Just Like The Movies

#244 Night of the Living Dead (1968)

2011-10-28T17:04:00.000-07:00

****

Director: George A. Romero

Cast: Duane Jones, Judith O'Dea, Karl Hardman, Marilyn Eastman, Keith Wayne, Judith Ridley, Kyra Schon, Charles Craig

#243 Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989)

2011-06-25T06:06:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Woody Allen

Cast: Woody Allen, Claire Bloom, Stephanie Roth, Mia Farrow, Jerry Orbach, Bill Bernstein, Martin Landau, Greg Edelman, Alan Alda, Anjelica Huston, Jenny Nichols, Joanna Gleason

Another example of Woody Allen's best work, Crimes and Misdemeanors is witty, adult, dark, philosophical, stark, and sumptuous. It follows two leads down two very different struggles, both happening simultaneously in Manhattan (where else?). Martain Landau plays an inspiring (and Oscar-nominated) role as Judah Rosenthal, a successful, married, and highly respected eye surgeon who is fed up with living a double life. When his mistress of two years, Dolores (Huston), threatens to expose their relationship to his wife (as well as reveal some shady embezzling Judah has done), Judah realizes he must take a drastic move to end his extra-curricular affair once and for all. Lost on what to do or where to turn, he goes to his brother Jack (Orbach), who convinces Judah to take Dolores out. "My people will take care of it. You won't be a part of it."

Meanwhile, somewhere else on the island, Woody Allen is living as Cliff Stern, a documentary film-maker with a not-so-successful track record in his career and a crumbling marriage. Forced to take a job to be his ridiculous brother-in-law's (Alda) biographer, he meets Halley (Farrow). The two grow as friends until Cliff finds himself madly in love with her, to a point that his paranoia over his brother-in-law's lame advances on Halley almost drive him mad.

The film celebrates Allen's familiar existentialist tone... and convinces us that only New Yorker's really know how to fuck up relationships properly. Alan Alda shines as a pretentious dope, and Woody's neurosis wiggles and trills off the screen until you feel like you yourself may walk away from this movie bumbling and wringing your hands together. In a Dovstoyevskian conclusion, the film examines the nature of the human conscience, the theme of religious guilt brought on by tradition, and the hopelessness of having hope.

Another Woody Allen classic that I'd happily recommend onto a friend.

#242 The Producers (1968)

2011-05-29T06:16:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Mel Brooks

Cast: Zero Mostel, Gene Wilder, Dick Shawn, Kenneth Mars, Lee Meredith, Christopher Hewett, Andréas Voutsinas, Estelle Winwood, Renée Taylor, David Patch

When a Broadway producer, Max Bialystock (Mostel), sinks so low as to sexually entertain over-the-hill ladies for checks to fund his projects, he finds himself ripe and ready for a new scheme. Enter Leo Bloom (Wilder), a timid, anxious, OCD accountant who in the process of examining Bialystock's books accidently blurts out that with a little clever book-keeping, it is possible to make more money with a flop than a success.

After some clever convincing, Bialystock convinces Bloom to give up his stuffy, lonely life and go in 50/50 with him on producing the biggest Broadway flop in history: Springtime for Hitler. The two seem to do everything perfectly: hire the worst writer with the worst script, the worst director, and even the worst cast. They find, however, sometimes a bunch of wrongs do make a right...

This film was actually hysterically funny on all accounts-- with no shortage of lude and slapstick humor. Gene Wilder's character's neurosis was a star-player in getting laughs, and each actor's commitment to the ridiculousness of their role was refreshing. I love this film, and I have high doubts that its 2005 remake can even hold a candle.

#241 City Lights (1931)

2011-03-17T15:08:00.000-07:00

****

Director:Charles Chaplin

Cast: Charles Chaplin, Virginia Cherrill, Florence Lee

#240 Dr. Strangelove (1964)

2011-02-27T11:01:00.001-08:00

*****

Director: Stanley Kubrick

Cast: Peter Sellers, George C. Scott, Sterling Hayden, Slim Pickens, James Earl Jones, Keenan Wynn, Peter Bull, Shane Rimmer, Tracy Reed

#239 The Double Life of Veronique (1991)

2011-02-12T10:35:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Krysztof Kieslowski

Cast: Iréne Jacob, Halina Gryglaszewska, Kalina Jedrusik, Aleksander Bardini, Wladyslaw Kowalski, Jerzy Gudjeko, Janusz Sterninski, Philippe Volter

The Doube Life of Veronique is the tale of two women, both played by Iréne Jacob, although two separate people, in two separate parts of Europe, living two separate lives. One woman is Weronika, a Polish singer, and the other is Veronique, a French music teacher. When Weronika has an unfortunate, unexpected death, Veronique feels an unexplainable and irreconcilable grief, as the two women--whom we know have never met, share an inexplicable strong emotional bond.

The film then follows the life of Veronique as she is courted by a unique stranger, a puppeteer living near her home. The dreamlike, elusive character of Alexandre serves as a jumping point for a series of quiet meditations on many of the things about life we cannot explain nor express. Dreams, hallucination, imagination, superstition, intuition... all realms of the personal which each human experiences entirely alone in their lifetime.

The film's feel reminded a lot of Amélie without the cheeky humor (and yes, I realize this one came first). The unusual romance is whimsical and fantasy, and the movie as a whole is a clever expression on some of the hardest things to capture about human nature. Very beautiful. Slow. Contemplative. This is what I consider to be a worthy-of-your-time romance. I wish more people were still making movies like this.

#238 The Awful Truth (1937)

2011-02-05T16:29:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Leo McCarey

Cast: Cary Grant, Irene Dunne, Ralph Bellamy, Alexander D'Arcy, Cecil Cunningham, Molly Lamont, Esther Dale

A silly little comedic romance– again, wholly carried by the dynamic Cary Grant and his opposing leading lady's (whomever she may be at the time) charisma and likability as a couple. In the story, two sweethearts' jealousy and suspicions lead to a quickly-arrived-upon divorce. The real drama, however, is involved in the time leading up to the finalization of their arrangement: as the two begin dating others, bumping into one another at inopportune moments, and parade through a variety of uncomfortable, chuckle-worthy situations. The inevitable, however, does arrive... and on the night that their divorce is going to become official to boot. The two find themselves under very expected circumstances alone at a secluded cabin. Dot dot dot...

The charm of this film, again, is purely the dynamism that exists between the two lead actors. The script carries legend of being extremely improvised, and it shows. The laughs are in the subtleties, the timing, the facial expressions... some of the brilliant things about films (and real life) that can never be translated into writing. The role of dancing, songs, games, drinks, and even simple introductions all play a key role in bringing these two bickering lovebirds away from one another and simultaneously right back into each others' arms.

Although I often wonder how so many Cary Grant movies made the 1001 list since they are all so simplistic, silly, and sweet, but then I find myself enjoying each one as much as the last.

#237 The Birth of a Nation (1915)

2011-02-01T17:11:00.000-08:00

Director: D.W. Griffith

Cast: Lillian Gish, Mae Marsh, Henry B. Walthall, Miriam Cooper, Mary Alden, Ralph Lewis, George Siegmann, Walter Long, Robert Harron, Wallace Reid

Appropriately described as one of the most revered and reviled films of all time, The Birth of a Nation is a film we simply wish to discard despite its groundbreaking stylistic and technical elements. Based on a rather racist play by Thomas Dixon entitled "The Clansman: An Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan," the film spans from a pre-Civil War era, through Lincoln's assassination, to a post-war age where racial rivalry is at its peak. Showing African Americans in the worst light with the most blaring racial stereotypes, the film dually functions as a piece of racist propaganda, suggesting that their rise to liberty was the downfall of Aryian civilization. Showing Klan members parading in on stallions to a song of victory, murdering "crazed" blacks all along the way, certainly makes the film's standpoint clear, and sickeningly so.

Despite the horrors that this film projects, it simultaneously offers some of the greatest leaps and advancements made by any film. It is often said that this is the pioneer motion picture to define modern cinema, being the first to include key shots such as match-on-action, shot-reverse-shot, and even camera techniques such as tracking.

The three hour long drama is widely-debated and of course rightfully controversial, and I by no means would suggest the film is any form of pleasant viewing. The sick feeling it will leave in your stomach is probably not worth its historical significance to the artistry of film. But nevertheless, if you are persistent on seeing where it all started (or are just pursuing a crazy goal of watching all 1001 like me), try to prepare yourself for what is sure to be, however relevant, a difficult viewing experience.

#236 Gold Diggers of 1933 (1933)

2011-01-28T16:31:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Mervyn Leroy

Cast: Warren William, Joan Blondell, Aline MacMahon, Ruby Keeler, Dick Powell, Guy Kibbee, Ned Sparks, Ginger Rogers

An imaginative, comedic, and even politically-pointed musical comes in the form of Gold Diggers of 1933. The film is essentially the story of a few young showgirls who are struggling to keep food on the table by any means–stealing milk from the neighbor, begging for jobs, and even canoodling with wealthy men. When one of the girls, Polly Parker (Keeler), falls for the musician across the alley, Brad (Powell), the women are surprised to find he is not only talented and kind, but he also happens to conveniently be from an extremely wealthy Boston family (only in Hollywood, I swear!). Providing music for the girls' latest musical (and even volunteering to be a stand-in when the leading man hurts his back), Brad is able to formally court and become engaged to Polly. When Brad's family finds out about his relationship and on-stage escapades, his brother chooses to intervene.

However, when the brother mistakes Polly's roommate Carol for Polly, he offends the wrong person when he calls showgirls cheap and vulgar. To seek her revenge, Carol enlists their friend Trixie to continue to dupe the brother (and the family lawyer) into falling for their false affections and also into buying them tons of lavish gifts. With Brad and Polly in on the joke, they even trick the brother into thinking he has drunkenly made love with Carol, and to "pay her off," he writes a check for 10k. It's only when Carol's true identity is revealed that we find that these two characters have real affection for one another.

The film includes four extraordinary stage productions, all coordinated by Busby Berkeley. Highlights include a sparkling rendition of "We're in the Money," light-up violins playing "Shadow Waltz," and the sparked-with-politics "Remember My Forgotten Man." Forgotten Man demonstrates the difficulties for the men and women during the depression, taking into account the veteran's of WWI whose owed-admiration was already being tossed aside.

The film is short, funny, and takes drastic plot twists. The musical numbers are quite segregated from the film, though brilliantly directed and performed, and interesting as well for their strong hard-hitting political statements. A light, easy watch.

#235 Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse (1991)

2011-01-23T19:18:00.001-08:00

*****

Director: Fax Bahr, George Hickenlooper, Eleanor Coppola

Cast: Francis Ford Coppola, Eleanor Coppola, Marlon Brando, Martin Sheen, George Lucas, Dennis Hopper, Sam Bottoms, Robert Duvall, Laurence Fishburne

A brief look into the making of Apocalypse Now, Francis Ford Coppola's epic, ruinous masterpiece that immediately followed his success with parts I and II of the Godfather trilogy. This documentary includes footage, diary entries, and sound recordings collected by Coppola's wife, Eleanor, all chronicling the making of the film.

Filmed on location in the Philippines, Coppola brought his entire family along with an enormous Hollywood production team to shoot the film over the course of what was supposed to be only a few weeks. Instead, it turned into years of filming and editing, with endless disaster: financial, physical, and emotional. Dealing with typhoons, firing main actors, the jungle conditions, the Philippine army warding off rebels, a heart attack, an overweight, unprepared Brando, placing all of his personal assets up for collateral to cover the new budget, and Coppola and his wife seriously both teetering on the edge of total insanity, the documentary focuses on the overwhelming obstacles behind the final product.

Despite all these obvious hurdles, some of the most interesting moments of the film were the views into Coppola's struggle with his own faith in the film's outcome. Often staying awake for days on end, personally re-writing the script, making up new scenes, and basically winging it, Coppola's methods during the shoot can only be described as feverish intoxication. His wife was able to capture via sound byte (unbeknownst to Francis at the time) much of his insecurities about the project turning out. Footage of Francis obsessively working and smoking cigarettes over a typewriter, giving actors' inspiring character direction, along with general interviews about his "artistic vision" for the project brought me back to memories of my own creative fever in the past. It made me wonder why I ever stopped craving that, and at the same time, I felt relief to not have a life full of such anxiety anymore.

Regardless, it's a great documentary to go hand-in-hand with viewing Apocalypse Now, and I highly recommend it. If it does not, on some level, inspire you then I truly question your being alive at all. It's really that grand.

#234 The Red Shoes (1948)

2011-01-19T17:32:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger

Cast: Anton Walbrook, Marius Goring, Moira Shearer, Robert Helpmann, Léonide Massine, Albert Bassermann, Ludmilla Tchérina, Esmond Knight

This film chronicles the story of Victoria Page (Shearer), a girl discovered by a sharp-edged, stuffy ballet director for her raw passion for the art form. When his leading lady announces she plans to marry, Boris Lermontov (Walbrook), seeks his new star. Victoria's rise to stardom happens in tandom with a young composer who Boris also gives a chance, a young Julian Crasner (Goring). Together the trio put on one of the greatest ballets entitled "The Red Shoes,"which tells the story of a young girl's red dancing shoes which once put on, dance her to her death.

Unbeknownst to Boris, however, Page and Crasner fall in love, and it's then that Boris is forced to scheme a way to get back his star (with whom he is undeniably infatuated). The film slips off into a dreamy dance sequence of the ballet "The Red Shoes." It was this inner-film performance that set the stage for so many other films' long production numbers (think An American in Paris)! Beautifully performed, it not-so-surprisingly becomes a foreshadow of the real heroine's demise.

Recently having seen Black Swan in theatres, I can't help but draw a comparison between these two plot structures. Without the sex and special effects, we are taken on a similar ride through the ill-fated course of a great, recently-discovered dancer. Also, over the summer, I read Anna Karenina, which I, again, can't help but draw connections to from this film. The allusions and inspirations preceding and following this film seem endless, and it's not hard to understand why. A must-see for any dancer, but also well-worth anyone's time who can appreciate stage-style performance.

#233 Diner (1982)

2011-01-16T20:20:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Barry Levinson

Cast: Steve Guttenberg, Daniel Stern, Mickey Rourke, Kevin Bacon, Tim Daly, Ellen Barkin, Paul Reiser, Kathryn Dowling, Michael Tucker, Jessica James

A bunch of college-age buddies gather together at the Fells Point Diner to shoot the shit until sunrise in the winter of 1959. Walking into the scene, you know they are the regulars: hollering at the waitress and looking as comfy in the booth as they might in their own beds. The group of six chums, despite their individual trials (an upcoming marriage, a pregnant friend with benefits, a gambling problem, a marriage going stale), the camaraderie between the guys remains the solid baseline of the film's plot.

Supposedly a semi-autobiographical account of director and writer Levinson's own experiences, the film's mini-plots are almost entirely irrelevant. The mood of the film is truly its core: nostalgia and the nerves that accompany a coming-of-age period. Supposedly, all of the scenes shot in the diner were saved for last after the cast had had time to get to know one another on a comfortable level– a clever move by Levinson to bring genuinity to the scenes. It's more fair to call the film a series of comedic vignettes as opposed to a full-on narrative, which only heightens the nostalgic sensation. Their memories become ours.

Although I am by no means a horny man with 6 best friends in 1959, I am nevertheless a post-college girl with a fond diner history of my own. The film is merely a popcorn, feel-good comedy, but with the heart that most of these 80s era movies also inexplicably pack. Safe for repeated viewing, and in fact, I even encourage it.

#232 A Star Is Born (1954)

2011-01-16T11:06:00.001-08:00

****

Director: George Cukor

Cast: Judy Garland, James Mason, Jack Carson, Charles Bickford, Tommy Noonan, Lucy Marlow, Amanda Blake, Irving Bacon, Hazel Shermet

Esther Blodgett (Garland) is a small-town girl who has worked her whole life toward making it big. When she finally makes it to a touring gig with a live orchestra, she gratefully bides her time while she awaits "the big dream." But her big break comes in a most unexpected form: the famous actor, Norman Maine (Mason), now working his way to the bottom through the habit of heavy drinking, sees something special in Esther. Together, they jumpstart her career into full-on stardom, celebrating their union in marriage along the way.

But while it was a beginning for the duo, it was the end of something else for Norman. As his career continues to plummet, his drinking continues to escalate. When Esther decides to leave her career to be by his side during recovery, Maine takes matters into his own hands.

The film is vibrant and inventive, and Garland's performance of "The Man That Got Away" was something I've been long overdue to experience. (Her 1961 comeback performance of that song has been spun as one of my favorite records for a few years now.) For its time, this film was one of the most expensive ever made by Warner Bros., however, it unfortunately will never be seen in its original form again. While it was released with astounding interest, 30 minutes were evidently butchered out of the film to shorten its run-time at the suggestion of some east-coast moneymen. And though the soundtrack remained in the Warner Bros. vaults, the footage was never recovered. Eventually the film was "restored" with stills and the original soundtrack running... I knew something was fishy when that long stretch of stills and montage ran after the first hour. This portion of the film is actually somewhat awkward and unsettling.

Still, on many occasions, I felt like this film was truly just a stage for Judy Garland to showcase her talents. The surrounding narrative, though at times extremely heavy, at times still seems toss-away against her musical performances.

Frankly, despite Judy's odd facial expressions and over-plucked technicolor look... and despite the somewhat obvious cheap-shots to stick in a song... I loved the film. A great classic musical to rival all others. Judy Garland enthusiasts... must-see.

On another interesting note: this film and the film I watched just prior, Apocalypse Now, both quote the same T.S. Eliot poem within their scripts. In Apocalypse Now, the insane photojournalist via Dennis Hopper quotes, "This is the way the fucking world ends. Look at this fuckin' shit we're in, man. Not with a bang, but with a whimper, and with a whimper, I'm fucking splitting, Jack." In A Star is Born, Mr. Libby quotes the same line when referencing the end of Norman Maine's career, "This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang but with a whimper."

#231 Apocalypse Now (1979)

2011-01-15T16:18:00.001-08:00

*****

Director: Francis Ford Coppola

Cast: Martin Sheen, Marlon Brando, Robert Duvall, Frederic Forrest, Sam Bottoms, Laurence Fishburne, Albert Hall, Harrison Ford, Dennis Hopper

During the Vietnam War, Captain Benjamin Willard (Sheen) is prescribed a dangerous and top-secret mission to track down and terminate the command of a certain Colonel Kurtz (Brando)... with extreme prejudice. Having gone renegade in Cambodia, Kurtz is believed to have made himself a god to the natives, carrying out murderous and insane practices under the command of no one but himself. Captain Willard faces a harrowing journey of both the physical horrors of war as well the mental/emotional, as he battles with his own renegade feelings, doubts of authority and waning dedication to "the cause."

Setting aside all of the details of the creation of this film, (which I believe are very much a part of what makes this film so fascinating), Apocalyse Now is already an epic masterpiece. Perhaps one of my favorite films of this project so far, (having viewed a number of war epics for this project already), I am stricken and entranced by the way Coppola has chosen to remove the story from "the horrors of nam" to simply the madness of war. The ethereal take on the opening and end portions of the film provide a trance-like view into the fog of psychosis surrounding the organized execution of a nationwide mass-murder mission.

Some of the most intense moments of the film were those which were unplanned, unedited, and unscripted. Sheen's tirade alone his room at the film's start was merely Coppola letting the cameras run as Sheen drunkenly stumbled and threatened the film staff. Brando's shadow mystery (and strongest line "You're just an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill") were all unintentional due to Brando's unpreparedness for the shoot. Some of the most captivating wreckage and violence were the result of an unexpected typhoon which devastated most of the sets, and the murderous slaughter of the bull... was real.

A very powerful film, which now added to my dossier, will no doubt be on regular rotation. Also, looking forward to someday soon reading the book The Making of Apocalypse Now by Peter Cowie. From what I've already sampled, the story of this picture's filming seems intense.

#230 Narayama Bushi-Ko [The Ballad of Narayama] (1983)

2011-01-13T15:51:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Shohei Imamura

Cast: Ken Ogata, Sumiko Sakamoto, Takejo Aki, Tonpei Hidari, Seiji Kurasaki, Kaoru Shimamori, Ryutaro Tatsumi, Junko Takada, Nijiko Kiyokawa, Mitsuko Baisho

In a remote mountain village in 19th century Japan, all inhabitants face an unusual and unfortunate destiny: at the age of 70 they all must be carried up Mt. Narayama to be left to die. In a primitive, hand-to-mouth existence, the natives of this village live out surreal and horrific scenarios on a daily basis (the local second-born sons take out their sexual frustrations on the neighborhood dog, a family is buried alive for taking too many potatoes...), making the unstoppable approach of each of their mountain-journeys far too ordinary.

The film chronicles one particular family, the Nekkos, who are anticipating the matriarch's, Orin's, 70th birthday. Her eldest son bares the task of taking her up the mountain, and her peaceful, dreamlike acceptance of her own mortality is astounding. What is so unexpected, however, is that we soon find that this useless ritual is the quality that gives their characters their humanity.

