Wowza...Five more...

...and I think, maybe, just maybe...I might be able to do this.

Hope you have enjoyed the first four installments of this quest.  I'm having a hell of a lot of fun doing it.  

OK. I have to get something out of the way...by way of bragging.  A friend of mine sent me an email about having watched "The General," simply because of my report.  Now, this friend is, well, pretty cool in just about every way one can be cool, but I'm always a little astounded when people listen to something I have to say.  ANYWAY.  Loved it.  So there.  Have you seen "The General?"  Do you think it's time you did?  

We're on films 16-20 today, which means these are films I had seen before starting this project.  Two of these today...I've seen a LOT.  One of the five I don't remember shit about, but MAN was it good.  Wait.  I'm getting ahead of myself.  

I've made an Excel spreadsheet that is sortable by all sorts of factors to try and keep myself a little organized while watching 100 movies.  I think I need to write about it, and some of the interesting math I discovered while creating it.  It's probably best that I figure out how to put that online and comment on it from there, but be warned.  A little of what I discovered will be discussed in film 19.  See that kids?  That's foreshadowing.  Oh, me and my literary devices.  

By the way...you do know this blog is stream of consciousness, right?  I don't edit this.  Unless I find spelling errors.  There's one in the last chapter.  I'm leaving it.  The grammatical errors...fuck it.  I like those.  I know the proper way to do things.  I just prefer letting this spill out and leaving it.  

Wait.  Films.  Great films.  Films from the AFI Top 100 (2007 Edition).  Let's go.

Films 16-20

16.  "Jaws."  

"Farewell and adieu to you fine Spanish ladies...farewell and adieu ye ladies of Spain..."  

OK.  You've seen "Jaws."  I've seen "Jaws." Probably dozens of times.  It's a brilliant movie, and if you know anything about the legend of the film...you know that most of that brilliance was a happy accident.  They couldn't get the damned shark to work, so they wound up not showing it nearly as much as Spielberg wanted to show it.  By the way, this is Steven Spielberg's first film I've gotten to on the list.  He's got FOUR, count them, FOUR more before we get to the end of this.  

I've seen "Jaws" a LOT.  What struck me this time through?  I was able to hear Chrissie start the Lord's Prayer right as she was dragged off the buoy by the leviathan beneath.  Gut wrenching.  The jump close up on Brody when Alex Kintner is consumed still gets me.  The shooting stars that just happened to get captured by the camera.  Wow.  The scene that was completely organic between Brody and his son at the dinner table...but mostly...

As I alluded to above (Fooled you!  I got to it before I got to number 19!), as I was organizing the films in the top 100, I tried to chart "eras."  There was an era in the list that I'm going to say starts with "The Graduate" and ends with "Raging Bull."  In this period, there are THIRTY films from the top 100.  Why is that?  Well, it's when filmmakers had balls of steel.  It's when cinematography, and soundtrack, and special effects, and acting, and risk just took gigantic leaps.  Think about "Jaws."  Here you have a film that starts out as a fairly straightforward horror/thriller...about a town, its police chief and its/his struggles with morality.  We are introduced to a lot of characters, some caricature, some fairly well fleshed out.  And then, about halfway into it, we suddenly shrink the film into the size of a little boat with three men and a fish.  Oh.  And the Atlantic Ocean.  So we get this little tiny set...floating on this great expanse of water.  The men are trapped.  The beast they are chasing is free.  Or is the beast chasing them?  Anyway.  There's even a moment that Spielberg gives us, when the Orca is passing through the shark jaws hung in Quint's "shop."  We know at that point that we are on to Act II.  Amazing.  Ballsy.  Yet, we as observers, go on this journey, happily.  Why?  Because it's compelling.  It's intelligent.  It makes sense that we go.  Damn.  What a film.  And to think, when I was a kid I had the Jaws game.  If I knew then...well.  I wouldn't have understood.  I'm glad I do now.

