Highlighting the Folly of so called "Bad Cinema"

In 2006, a popular magazine called 'Entertainment Weekly' released a list claiming what they believe to be the 25 most controversial films, http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1202224,00.html. Much less of a serious consideration of controversial films than a list where somebad 'bad' is depicted in films. In short the list resembles something alittle like this

25- Alladin

24- Caligula

23-Kids

22-Do The Right Thing

21-Bonnie And Clyde

20-Cannibal Holocaust

19-Basic Instinct

18-I am Curious

17-Freaks

16-United 93

15- Triumph Of The Will

14- The Warriors

13- The Da Vinci Code

12- The Deer Hunter

11-The Message

10- Baby Doll

9- Last Tango In Paris

8-Natural Born Killers

7- Birth Of A Nation

6- The Last Temptation Of Christ

5-JFK

4- Deep Throat

3- Faranhiet/911

2- A Clockwork Orange

1- The Passion Of The Christ

Nowehere in this list does it claim to be difintive, or a prominent source for academic studies, however is it possible that some of these choices have been elected on pure terms of its historical context rather than the filmic content? I mean any controversial film list which ignores Pier Paolo Passolini's disgusting 'Salo' and Lars Von Triers attack on the middle class 'The Idiots' in favour of Alladin needs some serious revision.

Don't get me wrong some of the inclusions like Natural Born Killers a cheap disjointed picture about the galmarising of criminals which lead to coipycat killings and Birth Of A Nation, an out and out racist film deserve recognition on this list. Besdes any film called cannibal Holocaust isnt going to be showing up on the Disney Channel anytime soon.

However what angers me with the label controversial is in spirit I often find, it is a label slapped on films lazily. Almost a euphamism for any film which would instantly be better warranted defiant maybe? Anti-establishment? Non-conformist? This especially angers me when brave and courageous filmamaking like Spike Lee's Do the right thing and Paul Greengrass's United 93 are deemed controversial. The former a character study of New York and the racial tension that amounts one day and the latter being a no-holds barred almost documentary like reconstruction of the tragic events which unfolded on september 11th 2001. What is controversial about these films? The fact that these people, these places and these situations do occur? The fact it strays away from a all too happy ending, because in real life happy endings don't neccesarily happen? What is controversial about depicting the truth?

If this is 'bad cinema' I would hate to see 'good cinema', cinema where people live in nuclear families, walk their dogs on a sunday morning and the only drug they are aware of is aspirin.