The film is slow, but illusorily so. The feelings of normalcy that this film injects into such unbelievable circumstances enables the mountain journey of Orin and her son Tatsuhei to feel impactful in a surprising, unexpected way. An interesting and unsparing examination of societal evolutions--left unchecked will develop in a direction that prove irreversible and unexplainable, yet nevertheless unstoppable.

#229 The King of Comedy (1983)

2011-01-09T11:59:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Martin Scorsese

Cast: Robert De Niro, Jerry Lewis, Sandra Bernhardt, Diahnna Abbott, Shelly Hack, Ed Herlihy, Lou Brown, Tony Randall

The King of Comedy follows the story of the pathetic shmuck named Rupert Pupkin (De Niro). A wannabe stand-up comic for late night talk show, he follows Jerry Langford's (Lewis) every move, even indulging into full and deep delusions with cardboard cut-outs in his own home. As he makes one legitimate take at becoming a star, his process indeed becomes to slowly cross the line into the realm of the twisted, as he conspires with another one of Langford's much-feared female stalkers.

This film came post-John Lennon's murder and serves as a dark warning into the dangers of celebrity worship. While it's true that it seems to be a large departure from what we might expect from both De Niro and Scorsese, I was able to draw some interesting comparisons between this film and another project they did together: Taxi Driver.

Both mentally unstable men at their beginnings, the characters of Rupert Pupkin and Travis Bickle both lead themselves into situations where they are bound for humiliation. And each for their own crime are able to receive a certain level of fame and recognition.

No wonder De Niro and Scorsese gravitated toward this script... and I am glad that they did. A sad, but fascinating movie. I love me some dark humor, yes I do.

#228 Tongues Untied (1989)

2011-01-09T09:18:00.000-08:00

Director: Marlon Riggs

Cast: Marlon Riggs, Michael Bell, Blackberri, Kerrigan Black, Gideon Ferebee, Essex Hemphill, A.J. Honey, Larry Duckette, Gerald Davis, Paul Horrey

With the feeling of 80s guerilla New York City fine art, Marlon Riggs brings us his documentary on black, gay America via the Black Men Loving Black Men revolution. Using fiction, accounts of his own life as a black gay man, civil rights movement footage, clips from (then's) modern media, dance, and poetry, Riggs paints a picture of an entire facet of Americans silenced by their inability to express themselves.

Of course, being a white, straight woman– how can I even begin to understand the context of this film? Is this film for everyone? To me, it was speaking to its own kind– it was speaking a language I didn't quite fully understand. Un-silence yourselves, speak, be heard, be unafraid. A powerful message to those who I imagine were masking an insurmountable amount of fear and pain with anger during this time.

Being who I am, I cannot change the angle from which I see this film. As an impartial audience, I can only step aside and acknowledge the film for what it is, and also, what it is not. I was not able to appreciate its format– the humor?, the poetry, the artistry that Riggs used in this film mostly repelled me and seemed dated beyond salvation. The message, however, is of course timeless and as important as ever. I am happy to have viewed this film, despite my non-enjoyment of the message's delivery.

#227 Spartacus (1960)

2011-01-09T07:47:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Stanley Kubrick

Cast: Kirk Douglas, Laurence Olivier, Jean Simmons, Charles Laughton, Peter Ustinov, Tony Curtis, John Gavin, Nina Foch, John Ireland, Herbert Lom, John Dall, Charles McGraw

When a rebellious Thracian slave, Spartacus (Douglas), is purchased by Baitius (Ustinov), the owner and operator of a gladiator school in Capra, he sets into motion a chain of events that forever change the destiny of millions. When forced to fight in the arena for the amusement of some visiting Roman nobility (in particular the leader of the Roman military, Crassus (Olivier)), a revolt spurs and the slaves free themselves. Leading his people into a revolution and campaign to leave Italy once and for all, Spartacus forms a legion of ex-slaves and gladiators strong enough to face legion after legion of Roman soldiers.

Taking the fair Varinia (Simmons) as his wife, Spartacus makes headway with his armies– all the way to the sea. But when they realize they are trapped on the shore without ships, Spartacus is forced to march on Rome and face Crassus once and for all.

Most of the film I spent curiously examining for any sign of Kubrick. Not so surprisingly, I found none, and it was only after the film that I read that Kubrick merely "took this on as a gig" after producer Douglas fired his standing director, Anthony Mann. It's a beautiful movie, and out of the context of Kubrick, it's not-so-surprising. A film full of interesting, twisted relationships as only can be expected when involving Roman nobility, and the battle scenes are indeed epic (for 1960). How fortunate that they put back in the classic "snails and oysters" scene between Olivier and Curtis! Also, I can now somewhat place one of my favorite films, Gladiator, into its proper context of being somewhat of a backwards homage to Spartacus. A true hero film.

#226 Steamboat Bill Jr. (1928)

2011-01-08T13:12:00.001-08:00

****

Director: Charles Reisner, Buster Keaton

Cast: Buster Keaton, Tom McGuire, Ernest Torrence, Tom Lewis, Marion Byron

William Canfield Jr. (Keaton) has just arrived home from his school in Boston to visit his estranged father whom hasn't seen him since he was a baby. His father, of course, is William Canfield Sr. (Torrence), but is perhaps more commonly known by the name Steamboat Bill. As owner of the town's old and trusty steamboat, Stonewall Jackson, Bill Sr. is facing hard times as John James King (McGuire) has just announced his new "palace on the water" steamboat called The King.

Steamboat Bill is devastated when he finally meets his son– terribly disappointed that his tweedy, silly, and also in love with King's daughter, Kitty (Byron). Bill Sr. tries to make Willie into a real man, but Willie is more interested in showing his affections to Kitty. When Steamboat Bill gets put in jail, Willie begins a haphazard rescue mission. Things get even more crazy when a cyclone blows through the town, destroying everything and putting everyone, and particularly our hero, in peril.

The film is adorable and even has its moments of laugh-out-loud hilarity. Buster Keaton is an acrobat and part of the magnificence of this film is fantastic physical humor. His expressions, tumbles, and tricks absolutely steal the movie away! Memorable scenes include trying on hats with his father (poking fun at Buster Keaton's real-life fashion), an umbrella mishap with the police chief, and fighting the cyclone winds. Many of the stunts were extremely dangerous and somewhat unplanned, including having entire full-weight walls fall inches away from Keaton.

Definitely take the time to watch this short comedy classic. Even non-appreciators of silent film I think will be presently surprised by the physical splendor of Keaton. Really excited to see another film from his repertoire!

#225 Novecento [1900] (1976)

2011-01-07T18:23:00.001-08:00

Director: Bernardo Bertolucci

Cast: Robert De Niro, Gérard Depardieu, Dominique Sanda, Francesca Bertini, Laura Betti, Werner Bruhns, Stefania Casini, Sterling Hayden, Anna Henkel

I've been working on this epic, historical political drama for a few nights now. Viewed in its original cut at a whopping run-time of 5.25 hours (with poorly dubbed-in voices instead of subtitles mind you), the film required more than the standard dosage of patience.

So what defines "epic" in this case? Masterful... or simply really, really long? Honestly, it's hard to say. Even the director himself seems not to know, as the film exists in many versions-- some even cut down by 90 minutes. Supposedly, Bertolucci says in these cases, 'Nothing important was cut.'

Well, that really summarizes my feelings about this film, and it's not stemming from a shallow place. In fact, my favorite film of all time (Gone With the Wind) is a long one too-- I have no time limit for films! But 1900 truly lacked relationship, momentum, and defining moments. The importance of this film is in the passage of time–politically and in the specific relationship of the two star-crossed friends: the landowner and the worker during fascist Italy. Over the course of five hours, the director is OF COURSE enabled to show the gradual and radical changes. He is presented with a unique opportunity to pace in what can feel almost like real time... (Isn't that incredible by the way? Films allow us to believe in years passing in hours. We are truly transported!) And while I understand that this film was never, on any level intended to be any shape or form of entertaining, but rather, was intended to live amongst the great political dramas, I stand my ground in saying that this film lacks Glue. It lacks cohesive qualities that make it feel seamless with direction.

Instead, we are jolted uncomfortably along with characters we don't quite understand. We watch history unfold (and without a good understanding of Italian history.. GOOD LUCK!) without any vehicle for emotion.

This films packs a lot of events into 5 hours, but it doesn't pack much heat. The fire and emotional impact only arise when there is extreme violence or sexual crudeness on screen. Moments. Never by plot or character.

For me, although it is always a great experience to invest yourself more deeply in stories (ie. I always prefer long, epic novels to short books), in this case, I could've done without 3 hours of this film.

And on a completely separate note, I also could've done without seeing young Robert De Niro's full frontal.

#224 From Here to Eternity (1953)

2011-01-02T15:19:00.000-08:00

Director: Fred Zinnemann

Cast: Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift, Deborah Kerr, Donna Reed, Frank Sinatra, Philip Ober, Mickey Shaughnessy, Harry Bellaver, Enerst Borgnine, Jack Warden

This is a film that boasts being credited with one of the steamiest on-screen love scenes ever put on film. And while I must say, the sandy, salty romp in the surf between Deborah Kerr and Burt Lancaster is nothing to be ignored, it was not sumptuous enough to sustain the entire film from becoming a rather large bore.

In 1954, the film won an endless number of awards, particularly from The Academy, taking big-time Oscars like Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actress (Reed), Best Sound, and Best Writing. And while I see the film's value to an America that loves the military and its 'boys,' I had a hard time understanding how this film had managed to be such a blockbuster.

Well anyway, it follows the story of three army men: Pvt. Robert E. Lee Prewitt, a transfer top bugler who is hard-headed after a tragic history with boxing; Sgt. Milton Warden, a noble, loyal man who is lovesick for his Captain's wife; and Pvt. Angelo Maggio, a scrawny, loud-mouthed, and good-natured smart alec who gets himself into trouble on a regular basis. All stationed in Hawaii in the peacetime days leading up to the December 7th attack on Pearl Harbor, we witness their struggles with their superiors, one another, and even love/loneliness.

I have nothing against the acting, score, mis en scene, or any of the goodies that make up great films. I guess my gripe comes from my personal opinion of this straight-on pro-military film. While it does make points on the limits and sometimes absurdities of the US Army, it does in many ways still celebrate the men and the structure that perpetuate the machine of war. For me, someone who finds the entire institution of military to be nonsensical, I have a hard time enjoying a film about the innermost workings of that very institution. While there have been other military films that I have not only tolerated better but actually greatly appreciated, this one fell flat for me almost immediately on all fronts.

What makes this one of the best films of all time? Someone explain this to me-- I really am curious! Did it just come at the right time?

I think that I get it. The ultimate macho man movie with heart... but I can still only honestly give it 2 stars on my scale of personal enjoyment. Lo siento, FHTE enthusiasts...

#223 Targets (1968)

2010-12-31T09:08:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Peter Bogdanovich

Cast: Tim O'Kelly, Boris Karloff, Arthur Peterson, Monte Landis, Nancy Hsueh, Peter Bogdanvich, Daniel Ades, Stafford Morgan, James Brown, Mary Jackson, Tanya Morgan

So the alleged story is as follows: Producer Roger Corman realized that under contract, Boris Karloff owed him two more full days of filming. He took 20 minutes of unused footage from the film The Terror and sent Karloff over to director Bogdanovich. The result is this short, horror crime film in which Karloff essentially stars as himself, a retiring old horror film actor who simply feels that he has become an anachronism. He states, "My kind of horror isn't horror anymore," as he waves a murder report in the newspaper.

This story is also cut with shots of boy-next-door Bobby Thompson, a young hunter who lives with his picture perfect family of his wife and two parents in suburbia. We watch as he prepares for a murdering spree: collecting guns, target practice, and lies. After killing his own family, he goes on a killing spree of complete strangers.

We expect, of course, that these two characters are going to cross paths, but when and how are indeed a surprise. A perfect commentary on the unstoppable movement toward a more violent America, in which we are all simply pawns. Faceless dots.

A remarkable reference could be made to Orson Welles in The Third Man (1949)-- how much do we care about these faceless, nameless dots? Looking forward to exploring that comparison.

#222 A Passage to India (1984)

2010-12-31T06:10:00.000-08:00

***

Director: David Lean

Cast: Judy Davis, Victor Banerjee, Peggy Ashcroft, James Fox, Alec Guinness, Nigel Havers, Richard Wilson, Antonia Pemberton, Michael Culver, Art Malik, Saeed Jaffrey

The doomed friendship between a young Englishwoman and Indian doctor erupts when she accuses him of rape after a mysterious, frightening incident during a tour of Indian caverns. The same director that brings you Bridge on the River Kwai and Lawrence of Arabia (haven't viewed the latter yet), brings you this period-destination film based on the novel by E.M. Forster (1942).

Adela (Davis) and Mrs. Moore (Ashcroft) are Brits who have just arrived in India (currently colonized by the British) to visit and prepare for Adela's engagement to the city magistrate. Upon arrival, they find they are paraded from British camp and club to British houses to British teas, never experiencing the real India. At one particular event meant to bring Indians and British together, they are appalled at the deplorable treatment that the British give the Indian members of the party. They are awakened to the debilitating prejudices that cripple the relationship of the two nations.

On a moonlight night, Mrs. Moore creeps out of her room into a Hindu mosque. She finds there a young Indian doctor named Dr. Aziz (Banerjee), and in this holy dwelling, they discover kindness in one another. The Indian doctor is beyond thrilled to find that a kind-hearted Brit does exist, and he promises to show her the real India. He offers to take her and Adela to visit some landmark caves.

Dr. Aziz spends loads of money preparing a "proper English" experience, purchasing loads of servants to even carry a table and chairs to the top of the peaks for their afternoon cup of port. After exploring the first cave, Mrs. Moore feels ill and disturbed by its alarming echoes, and she sends Adela on with Dr. Aziz alone. As the two journey together, they become closer, even comfortable enough to discuss the intimate details of their private lives. When Adela ventures into a cave on her own, a mysterious, spiritual hallucination takes place, and later in court, she accuses Dr. Aziz of raping her.

Of course, this film is an adaptation, so it relies on a screenplay to explain the complex emotions of characters which a book can so easily tell us. The out-of-place experiences had by Adela are highlighted in a pointed scene where she travels by bike to a ruined temple, finding herself shocked by her attraction to erotic coupling statues. Dr. Aziz realizes the complicated nature of his friendship with Mrs. Moore when his fellow people chant her name like a spirited-saviour, when really it is she who fled the court proceedings of Dr. Aziz, unwilling to testify in his honor.

The film is paced almost identically to Bridge on the River Kwai, and I noted that fact even before I realized it shared a director and lead actor with the film. Although the story is full and is built for tons of emotion, I found it somewhat stripped of those elements in the attempt at condensing a large novel into a short, cohesive film. I support its inclusion on the 1001 list nevertheless. A positive viewing experience.

#221 Harold and Maude (1971)

2010-12-24T09:10:00.001-08:00

*****

Director: Hal Ashby

Cast: Ruth Gordon, Bud Cort, Vivian Pickles, Cyril Cusack, Charlers Tyner, Ellen Geer, Eric Christmas, G. Wood, Jud Engles

Perhaps this is where the few readers of this blog throw up their hands in frustration and finally stop following me once and for all–today is the day I give Harold and Maude 5 stars. But let me tell you why.

While it's true that it boasts no true surprises– that very early on you gather a sense of where these characters are going– it's the entire purpose, point, and play-out of this film that make it such a gratifying watching experience.

Bud Cort is Harold, a young, wealthy, death-obsessed boy, constantly performing elaborate mock-suicides for his own pleasure and ironical attention-seek. The dark humor of these spectacles are brilliant unto themselves, as they are the catapult for so many serious and comical nuances in each of the characters. Harold, also in his spare time, enjoys attending funerals in his self-purchased hearse. It's at these funerals that he runs into Maude (Gordon) and begins a reluctant albeit curious friendship.

Maude is a vivacious, arguably-crazed maniac bent on sucking the marrow out of every moment. As she approaches her 80th birthday, she sees all the joy of every situation, and with the innocence of someone who has never been through anything (although she is quite the opposite, we know, due to her Nazis prison camp tattoo) she approaches Harold as not only her contemporary but her best friend.

The two fall in love with what I like to classify as 'a different kind of love.' The kind that spans across ages, the surreal, the inhuman–anything capable of loving or being loved, no matter what form it takes. And although they often express their affections in the realm of we like to call romance, their almost sacred affection and understanding seems to stretch far beyond the limits of that classification.

It's true that this free-spirited film is just what we might expect to come out of this era in film-making, but it is the mastery of character, mood, and script that make this film entirely un-dismissable and unforgettable. I think there are many different ways to approach films. You can approach them for what they mean, how they expressed something, the sheer mastery of the skills and art form of film itself, their experiments in capturing something new, etc. While I'd admittedly not be able to stand my ground in holding this film up to some of the 'standard greats' in film history, I firmly believe it should be recognized and revered for what it is great at doing: capturing the limitless vitality of the human spirit.

#220 Ba Wang Bie Ji [Farewell My Concubine] (1993)

2010-12-23T18:47:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Kaige Chen

Cast: Leslie Cheung, Fengyi Zhang, Li Gong, Qi Lu, Da Ying, You Ge, Chun Li, Han Lei, Di Tong, Mingwei Ma, Yang Fei, Zhi Yin, Hailong Zao, Dan Li, Wenli Jiang

The story of two friends presents itself here in one of the most fascinating relationships on film, and perhaps one of the most original in the genre of historical fiction. This epic drama is the story of two Beijing opera performers bonded together at a young age through their own personal hardships as well as the daily brutal torture of operatic training.

Cheng Dieyi (Cheung), as a boy was given to the theatre troupe by his prostitute mother who was unable to care for him. Understandably sexually confused and abused, he was trained to play female roles. His close mate and 'stage brother, Xiaolou (Zhang), trained as a painted-face male lead. Later in life, when the two received stardom for their leading roles in the famous play "Farewell My Concubine," their relationship as friends became cemented as one of true brotherhood. Dieyi's love for his castmate, however, was romantic and sexual, and despite the genuinity of their relationship, those feelings were never reciprocated.

As Xiaolou courted and married an up-scale prostitute lover, Dieyi found solace in a wealthy patron by the name of Master Yuan. While the complexity of these relationships changed and melded with the many changes of the political climate of 1940-1960s China, the drama climaxes when Xiaolou is given the opportunity to save his own skin or stick up for one or both of his closest friends–his wife and Dieyi.

Critically acclaimed for being, along with The Blue Kite, one of the greatest records of China's recent history, this film speaks volumes to the heat and disparity that touched every population of China during this time. Even in the arenas of that which we often consider untouchable and glamorous, we are awakened to the brutality and betrayal within and outside these small societies.

While I could, again, not follow all of the intense political drama, I was indeed captivated and alarmed by much of the sexual and relationship complications this film offered. A sincere explosion of stimuli for both vision and sound, Farewell My Concubine is nothing short of a scrumptious spectacle.

#219 Modern Times (1936)

2010-12-22T03:36:00.000-08:00

*****

Director: Charles Chaplin

Cast: Charles Chaplin, Paulette Godard, Henry Bergman, Tiny Sandford, Chester Conklin, Hank Mann, Stanley Blystone, Al Ernest Garcia, Richard Alexander

Modern Times was simultaneously Charlie Chaplin's last silent film and first non-silent film. While most other directors were making audio-filled talkies, this masterpiece remains (for the majority) a silent picture. Only in rare moments are voices heard, though the film is bursting with sound effects, music, and even a glimmer of Chaplin's own voice in a musical number toward the end.

The film pokes fun at the burst of the industrial revolution: the assembly line, the depression, the fear of communism, and the gadgets that seemed to be replacing the humans that created them. Chaplin plays a factory worker at the Electro Steel Company. On the assembly line, he performs the simple, hurried task of tightening about a billion bolts, until some unfortunate, haphazard circumstances lead him to have a nervous breakdown. These opening skits were the best part of the entire film, and my dad and I were laughing out loud consistently throughout the first half hour.

After Chaplin's character's hospitalization, the film takes more a chaotic turn. In and out of jail, running about, general hysteria-- only to be followed by a love interest in the form of a homeless orphan girl. We watch as Chaplin and the girl try to establish a home for themselves to share, taking on various jobs and working through the hard times.

Whether you take Chaplin's meditations on industry seriously or not, this film really stood out to me for so many reasons. Unlike some others on the list that seem to fade in and out of my memory during this project, the physical comedy and coordinated talent of Chaplin is undeniably remarkable. Whether or not the story is concrete or the other characters are interesting-- it all seems to matter-not in the presence of such an intense and fantastic comedic performer and director.

#218 Spoorloos [The Vanishing] (1988)

2010-12-16T17:12:00.000-08:00

****

Director: George Sluizer

Cast: Bernard-Pierre Donnadieu, Gene Bervoets, Johanna ter Steege, Gwen Eckhaus, Bernadette Le Saché, Tania Latarget

What is worse than death? For Rex Hofman, it is living a life shrouded in the torturous mystery of his girlfriend's disappearance. While vacationing together, Rex and Saskia stop at a gas station in France. When Saskia never returns to the car, Rex launches a full investigation of her disappearance. Years later when the case goes cold and the police have long-since shut the file, Rex remains plagued by the mystery and his sorrow.