Other thoughts:  Roy Scheider is underappreciated in this.  Not only for the "You're gonna need a bigger boat" ad lib, but for the way he so subtly conveys things.  His pouring of the wine into the tumbler after Hooper tells him he should "let it breathe."  Just phenomenal acting.  Look at his cautious joy that spills into jubilation when the tiger shark is caught.  Yes, the "You're certifiable, Quint!" is over the top.  So what?  Know what's funny about this list?  You see a lot of actors in more than one film.  Scheider is coming up again in "The French Connection." How about that?  

I wish I could have been there to watch Robert Shaw deliver the speech about the USS Indianapolis.  It gave me goosebumps this time, as it has EVERY time I've watched it.  

I'm rambling.  I don't need to tell you to see "Jaws."  You probably already have.  Try it again. 

17.  "12 Angry Men."  I kinda feel like I should recuse myself from discussing the film "12 Angry Men."  I have loved this story since I first read the play in junior high school.  I think it's a thrilling, intelligent piece of fiction that so captures our imagination that it's hard not to fall in love with it.  I knew when I read it, despite the fact that I had exactly NO experience in this field, that I would want to direct it some day.  I'm an actor.  I've never taken a theatre course in my life.  Not a one.  "12 Angry Men" was the first play I got to direct, and it is still one of my happiest memories in a lifetime of performing.  As such, it is hard for me to talk about this movie without getting personal.  I will say one thing.  Despite not watching the film for a couple of years before I directed it, I got a lot of the things the same as the film.  I used a kris style blade, and our diagram of the apartment was almost exactly the same.  Weird.  I don't think those things were things I would have drawn from my subconscious, but somehow, they just felt right.  I'm rambling again.

Sidney Lumet made his directorial debut with this film.  Think about this.  We're going to make a film.  It's essentially going to be 12 guys sitting around a table in one room.  That's the whole thing.  Yet, the performances that Mr. Lumet was able to wring from his actors.  Wow.  Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Ed Begley, Eli Wallach and Jack Warden are all incredible as the principal roles of Jurors 8, 3, 10, 4 and 7, respectively.  However, then you get the great job by Jack Klugman.  Martin Balsam as the foreman.  Ed Binns.  I'm going to stop there or I may as well just list them all.  Their names are on the IMDB link above.  This film is a study in acting.  It's a study in ensemble acting.  It's a study.  

So.  How did I feel watching this as part of this mission?  What struck me this time around, given my life at this time?  I love this movie more today than I ever have, and I loved it a lot before.  Everything about it is pitch perfect.  The sweat, the "measuring."  OK.  I gotta editorialize.  This play/story depends on a certain decidedly male dynamic.  Yes, I can be convinced that "12 Angry Women" has a dynamic as well...but "12 Angry Jurors?"  False.  Forget it.  You need the guys laying their manhood on the table and saying "mine's bigger and that makes me more right than you."  There's a whole lot of that in this movie.  Jack Warden's performance really got to me this time.  Of all the characters, I'm not certain that Juror 7 really cares about the innocence or guilt of the kid.  I still don't believe Jack Warden did, either.  Great performance.  

I had also forgotten that we get a brief shot of the accused at the beginning of the film.  Powerful stuff.  

Look, I'm not going to go on further.  "12 Angry Men" is necessary viewing.  So go.  Make it necessary. 

18.  "Star Wars."   

It's fucking "Star Wars."  

19.  "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid."   I confess that I believe I have watched this film when I was MUCH younger, but I don't remember anything about it.  Except the bicycle sequence and the final shootout.  I also confess that I'm not at all familiar with the name George Roy Hill.  I am now.  

Remember when I said above that the era that started with "The Graduate" was the beginning of some amazing films?  Here's another one.  

(OK, I gotta confess something else.  I hope you laughed out loud at my thoughts on the film above - "Star Wars."  Truth be known, a lot of what I'm talking about with this film and "Jaws" apply to "Star Wars" as well.  I just didn't want to get bogged down in it, and frankly, I thought what I wrote above was hilarious.  It kind of summed it up, dontcha think?  Oh yeah, I watched "Star Wars" with my kids, and for my four year old, it was his first time.  It was great.  OK.  Done with "Star Wars."  Except that when I watched it I found it to be AWESOME all over again.  OK.  Now I'm done.)

