choosing The Tree of Life over Synecdoche, New York because it felt more affirmative and hopeful to him. He acknowledged that this was a personal preference, not an objective rule.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to use an Ebert list
Ebert warned that precise ordering is a poor subject for argument. He called greatest-film lists subjective and described them as propaganda in the sense that critics use them to draw attention to films. The useful question, then, is less “Is this the definitive ranking?” than “Which film might I discover or see differently?” Read Ebert’s introduction to The Great Movies.
That discovery impulse also shaped his Great Movies project: Ebert sought a balance between widely known films and titles readers might not yet know, describing the act of giving another movie lover a wonderful film’s title as a gift. His list is best read as an invitation to watch and respond, not as a requirement to agree.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
- The Help (Three-Disc Combo: Blu-ray/DVD + Digital Copy)
Rank #3
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