Having taken over his life completely, the campaign to find Saskia expends all of his time, money, and energies. When he finally comes face to face with her abductor, Raymond, he is met with an unexpected proposition. Raymond–a normal man by any other definition: a professor, husband, father– offers Rex the opportunity to find out how Saskia died, but only by experiencing it himself. Otherwise, he will never know.

Thus, the film reaches the ultimate psychological climax. And while I refuse to spoil the ending, I will say it is one of the most disturbing things I've seen in a long, long time.

While this film by no means follows the standard "horror" genre formula, it supplies enough suspense and fright to indeed go beyond a mere 'crime film' into the classification of horror/suspense. A shocking and frightening foreign film, whose later remake I suggest could not possibly compare. Unique in that it follows the mind/life of the criminal in more detail than that of the victims, we get a fascinating view of Raymond practicing for his crime (without ever really seeing the actual full thing). And in what we can only assume are Saskia's last moments alive, we are plagued with the unfortunate experience of watching her vitality and innocence as she interacts with who will soon facilitate her unfair and inhumane demise.

Worth seeing, but come prepared. This one is not going to leave you with a good feeling in your stomach.

#217 Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

2010-12-15T18:16:00.000-08:00

***.5

Director: Sergio Leone

Cast: Henry Fonda, Claudia Cardinale, Jason Robards, Charles Bronson, Chriele Ferzetti, Paolo Stoppa, Woody Strode, Jack Elam

Always referred to a "masterpiece tribute to Hollywood westerns," I approached Once Upon a Time in the West with an open-mind to the western genre. Growing up, I peered restlessly into my grandfather's grainy television every Christmas as he barraged us with westerns. Always the same scenery, always the same good guys in white hats shooting at the bad guys in black hats, always the same twangs and twaddles. Although these memories are now fond ones because I loved and miss my grandfather, I have to say I never remember finding westerns of any interest. I remember them being long, boring, and confusing. Needless to say, I tried to go into this with a fresh attitude.

Jill McBain (Cardinale) has just arrived to middle of nowhere dessert all the way from New Orleans to meet her recently-wedded husband and his children at his home. When no one fetches her at the station, she makes her way there via carriage to find that her entire new family has been murdered. After burying them, she begins to piece together who killed them and why.

Frank (Fonda) is a mysterious villian renegade, hired by a crippled railroad tycoon to keep everyone and everything out of his and the new railroad's way. Frank's vicious and brutal methods happen to involve the murders of McBain family, who we later find out owned extensive property that was due to make million off of the new railroad's passing through.

Jill, bound and determined to follow through with her dead husband's dream of creating a boom town, hires two renegades to hunt down Frank not only for revenge but also to ensure her own safety.

Through the course of the film, Frank and Jill cross paths, we uncover surprising dark pasts, and the shoot-outs are as creative as they are endless.

While never a big fan of westerns, I struggled through the first hour of this 'epic.' It was then that surprising subplots began to unfold. One of the greatest moments of this film (and perhaps of MOST films I've seen thus far) is Jill's speech about rape:

If you want to, you can lay me over the table and amuse yourself. And even call in your men. Well. No woman ever died from that. When you're finished, all I'll need will be a tub of boiling water, and I'll be exactly what I was before - with just another filthy memory.

Wowza! And although truly one of the most sickeningly deplorable characters ever on film, Frank is played geniously by Henry Fonda.

I highly recommend this film, albeit with patience and an open-mind for the non-western savvy crowd. It'll reel you in, and you'll be glad you took the time. Looking forward to more classic westerns.

#216 The Lady Eve (1941)

2010-12-12T18:12:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Preston Sturges

Cast: Barbara Stanwyck, Henry Fonda, Charles Coburn, Eugene Pallette, William Demarest, Eric Blore, Melville Cooper, Janet Beecher

Jean Harrington (Stanwyck) is a traveling card-playing con-artist, and she has chosen a new target: Charles Pike (Fonda), scientist and beer fortune heir, returning from study in the Amazon. When the two cross paths on a luxury ocean liner, what begins as a play for Charles' money soon turns into an unexpected romance. As was destined, Charles finds out Jean's true identity and former intentions, and the two split. It's the unexpected, zany circumstances of their reunion that bring laughs and ridiculous comedic drama.

Fonda and Stanwyck are both charming and funny, and the plot is completely silly and good-natured. I find it easy to group in with other romantic comedies of the era, though (like so many of the others) this one stands out on its own for its own set of reasons. Fonda is awkward, silly, and delightful. Stanwyck is saucy, scrumptious, and classic. A fun film for popcorn and a weekend night in.

#215 La Passion de Jeanne D'Arc [The Passion of Joan of Arc] (1928)

2010-12-11T18:37:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Carl Theodor Dreyer

Cast: Renée Falconetti, Eugene Silvain, André Berley, Maurice Schutz, Atonin Artaud, Michel Simon, Jean d'Yd, Louis Ravet, Armand Lurville, Jacques Arnna

Passion of Joan of Arc is said to be the greatest of all Joan of Arc films, and perhaps even one of the greatest silent films of all time. On both of these claims, I have little to compare it to within my own experience, but I don't find it hard to imagine it all being true.

Filmed in France in 1928, just eight years after Joan of Arc was canonized, the film is a spectacular nonfiction (albeit highly abbreviated) account of the trials of Joan of Arcs, derived from official court documents. The film is indeed a bizarre affair, using almost no film-maker tricks to help with continuity– ie., no match-on-action, no eyesight leads, no camera angle consistencies. The jumping, motion-happy shots seem to land in dramatic angle after dramatic angle, typically far below the subject's line of vision. Joan is often viewed from below, towering over the camera with her eyes always wide and lifted as if only addressing God.

As with so many other martyr films (forgive me but only Passion of the Christ is really coming to mind at the moment), we are flung into whirls of violence and empathy. We are often asked to place ourselves into the martyr's shoes. We are asked to imagine making such a sacrifice. And often in these movie-going experiences, we are consoled by an omniscient feeling that we know more or understand our matyr better than the torturers and executioners. In this film, however, we are not given that comfort. We are not asked to identify. In fact, to the end, Joan remains a mystery. Perhaps this was artistic intent, or perhaps the director himself had not quite made up his mind about her either.

While I would say this certainly isn't one of the easiest films to get through, it is surprisingly easy to follow despite my lack of knowledge to the real historical significance of the real Joan of Arc. An obviously significant film that I am happy to have seen and look forward to learning more about.

#214 A Room with a View (1985)

2010-12-08T17:33:00.001-08:00

Director: James Ivory

Cast: Helena Bonham Carter, Julian Sands, Daniel Day-Lewis, Maggie Smith, Denholm Elliott, Simon Callow, Patrick Godfrey, Judi Dench

Lucy Honeychurch is a young proper lady growing up in the English countryside, and she is traveling to Florence with her older cousin and chaperon, Charlotte Bartlett. When the two find themselves unexpectedly placed in cramped rooms without views, a chain of events begin that will forever change young Lucy's life.

When at dinner, two eccentric gentleman guests offer the ladies their rooms (with spectacular views), the ladies reluctantly accept the generous offer. The younger of the two gentlemen, George Emerson, takes an instant peculiar liking to Lucy, and days later, on a picnic in the countryside, he romantically snatches her into his arms and kisses her.

When Lucy returns home to her engagement to the uber-sophisticated, nasaly, and stoic Cecil– she is forced to examine the true value of her comfort versus the reckless abandon of true happiness.

Though idealistically set and lavishly costumed, the film lacks cohesiveness. Disjointed, unlikely happenings lead to bursts of emotion which we never saw evidence of forming? It is hard to celebrate the love exclamations of two characters that we have never seen together...

As I have said before, Daniel Day-Lewis is one of my favorite performers, and my bias continues–as I truly felt his light, silly performance as Cecil brought amusement and charm to a film that otherwise lacked relatable character. Entertaining, but I caution that it will satisfy no substantial appetite for drama, comedy, history, or romance.

#213 Paths of Glory (1957)

2010-12-07T17:05:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Stanley Kubrick

Cast: Kirk Douglas, Ralph Meeker, Adolphe Menjou, George Macready, Wayne Morris, Richard Anderson, Joe Turkel, Christiane Kubrick

Stanley Kubrick's Paths of Glory could be one of the most poignant, blood-boiling examinations of the irony of war ever made. With the sole intention of exposing the senselessness of murder–not only to the enemy but to the human race– this film manages to so thoroughly give rise to your emotions that it's almost impossible not to be bursting through the screen with anger.

When three French men go on trial for supposed cowardice in face of the enemy (as an example to their regiment for not winning a battle), their colonel (Douglas) rises in their defense. Explaining that their mission was impossible and they only retreated to save their own lives, he attempts to sway the court marshall toward their innocence. But the egotistical, power-hungry General Mireau (Macready) has set the wheels in motion for these mens' executions, and as with many large institutions– it's impossible to stop the momentum of anything, no matter how wrong.

The corruption, hypocrisy, and mindless ordering/following are highlighted full-stop in this film, and it is only in the last few moments of the entire feature that we witness any glimmer of hope for otherwise. While this film acknowledges the possibility for change and innocent ignorance of man as a race, it also firmly supports the ideology that we are doomed to be the mechanism of our own demise.

This film will have you thinking in a broad scope, and it masterfully will call upon your emotions. Kubrick, as always, manages to entertain while also push the limits of your pleasurable movie-going experience into the realm of the surreal, or in this case, sadly real.

#212 Rain Man (1988)

2010-12-06T18:17:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Barry Levinson

Cast: Dustin Hoffman, Tom Cruise, Valeria Golino, Gerald M. Molen, Jack Murdock, Michael D. Roberts, Ralph Seymour

Selfish, egotistical Los Angeles car salesman Charlie Babbit (Cruise) has just found out that his father has died. He makes a U-turn on the highway with his girlfriend in the car, and he heads to the funeral out of obligation. When he finds out that all he receives from his estranged father's estate is his old car and some rose bushes, Charlie goes on a mission to find the 'elusive' trustee who got his father's 3 mil.

But Charlie gets an answer he never expected. The trustee is a brother (Hoffman) he never knew he had–an autistic savant, living in an institution in his hometown of Cincinnati. Outraged and desperate to get the money, Charlie abducts his brother and begins a long road trip across the country back to LA. Along the way, this self-centered man must care for his high-maintenance, disabled brother. In the process, he learns patience, forgiveness, and compassion, and suddenly, Charlie finds himself wanting to hold onto his brother for reasons other than money.

Hands down– the best acting of Dustin Hoffman's career. Tom Cruise, though unexperienced in this role, plays the asshole like no other as well. A challenging topic for a film which was given up by many directors before Levinson took the script–the film challenges the conventions and our comfort-level with our own conceited natures and prejudices. As we watch the over-the-top Charlie learn the value of familial love, there is something beautiful in the way that Raymond's (Hoffman) condition is unknowingly forgiving to Charlie's brutal behavior.

In the end, it's a heart-felt roadie film. A touching story, an unlikely narrative, but with great comedic relief. The real star of this film is the acting, in which Hoffman will astound you.

Love.

#211 42nd Street (1933)

2010-12-05T18:35:00.001-08:00

***

Director: Lloyd Bacon

Cast: Ruby Keeler, Warner Baxter, Bebe Daniels, George Brent, Guy Kibbee, Una Merkel, Ginger Rogers, Ned Sparks, Dick Powell

The film that single-handedly saved Warner Brothers from bankruptcy in the 1930s, and inspiration to one of the most legendary, long-running broadway musicals of all-time, 42nd Street needs no introduction. The black and white musical follows a variety of characters in the leading up to an opening of a new broadway show. There is the high-strung, lay-it-all-on-the-line director, the nervous but adorable stage manager, the dramatic, romantic, diva star, and the doey-eyed newcomer just ready to make her break.

We watch the auditions, meet the finances, attend the rehearsals, and even get all the dressing room dramatics. 42nd Street is a tribute to those who not only love musicals but classic film as well. Delightful.

#210 The Piano (1993)

2010-12-02T18:34:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Jane Campion

Cast: Holly Hunter, Harvey Keitel, Sam Neill, Anna Paquin, Kerry Walker, Geneviéve Lemon, Tungia Baker

The Piano takes place in the 19th century– Ada (Hunter) is a mute woman who has just been married off by her father. She and her daughter, Flora, leave their native Scotland to make what seems to be an incredibly difficult boat journey to New Zealand frontier. Stranded on the beach, we as an audience quickly come to understand the important bond between mother and daughter (via sign language and nonverbal understandings), and even moreso between mother and beloved piano.

When her husband, Alistair, finally shows for her rescue, he doesn't bother to notice or care for her attachment to the piano–despite multiple efforts. Even more carelessly, he trades the piano to a local native, Baines, in exchange for land despite the confrontation that ensues with Ada as a result. Alistair also informs her that he has promised her services in providing Baines with piano lessons, as he has personally requested.

Ada reluctantly goes, if only to get the chance to visit her precious piano. She soon realizes, however, that Baines has no interest in learning the piano. Instead, he nurses his infatuation with Ada. The two make a deal that she will visit once for each black key on the piano, allowing Baines to "do what he pleases" as she plays–and once all the keys have been spoken for, she may have the piano back. Thus begins an erotic and often silent struggle between the two characters.

Of course, when Alistair eventually learns of the love affair, he is driven mad that he cannot illicit a similar physical response from his wife. He takes drastic measures which lead to tragedy, drama, horror, escape, and love (not necessarily in that order).

This film is truly bizarre, albeit extremely "exciting" at parts. Intensely erotic in a "forbidden fruit" kind of way, it takes bold moves with both the male and female bodies, the concept of prostitution, domestic violence, and rape. On the same token, it is confusingly enough... a love story, and a very mushy one at that. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't surprised and entertained by this film.

Of course, my major grief is about the acting. Holly Hunter, though doing wonders with her facial expressions, was entirely the wrong person cast in this role. Although she did play many of her own piano parts, her Scottish accent was DEPLORABLE! In other ways, I felt the role required a woman with a more apparent wear on her face, if that makes any sense at all. Angelica Houston (who was actually considered by Campion for the role) immediately comes to mind as what I imagine the perfect Ada to be.

At any rate, an important film– equated in my mind with breaking sexual boundaries much in the way Last Tango in Paris did.

#209 Les parapluies de Cherbourg [The Umbrellas of Cherbourg] (1964)

2010-11-30T17:28:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Jacques Demy

Cast: Catherine Deneuve, Nino Casteinuovo, Anne Vernon, Marc Michel, Ellen Farner, Mireille Perrey, Jean Champion, Pierre Caden, Jean-Pierre Dorat

On a day like today where it literally has not stopped raining for even a moment since I woke this morning, I found it only fitting to finally get to The Umbrellas of Cherbourg. This having been a personal recommendation of a good friend of mine, I was quite excited to see it. Actually, perhaps rather than excited, the word would be 'interested'. I walked into this film knowing that it would be unusually pleasant–even if perhaps at first it stylistically offends. Not sure what that meant really, I popped the dvd in, and was not-so-surprised to find the forecast to be true.

The Umbrellas of Cherbourg is entirely a musical, but not in the usual sense. Instead of random outbreaks of song, every single phrase of dialogue is sung in the movie. And even further, there is no repeating melody, no chorus, no predictability. The entire movie rolls along with a symphonic (and sometimes jazzy snazzy) score, and the characters seem to sing out their lines with whatever little melody they please. For the first 30 minutes at least... I have to wholly admit that this is not only alarming, but extremely uncomfortable.

Soon enough, however, you become interested in the 'mood changes' brought on by the background music, and in some ways, the singing makes the French subtitles easier to follow.

The story is of Geneviéve (Deneuve– aka Belle de Jour!), 17-year-old daughter who lives with her widowed umbrella-saleswoman mother (Vernon) in Cherbourg. She falls hopelessly and secretly in love with a 20-year-old mechanic named Guy (Casteinuovo), and when the two make plans to marry, Geneviéve's mother strictly forbids it. When Guy gets drafted and sent to the war in Algeria for two years, the two lovers consummate their relationship, and in the process, Geneviéve conceives. The two lovers promise to wait for one another.

But just three months after Guy's departure, Geneviéve finds herself weak–physically and emotionally. With only discouragement from her mother, she struggles to think about Guy at all. When a wealthy jewel salesman (Michel) claims love-at-first-sight and asks for her hand in marriage, she follows her mother's advice and accepts. She is married only a month or so later–just a short few months after Guy's initial leave!

When he is injured and comes back to Cherbourg early, he is devastated to find the truth about Geneviéve's decisions. In depression, he takes to drinking, sleeping with prostitutes, quits his job, and mourns the death of his Aunt. With the help of his Aunt's former nurse, he comes back to life through successfully starting his own gas station. After marrying her, Geneviéve and Guy find each other for the first time in an unexpected place on an unexpected evening.

The film is separated into three parts: the departure, the absence, and the return. And while the plot doesn't boast anything new, it's all in the presentation that sets Umbrellas apart. The first French musical ever to be shot in color, it's a splendor of a film, albeit one that requires patience and an open-mind. If you have any heart for musicals, guaranteed that you'll catch yourself smiling a few times at the very least... if not secretly captivated by the end.

#208 Frankenstein (1931)

2010-11-28T21:04:00.000-08:00

****

Director: James Whale

Cast: Boris Karloff, Colin Clive, John Boles, Edward Van Sloan, Mae Clarke, Dwight Frye

Sometimes regarded as one of the greatest horror thrillers ever made, James Whale's 1931 Frankenstein is indeed a masterpiece. I figured I would take a gander at this film since it is such a prominent part of another film I just watched from the 1001, The Spirit of the Beehive.

Based only loosely on the novel of the same title by Mary Shelley, it is the story we know all too well: a man who's drive for science takes him into a realm that has not and should not be explored–the creation of life. Aided by his hunchback assistant named Fritz, Dr. Frankenstein (Clive) steals from graves and science labs to build a monster to bring to life, much to the horror of his fiancé and professor. When the monster gets loose on the town, it begins a path of death and destruction, out of anger, fright, but most often confusion. We both pity and fear the monster that doesn't know any other way other than to kill.

When Frankenstein decides he must destroy his creation, the entire town rises up to help, and a fatal and tragic ending follows.

While I was expecting a somewhat unapproachable, choppy, and cheesy horror film, instead I was delighted to find a very comprehensible film. Where so many older films lose their punch (old comedies lose their humor, old romances lose their relatability), Frankenstein manages to still shock and scare. Countless moments had me squirming in my seat with suspense, feeling repulsed, or jumping back in surprise. Only a true masterpiece can maintain such an impact with an audience nearly 80 years after its creation. A must see for any film appreciator, especially those of the horror genre.

#207 Cheech and Chong's Up In Smoke (1978)

2010-11-28T19:28:00.001-08:00

Director: Lou Adler, Tommy Chong

Cast: Cheech Marin, Tommy Chong, Strother Martin, Edie Adams, Harold Fong, Richard Novo, Jane Moder, Pam Bille, Arthur Roberts, Marian Beeler

While this film boasts careful screen composition and widescreen set-up, I still found it hard to believe those were the real reasons Up In Smoke found its way onto the 1001 list. Although I'd seen pieces of this movie on Comedy Central off-and-on for pretty much my entire life, I'd never had the interest or the patience to sit down and watch it from beginning to end. And why should I? Unless you grew up in the 70s or indulge in the stoner-culture, the film isn't speaking to you.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you can't enjoy the film, but I AM saying it will leave you feeling a bit like you've walked into a club of which you aren't a member. Although I could appreciate the sheer nutty, adlib humor, I found many of the gags to be brushing past me in "well that would've been funny if..." manner.

The film is the story of Pedro (Cheech) and Man (Chong), two burn-outs who haphazardly find themselves as compadres. Pedro is a struggling Mexican-American who finds just enough money to trick out his station wagon with blue fur, and Man is a hippie stoner who lives with what we can only assume are his wealthy parents. When the two come together, pandemonium ensues–only problem is, the two are too high to notice. Caught in major drug busts, police chases, and battle-of-the-band contests, the two friends never seem to catch on to anything, and quite literally blaze their way through every harrowing situation they come across.

While I can't lie and say this is one of my favorite films, I can understand how it has become a phenom of our culture. For that, at the very least, Cheech and Chong get my respect–just not my laughs.

#206 The Spirit of the Beehive (1973)

2010-11-28T07:01:00.000-08:00

Director: Víctor Erice

Cast: Ana Torrent, Fernando Fernán Gómez, Teresa Gimpera, Isabel Telleria, Ketty de la Camara

In a remote, rural 1940s Spanish village, a young girl named Ana is growing up with her father, mother, older sister, and housekeeper. Her father is a beekeeper who spends most of his time writing about his bees. Her mother is distant, preoccupied in a self-absorption of writing long letters to her secret lover. Her sister Isabel is her only friend, albeit a somewhat mischievous one, always playing tricks on Ana and taking full advantage of her youthful and gullible nature.

