I give your list a ten.
Don't buy the books I wrote
https://sites.google.com/site/authorschindler/

It is obvious why not as some of the films you list are under two hours long and cannot possibly be described as epic.Surely including THE WIZARD OF OZ was a joke? Please tell me that it was.

I think I see your point. I have made an amendment to my list since I get why those two films are not entirely appropriate for the intended definition. Thanks for explaining the misconception.
"Don't buy the books I wrote
https://sites.google.com/site/authorschindler/
"

The problem is that the genre is pretty hard to have a universal definiton for, and different people seem to have their own definitions on what constitutes one. But given how IMDB has split up the message boards (which does have sci-fi and fantasy as their own which those two films,
2001
and
Wizard of Oz
respectively, would be more closely classified as) for each genre, they (including the OP) appear to be going with the one AFI one of as "A genre of large-scale films set in a cinematic interpretation of the past." (With their examples here on the link to this board being
Gone With The Wind
,
Ben-Hur
, and
The Last Samurai
. Granted I'm still not sure why they decided to roll them in with disaster films) And those types of films are usally the ones normatively put into the epic genre, though it is when you get beyond that that different people seem to potentially start having other additions. (Though it should be noted that there could be a distinction between "epic" as a genre and as a description) Now maybe a better term for IMDB would of been "historical epic" or "period drama", or something to that effect. Again, I'm not trying to say who's right and who's wrong or anything. But I thought it was notable that I'm pretty sure this is what's being gone for when talking about "Epics" on this board.

Why not?
"Don't buy the books I wrote
https://sites.google.com/site/authorschindler/
"

As great of films as
The Wizard of Oz
and
2001: A Space Odyssey
are, I don't think they fit the standard definition for the epic genre.

The Vikings (1958)
The Robe
Demetrious & The Gladiators
The Egyptian
The Grapes Of Wrath
The Count Of Monte Cristo
The Sea Hawk (1940)
Bounty
The Prince & The Pauper (1937)
The Sound of Music
The Fiddler on the Roof
Other notable movies I would like to mention (that happen to be both "epic" and "classic" but are not essentially "classic epics":
The Wizard Of Oz
2001: A Space Odyssey
"Don't buy the books I wrote
https://sites.google.com/site/authorschindler/
"

You may want to consider
Khartoum
from 1966 directed by Basil Dearden and starring Charlton Heston and Laurence Olivier
55 Days at Peking
from 1963 directed by Nicholas Ray starring Charlton Heston, Ava Gardner, and David Niven
From the same era as
The Last Emperor
would be
Gandhi
from 1982 directed by Richard Attenborough and starring Ben Kingsley
If you were to include modern epics you could include the likes of
Dances with Wolves
,
Braveheart
,
Gladiator
,
The Last Samurai
, etc. You could even probably consider ones like
The English Patient
and
Titanic
in a
Gone with the Wind
/
Doctor Zhivago
sort of way. Though only time will tell if all or any of them become considered classics like the other ones listed. Granted some of the older ones we have listed in this thread (
El Cid
,
55 Days at Peking
,
The Fall of the Roman Empire
, and
Khartoum
) have become pretty obscure at this point. (which is quite a shame)

You might add:
War and Peace
Barry Lyndon
Moby Dick
Braveheart
"Did you make coffee? Make it!"Cheyenne.