This message has been deleted.

I wouldn't give it 10 because of the holes.
One of the conflicts between Stevens and Miss Kenton that she called his father "William". An under-butler should be called Mr 'Something' because it was his title. The point of that conflict was that Stevens had personal feelings towards his father, and he showed favour towards him. But actually he was reasonable and fair, because his father should have been called Mr Stevens.
What was Mr Benn? A butler or a valet? If he was a valet, Stevens wouldn't have invited him to his office/sitting room. But why would a butler travel with the employer? Valets DID travel with the employer, because butlers were in charge at home.
How many years have Miss Kenton spent working there? In the book she came in 1923 when she was in her twenties (unreasonable, she was far too young for a housekeeper) and left in 1936 (when she was 34-35). In the film she came and left in the thirties.
Housekeepers, lady's maids, cooks, and valets weren't expected to answer to the butler. They were their own people. They had to answer to the mistress/employers. Housekeepers, cooks, and lady's maids were hired by the mistress. But Miss Kenton was hired by Mr Stevens. She should have been hired by Lord Darlington. A housekeeper was more or less equal to the butler.
When they hired Lizzie - it was a goof. Housekeeper hired housemaids, parlour-maids, between-maids etc. Mr Stevens didn't have any sayings in that. Miss Kenton didn't need his approval to hire Lizzie. Butlers had nothing to do with the housemaids.
Where was the historical advisor those times?
I hated that pigeon scene in the end. I preferred the book's ending.

Yes its a 10 for me.

Eh. "Top 250" is a popular vote, and by definition is a lowest-common-denominator measure.
The more challenging or unusual a film is; the more demands it places on the viewer; the more it values art over box office - the less likely it is to be in a "top 250" popular poll.
Lists like that will never give proper due to films like this. It's an exercise in frustration to look at them.

Nothing to see here, move along.

I personally think it should be in the top 250.
"Life after death is as improbable as sex after marriage"- Madeleine Kahn(CLUE, 1985)

This message has been deleted.

It gets an 8/10 from me. While I liked the nuance and the character development, it doesn't hit me as hard as a 9 or 10 should. By that I mean: a difficult to define power, like Casablanca, or Lawrence of Arabia have, which deserve (imo) a 10. Maybe a rewatch will make me change it to 9. Thank God it was made, though, and I only wish most movies were this good.
"Did you make coffee? Make it!"Cheyenne.

It's in my top 5 of all time. However, this just isn't a film for everyone. It is very nuanced and develops slowly. Some people like more action (rather than character development) and for things to be spelled out more obviously for them. I think the level of nuance in it, though, is extremely remarkable to find in a movie. It has several layers of meaning, but I think that probably goes over some people's heads, leaving them bored and blind to the brilliance of this film. In that regard, I suppose it is actually doing well to get a 7.9, which after all is a very high rating.

I've just given it a 10, that'll help
Brilliant film.