Perhaps the only thing the people of this village really have to look forward to is when the new movie reel comes to the local cinema–children jump around the truck, and everyone in the town crowds in the door, having brought their own chairs. When James Whales' 1931 Frankenstein comes to town, Ana is nothing short of traumatized by the monster; however, her ferocious curiosity is not to be confused with fear.

Ana begins a solitary journey to find the monster, to summon his spirit, to find out if and why he killed the little girl in the film. Her obsession leads her into dangerous situations–journeying far away from home to a remote abandoned farmhouse, feeding vagabonds, and long, lost walks in dark forests. Her dysfunctional family hardly notices until the father's coat and pocket-watch go missing, as a result of one of Ana's schemes.

The film is extremely slow-moving with dry, rolling landscapes. The homes feel as abandoned as the land, and the characters within Ana's family are never shown together on screen–always separated, always isolated– even when at the dinner table. Ana's adventure is one purely on her own, and her wide eyes are wide open windows into her emotions. Without much dialogue (and often when there is, it is in a whisper), we are able to imagine all of the overwhelming feelings and wonderings of small Ana.

The film is often cited as being a grand inspiration for Pan's Labyrinth, a modern day Spanish fantasy film. After seeing both, I can really see the similarities in the use of the young girl, but the pacing and use of violence in Pan's Labyrinth make it almost unrelatable to the quiet, contemplative Spirit of the Beehive.

#205 Stand By Me (1986)

2010-11-26T10:49:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Robert Reiner

Cast: Wil Wheaton, River Phoenix, Corey Feldman, Jerry O'Connell, Kiefer Sutherland, John Cusack, Gary Riley, Casey Siemaszko

An adaptation of Stephen King's novella "The Body," Stand By Me is the story about the coming-of-age revelations and the bonds of boyhood. Four friends in the year 1959 are one weekend away from beginning junior high and embark on a journey to recover the body of a boy their age who has gone missing. On the journey, we get to know the boys– Gordie, a smart, small boy living in the shadow of his dead brother; Chris, the group's leader who has a bad reputation despite his good nature; Vern, the chubby, somewhat pathetic goof, and Teddy, the crazy, smart-alec who has a reputation based on his father who lost his mind on the beach of Normandy and abuses poor Teddy.

What the boys experience on the journey changes them, and the bonds they create resonate for them all through their lives. The film, in fact, is a memory of Gordie's-- and his voice-over narration leads through the harrowing adventure with an equal mix of adult nostalgia and boyish innocence.

Unlike some other boyhood-bond movies I've seen, this one doesn't wreak too much of sentimentality, except when it really counts. I've always found myself enjoying Stephen Kind adaptations: Shawshank, Carrie, Green Mile, The Shining. Looking forward to seeing the others, if any, on the list.

#204 Fargo (1996)

2010-11-26T07:12:00.000-08:00

*****

Director: Joel Coen

Cast: Frances McDormond, Steve Buscemi, William H. Macy, Peter Stormare, Harve Presnell, Steve Park, John Carroll Lynch, Kristin Rudrud, José Feliciano

The Coen Brothers' widely-disputed "true story" about a North Dakota kidnapping case turned murderous in the year 1987–it's a folksy, you-know-the-town-all-too-well kind of story.

Jerry Lundegaard (brilliantly played by Macy) is a poor sap working at a car dealership, secretly over-run by debt, and under the strong thumb of his wealthy father-in-law. He arranges for his folksy, midwestern "You betcha!" wife to be kidnapped, so he can split the ransom with the criminals, and start a business deal that will relieve his debt.

But when the two hitmen, Buscemi and Stormare, find themselves involved in triple homicide as opposed to just a single kidnapping, the whole rug begins to unravel. Enter Frances McDormand (the director's wife, mind you) who plays Marge Gunderson, another folksy character who would go on to win best actress with the Academy for this performance. A pregnant, slow-moving, and slow-talking police chief, she calmly steps weaves her way through the complicated mess. She is always 2 steps behind, but just close enough to make everyone nervous.

We watched as Jerry sweats out the complications of the chain-reaction he has started. His fumbly speech, his awkward manner as his brain spins in circles... so completely relatable and real that it can't be anything but brilliant.

Often described as a black comedy, it in some ways brought Little Miss Sunshine to mind. Even though that film is on a whole other level in terms of what brand of "comedic relief" is used, the parallels between Jerry (Fargo) and Richard (LMS) somewhat astounded me. Both even depend on a certain "Stan Grossman" to bring their wacky business deal to fruition. Was LMS a nod to the Coen Brothers?

Regardless, A+

#203 Saving Private Ryan (1998)

2010-11-25T18:18:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Steven Spielberg

Cast: Tom Hanks, Tom Sizemore, Edward Burns, Barry Pepper, Adam Goldberg, Vin Diesel, Giovanni Ribisi, Jeremy Davies, Matt Damon, Ted Danson

Coming into a film like this, you can only try to prepare yourself. You can assume brutality, you can assume heart-tearing relationships being suddenly and unfairly destroyed, you can assume deep, strong stand-points on the ideals of war.

Prepare and assume all you want, it doesn't much change the experience. The horror of war perhaps never more realistically depicted than Saving Private Ryan–the highest grossing film of 2008 and one for which the Department of Veteran Affairs had to set up a 800 hotline for traumatized veterans who had seen the film.

The film begins with the Normandy invasion, a 25-minute slaughter of American soldiers, only even more crippling due to the shaking hands and vomiting out of sheer terror which you witness just moments before they strike the beach. Out of the survivors, 8 men are selected to carry out a special mission: saving private ryan. Private Ryan is one of four soldier brothers, and in fact is the only one left alive. In order to ease the suffering of his mother, he has been ordered to be retrieved and sent home alive. Of course, in order to locate him in all of France, 8 men risk their lives in his pursuit.

You can imagine all of the dilemmas brought up through this film-- the worth of one man's life over another, the insanity of war itself. It's a startling and humbling film that did bring me to tears. But of course Spielberg brings us to tears! He is not only a very capable director, but he also has the success to have any tool at his disposable to bring us his vision. What is important is that after the initial tears, the initial experience... comes the deeper implications which stick with us.

The men in this film are not the heroes we expect, but rather ordinary men who become some version of hero through braving and just doing the best they can. In this respect, we are able to at least ATTEMPT on some small scale relate to the terror and the confusion. Janusz Kaminski, Spielberg's cinematographer (who also worked on Schindler's List), does a brilliant job of knowing when to let us be overwhelmed by chaos and when we need to feel more-oriented.

A brilliant film that I look forward to learning more about.

#202 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939)

2010-11-24T19:27:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Frank Capra

Cast: James Stewart, Jean Arthur, Claude Rains, Edward Arnold, Guy Kibbee, Thomas Mitchell, Eugene Pallette, Beulah Bondi, H.B. Warner

A sudden US Senate vacancy leads to a dilemma-- who will fill this seat, and will this person be someone that gives the senators who appoint him a hard time about a greedy bill they've organized for personal profit? Claude Rains as Senator Paine chooses to elect Jefferson Smith (Stewart), a politically-oblivious patriot who is popular in the media for his work with children.

Mr. Smith shows up in Washington doey-eyed. He visits monuments, gabs nervously, drops his hat in front of pretty girls, and is in innocent awe of everything about the American government. What comes hand-in-hand with this innocence is honesty, and when Mr. Smith tries to begin a bill to build a boys' campground that will disrupt the other senators' greedy bill... all hell breaks loose. A smear campaign begins on Smith, trying to expel him from the senate based on a web of powerful lies from powerful people. But can honesty and justice prevail?

When this film came out in 1939, Capra used it as a powerful tool for reaching the masses with a message: the message being a swift punch in the nose to the US government. The film caused a political uproar but received rave reviews from not only critics but movie-goers all across the country. The film addresses concerns still very relevant to todays' citizens about todays' government. We'd all like to imagine such a hero as Mr. Smith in our own Congress--the only voice of reason and truth amongst the majority. But as we can see, it's no easy undertaking to be the hero, and can we even expect modern day man to take that kind of powerful stance on anything? Or will he just blog about it and hope to get a reality television series?

At any rate, Jimmy Stewart is astounding in this film. He bashes through multiple levels of adored and powerful screen presence within this film: innocence/naivety, adorable heart-throb, and commanding, powerful hero. Though quite long, the film was very accessible, even for someone who would typically shy away from political dramas. A classic for certain.

#201 Caravaggio (1986)

2010-11-22T18:47:00.000-08:00

Director: Derek Jarman

Cast: Noam Almaz, Dawn Archibald, Sean Bean, Dexter Fletcher, Nigel Davenport

Who was Caravaggio? Don't expect this film to tell you.

On the contrary, the film is more of an imagined, vignette view of his life–imagined lovers, relationships, and career. Fiction. What could've been, but probably wasn't. Set to long 'bouts of poetry and full of cheesy 20th century anachronisms that are either meaningful (lost on me!) or a playful poke.

What's more is that the film-maker seems particularly fascinated with the concept of homo-eroticism in the artist world during the time period of the baroque. Simply glazing over Caravaggio's true artistic importance to his era (tenebrism, the first bouts of realism verse idealism, single light source, motion/dynamism within painting, breaking the boundaries of the 4th wall).... and rather spends that time daydreaming about what sorts of erotic gay relationships may have inspired each painting.

While there is nothing wrong with this non-literal approach to the film, I did have quite a number of issues with its general presentation. For one, the lack of dialogue (and inclusion of so much poetry) makes this film practically inaccessible to anyone not already familiar with who Caravaggio is-- and even for the most avid art history lover (myself), the film was a hard view. The broken, sporadic timeline made the vignettes difficult to follow, though I can only suppose they were added for artistic "breath" in the plot's (or lack thereof) momentum.

One thing I can commend this film on is its OWN use of realism-- how dirty and fantastic the characters appear! This, I'm sure, Caravaggio himself would've commended.

Overall, wouldn't recommend to anyone who isn't a major art history buff or fan of artistic nonlinear, plotless film. A difficult sell for most.

#200 Gilda (1946)

2010-11-21T17:57:00.000-08:00

Director: Charles Vidor

Cast: Rita Hayworth, Glenn Ford, George Macready, Joseph Calleia, Steven Geray, Joe Sawyer, Gerald Mohr

"Who, me?"

Regarded as one of the greatest-of-all-time screen romances and film noir, Gilda is a film that is surprisingly not so much about love, as it is about pride. Johnny (Ford) is a small-time crook who has had his life saved by Ballin Mundson (Macready), a large-time crook and illegal casino operator in Argentina. The two come together in an almost homo-erotic friendship, working together at the casino, until Ballin shows up with a wife one day-- Enter Gilda. Gilda (Hayworth) is a woman that seems to have some sort of complicated secret past with Johnny, and the two will spend the entire film battling between wanting and wanting to ruin one another.

Although Hayworth is gorgeous and saucy, and although this film is generally considered to be one of the greatest of its genre and era-- there are a lot of reasons that Gilda didn't hit a homerun with me. For one, the ongoing tension between Gilda and Johnny (which is supposed to be sexually-charged as well as fueled by hate) seemed erratic and disjointed. Granted, the two characters are understandably working through complex fiery emotions, but on the whole, their actions, arguments, and jabs at one another seem senseless, unlikely, and confusing. The back-and-forth between Gilda and Johnny, however, was not nearly as annoying as the man-love bizarre relationship between Ballin and Johnny. Even for a mob-related relationship, it was a bit too much man-love for what I could handle. Ballin as a villain was ruined by what I can only call... cheesy acting (perhaps highlighted by a cheesy over-exaggerated musical score).

I also felt the plot was clogged up with extraneous characters and details which just confused and burdened. All of the build-up about the business relationships/the safe--all for no pay-off.

I will say, however, that Hayworth's screen presence was one of the most powerful and commanding of all the 30s and 40s heroines I've seen thus far. Still doesn't mean I love the film. :(

#199 The Palm Beach Story (1942)

2010-11-20T07:19:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Preston Sturges

Cast: Claudette Colbert, Joel McCrea, Mary Astor, Rudy Vallee, William Demarest, Robert Warwick, Sig Arno, Robert Dudley, Franklin Pangborn

Gerry Jeffers (Colbert) is a loving housewife of a new variety–determined to help her architect husband (McCrea) succeed, she divorces him and tries to find a new husband to finance his projects. Her husband, Tom, is of course driven practically mad with jealousy and misunderstanding at his wife's intentions. When Gerry takes off to West Palm Beach with one of the richest men in the world, John D. Hackensacker III (Vallee), Tom follows her there to win her back.

With a plot so ludicrous, it is easy to suspend disbelief and enjoy the sheer silliness of a film like this. You can't get mad at Claudette Colbert, no matter how goofy her acting is, and the costuming of this film unto itself is a masterpiece. Just in tow with other screwball comedies of the 1930s, this witty feel-gooder will keep you smiling. And just when you think it's impossible for all to come out of this happily, Sturges surprises you with an even more ridiculous happy ending than you could imagine. Pleasant to the end.

#198 Black Narcissus (1947)

2010-11-19T19:23:00.000-08:00

Director: Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger

Cast: Deborah Kerr, Sabu, David Farrar, Flora Robson, Esmond Knight, Jean Simmons, Kathleen Byron, Jenny Laird, Judith Furse, May Hallat

Sister Clodagh is a young nun who has just been promoted quite unexpectedly (and perhaps too soon) to start a new convent, school, and hospital at a remote location in the Himalayas. The palace is an old harem, perched atop a cliff where the wind blows strong 24/7 and people have a habit of not staying long.

Leading a team of four other nuns, she seeks help and companionship (albeit reluctantly) from a guide named "Mr. Dean," a dark ruffian who lives amongst the natives. He helps the nuns to understand the superstitious natives (who are only attending the convent because they are being paid to do so), a young Prince/General, and a poor, young, and fiesty native girl.

The sensuous history of the palace seems to slowly begin wreaking havoc on the pious group's psyche, and Sister Clodagh and Sister Ruth seem to be at odds with one another over their pasts and their affections toward Mr. Dean. When the young prince and fiesty native girl disappear together and a young village boy dies, Sister Ruth is sent over the edge into insanity and tries to take Sister Clodagh (quite literally) over the edge with her.

Though I have nothing exactly against the film, I can't say anything about it particularly captivated me either. I understood the deep psychological complexity these characters possessed, and I also was aware of the ongoing irony of the nuns (those with unfounded beliefs) being more grounded than those without (superstitious natives). It seemed to me, however, extremely disjointed–almost broken into stiff segments of action/theme. And while I understood the purpose of the Mr. Dean character, he came across as cheesy (um, those shorts???).

As for the plot twist, without giving toooo much away, Sister Ruth quickly and somewhat suddenly becomes the center of attention. The jarring visuals this plot twist inspired were extremely disruptive and disturbing to the greater picture. Yet to be decided if that was a stroke of genius or unsuited.

#197 Ostre Sledované Vlaky [Closely Watched Trains] (1967)

2010-11-19T17:15:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Jirí Menzel

Cast: Václav Nekár, Josef Somr, Vlastimil Brodsky, Vladimír Valenta, Alois Vachek, Ferdinand Kruta, Jitka Bendová

Milo (Nekár) is a wide-eyed Czech boy who has just inherited his father's position as train dispatcher at the local train station. He enjoys the job because it means he doesn't have to do "any real hard work." He is quiet, nervous, and skinny, and he tries his best to take after his superior Hubika (Somr), a ladies' man and rule-breaker.

Milo finds himself sweet on a young female conductor, and the two begin a bit of an innocent romance. When she prompts Milo to become physical, Milo's nervousness gets in the way. Depressed and embarrassed, he acts out with self-mutilation and telling anyone who has a pair of ears about his problem. He is determined to find an older woman to give him experience, so he can make love to his girlfriend.

All of this happens amidst World War II, but unlike other films, this one in no way glorifies it-- it is incidental and not center-stage, though it does play an important part in the conclusion of the film. When Milo and Hubika agree to take part in a plan to destroy one of the enemy's ammunition trains, things go a bit awry.

Though quiet, black and white, and in subtitles-- the slowness of this film was neither agitating or daunting. Milo's innocence was endearing and relatable, and the tragic end of the film was not changed from the original novel's.

#196 The Fly (1986)

2010-11-18T16:52:00.001-08:00

****

Director: David Cronenberg

Cast: Jeff Goldblum, Geena Davis, John Getz, Joy Boushel, Leslie Carlson, George Chuvalo

Cronenberg explores the consequences of science, medicine, and technology going too far in this gruesome thriller, horror romance. Jeff Goldblum plays a lonely (though absolutely ripped?) scientist who has just secretly solved the mystery of teleportation! Geena Davis arrives as a reporter, learning about the project for a book. Together, as they explore the possibility of teleporting live organisms, the two fall in love in a fast, steamy love affair.

In a fit of drunken jealousy, Goldblum decides to teleport himself in his woman's absence, and what he initially thinks is a purification of his genes is actually much more horrific: his genes have been fused with that of a house fly that was also in the teleporter.

As he slowly transforms and degenerates, the two lovers are both forced to deal what comes. Goldblum begins to lose control over his body and his mind, and Davis finds some shocking news at the doctor's that sends the plot into entire other arena of intense.

What could've simply been a scary gore-fest turned out to be a highly emotional, political film. Being a true horror-movie-hater myself, I was gearing myself up for a 90 minute struggle. Instead, I found it to be pretty fascinating, and I didn't ever even have to look away! The ending was so sad and overwhelming that I felt tears welling, though one never fell. Awesome movie, but disappointed to see it had such an obvious lead for a sequel. Heard it wasn't as good, but I don't plan on trying to find out!

#195 Sherman's March (1986)

2010-11-17T18:33:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Ross McElwee

Cast: Ross McElwee, Burt Reynolds, Charleen Swansea

Like so many others, I was duped by this film. I nestled down on top of my comforter for what I assumed was going to be a 2 hour long documentary on Sherman with some sort of odd sprinkling of personal-sharing on the part of the film-maker (as I had read in the film description). What I found, however, was one of the first and most noted diary films of the documentary genre.

Ross McElwee is a southerner who is about to start a film that retraces Sherman's march through the south, researching the southerners that are still affected by his legacy. Instead, he is caught off guard by his girlfriend leaving him for her ex just before he begins his journey. Thus, he has a hard time concentrating on Sherman and begins to instead be side-tracked by his own personal shortcomings as a lover, boyfriend, and person.

He begins to explore countless past relationships as well as new relationships set up by his rather determined match-maker friends. Soon, his film becomes almost entirely about this journey with the occasional "Oh, right! Back to Sherman!" moments. One of the greatest moments of this film comes with mindfulness realization that he is not just filming his own life, but perhaps he is filming to HAVE a life. In other words, he begins using his filming as an escape and an excuse.

The self-aware, diary-style film is a very slow moving, plotless exploration of one man's experience of the human condition. The answerless, romantic-comedyless search for companionship and success. For the most part, I loved this film--as I usually always love documentary films! Although interesting and sometimes masterfully edited, I found myself somewhat inattentive at parts–whether that is my own fault or the film-makers is undetermined. See for yourself.

#194 Duck Soup (1933)

2010-11-16T18:00:00.000-08:00

*****

Director: Leo McCarey

Cast: Groucho Marx, Harpo Marx, Chico Marx, Zeppo Marx, Margaret Dumont, Raquel Torres, Louis Calhern

One of the Marx brothers most famous films, but certainly not their most successful at the time of its release, Duck Soup is a plotless, confusing hour of silliness-- brilliant! Groucho plays Rufus T. Firefly, the new leader of Freedonia-- a country financially supported soley by his sometimes love-interest, Mrs. Teasdale. However, the leader of Sylvania (played by Calhern), wants to win Mrs. Teasdale affections and eventually goes to war with Freedonia for well, no particular reason.

The truth of the matter is, the plot of this movie is completely pointless and incidental. Though often called one of the greatest political and war satires ever, I mostly just see a brand of comedy that is unparalleled. After this film tanked in box offices, the brothers left Paramount and began making movies with MGM that were more musical and certainly more structured.

If nothing else demonstrates the randomness of Duck Soup, then perhaps Groucho Marx's explanation of the title will: "Take two turkeys, one goose, four cabbages, but no duck, and mix them together. After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life."

I came into this movie expecting something silent and extremely unapproachable, and I was so SO pleasantly surprised. Not only is this film easy to watch, but it is also so goofy that it is impossible not to love it. The Marx Brothers' camera-aware one-liners are sometimes poorly delivered, and the screen presences are extremely unorganized/unplanned-- making the film feel like a bad stage-show, and absolutely amazing for that reason. In all of the places where we expect modern cinema to do the opposite, the Marx Brothers get away with just about everything. SO love this film, and I am adding it to my list of "must watch again"s.

#193 Au Revoir Les Enfants (1987)

2010-11-15T18:03:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Louis Malle

Cast: Gaspard Manesse, Raphael Fejt ö, Francine Racette, Stanislas Carre de Malberg, Philippe Morier-Genoud, Francois Berléand, Francois Négret

In the midst of World War II, two Catholic boarding school students in France find unexpected friendship. Julien Quentin (Manesse) is a sensitive, momma's boy who despite his hatred for school has a decent amount of popularity amongst the other boys. Jean Bonnet (Fetjö) is a newcomer to the school and is finding it hard to adjust.

When Julien learns that Jean is actually a Jew in hiding, he stops taunting him with the other boys and slowly develops a friendship with him. When Gestapo receive word that the school is hiding Jews and come for Jean, Julien faces one of the hardest days of his life.

Based on the actual events of his childhood at a wartime boarding school, director Louis Malle is careful to depict the film entirely from the child's view. No omniscient understanding of the war-- only what the priests and teachers tell the children (practically nothing). This view allows for a true innocence in perspective that makes the emotions of the children completely within our empathetic grasp as viewers. In addition, the film is shot in a dark, snowy, damp setting that chills you in just watching. The title translated to English ("Goodbye, Children") refers to both the climactic departing at the film's conclusion as well as the unavoidable end of childhood innocence.

The film uses a series of interesting motifs to highlight the unusual unification of these two characters, ie. continually reminding you of their separation, even when shown together. One of the strongest motifs I noticed is the visual of the "looking glass." The character Bonnet is consistently viewed through glass, in reflection, or in a window-like frame-- and more often than not, we find that it is Quentin who views him through this frame. (Think of the piano lesson window, the mirror in Bonnet's locker, the doorway of Bonnet's exit, the framed soldier who comes for confession.) Also remember the opening scene of the movie where we watch Quentin look out through the train window, trapped and isolated, with a distinct naive view of the world. It is when viewing Bonnet through these frames that illuminates the importance difference between the two friends--it reminds us that even though they are mates, they are still very isolated, coming from two very different worlds.

Another beautiful and tragic perspective on World War II--refreshing and endearing for its unique vantage point on the happenings of the Holocaust. Of course, this film is only minutely in documentation of the war-- and more about the climax and denouement of friendship as a result of persecution. A microcosm scope.

#192 Rebel Without A Cause (1955)

2010-11-14T20:58:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Nicholas Ray

Cast: James Dean, Natalie Wood, Sal Mineo, Jim Backus, Ann Doran, Corey Allen, William Hopper, Rochelle Hudson, Dennis Hopper, Edward Platt

Jim Stark is from a middle class family who doesn't know how to love him. They move him from town to town to keep him out of trouble, and in particular, his father is about as far as can be from the "be a man" role model. When he comes to this new town, Jim finally begins to find the affection he's been searching for, albeit in unusual places: Plato, a ruffian kid, Judy, a love-starved daughter and bully's girlfriend, and Ray, a juvenile delinquent detective.

Unfortunately, even though he makes a go at starting a-new, other kids in the new town are making it anything but easy-- forcing him to knife fight, play chicken, race stolen cars, and the like. When Plato's deeply disturbed antics take center-stage in a shoot-out with police, Jim does what he can to defend his first and only friends.

James Dean is Jim, and Dean is a Brando-esque screen presence. The mumbles, the squint, and the nonchalant command of the screen-- he is pretty electric in this film. Interestingly enough, Brando actually screen-tested and turned down this role, so the similarity in Dean's acting style for this film to Brando is not-so-surprising. Natalie Wood-- how DOES this girl keep landing roles across these bo-hunks?? William Beatty AND James Dean?? Frankly, I'm finding her to be a bit under-whelming as an actress.

The plot of this film is so bizarre that I am truly baffled at its enormity of "classic" respect. Granted, it's all about James Dean, isn't it? I mean... I had a poster of him on my wall from this film (never even having seen it) for the majority of my junior year of college.

Anyway, like I was saying... BIZARRE plot. Lots of unnecessary characters and subplots in this film-- lots of details that confuse and are never elaborated on. Many things mentioned but never explained. Who is this woman caring for Plato-- and why does she keep re-appearing in such a random, unsupported fashion? No one really got too upset about Buzz's death, did they? And is the subplot of Judy's father really need to be there? All it did was open up doors of confusion-- is she sexually attracted to her own father?

What?

Mostly, I just tried to "let go" with this film. Suspend disbelief, and try not to be so hung up on the odd turns this film took me down. Obviously this film is loved for its actor performances and certainly not for its storyline, so I'll try to appreciate it in the same light.

#191 Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953)

2010-11-14T13:45:00.000-08:00

***

Director: Howard Hawks

Cast: Jane Russell, Marilyn Monroe, Charles Coburn, Elliot Reed, Tommy Noonan, Carol Channing

An exceptionally comedic, light-hearted musical performance from both Russell and Monroe, playing two showgirl friends on their way to Paris. Lorelei Lee (Monroe) is engaged to be married, and unbeknownst to her and her friend Dorothy (Russell), she is being followed by a private investigator hired by her fiance's father. He wants to make sure she isn't marrying his son for just his money, and well, she just might be. "But is that so wrong?"

The musical numbers are sparkly and are meant to razzle-dazzle you. Monroe is over-the-top and purrs out her lines with unbridled sexuality. Though nothing to take too seriously, the film is a must-see for its most unusual brand of comedy and sex appeal. Russell is absolutely tranny-tastic as Dorothy-- LOVE IT!

#190 My Brilliant Career (1979)

2010-11-09T15:05:00.000-08:00

Director: Gillian Armstrong

Cast: Judy Davis, Sam Neill, Wendy Hughes, Robert Grubb, Max Cullen, Aileen Britton, Peter Whitford, Patricia Kennedy, Alan Hopgood, Julia Blake

Now, I've never been huge on romances-- for me, they are truly a rare-to-sometimes food. But I had some decent hope for this film: a headstrong feminist protagonist, a period piece, and with excellent reviews! Unfortunately, I spent most of the time during this film wondering how it ever made the 1001 list-- and haven't I seen this before on Lifetime?

Sybylla Melvyn (Davis) is an ugly woman, and she is struggling against 19th century societal conventions to settle down and get married. She seems dead-set on starting a career in art, literature, or music, and the film is based around her struggle to fulfill that goal. In fact, the film even opens with a grandiose monologue about her brilliant career-- so brilliant, in fact, that we never need to see her doing it or ever even find out what it is she decides to do!

A number of stuffy and I guess supposedly "hunky" suitors and stubborn family members attempt to derail her plans, but Sybylla does her best to not forget herself.

For one, if you're going to call the film "my brilliant career"-- then perhaps the person should HAVE a career. Or at least a more specific ambition. Secondly, the main suitor, Harry Beecham(played by Sam Neill), is supposed to be a hard conflict of interest for Sybylla, but it was hardly convincing. Their romance really rang dead-as-a-doornail, lacking passion or ferocity (which I think was supposed to be a major aspect of Davis' character), and frankly... I just wasn't buying it.

The film was kind of a cheesy snore, and I found myself wishing that I was watching Pride and Prejudice, Marie Antoinette, or countless other romance/period piece films that I enjoy far more than this one. I'd say unless you're okay with being underwhelmed or unless you're a HUGE sucker for any romance film in existence, it's really okay to skip this one.

#189 Splendor in the Grass (1961)

2010-11-08T15:01:00.001-08:00

***

Director: Elia Kazan

Cast: Warren Beattty, Natalie Wood, Pat Hingle, Sandy Dennis, Sean Garrison, Audrey Christie, Barbara Loden, Zohra Lampert, Fred Stewart

This is what happens when you repress young sexuality-- the woman goes to a mental institution, and the dude knocks up another woman! Just kidding. But seriously.

Deanie Loomis (Wood) and Bud Stamper (Beatty) are in a Kansas high school in 1929, and they are in love. They are also caught in the midst of sexual teenage angst-- both afraid to take the next step in their physical relationship. Scared to let down their parents, their image, and each other.

Instead of following their own instincts to be intimate with one another, the two travel down a much more complicated road of suppressed sexuality-- Bud seeks solace in other girls, and Deanie finds rebellion and self-injury. The road drives them apart, but you can't get TOO far when you're from Kansas, right? When they finally find each other again, what has become of themselves?

The film was hyper-dramatic, though the warnings are real. They say "teen pregnancy is 100% preventable." Well guess what-- so are the sexually-repressed crazies! In that aspect the film was frustrating. Warren Beatty makes his big-screen debut in this film, and having seen his later work (Bonnie and Clyde), my warmth toward his Marlon Brando-esque glow only gets hotter. Natalie Wood does some brilliant crazy-work in this film as well. I think the amount of frustration I felt while watching this film speaks volumes about its effectiveness. Though first inclined to complain, on second thought, I think it really gets to the point steadfast.

I also felt the "splendor in the grass" thread that holds this film together is actually a very beautiful and profound metaphor as well.

Overall, it is a steamy, emotional, and not entirely pleasant romance. Popcorn not needed, though encouraged. Not a first date movie-- could get awkward.

#188 M. Hulot's Holiday (1953)

2010-11-08T12:00:00.000-08:00

Director: Jacques Tati

Cast: Jacques Tati, Nathalie Pascaud, Michele Rolla, Valentine Carmax, Louis Perrault, Andre Dubois Lucien Fregis, Rayond Carl, Suzy Willy

M. Hulot's Holiday is a feel-good, screwball comedic glance at vacation. Hulot heads to spend his holiday at a seaside resort, wreaking accidental and good-natured havoc all over the town and his fellow vacationers. The scene, the people, the music-- all a very gentle, too-true satire on the concept of going on holiday.

The film is virtually silent, as Hulot's slapstick comedy is nearly all physical/situational. The character is charming and innocent, and the plotless jokes roll on for nearly 1.5 hours. While humorous and gentle-- I have to be honest and say I did find myself drifting off in thought at some points aka... getting quite bored. Although the movie was adorable, and I might even be brave enough to say that I think I now see where the character Mr. Bean was stolen from... I just can't say that I found the movie to be anything too memorable. Definitely a movie suited for a lazy afternoon-- casual, light-hearted viewing.

#187 Hitlerjunge Salomon [Europa Europa] (1990)

2010-11-07T20:59:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Agnieszka Holland

Cast: Solomon Perel, Marco Hofschneider, Julie Delpy, Rene Hofschneider, Piotr Kozlowski, Klaus Abramowsky, Michele Gleizer, Marta Sandrowicz

Europa Europa is the harrowing true story of Solomon Perel, a Jewish Holocaust survivor and Nazi war hero. Yep, you read that correctly. Discovered at a Polish orphanage after being separated from his family, he haphazardly climbs Nazi ranks as a model Hitler Youth and German citizen to avoid termination. In the face of the choice of becoming a Jewish martyr or survive-- he chooses survival. Along the way, he faces countless challenges to his faith, his body, and his true identity.

Though understandingly tragic and graphic, Europa Europa manages to remain a deeply personal narrative. In Perel's story, we examine the alternative to an honest death: the price of survival. Overwhelmed with fear, confusion, and guilt, Perel faces some of the most unique challenges imaginable-- even for WWII.

This film proves not to be the easiest in the world to form an opinion on...

On one hand, I am beyond captivated at the remarkable nature of this man's story-- and I want to go running to the bookshelves to uncover what parts of this story are true (and which were embellished for the film-- though not hard to imagine most of the horrors being true). I also believe the film finds itself a stable and respected place amongst other World War II and Holocaust films-- a subject matter that we have no right to forget.

I do have some minor gripes with the film however. One being the classic European flashback/fantasy sequences. The second being the unlikely, jolting savior-like ending. What really happened?

I wish to be more present in the protagonist's consciousness as well. I see his fear, I feel his guilt-- but what is he thinking? I want to hear some of these complicated emotions verbalized....

But I guess that's where Perel's book would be helpful...

Regardless of the details and minor gripes-- this film electrifies and humbles. Overwhelms and frightens. Pays tribute and honors. Definitely a valuable view.

#186 Manhattan (1979)

2010-11-06T21:44:00.001-07:00

****

Director: Woody Allen

Cast: Woody Allen, Diane Keaton, Meryl Streep, Michael Murphy, Mariel Hemingway, Anne Byrne Hoffman, Karen Ludwig, Michael O'Donoghue, Tisa Farrow

Two years after Annie Hall, Allen and Keaton are together again on-screen in Manhattan. With the same witty, neurotic voice-overs, Allen presents a new complicated love-polygon featuring a new cast of intellectual New Yorkers. This time, Allen is Isaac-- and Isaac is dating Tracy (Hemingway), a 17-year-old girl who is helping him forget about his now-lesbian ex-wife (Streep) (who just so happens to be writing a rather embarrassing tell-all about their former marriage). Isaac's best friend, Yale (Murphy) is cheating on his wife with Mary (Keaton)-- a self-conscious but chatty Philadelphian. Isaac and Mary eventually come together out of mutual feelings of rejection to experience their own complicated version of a relationship.

I've come to decide that Woody Allen flicks are a flavor of icecream. You either like it, you hate it, or you're altogether lactose-intolerant. Personally, I find this particular flavor to be delicious, and a safe go-to pleasurable move-going experience. While Annie Hall has particular sentimental value to me as it was my first memorable Woody Allen film-- Manhattan had the same undeniably classic feel. And let's face it-- Allen and Keaton were made to be together on film!

When I think of these Allen films (as a whole), I tend to think of them as one comedic, pleasant popcorn experience. They allow me to both laugh and commiserate, and I appreciate that in a simplistic (but not dismissable) way. I don't always need grandiose gestures from a film to find it irreplaceable and/or memorable. For me, Manhattan is neatly tucked into the greater, undulating love-folder that is Woody Allen.

#185 Fa yeung nin wa [In the Mood for Love] (2001)

2010-11-06T19:33:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Kar Wai Wong

Cast: Tony Leung Chiu Wai, Maggie Cheung, Lai Chen, Rebecca Pan, Paulyn Sun, Kelly Lai Chen, Man-Lei Chan, Tsi-Ang Chin, Roy Cheung

In the way that Lost in Translation remains my favorite film-- this movie captures and moves me somewhere deep below the surface. It doesn't always have to be said. It doesn't always have to be shown. We don't always have to rip each other's clothes off, cry, fight, or even talk to express the complications of our relationships. Sometimes we just keep secrets. We just look at one another. We just know.

Some call this film the greatest romance of 2001, and while I'm not entirely sure who that'd be up against-- I am still not afraid to agree.

The film takes you to a picture-perfect 1960s Hong Kong where two neighbors befriend one another once they realize their spouses are involved in an affair with one another. Leaning on each other for consolation, advice, and even supportive "rehearsals" for the various coping and confrontations involved with being the victims of infidelity, the two form a bond that blossoms into restricted, careful romance. Vowing not to be like their unfaithful spouses, the two waltz around each other carefully, creating one of the most beautiful and forbidden romances ever on screen.

The soundtrack, cinematography, and improvised script give the film a haunting and quiet feel that leaves you aching for resolution-- so much like real life that you forgot you're in a movie for long periods of time. While some might find these moments optimum for taking a bathroom break, certain movie-goers (myself included) found my eyes locked on the screen-- barely blinking, barely breathing!

A beautiful love story. Slowly unfolding.

Highly Recommended for the patient and romantic spirit.

#184 The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957)

2010-11-05T18:44:00.001-07:00

***

Director: David Lean

Cast: William Holden, Alec Guinness, Sessue Hayakawa, Jack Hawkins, James Donald, Geoffery Horne, André Morell

A great war classic (based on the novel of the same name by Pierre Boulle) famous for showcasing one of the smaller-battles of war--the struggles of men whom were not necessarily front-line heroes, but still heroes nonetheless. British POWs during World War II are put to work to build a bridge over the River Kwai under the command of Japanese commander Saito. With his own life and honor on the line, Saito decides to put the British officers to work as well (which breaks one of the conditions of the Geneva Convention). Thus, a war of wills begins between Saito and British officer Nicholson, who for the morale of his men and sheer principle, refuses to work.

When the war of wills is won and Nicholson is put in charge of the bridge project, he begins organizing the construction of a bridge that will not merely stand as a makeshift temporary passage bridge, but rather a testament of the true skill and pride of the entire British army. Soon it becomes confused as to whether or not this bridge is for Britain or a monument to his own ego-- as he walks the line between leader and traitor, even found enlisting workers who are sick or injured.

When the British army commands that the bridge be destroyed and sends a small outfit to complete the demolition (including one American who had just escaped the work camp on the Kwai), Nicholson is eventually faced with the battle between his pride, his country, his duty, and his ego.

While at moments very suspenseful, I am surprised that this film is remembered as such an masterpiece epic. On the whole, not very much happens in this film-- truthfully, absolutely no subplots exist beyond the main bridge story. William Holden's character was unique to the screenplay and adds a sort of genuine raw masculinity to the picture. In fact, after the film I watched a short documentary on the making of the film, and the trials and tribulations of actually engineering the bridge and demolishing it were quite fascinating and made me appreciate the film much more.

#183 Laura (1944)

2010-11-02T16:47:00.001-07:00

Director: Otto Preminger, Rouben Mamoullan

Cast: Gene Tierney, Dana Andrews, Clifton Webb, Vincent Price, Judith Anderson

Considered to be one of the greatest film noirs of all time, Laura is a murder-mystery with all of the check boxes ticked: love triangles, obsession, black-and-white beauty, extravagance, detectives in trench coats, cigarettes, and mysterious disappearances. The film is also considered to have one of the greatest musical scores of its time.

Unfortunately, Laura fell flat for me.

It wasn't a total flop though. I followed the story. I understood the characters. I found the idea that a woman could be so entrancing that a detective could fall in love with her corpse very creepy and spectacular. I found Waldo's ambiguous sexuality suspicious and plot-twisting.

But to me-- as much as I love plot, costume, music, scenery, the whole nine yards of film-- at the end of the day, it's really all about the acting. Well, not always. But in film noir, certainly! Laura herself, though beautiful, had really no personality or charm to convince me she was worth all this trouble. The detective, though peculiar in his investigation methods, never really gave me too much indication that he WAS falling in love with Laura. And Waldo, albeit the most entertaining part of the movie, was rather obvious from the get-go in his intentions and guilt.

The mis-en-scene of the clock + baseball game bring some clever symbolism to the story, but not too clever to save the sinking ship. Ultimately, I want more entertainment value if all I'm getting is a murder mystery. I give it credit for its importance to its time... and that's about as much as I can spare.

#182 The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985)

2010-11-02T14:08:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Woody Allen

Cast: Mia Farrow, Jeff Daniels, Danny Aiello, Irving Metzman, Stephanie Farrow

Cecilia is a young woman living in Depression-era America, struggling to work a waitress job to support herself and her abusive, cheating, and jobless husband. She is alone, and the only thing that gets her by are her frequent, indulgent trips to the cinema where she fantasizes about a carefree and romantic life. After seeing one particular picture, The Purple Rose of Cairo, a number of times-- the romantic hero of the film jumps off the screen and steals her away, leaving the other characters confused and moviegoers wanting their money back.

Cecilia enjoys her romance with Tom (Daniels) until her the actor that PLAYS Tom (also Daniels) comes to trick Tom back onto the big screen. A love triangle is created, and Cecilia finds herself suddenly the princess instead of the poor housewife.

This film is a comedic departure from Allen's usual New Yorkers-having-marital-problems theme, and it explores the relationship that many of us (myself included) have with Hollywood pictures. The movie still contains the great one-liners that Allen is known for, and the fun level of make-believe provides a wonderful escape--quite literally the one the film is based around.

While at first, my inclination was to back away from the cheesiness of the romance and somewhat over-the-top acting... I soon realized that it was done purposefully and with comedic intention. The carefree trip that this movie takes us on is one in which we are able to nod at our own inclinations at living vicariously through the movies that we adore.

Delightful and unexpected!

#181 The Big Chill (1983)

2010-09-07T17:59:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Lawrence Kasdan

Cast: Tom Berenger, Kevin Kline, Glenn Close, Jeff Goldblum, William Hurt, Meg Tilly, JoBeth Williams

Seven U of M college grads of the 60s are re-united again under one roof when one of their former buddies unexpectedly commits suicide. Harold, Sarah, Michael, Karen, Meg, Nick, and Sam have all reached their mid-life crises-- divorced, bored in marriage, drugs, adultery, lonely, childless-- you name it, one of them is dealing with it.

They haven't seen each other in years, but it's obvious they have some unfinished business with one another: arguments to resolve, sexual tension to extinguish, truths to be told. Without a flashback and with minimum sentimental reminiscing, this film manages to express the ache of nostalgia in a simplistic way.

At times it is humorous and other times tragic (but isn't that how nostalgia itself works as well?), the film brings to life some interesting ideas about what to do once you realize you've left your youthful happiness in the dust.

This is something that I, personally, have been dealing with already only having graduated from college a few months ago. I have to imagine how one day much later, after I've married my own corporate suit and produced babies, it would hurt very much to suddenly be walloped on the head with a reminder of my more carefree past.

It was a nice, albeit pointedly 80s film-- some parts dragged, some characters' stories seemed a bit... much. But I appreciate it nonetheless, and that includes its 60s soundtrack.

#180 Bonnie and Clyde (1967)

2010-09-06T17:00:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Arthur Penn

Cast: Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway, Michael J. Pollard, Gene Hackman, Estelle Parsons, Denver Pyle, Dub Taylor, Gene Wilder

Some day they'll go down together.

They'll bury them side-by-side.

To few it'll be grief,

to the law a relief,

but it's death for Bonnie and Clyde.

-Bonnie Parker, 1933

Bonnie Parker (Dunaway) and Clyde Barrow (Beatty) were real-life American depression-era outlaws who became criminal celebrities during the 'public enemy' craze between 1931 and 1934. This film adaptation of their story is comedic, sultry, fashionable, and action-packed, and it stands today as a true classic in the genre of American outlaw films.

This young unmarried couple leads a gang of criminals around the country, robbing banks, grocery stores, gas stations, and stealing cars all along the way. While they manage to stay free, this doomed couple is aware that their luck is bound to run out soon. They suffer from being sensationalized in the media, and consequently, pinned with many crimes they didn't commit. However, they were responsible for numerous murders... so don't feel too bad for them.

This film is often referred to as a slapstick comedy, but I didn't see that so much. Much more notably it was a film about sex and violence, as this was one of the first films to be made after a significant "loosening" of the censorship rules. Estelle Parsons won an Oscar for her performance as Buck Barrow's (Clyde's brother) wife, and this film also was Gene Wilder's first on-screen appearance. I actually have to admit that I would've probably given this movie another star if it weren't for Parsons' performance-- I found it almost intolerably annoying. Of course, that IS the point of her character, but it was excessive and ruined some key scenes of the film for me. Dunaway is a gorgeous Bonnie, and her costuming was truly outlaw-French chic. Beatty as Clyde sometimes is almost a toonce too... hunky... to be believable, but I still think this is an amazing classic.

It stands as a clear predecessor to an entire genre of great crime films, especially The Godfather which would follow in 1972.

Yes please.

#179 Broadcast News (1987)

2010-09-05T01:48:00.001-07:00

Director: James L. Brooks

Cast: Holly Hunter, Albert Brooks, William Hurt, Robert Prosky, Lois Chiles, Joan Cusack, Jack Nicholson, Peter Hackes

Holly Hunter plays Jane Craig, a network news producer who throws her whole life into her job--a woman whose neurosis is her greatest and worst asset. The two men in her life are two news anchors-- one is her best friend, Aaron (Brooks), who is both experienced and talented. The other is a handsome, showy newcomer, Tom (Hurt), who both infuriates and romantically intrigues Jane.

The three of them mixed together in one workplace equals a hectic, high-stress environment, and Jane struggles to deal with the pressure of juggling the two relationships. On one hand, her relationship with Tom frees her from the stressful, highly ethical and tightly-wound life she has created for herself, but on the other hand, he also represents everything she has hated and fought against. Jane cares about honesty, accuracy, and relevance with the news above all else (even her social life), and Tom believes to get farther in the business, you just gotta dress it up a bit.

Where those two clash, conversely, Jane and Aaron meet on level ground--both are dedicated to the same causes and have shared a long working relationship with one another. Aaron being in love Jane complicates the love triangle, and as he warns her against Tom-- is he doing it because he's looking out for her, or is he doing it because he's jealous?

The love triangle was a bit typical, the events were a bit predictable, and the high-stress workplace seemed overdone and fake. I thought Holly Hunter's character felt way over the top-- Ok, Ok, we get it. She's good at her job. She's neurotic. I don't necessarily think the error was entirely in the acting either. It seems like every intense moment was over-written and over-emphasized. It's not that I don't appreciate movies that present things very plain and simple when the characters' personalities call for that method of showcasing emotion, but I think to create realism within complicated relationships, the subtleties of the characters are extremely important. The characters of this particular film were too busy flailing and nagging for me notice anything else about them.

The film is, however, a comedy. And perhaps what I'm finding as redundant is supposed to be comedic... c'est la vie. I just found myself consistently more irritated than humored.

Why two stars then? I give it two stars because it wasn't a total abomination. For me, two stars usually translates to: "It had its moments."

In the end, it was an easy-to-watch popcorn 80s film that some people would really enjoy. Just not my particular cup o' tea.

#178 Belle de Jour (1967)

2010-09-04T17:56:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Luis Buñuel

Cast: Catherine Deneuve, Jean Sorel, Michel Piccoli, Geneviéve Page, Pierre Clémenti, Francoise Fabian

Séverine Serizy (Deneuve) is a beautiful, elegant upperclass Parisian housewife who is happily married to a handsome surgeon named Pierre (Sorel). The problem, however, (and there always is some problem, isn't there?) is that she cannot bring herself to be intimate with him. They sleep in separate beds even after a year of being married--Séverine is cold, but not cruel.

In her mind, she drifts off into violent, fetishtic sexual fantasies to satisfy her needs and urges, and the unknowing, patient Pierre just politely kisses her and awaits the day he will get to be intimate with his wife. Séverine's fantasies, however, become real when she begins to gain an interest in the happenings of the local brothels after she hears a woman that she knows has begun working for one.

Séverine begins slipping away to the house of Madame Anais to work as a prostitute under the name Belle de Jour (Beautiful Day), named for the fact that she only works afternoons while her husband is at his job. She begins to feel satisfaction, and her confidence blossoms. She begins to see and understand Pierre's "man-urges" after dealing with bizarre and sexually aggressive clientele. It's only after one of her clients begins to step into her married life that things start getting messy.

One of the great things about this film is the way we get to wander in and out of surreal interludes into Séverine's fantasies without warning or explanation. We hear cats meowing in the distance or see the child version of Séverine moving throughout scenes where the main character experiences these day dreams. The transitions are smooth, but easy to follow, and they enlighten a lot of what Séverine is going through in her sexually-complicated emotional sphere--things that would be hard to explain on screen other than through dialogue.

I think Belle de Jour stands as a bit of a cultural landmark as well in the realm of erotic film-making. Despite the extremely steamy subject matter, the director didn't need to show nudity OR sex to make us understand how much of it was actually happening. Half of the titillation, of course, is experienced through suggestion or what is left unsaid. By letting the viewer fill in the gaps, we are able to experience the eroticism while still getting a sense of the subversive nature of the plot.

An amazingly interesting theory about this subtle surrealist masterpiece is... what if the prostitution situation was all just fantasy and day dream as well? What if it was another erotic vision of Séverine's, complete with her aggressive, I'd-die-for-you client lover? Without giving too much of the film away, I'd also think that the final state of Pierre gives support to this interesting theory-- in the end, he is stripped of the ability to act on his 'man-urges', isnt' he? While part of me thinks this is an interesting final place for him to end up in a Séverine fantasy (she is able to have her true love but is also free from the pressure of intimacy!), I also think this disproves the same theory! I do, on some level, think that Séverine uses prostitution as a way of understanding her husband and bringing herself closer to him. The two ideas conflict greatly, and so I'd be interested in knowing what other people think about all this.

At any rate, a very interesting and approachable film, even with its somewhat saucy subject matter.

#177 Ultimo Tango a Parigi [Last Tango in Paris] (1972)

2010-09-04T08:05:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Bernardo Bertolucci

Cast: Marlon Brando, Maria Schneider, Maria Michi, Giovanna Galietti, Gitt Magrini

"Go get the butter."

Last Tango in Paris is the story of Paul (Brando), an American businessman living in Paris whose wife has just committed suicide. Those are the facts. But the truth about this character is that he has been reduced so greatly by his sorrow that all that remains left of his ability to express himself are the banest, cruelest, and most animalistic urges.

When Jeanne (Schneider) goes apartment-hunting for herself and her fiance, she walks into an empty, dingy apartment and finds Paul sitting in the dark. When he begins to rape her, she casually accepts, and soon the two have made a deal to continue to meet there regularly-- no names, no feelings, no questions.

The brutal, anonymous love-making of Paul and Jeanne is sensual but cruel, and it could be argued that it is one of the most raw portrayals of emotion ever on screen. How appropriate was Brando's casting in this role-- I can't even begin to express. The ferocity of his method acting makes Paul's character undeniably (and frighteningly) real. Whether Brando was an obnoxious person doesn't change my opinion about his ability to bring a character to life. When he acts, you can actually sense his character's thoughts and emotions boiling right behind his face. I felt this was so necessary for Paul-- after all, he's the hero of a movie with the only moving plotline being his slowly growing grief.

A lot of controversy was stirred up by the amount sex in this film at the time of its release, and even more criticism was thrown at the director for showing Schneider naked many, many times but never Brando. It's true, it can feel a bit debasing or humiliating to the female, but that's exactly the point of this film-- that was their relationship. She was an object, a vessel, and she allowed herself to be that outlet for the volcanic, hungry needs of Paul.

The greatness of this on-screen relationship is the honesty that is presented through what they choose not to say. The way two people can be using each other simultaneously for very different things. Or the way that one person can allow another work something out through them.

This isn't one of my favorite films, I can tell, and it never will be. I can say, however, that I have tremendous respect for it. This is one of those films where the portrayed emotions are so overwhelming that you almost bow down to the film-maker for just finally getting it all out into the open. A little bit less weight is on our shoulders. Or at least that's how I felt.

#176 Thelma & Louise (1991)

2010-09-03T16:39:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Ridley Scott

Cast: Susan Sarandon, Geena Davis, Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsen, Brad Pitt, Chris McDonald

What some might casually write-off as a feminist-feel-gooder actually has a lot more guts than just that. Thelma and Louise are two completely ordinary Arkansas women, both a bit doomed by their discontent with their own lives. Thelma (Davis) is a housewife who tolerates her rug salesman husband's tantrums, and Louise pours coffee at a roadside diner for a living. Both agree to head off for the weekend and 'let their hair down.' Thelma even opts to tell her husband in a note--too terrified to speak with him about it.

Like typical chicks, they loosen up after a couple of roadside bar margaritas, and Thelma succumbs to lusty temptation by a handsome cowboy who asks her to dance. This takes a horrific turn, however, when he attempts to rape her in the parking lot later that same evening. Louise comes to save the day, and the two end up being to blame for a violent outburst that ends the man's life.

Thus begins the convertible scenes against a desert sunset, country music on the radio, hair blowing in the wind... and that's fine. As viewers, we expect it, and we even want it for these women. This film has all the great traditions of a roadie film, but it packs a few surprise punches as well. Chick flicks take something like this down a road of haphazard goofy scenes, but this film takes those opportunities to have fun.. but with real heart. As the two dig themselves further and further into the hole-- now Wanted in three states-- they seem to be doing something not just for themselves but for all down-trodden, hopeless women.

Personally, I thought it was brilliant. I am the first to stick my nose up at bad romantic and/or feminist comedies-- well, at least modern day ones. I found this movie to be gutsy and strong, while still showcasing realistic 'oh shit' moments and mistakes. It has something that previously in cinema really was only shown through male characters, and for that reason it felt fresh and exciting. Not to mention, I love when films get you rooting for the bad guy... err... girls!

Upon reading some reviews of the film from the time of its initial release, I found Roger Ebert's critique of the ending to be exceptionally interesting and spot-on. I quote:

I would have rated the movie at four stars, instead of three and a half, except for one shot, the last shot before the titles begin. This is the catharsis shot, the payoff, the moment when Thelma and Louise arrive at the truth that their whole journey has been pointed toward, and Scott and his editor, Thom Noble, botch it. It's a freeze frame that fades to white, which is fine, except it does so with unseemly haste, followed immediately by a vulgar carnival of distractions: flashbacks to the jolly faces of the two women, the roll of the end credits, an upbeat country song.

I agree with his critique in citing this as a bit gutless for a movie with so much piss and vinegar. The film was given a brilliant pay-off, but in the editing execution, they chickened out. Indeed, a damn shame.

Still a great movie in my book though. A smart, but easy feel-good for BOTH men and women.

#175 His Girl Friday (1940)

2010-09-01T20:39:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Howard Hawks

Cast: Cary Grant, Rosalind Russell, Ralph Bellamy, Gene Lockhart, Porter Hall, Ernest Truex

Another slap-stick Cary Grant romantic comedy-- you'd think they'd get old, but they really don't.

Hildy Johnson (Russell) is an ex-newspaper reporter who has come back to the office to tell her ex-husband and former boss, Walter Burns (Grant), that she is moving to Albany to remarry. Burns just isn't having it, and he decides to pull every trick in the book to get her back on the job and back in his life.

Suckering her into working on a story about a murderer on death row, Grant manages to even surprise himself with the complex web that keeps Hildy post-poning her train tickets to Albany. Things get even hairier when the story (and the murderer) end up right in the newsroom between the two.

It's certainly nothing surprising, but it has that charm that just screams "Great Classic Film." Cary Grant bumbles off fast-paced, witty lines to keep the woman around, much like he did in The Philadelphia Story that same year in Hollywood. Although I can't say I thought it to be anything ground-breaking or thought-provoking, I will say that this movie is a great popcorn, feel-good classic... with enough twists and turns to keep you captivated until the end. A delightful one. I'd like to call this a good date movie, but I think that is just exposing my sad, deranged fantasy of finding a man that appreciates classic Hollywood like I do.

#174 Crumb (1994)

2010-09-01T17:39:00.000-07:00

*****

Director: Terry Zwigoff

Cast: Robert Crumb, Charles Crumb, Maxon Crumb, Aline Kominsky, Robert Hughes, Martin Miller, Don Donahue, Dana Morgan, Trina Robbins

I think there is a lot to say about Robert Crumb, his family, their lives, and his work, and this movie presents a lot of questionable statements, images, and thoughts. It confirmed (and yet made me suspicious of) many of the things I thought were wrong or right about people in America. I think it presents a lot of questions about things that many of us are already busy questioning in our own lives and moral character-- and so in this tiny little movie review, I won't attempt at cracking the big-picture code.

So instead, I am going to try to stay focused on Crumb for its value as a film, and not relish on Robert Crumb's value or meaning as a man.

This film is a portrait that makes no attempt at setting a stage to present "the character" of Robert Crumb. He is simply shown as he is, and obviously how he always will be-- and it's also obvious the film crew probably didn't have much of a choice anyway.

For those who don't know who Robert Crumb is, he is an American illustrator, most well-known for his involvement in the underground comics of the 1960s and 70s-- showcasing a twisted, satirical, and subversive view of popular American culture. He is perhaps most well-known for including such deeply personal and passionate expressions of all his most inner-demons (most notably sexual perversion) in his work. You might wonder how a film could manage to reveal more about a man who has already bared-all to the public in his work.

I think the big reveal comes in including the cast of people surrounding Crumb. It's obvious that these are the people that most often illicit his seemingly nervous laugh, and it's also around these people that Crumb seems to be able to verbalize some things that might only ever have been spoken of on paper. Despite the controversially claimed "disturbed" nature of his work, the film-makers managed to show Crumb in his familial context-- showing that he is actually 'the sane one of the family.' The film includes his past girlfriends and wives, his two brothers (Charles and Maxon), and his mother, and the film seems to be just as much about them as it is about the artist. Through these people and his artwork, you sense you are getting the full story, and that Crumb's sarcastic, witty remarks perhaps are a carefully-tuned defense mechanism.

Robert Crumb's art isn't for everyone-- and the film finds critics on both sides, sure. But as a film, I don't think anyone can deny the complexity and brilliance of the story. It manages to shock you without shoving anything down your throat. It also manages to take a lot of things we thought we understood (or at least understood that we were scared of) and brings them bubbling to the surface of our conscience. "Is that really wrong?" "It makes me uncomfortable, but does that mean it shouldn't be?" Of course, all of this serious thinking is peppered in to a pretty straight-forward style documentary about a group of people who are so unusual that we can't help but try to use every ounce of ourselves to simply understand.

I think the greatest thing about this film is that it presents deeply complex and dark themes in the most neutral, you-decide-for-yourself light possible. It enables conversation and an intelligent audience, and for that, I commend the film-makers greatly.

#173 Lan Feng Zheng [The Blue Kite] (1993)

2010-08-31T10:43:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Zhuangzhuang Tian

Cast: Wenyao Zhang, Xiaoman Chen, Liping Lü, Quanxin Pu, Xuejian Li, Ping Zong, Hong Zhang

Let me prequel my writing here by first stating that I don't really feel comfortable and/or qualified enough to be making any sort of judgments on a film like this.

The Blue Kite is a monumental film, packed with history-- not only in the portrayed narrative, but the story of the film itself. Banned from China even before it was finished, the film was smuggled to Japan to be sold on other foreign markets. It remains today as one of the most honest outstanding films to tackle the difficult political atmosphere of 1960s Beijing.

On Dry Well Lane in 1953, a young Chinese couple marries with much celebration, family, and food. A year later, their son, Tietou, is born. The boy flies his blue kite in the lane, and the family lives a simple life where to know the happenings of the neighborhood, all they had to do was look out the window.

But as the political climate in China changes, so does the family. The film is broken into three sections: father, uncle, and stepfather-- in representation of the Hundred Flowers Campaign, The Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution. Each change of the familial patriarch marks the change in China under Chairman Mao.

I thought the film was extremely thoughtful, and even though I studied these Chinese history topics extensively in school, I still found the film very hard to follow. A lot of events were shown in the film that the fresh-eyed viewer would need further explained, ie. the sparrow-killing leading to famine. I can see, however, to the more-educated eye how impactful this film is not only as a piece of art but also as a historical document.

I also think a lot of my confusion with this film comes with my complete naivety when it comes to Chinese film-making. This is something I look forward to remedying though, and I did like the film despite some of my inability to follow all of it.

#172 My Left Foot (1989)

2010-08-26T18:38:00.001-07:00

****

Director: Jim Sheridan

Cast: Daniel Day-Lewis, Brenda Fricker, Alison Whelan, Kirsten Sheridan, Declan Crohgen

Day-Lewis is one of my favorite actors, and he absolutely astounds in this touching true-life tale of Irishman Christy Brown-- a man born trapped in a body he could not control. Assumed to be mentally-retarded throughout his childhood, Brown eventually manages to show his family that he is not only intelligent, but that he also has artistic talent--all through the use of his left foot, the only part of his body he can control and communicate with. Christy suffers from cerebral palsy, and the film outlines his own and his poor Irish family's struggle with the disease.

Of course, the most unbelievable aspect of this film is the acting, and rightfully so-- it won two Oscars for it. One went to Day-Lewis for best actor, and another went to Brenda Fricker who played Brown's mother. These two actors absolutely stole the show, and as far as I'm concerned... there were other people in the movie?

It is said that Day-Lewis was so "into" his character, that he often refused to come out of it on the set, forcing his cast-mates to help him with food. He even broke two ribs during film-making due to the convulsions he performed in his wheelchair!

The film takes a subject-matter which seems it has no chance but to go for the sad-turned-hopeful angle, and instead it goes down another surprising road. The film is humorous and thoughtful. It is more about relationships than about depression, and that is what made it such a surprising and delightful viewing experience.

#171 Die Büchse Der Pandora [Pandora's Box] (1929)

2010-08-22T20:17:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Georg Wilhelm Pabst

Cast: Louise Brooks, Fritz Kortner, Francis Lederer, Carl Goetz, Krafft-Raschig, Alice Roberts

All hail the dark lady: the innocent temptress who brings disaster and demise to everyone she meets. She is perhaps the most infamous femme-fatale in all of Hollywood history, both unaware and acutely in-tune with her sultry sexuality as she destroys all within her path. Lulu (Louise Brooks) is an unstoppable force, comparable only to Pandora of Greek mythology-- a charming beauty, who through innocent curiosity unleashes hell on the world.

Lulu is a dancer. Or a prostitute. Or both. But most notably, however, she is the mistress of a highly esteemed newspaper editor, Dr. Schön. He, along with everyone else, is wrapped around her little finger, and despite his plans for marriage to another, he continues to see Lulu. She famously claims, "You'll have to kill me to get rid of me!" To which Dr. Schön will explain to his son Alwa as, "Beware of that woman. She is not the kind of woman you marry. It would be suicide."

When Schön is caught cheating on his fiance with Lulu, he is forced to marry Lulu instead. When an argument between the just-married couple (over Lulu's flirtation) ends in murder, Lulu begins an adventure with his son Alwa that leads only to more disaster. The film also features one of the first hints of lesbian love in Hollywood through the character of Countess Anna Geschwitz, who just like all the others, is infatuated with Lulu. Just as well, this is also Hollywood's first attempt into the mind of a serial killer, as the end of the film features Jack the Ripper in foggy London who encounters Lulu's charm on a cold holiday night in December.

This film is particularly special to me as it is the inspiration for my all-time favorite musician's latest album: Rufus Wainwright's "All Days Are Night: Songs for Lulu." On his album and on his tour, he pays homage to the dark lady within us all (appropriately named Lulu and based off of this character), and his live stage performance for the album includes a dramatic interpretation of the album through visuals, costume, and music.

Needless to say, my expectations for this film were beyond high, and I was not disappointed. Louise Brooks was an extremely intense screen-presence which surprised me greatly. Being one of my first full-length silent films, I was settling in for a long, tedious watching-experience, but instead was actually quite surprised to find it so captivating and visually-stunning. I appreciated not only the amazingly dark story, but I found the form of acting in this German expressionist film to be refreshing and new. (Yes I realize those are strange words to describe something so old!)

It seems that Lulu is destined to repeat this doomed fate over and over again for eternity in some other dimension-- her story is so timeless. Perhaps it is because there is so much Lulu in each of us, especially amongst today's sexual-culture.

We love Lulu but cannot deny her hand in the always-present downfall.

Salacious and naughty and erotic and heart-breaking.

#170 Roman Holiday (1953)

2010-08-21T20:20:00.000-07:00

****

Director: William Wyler

Cast: Audrey Hepburn, Gregory Peck, Eddie Albert, Hartley Power, Harcourt Williams

It's hard to imagine anyone not knowing who Audrey Hepburn is, but it just-so happens that was just the case at the time of this film's release in 1953. This is the film that gave her a huge Hollywood break, and rightfully so. I imagine it's the same film that sent so many young women to get their hair chopped in the mid 50s.

It's a story a lot like Aladdin? Ha. Princess Jas.. errr... Princess Anne escapes from the drudgery and pressure of her royal life to play on the streets of Rome with a common boy, Joe Bradley (Gregory Peck). Little does Anne know that her charming, American host to Italy is actually a reporter who plans on making a good deal of dough from the story of his day with the missing diplomat. When he realizes her charm, he finds the thought of hurting her by publishing the story impossible. Instead, they enjoy their day amongst the sites and thrills of Rome and cherish their few and fleeting moments together. Despite the fact it would be impossible to continue a relationship beyond those precious 24 hours, the two begin to fall in love.

The story is simple and silly, and the film is filled with slapstick comedy. Hepburn plays the part of the doey-eyed beauty so well, and whose arms are better than Peck's for damsel-in-distress rescuing? When you see one of these classic love story black-and-whites, it is easy to fall in love with it. When you see ten of them, you start to notice the predictable swings of the plot-line, but you still can't help but be charmed. Perhaps this film falls into the latter category for me (no, it was admittedly NOT full of surprises), but it was nevertheless an incredibly cute and enjoyable watch. Worthy of its ten Oscar nominations? Mahaps. Worthy of watching 10 more times before I die? Yes.

#169 Meet Me In St. Louis (1944)

2010-08-15T15:20:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Vincente Minnelli

Cast: Judy Garland, Margaret O'Brien, Mary Astor, Lucille Bremer, Leon Ames, Tom Drake, Marjorie Main

This bizarre, Southern technicolor musical is set in the year 1903 in... you guessed it... St. Louis, Missouri. It's the story of an 'average' family filled with young, coming-of-age women both lovesick and ready for mischief. It's a simpler time, of course, when "men don't like girls who kiss before engagement." Judy Garland plays Esther, a middle child who is falling madly in love with her pipe-smoking, sweater-wearing neighbor. She seems to have a steady hand in keeping her family in line-- she plots to marry off her older sister and often is the one to take care of her two mischievous younger siblings (one of which is "Tooti" played by the famous child-star Margaret O' Brien).

The costuming, sets, and songs are over-the-top with color and imagination. The make-up and hair are plastic-perfection! Garland croons, swinging in doorways and off the sides of trolleys. Zing, Zing, Zing goes her heart strings, and the moment I finally saw that scene in its full cinematic context, a bit more of my life was indeed complete.

However, what seems to be the makings of almost a too-perfect, happy family classic somehow takes a dark turn. Long and dramatic interludes are taken into rather morbid subject matters, such as the youngest daughter burying her dead dolls, Halloween ghosts, and a young tortured child beheading her family's snowmen with a bat. Yes. This really happens.

And although it's still a speculation amongst critics as to whether this film is meant to be simply entertaining melodrama or whether it pushes the edge of making comment on familial bliss... it does not matter. Meet Me In St. Louis is by no argument meant to do less than dazzle.

#168 Rosemary's Baby (1968)

2010-08-10T09:27:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Roman Polanski

Cast: Mia Farrow, John Cassavetes, Ruth Gordon, Sidney Blackmer, Maurice Evans, Ralph Bellamy, Victoria Vetri

With her sunken-in cheeks, translucent skin, and mod dresses, Mia Farrow glimmers in Rosemary's Baby as perhaps one of the most innocent and tortured victims of evil in horror movie history. Excited to begin her life in her new NYC apartment with her handsome actor husband, Rosemary Woodhouse (Farrow) occupies her days redecorating and entertaining the older and somewhat eccentric neighbors. When she and her husband decide to try for a baby, the neighbors seem to become more involved in her life than ever, taking their 'helpfulness' to a whole new level of creepy.

As her pregnancy escalates, Rosemary gets sicker and sicker, and she begins to question those that are supposed to be watching out for her. The ever-looming presence of evil both for the viewer and the star of the film never wavers, and it becomes a suspense to the end-- what really is wrong with Rosemary's baby?

I enjoyed the film-- it was an easy watch. Though horrific and skin-crawling at times, it was presented more in the form of a mystery rather than an all-out exocist, slasher, suspense horror. One of the attributes of this film most consistently noted in my film book is Polanski's knack for pacing when telling this story. I have to agree and say that I found it appropriate--the slow on-slaught of things-not-quite-right lead to the ending being both not surprising and yet completely shocking.

My gut reaction to the ending was. "Really?" I felt let down with the anti-climax and ambiguity. But now since a day has passed since my initial viewing of the film, I feel much better about it. I guess it's in our nature to want the inertia of the film to carry us to a conclusive ending. The look in Rosemary's eyes as she thought long and hard about mothering her child is certainly something to leave a lasting impression-- and that is what makes a great film.

#167 Brazil (1985)

2010-07-16T19:03:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Terry Gilliam

Cast: Jonathan Pryce, Katherine Helmond, Robert De Niro, Ian Holm, Bob Hoskins, Michael Palin, Ian Richardson

A hats-off to Orwell's 1984, Brazil is set a retro-futuristic society under the hand of a tyrannical government, (though it lacks a Big Brother figure). When a fly falls into a printer and causes a printing error, a man is wrongfully arrested, tortured according to someone else's health file, is accidently killed.

Sam Lowry is a man who is working a mind-numbing job somewhere within the government, and daily, he drowns in the sea of paperwork produced by his government. When trying to take an insurance check to the wrongfully-widowed wife, he finds that her upstairs neighbor is the woman of his dreamworld-- a woman that he saves each night in his sleep. Determined to find her, he takes a promotion to The Ministry of Information Retrieval to get access to her file, and he begins his search for her. When she wrongfully gets mixed up as being a terrorist, Sam changes the records to say she is deceased, so they will no longer hunt for her.

The plan, however, backfires, and Sam is arrested. He finds himself in the token 'black bag' and torture chair...
And from there... I'll let the movie be a surprise.

It's confusing, it's fast-paced, and it's also kind of magical. The world in which Sam lives is nothing like our own, (except in terms of cultural mythology). On the same note, however, it is a world we are all too familiar with thanks to the written warning of George Orwell. The surrealistic background upon which the plot takes place is a frantic and frightening one. The enemy is obvious. Paperwork. People in charge. The ones who won't listen. The ones who will "just follow procedure." The ones who will wipe you out.

I feel like the film is somewhat masterfully created and imagined, though I did find many things within the movie that lead it to be hard to understand, and sometimes, hard to tolerate.

Although I feel I have much more to say about this film, I'm going to close this review early on account of tired eyes. I think it's definitely worth seeing, however, especially if you've read 1984.

#166 Midnight Cowboy (1969)

2010-06-23T17:36:00.000-07:00

****

Director: John Schlesinger

Cast: Jon Voight, Dustin Hoffman, Sylvia Miles, John McGiver, Brenda Vaccaro, Barnard Hughes

Joe Buck (Voight) is a young man from Texas who has just quit his job as a dishwasher and hopped on a bus to New York City. He plans to make a big buck by 'hustling' from wealthy, upper-crust ladies, but it turns out he's the one that gets hustled. Slow to catch on to the New York way of life and standing out like a black cat in snow with his cowboy get-up, he loses just about everything, including a bit of his pride.

He befriends a scammer, Ratso Rizzo (Hoffman), and what at firsts seems to be a relationship formed out of necessity soon becomes a close camaraderie. Rizzo's illnesses become a concern for Buck, and for the sake of friendship, he finds himself doing things he never imagined himself to do.

Having heard about this film from a friend years ago, this was not at all the image I had painted in my mind. I never expected this to be a film about friendship, and further, I never expected this to be a film starring Dustin Hoffman. I thought the film was not only emotional, but it was masterfully filmed. The flashbacks, though jarring and confusing, gave hints into Voight's character, and I appreciated that-- he was a man of few words. Hoffman, as always, was a captivating presence as Rizzo.

When this film was released, it was rated X (no admittance under age 17). It was the first rated X film to be shown on television, to a president while in office, and to win an Oscar. It eventually had its rating dropped to R without removing any content of the film, interestingly enough.

I had heard bad things about this movie, but I found it be rather classic in nature. I can see where a lot of later films have drawn influence from it, and I respect that. And who knew Jon Voight was actually hott at one point? Weird. Anyway, I give it 4 stars for being just centimeters below what I would call cinematic gold, and I would definitely love to see this movie again.

#165 Kramer vs. Kramer (1979)

2010-06-21T02:25:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Robert Benton

Cast: Dustin Hoffman, Meryl Streep, Jane Alexander, Justin Herry, Howard Duff, George Coe, JoBeth Williams

Ted Kramer (Hoffman) is obsessed with his job, and he stays late to tell jokes with the boss. Joanna Kramer (Streep) is a housewife who is losing it, and she chain smokes on the couch at night. And then, suddenly, she leaves her husband and 5 year old boy to find herself. Lost, upset, and conflicted, Ted has to learn how to be a decent father. He has to learn to juggle his two lives-- his life at home (grief, loneliness, fatherhood) and his professional life as a successful, stressed out art director. In a way that is not too sickenly sweet to stomach, this film is the story about a man becoming... well, a real man... a father.

When Joanna returns over a year later to fight for custody of her son, things get even harder. When Ted loses his job in the middle of the custody battle, things get even harder yet.

And well, the ending is something I won't spoil in this review.

Even though Hoffman and Streep are two of my favorite actors (especially Hoffman!), I was reluctant to watch this film based off of its description. I figured it would be cheesy and sentimental-- and worst of all, not real. But with Oscars for not only best actor, best actress, but even best picture! Well, I gave it a try.

I was moved by the simplicity of this film. Having seen its poor imitators (Big Daddy much?), I was pleasantly surprised with the honesty of this film. The moments of father-son bonding were never unreal, never too contrived. They were simple, and they were warm. One of the most outstanding moments of the film is Dustin Hoffman on the stand as a witness in the courtroom. I paraphrase: "If a woman is every much as equal to be in the workplace and be a strong woman, then why does a man not have an equal right to be a loving, nurturing single parent?"

I thought the acting was brilliant, and I thought it was just the right amount of emotion. I am really pleasantly surprised to love this film. Delightful.

#164 The Jerk (1979)

2010-06-20T17:13:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Carl Reiner

Cast: Steve Martin, Bernadette Peters, Caitlin Adams, Mabel King, Richard Ward, Dick Williams, Bill Macy

Navin R. Johnson (Martin) is a dimwitted, but lovable man who was raised in a rural poor black family-- and he doesn't know that he's white. Once he finally figures this out, he goes off into the 'real world' to live his life, and he gets into all sorts of trouble along the way.

The comedy of this film is throwaway and awesome. I actually have always hated Steve Martin in all of his movies, but people reassured me that this is 'his only good film.' I actually loved this movie from beginning to end, and it made me laugh consistently. While it's super silly and extremely contrived, the characters are ridiculously loveable, including Bernadette Peters who plays Navin's main love interest, Marie Kimble.

I would definitely watch this film again and recommend it to others. Most importantly, it redeemed Steve Martin, if only slightly, in my mind.

#163 Blue Velvet (1986)

2010-06-19T14:49:00.000-07:00

***

Director: David Lynch

Cast: Isabelle Rossellini, Kyle MacLachlan, Dennis Hopper, Laura Dern, Hope Lange, Dean Stockwell

Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) is back from college to take care of the family hardware store after his father suffers a serious stroke. On his way home from the hospital, he stops to throw rocks in an empty field and discovers a human ear lying in the tall grass. Taking it to his neighbor, the local detective, they promise to look into the case, but Jeffrey needs to butt-out. The detective's daughter (Laura Dern) spills some information about the case, and Jeffry takes it upon himself to do some mystery-solving of his own.

This leads him to the apartment of Dorothy Vallen (Isabella Rossellini)- a deeply disturbed and tortured lounge singer who seems to be mixed up in some awful, dirty business. Jeffrey witnesses as Dorothy is sexually abused by a torturously evil and mentally disturbed man named Frank Booth, and he uncovers the truth about Dorothy's kidnapped family.

All of this wraps itself up into a romance with the detective's daughter, a twisted sexual relationship with Ms. Vallen, a jealous jock boyfriend, a perverted clown, a man in a yellow suit, and a blue velvet fetish.

The film seemed to me to be making some brilliant observations about suburban society and its under-belly. What on the surface is tulips blowing in the wind and fireman riding by waving in slow motion--is really a dirty apartment building full of bourbon, perversions, abuse, and secrets.

Though beautifully shot and continually surprising, the actors of this film aka LAURA DERN were really quite awful. Every time I found myself slipping into the dark world that rests beneath the surface... butterface Laura Dern popped on screen and killed everything. One of the most amazing and disturbing scenes of the film is the appearance of Dorothy Vallens at the house of the detective. Ghostlike and somewhat possessed, she is clinging at Jeffrey, and it is completely beyond amazing/horrific. Then, cut to Laura Dern, who is making the most god awful crying face I have ever seen captured on film. This woman is far more horrifying than anything else that was happening in the film. Ruined it for me.

I also don't want to spoil the ending of the film, but I found it to be SO disappointing. The director really opened an interesting door with how long he let the guns be pointed in suspense at the end, but then he chose to bring it round full circle back to Happy Days. It's obvious he was making a nod back to the beginning of the film-- he even re-used some of the footage-- but it didn't leave me in a good place. The calling-in to dinner and scene in the park were just a little too much for what I could stomach. I wanted an ending that revealed something or left it just a little uncertain. I can't decide if it was a cliche ending, or if it was cliche to make a point.

#162 Dancer in the Dark (2000)

2010-06-15T21:07:00.000-07:00

*****

Director: Lars Von Trier

Cast: Bjork, Catherine Deneuve, David Morse, Peter Stormare, Joel Grey, Cara Seymour, Vladica Kostic, Jean-Marc Barr

Bjork plays Selma, a Czech immigrant mother working in an American basin factory-- secretly hoarding away money to pay for an operation for her son's eyes. Selma is going blind, but she doesn't want anyone to know. Her friend helps her at the factory, explains what happens in the movies when they go, and she walks along the railroad tracks to get home from her job at night. Her son is destined to the same fate unless she gathers enough money-- and she is so close to doing so.

Finally, she confides her secrets to her landlord and friend who has a secret of his own: he is broke, and he can't tell his spending-happy wife. Stealing the money from Selma, he forces her to kill him to get the money back. A trial, more lies, uplifting moments, and capsizing hope.

The film is a musical, full of self-aware interludes of Bjork performances. The film gains almost a technicolor brightness in fantasy-- the only world where Selma can find refuge from the physical and emotional darkness of her life. The story was so suspenseful that when a song came, I nearly crawled out of my skin with impatience to get back to the film's reality. I wept through the last 45 minutes of the film, quite inconsolably.

Although low budget, shaky, sometimes frustrating, and sometimes even TOO MUCH-- the film moved me in a big way. Not just through story but through artistry as well.

I found it to be brilliant.

#161 Neco Z Alenky [Alice] (1988)

2010-06-15T18:24:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Jan Svankmajer

Cast: Kristyna Kohoutova

Czech-filmmaker, animator, and puppeteer, Jan Svankmajer, creates one of the most bizarre and hyper-imaginative adaptations of Lewis Carroll's Alice In Wonderland perhaps ever made. The film is a gothic and dark examination of the story, and through the use of only one actress (Kohoutova) and loads of handmade puppets, he examines dark themes such as the danger of routine, overeating, and materialism.

The imagery and characters are more creepy than charming, constructed from household objects that seem to be glazed in rot and formaldehyde, it is definitely not a children's movie. The animation and editing are in themselves a disturbing and choppy production--their movements in addition to the jarring, sharp sound effects make this film seem absolutely twisted.

For anyone who is interested in stop motion, animation, puppets, gothic stories, fairy tales, and/or experimental film-making... this is a must-see. There were too many strange and jolting things about this film to be anything but spectacular. Definitely disturbing though. I was impressed.

#160 2 Ou 3 Choses Que Je Sais D'elle (1967)

2010-06-13T19:32:00.000-07:00

*

Director: Jean-Luc Godard

Cast: Joseph Gehrard, Marina Vlady, Anny Duperey, Roger Montsoret, Raoul Levy, Jean Narboni

In my opinion, this film is borderline unwatchable. The title translates to "Two or Three Things I Know About Her," 'her' being Paris, not the main protagonist of the film, Juliette Jeanson played by Marina Vlady. Godard uses Juliette as a metaphor for materialism in 1967 Parisian society. Juliette is a wife and mother of a middle-class suburban family, and twice a week, she prostitutes herself for money in hopes of getting beyond her stale life. Godard believed this was very much so a metaphor for the way the people of Paris prostitute themselves for money and possessions. The film is splattered with bits of anti-American sentiment vs. worship/fascination of Hollywood.

The reason, however, I find this film practically intolerable is not the subject matter. The message of this film is unreachable through the format. The film cuts back and forth between scenes of a construction site and scenes of slow-moving Vlady, talking in monotone about her feelings and ending every sentence with "I don't know." You can tell that she has lost something valuable. A personality, a vigor-- something is wrong. But her words might as well have been singing "three little monkeys jumping on a bed." The significance of her speech was so convoluted with flowerly philosophy that it was truly senseless.

I barely made it through this film, even after breaking it into two sittings. I enjoyed Breathless by Godard, so I was very unhappy to hate this film so much. The message isn't important, but as a graduate of a communications degree, I can't help but be turned off by works of art that fail to clearly speak.

#159 American Graffiti (1973)

2010-06-11T16:19:00.000-07:00

***

Director: George Lucas

Cast: Richard Dreyfuss, Ron Howard, Paul Le Mat, Charles Martin Smith, Cindy Williams, Candy Clark, Harrison Ford

Coming into this film, I was expecting something a bit more epic-- a bit more serious in content. It turns out, American Graffiti is Grease without the musical numbers... 16 candles without the 80s garb. It's the story of two young men in the 50s, having their last night out on the town before they fly east for college. They meet opposition from both friends and girlfriends who are staying back home, all of whom are dealing with their own series of mishaps.

Structured a lot like the 80s teen-flicks, each character really has its own plot-- only meeting with other characters every so often throughout the film. The content is light-- meeting up with chicks, going to the burger joint, racing hot rods through town, etc.

Basically, I felt like American Graffiti was a popcorn classic that you enjoy because it IS "classic." To me, however, that feeling was lost. I'd never heard of this movie until recently, and I wasn't very entertained by it.

#158 All About Eve (1950)

2010-06-08T23:00:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Joseph L. Mankiewicz

Cast: Bette Davis, Anne Baxter, George Sanders, Celeste Holm, Gary Merrill, Hugh Marlowe, Gregory Ratoff, Marilyn Monroe

Of all the despicable villains cast on-screen, what could be more vicious than a woman? My skin crawled the entire movie through. Eve Harrington (Anne Baxter) is the definition of pure evil.

All About Eve is story of theatre actress Margo Channing (Bette Davis) and her friends-the playwrights, directors, and sponsors who adore her. It's her story, of course, until Eve wanders in. Star-struck and simple in her dirty trench coat, she slowly works her way out of the rain and into Margo's dressing room, stuffed with a cascading gut of sweet talk and humble pie. Within ten moments of her screen presence, any woman in audience to this film could sense it-- Miss Harrington is anything but innocent.

The film is the twisted and confusing tale of Eve Harrington's life, intertwining with that of fame, friendships, and Ms. Channing. What on the surface can cooly play as another heavily-coated 1950 Hollywood dialogue picture... hides a cunning, fly trap of deception, cheating, and what I believe to be... the making of a great film. Never underestimate the viciousness of women, especially to each other. It's a private hell that exists only in our world, and it fascinates me to watch it from the outside sometimes.

The film also placates to other palettes. It has all the glamour of old Hollywood with champagne, elaborate gowns, and even a cameo from Marilyn Monroe herself.
The film won 6 Oscars including Best Male Actor (George Sanders), Best Director, Best Costuming, Best Sound, Best Screenplay, and even Best Picture. Other nominations included Best Leading Actress (both Baxter and Davis), Best Art Direction, Best Editing, Cinematography, and Music.

Yes please.

#157 The Queen (2006)

2010-06-05T21:22:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Stephen Frears

Cast: Helen Mirren, James Cromwell, Alex Jennings, Roger Allam, Sylvia Syms, Tim McMullan, Robin Soans, Lola Peploe

The central figure of this film is Queen Elizabeth II (played by Helen Mirren) just after the death of Princess Diana. Tony Blair has just been named Prime Minister, and Elizabeth juggles the traditions of her life-long job with the innovation of her people's beliefs. Getting glimpses into the relationship of Diana to the royal family, and leaving the likes and dislikes to ambiguity, the audience of this film never really needs to form an opinion for or against the queen. We sit as quiet contemplators. Do we feel pity for her? Do we understand her? Or are we disgusted?

Politics, as with any country, are strongly connected to fads and passions that are created and felt by the masses. Movements and incidents rise into high-profile, highly emotional situations--sometimes without reason. The film addresses the queen's method of dealing with these things in the past, and her struggles to break tradition for the death of Princess Di-- a woman who no longer was a member of the royal family but had somehow remained a beacon of light for the UK as well as the rest of the western world.

It's a classic struggle of old vs. new, tradition vs. modern, and the stiffness of the characters and plot are appropriate for the content. I enjoyed the film, but I was not blown away. I did not enjoy Alex Jenning's portrayal of Prince Charles.

I was alive when Diana died, and I remember being fascinated by her and the royal family at the time. I had never stopped and wondered what things looked like from the other side, and as a young girl, of course I was oblivious to the political controversies wrapped up in the situation. Even more interestingly, I was very in-tune even as an elementary school girl to what the world (my parents included) were feeling. What did I know or care about Princess Diana? Why was I suddenly so emotionally invested? Emotions are mimetic behavior, and if the pulse of Diana's legacy was strong enough to reach me, I have to imagine how easily it reached others more familiar with her life story.

Diana was indeed a beautiful woman and inspiring philanthropist, but how did her death manage to become larger than her life? And was it really so strange and horrifying that the queen, a woman who was born without choice into her duties to the nation, wanted to follow the traditions she was taught? I can't decide.

Quet. Thought-provoking. Dull. Enlightening. Concise.

#156 Breathless (1960)

2010-06-02T21:54:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Jean-Luc Godard

Cast: Jean-Paul Belmondo, Jean Seberg, Daniel Boulanger, Jean-Pierre Melville, Henri-Jacques Huet, Van Doude

A young thief named Michel kills a cop and heads to Paris. He hopes for two things: to get the money he's owed so he can escape to Italy... and to bring the American girl, Patricia, he is accidently falling in love with along with him. Patricia being totally clueless to his secret life as a criminal, the two reluctantly fall in love with one another through banter, cigarette smoke, and sex. Eventually, she uncovers the truth about his character and makes a series of decisions that ultimately affect both their lives.

Upon reading other reviews of this film, all I read over and over was "this is an art student's film." I can't even begin to act like I know anything about film, technically or thematically. My only acquaintance with that type of knowledge comes from one Intro to Film course in college and years of friendship with my budding director friend, Eddie. This film, though, was fresh. It was incredibly sloppily edited, but with purpose. The dialogue was chosen both carefully and carelessly. This could be an interesting comparison or it could make me sound like a complete idiot, but it really reminded me of some of Andy Warhol's films.

There have been a few films on the list so far that I've just felt like a dummy when trying to write about them afterward. I feel like there is lots of great significance in this film not only to the apparently-esteemed career of Godard, but to film-making in general. I'd like to do some reading about this film, or maybe watch it again sometime with the commentary activated.

I do know, however, that the characters are charming and likable despite their moral shortcomings. The cinematography and editing are interesting at the very least as well. A complex film made to look easy, I suppose. Looking forward to discussing this with some of my more-knowledgeable friends.

#155 Fanny Och Alexander (1982)

2010-05-30T09:26:00.000-07:00

*

Director: Ingmar Bergman

Cast: Pernilla Allwin, Bertil Guve, Allan Edwall, Ewa Froling, Jan Malmsjo, Gunn Wallgreen, Borje Ahlstedt

Fanny and Alexander is the story of the Ekdahl family- owners of a small theatre company in early 20th century Sweden. The family is struck by tragedy when the owner of the theatre company, wife to Emilie, and father to Fanny and Alexander dies in his bed. His wife remarries the Bishop, and the family moves into a home of the clergy, undergoing emotional torture by the Bishop and his way of life. The family struggles to free themselves from the cruel captivity.

This film is full of characters-- a loving, nurturing grandmother, a floozy of an uncle who knocks up a maid, servants.. but it still did not ring a positive note with me. The film is slow, and is over three hours in length. It is full of flowery dialogue and mystical appearances of ghosts, talking statues, and mummies. I wanted to like this film, but I found myself irritated by the language/subtitles, and the plot-line was buried in subplots that were far less captivating. Lots of wandering children in dark hallways. Lots of crying and shouting in Swedish and German...Blagh.

I can see how this film may hold an emotional strength for some, but I was bored. I was bored and unsurprised by each turn. Even the uncle's mistresses' baby didn't bring an up-turn in the plot's action. I even had to shut off the sound and read the subtitles for the last 30 minutes because I was tired of listening to the rambling of the stoggy characters.

Definitely won't be seeing this again.

#154 12 Angry Men (1957)

2010-05-29T19:23:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Sidney Lumet

Cast: Henry Fonda, Lee Cobb, Jack Klugman, Joseph Sweeney, Martin Balsam, Jack Warden, George Voskovec

One dissenting jury member (Henry Fonda) of what seems to be an open-and-shut murder case sends a room full of men into fury on the hottest day of the year. The details of the murder trial slowly unravel (along with the men's tempers) over the course of the film. To even its audience, the evidence seems so stacked against the defendant, it is hard to imagine Fonda is going to have any luck convincing the hotheads in the room that he may be innocent. With a cool head, however, holes get punched in both sides' cases until a verdict is reached, chairs are overturned, rain falls, and tempers cool.

I was worried this was going to be a boring movie, and I'm feeling a bit stupid for that now. It was captivating hearing all the details unravel and solving the mystery along with the jurors. Henry Fonda is such a chill dude, and somehow, seems so trustworthy in his character. All taking place in one room, the acting and dialogue are EVERYTHING in this movie. It's incredible how the director was able to get emotions to rise and fall so rapidly in the story line. And the conclusion! Whether you saw it coming from the beginning doesn't matter-- it's the bare emotion of the way it comes to place that caught me off guard and gave me such a thrill.

Really loved this movie, and I would say it is a must-see.

#153 The Apartment (1960)

2010-05-23T21:16:00.000-07:00

****

Director: Billy Wilder

Cast: Jack Lemmon, Shirley MacLaine, Fred MacMurray, Ray Walston, David Lewis, Hope Holiday

C.C. Baxter (Jack Lemmon) is a young man who is trying to work his way to the top of the corporate ladder. How does he do it? By lending his superiors the key to his apartment, so they have a place to take their mistresses, of course. All seems to go well until he falls for his new bosses' girlfriend--played by Shirley MacLaine.

Light-hearted and fun, the film takes a surprising dark turn when suicide attempts, loneliness, and heartbreak come into the picture.

Jack Lemmon is handsome and funny--hard to believe, considering I first saw him in Grumpy Old Men.

The whole time I was watching the film, I was trying to understand how this film received 10 Oscar nominations. In the end, I really did enjoy the film, but it wasn't the kind of movie to stick with you for long. A snack movie. Between lunch and dinner. But still delicious.

#152 Le declin de l'empire americain (1986)

2010-05-18T19:20:00.000-07:00

**

Director: Denys Arcand

Cast: Dominique Michel, Dorothee Berryman, Louise Portal, Pierre Curzi, Remy Girard, Yves Jacques

Having read the plot summary for this film, I'm not sure what I was expecting. It's the story of four men and four women who are all neighbors and friends with very complicated love lives. For the majority of the film, the two sexes remain separate-- the men prepare a meal for the group at a country home while the women work out together at a gym. The entire basis of both groups' conversations are their many sexual exploits, most of which are bizarre and involve infidelity. Slowly throughout the film, it is revealed that most members of the group have slept with one another, only excluding the homosexual male, Mario, who seems to have some form of serious STD as a result of his "cruising" for sex in a local park. Eventually, after dinner and wine are served, secrets come out, and not all parties live up to their former open-minded boasting.

The film is undoubtedly sexually provocative, and I liked that it was focused on the sexuality of the middle-aged. What bothered me, I guess, was the overly-done crudeness of it. I'm not a close-minded or prude-ish person when it comes to talking about sex, but the "normal" characters acted in such ways that I found to be extremely exaggerated and unrealistic. If the value of this film is in the shock factor, then perhaps it is lost on my generation-- I'm sure it had a much different effect in the 80s, particularly the rather slanted, stereotypical view of homosexuality.

I guess I rated this film so harshly because it just didn't do the job. Making a provocative and pointed film about sexuality, infidelity, and marriage-- always interesting topics, sure. But this film just didn't hit the right note. It seemed far more focused on shocking, rather than revealing. I feel like it was, in a lot of ways, extremely reminiscent of the approach Woody Allen often takes on the subject, particularly in the film Hannah and Her Sisters. In some way, however, the banter, the noises, the nudity... just left me feeling repulsed and unenlightened. Definitely an interesting watch, but I don't think I ever need to see this film again.

#151 My Man Godfrey (1936)

2010-04-03T14:42:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Gregory La Cava

Cast: William Powell, Carole Lombard, Alice Brady, Gail Patrick, Eugene Pallette, Jean Dixon

My Man Godfrey is a depression-era slapstick comedy, poking fun at the silliness of the overly wealthy. Carole Lombard plays Irene Bullock, a young upper-class woman who is a member of perhaps the most out of control, ridiculous family ever. She comes across Godfrey (William Powell) at the city dump, trying to bribe him into being her "forgotten man" for an upper-crust scavenger hunt. Offended and bent on teaching the Bullocks a lesson, he goes along with it and even accepts a position as the Bullocks' butler. Unbeknownst to the family, Godfrey is actually an upper-crust gentleman himself.

The comedy is slapstick and the story is absolutely absurd, but it is a pleasant movie. Lombard and Powell are both wildly amusing, though at times the other women in the film overdid the shrill squabbling to a point that it almost gave me a headache. I enjoyed it though, and I'd recommend it to someone in the mood for a laugh.

#150 The Thin Blue Line (1988)

2010-04-03T14:29:00.000-07:00

***

Director: Errol Morris

Cast: Randall Adams, David Harris, Gus Rose, Jackie Johnson, Marshall Touchton

This is a documentary bent on exposing a case of wrongful justice carried out in Dallas County, Texas. The story is that of Randall Adams, a man sentenced to life for the murder of police officer, Robert Wood-- the disturbing part being that he is innocent. The documentary dramatically re-enacts the case, obtaining interviews from all involved, including the then-16-year-old runaway who did in fact commit the murder of the police officer.

Randall Adams, somewhat of a drifter, ran out of gas on his way home from work one day. A 16-year-old runaway (David Harris) assisted him on the side of the road, and the two spent the rest of the day together: drinking beer, smoking weed, and saw a movie. But this is where their stories diverge. Randall Adams claimed he went back to his motel, watched tv, and went to sleep. David Harris claims they were driving when a cop pulled them over, and Adams fired at the officer as he approached the car.

Carried by the momentum to quickly clear out the case, the police of Dallas County and VIdor, Texas neglected to examine the majority of the evidence pointing clearly at David Harris as the murderer. Instead, Randall Adams was tried and found guilty, and it wasn't until after the release of this documentary that he was freed from jail-- 12 years after he was convicted.

The story is a good one, albeit quite frustrating to watch dumb people fuck up a man's life. Also, the style of the documentary was very, very dated to the 80s. I enjoyed the film a great amount, but it's not the best documentary I've ever seen. Also, the director reused clips of footage probably 6-8 times throughout the movie. Perhaps he was doing it for emphasis, but at certain points, it just really felt like he didn't bother shooting enough to make a film.

#149 Adam's Rib (1949)

2010-03-26T22:45:00.000-07:00

****

Director: George Cukor

Cast: Katharine Hepburn, Spencer Tracy, Judy Holliday, Tom Ewell, David Wayne, Jean Haygen

I've been on a Hepburn rampage this week, as I borrowed Haley's collection. So here, third in a row, is another Hepburn film I've watched that graces my list. Adam's Rib is the story of two married lawyers (Hepburn and Tracy) who face each other in a court case regarding a woman who has shot her husband after she catches him cheating. Mrs. Bonner (Hepburn) is defending the woman on the grounds of equal rights for women, attacking the double standards for cheating men and women. Mr. Bonner (Tracy) represents the public who is charging the defendant with assault and attempted murder.

In the beginning, the couple seem blissfully happy as a married couple. But as the case gets more complicated and Mrs. Bonner stirs up more interest in her defense, their marriage goes on the rocks. The end of the case and the result of the marriage, I won't spoil in my review, but it's not so hard to make a guess of what happens. The humor in the film is somewhat iffy, though Hepburn maintains a captivating screen presence, as always.

I guess I'm struggling with the Tracy-Hepburn screen dynamic in comparison to that which existed between herself and Cary Grant. I took it upon myself to do a little research, and it turns out that Tracy and Hepburn actually maintained a very long real-life relationship off-screen until Tracy's death in 1967. Perplexing indeed.

I'm just not sold on it though. Also this week I've watched Woman of The Year-- another Tracy-Hepburn flick which is not a part of my list, and same thing there-- lack of attachment to characters and plot. Maybe it is a personal bias against Spencer Tracy, but something about him just isn't clicking with me in these films. He leaves a Ben Affleck after-taste in my mouth, which I assure you, is not a good thing.

More Cary Grant please.

Also, I find the "rub-down" scenes in this film to be somewhat disturbing.
That is all.

#148 Bringing Up Baby (1938)

2010-03-25T19:44:00.001-07:00

****

Director: Howard Hawks

Cast: Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant, Charles Ruggles, Walter Catlett, Barry Fitzgerald, May Robson, Leona Roberts

Bringing Up Baby is the second Katharine Hepburn flick of the project and the third of my life-- and I was not let down. Cary Grant and Hepburn both play hilarious characters destined for misadventure with one another. Hepburn is always a splash in comedy, but the real surprise of the film was Grant who plays a delightfully dimwitted and tweedy scientist. How refreshing to see Grant in a role other than the dashing ladies' man he typically portrays!

Grant is Huxley, a paleontologist trying to woo the lawyer of a rich woman who is considering donating 1 million dollars to the museum of his employment. On the golf course, he haphazardly meets Susan Vance (Hepburn) who begins a never-ending mixup (seemingly on purpose), intertwining their lives to the point of no return. Her misadventures begin when she accidently plays his ball on the golf course, steals his car, and rips his coat and her dress at a party later that evening. Deciding he is the man she is destined to marry, she will force to include him in the seemingly insane task of taking care of a leopard her cousin has sent her from afar.

The actors are brilliant, but the involvement of the leopard (named Baby) was just a little too ridiculous for me. Also, there were a few scenes where the misunderstandings get too crazy, and the dialogue results in just a mash-up of 10 characters all yelling at once. Not my favorite Hepburn, but definitely a great movie and worth the few dollars to rent it.

#147 The Philadelphia Story (1940)

2010-03-10T07:02:00.000-08:00

*****

Director: George Cuckor

Cast: Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant, Jimmy Stewart, Ruth Hussey, John Howard, Roland Young

A remarkable comedic romance starring Katharine Hepburn as Tracy, an elegant upper-class woman engaged to be married for the second time in her life. This time, she's engaged to someone of a lower class, and as her wedding approaches, people come out of the woodworks to make things difficult for her. Despite her successful efforts to keep her socialite life incredibly private in her first marriage, reporters have found their way into her wedding (Jimmy Stewart and Ruth Hussey) thanks to her suave and good-humored ex-husband C.K. Dexter Haven (Cary Grant). Thus begins the two-hour comedy of Hepburn juggling her guests, performing for the reporters, handling her ex, and all the while trying to save face.

The story is unexpected in parts, and on the whole, incredibly funny. I am always so pleased when classic films manage to crack me up, as so often I find the humor to be wrung out through long dialogue. This movie was a great exception, as it had me laughing almost the whole time.

Superbly pleasant and another one of my favorites so far in this project. Yes yes yes. More please!

#146 Raising Arizona (1987)

2010-03-09T09:01:00.001-08:00

**

Director: Joel Coen (The Coen Brothers)

Cast: Nicolas Cage, Holly Hunter, John Goodman, Trey Wilson, William Forsythe, Sam McMurray

The Coen Brother's second film, Raising Arizona, is a ridiculous comedy featuring Nicolas Cage as Herbet I. McDunnough (you can call him H.I. for short), an outlaw who has never taken his crimes too seriously. He smiles for his mugshots but wishes he could stay straighter-- ahh, but that damn Reagan guy in the White House just makes it so hard. He forms a relationship with the woman taking his pictures in lineup (Holly Hunter) named Ed, and the two of them marry and begin a life together after H.I. is released after his 3rd stint in the jail of her employment.

She resigns from her post, and the two attempt to start a family, alas-- they cannot conceive. It is only so convenient that someone in town has just given birth to quintuplets, and Ed and H.I. take it upon themselves to take one off their hands, seeing it as only fair that they should at least get one. "They have more than they can handle."

The movie reminded me a lot of My Name is Earl-- western accents twanging, hillbilly logic, trailer homes, and wife beaters. The humor is somewhat low brow, though at times it surprises you with glimpses deeper into the characters. On the whole, I didn't find it to be that great of a film. John Goodman's acting is always a pleasure though, and in this film he plays another escaped convict who tries to steal the baby (Nathan Jr.) from the McDonnough's for the reward of returning him.

The film was pleasant, and the characters were sometimes very cute-- particularly Holly Hunter. I don't think I would ever go out of my way to see this film again, but if it was on television, I might pause and watch a bit... instead of clicking by.

#145 Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer (1992)

2010-03-08T19:53:00.000-08:00

****

Director: Nick Broomfield

Cast: Nick Broomfield, Arlene Pralle, Aileen Wuornos, Steve Glaser

This is the documentary of serial killer Aileen Wuornos. Or was she a serial killer? Or is this documentary even about her killings? Or her? Not really.

This documentary is actually a look at the people surrounding her case: the police, her adoptive mother (adopting her just after she was arrested, oddly enough), her makeshift lawyer, the courts, etc. Her case is unique in that is shrouded in lies, back-tracking, a complicated history, and a slew of people that involved themselves in her case to make money. The documentary focuses mostly on her lawyer, Steve Glaser, a pot-smoking hippie who calls himself Dr. Legal and seems far more interested in writing classic rock anthems about her case than about working on it... as well as her seemingly insane adoptive mother, who adopted Aileen just as she was brought to court, charging outrageous amounts of money for interviews and movie deals. The two, together, seemed to manipulate and turn heads, convincing Aileen to plead no contest and to take the death penalty...

Oh, it's confusing. I've actually clouded my thoughts on this film by watching the follow-up documentary created by Broomfield 12 years later entitled The Life and Death of a Serial Killer. In this documentary, we get a foggy look at Aileen's complicated and abusive childhood, her lesbian relationships, her callgirl work, and her side of the story (though it changed from interview to interview).

One thing is for certain, however. The legal happenings surrounding this case certainly seemed beyond backwards. Aileen Wuornos was an abused child, coming from a home of incest, betrayal, abuse, homelessness, teen pregnancy, prostitution, hitch-hiking... you name it, she experienced it. She entered into the world of being a hitch-hiking hooker, where she allegedly began murdering her customers-- 8 in total. In the end, she was charged with 6 counts of the death penalty, and her sentence was indeed carried out. However, along the way, her lawyer, crazed adoptive mother, abusive people from her childhood, AND the police working on her case were all found guilty of cheating her and using her for movie deals and money.

Back and forth throughout the film, Broomfield interviews Wuornos, who sometimes testifies extremely convincingly that she had been brutally raped, and only killed customers when she thought she was in serious danger of being murdered herself. Sometimes, however, she would renounce these statements and said she killed to make burglary easier. It's a confusing mash-up of who is lying and who isn't, and by the end of the second documentary, the filmmaker himself is on the witness stand.

The end of the film makes a pointed view of the final days of Wuornos. Obviously completely driven to insanity, she raves about conspiracy theories, poisons, in-jail rapes, and even aliens. It is pointed out that the day before her execution she was considered by state psychologists to be perfectly sane, and thus, her sentence was carried out. At the end of the film, there seems to be a silent bond between filmmaker and audience that something seriously wrong has taken place within the justice system-- though it's absolutely impossible to know where to point the finger.

Was Wuornos truly a cold-blooded killer? And in the end, after all the corruption, lies, cheating, cover-up, wrongful profit surrounding her case... did it really matter? Chilling indeed.

The movie Monster was in fact released as a Hollywood picture about her. After all the disgusting information about how these movie deals came to be, it's almost hard to stomach the thought of watching such a film-- when even a documentary filmmaker 15-years-on-the-job wasn't able to really uncover the truth. How can we trust that Hollywood even had a clue?

Ah well.
If you're interested in crime, documentary, political corruption... it's all very fascinating, albeit very disturbing. I do recommend, however, if you watch The Selling of a Serial Killer that you follow up with the second documentary. It is much more telling and focused on the woman herself, although both sides of the story are worth raising an eyebrow over.