"Butch Cassidy..." quickly became a favorite film of mine with this one viewing for one reason.  The extended chase scene in the middle of the movie.  I have shown the film "The Godfather" to a lot of people.  When the wedding scene concludes, I stop the film and ask the new viewer..."How long do you think that scene was?"  Invariably, the answer is usually around 5-6 minutes, but NEVER more than 10.  The wedding scene in "The Godfather" is 25 minutes long.  Why am I telling this story?  Because, as the chase scene was going on, I suddenly thought, "wait a minute... this has been going on a LONG TIME...and I'm totally mesmerized."  I figured I'd just watched a director basically take a one line joke, "Who are those guys?" and extend it to a 10 minute, compelling as hell, scene.  Except, I got Godfather Wedding Scened.  The chase sequence is 27 minutes long.  Yes, there are a couple of brief stops on the way, but the whole time our protagonists are concerned with one thing.  Getting the hell away from the posse that never relents.  FOR 27 MINUTES.  Think about that.  Think about "The Avengers" or any other film today.  Imagine that the scene with Thor being dropped out of the Helicarrier and separated from Mjolnir took more than 5 minutes to play out.  You'd be bored to tears.  Yet, here I am, modern man, with modern sensibilities, completely engrossed in a one bit TWENTY SEVEN MINUTE chase.  That, my friends, is filmmaking.  

Other things of note:  name a film with two more handsome leading men.  I put the picture above as an illustration of that.  Whoo boy, those guys are pretty.   The ease with which both Newman and Redford let comedy roll off of them in this movie...the skill.  Amazing.  Katherine Ross is underutilized in this.  Just like "The Graduate."  Like "Jaws," there is a definite break between acts in this.  The sepia toned montage to get us there...I hate to keep saying "brilliant," but I don't know what more to say.  My GOD, this is a great movie.  Watch it.  Watch it again.  I used to laugh at the notion that movies were at their best during the era of the 70's.  Bullshit.  I was wrong.  This wasn't quite the 70's, but it's in that era.  Good lord, these guys knew what they were doing.  Even George Roy Hill.  Good ol' never known to me before George Roy Hill.

This is now one of my favorite films I've ever seen.  And I can say I've really only watched it this one time.  Takes a powerful something to break me from a rut.  

This is a powerful something.

20.  "Pulp Fiction."  When I wrote about "Forrest Gump," I mentioned that it beat out a couple of other films on the list for Best Picture of 1994.  "The Shawshank Redemption" and "Pulp Fiction" were those films.  I said I wasn't sure that (despite much criticism on the internet about how either of those were a better choice than "Forrest Gump") any discussion of "Forrest Gump" not deserving the Oscar was of merit.  

I just watched "Pulp Fiction" again.  It's a great film.  I'm still not sure it was a better film than "...Gump."  I'm just not.  It's certainly revolutionary.  It's got some amazing performances.  Bruce Willis is great in it.  So is Travolta's junkie.  Like Jimmy Stewart's drunk in "The Philadelphia Story," Travolta's heroin daze is incredibly well performed, even down to the way he holds his mouth when he leans in to the intercom.  He's riding the horse.  I'm convinced of it.  That takes a lot of skill.  Samuel L. Jackson's Jules is full of angst, sentiment, and just enough batshit crazy cold blooded ass killer to make him terrifying.  And terrifyingly compelling.  The MacGuffin with Marsellus Wallace's briefcase, the immensely quotable dialogue, "Check out the big brain on Brad!"  "What ain't no kind of country I ever heard of!" "Now, right now, I'm a fuckin' race car, and you got me in the red."  "We're all gonna be like three little Fonzies."  Lots and lots of them.  The soundtrack is great.  I lived with a woman for a couple of years, and we listened to this soundtrack a lot.  I always dug it.  I confess, I didn't dig the movie the first time I saw it, but it grew on me. 

And that, brings me to my thoughts on the film.  It's an important, great film.  I'm glad I got to revisit it during this.  I think Tarantino should be given enormous credit for getting this film made.  But...then he appears in it.  And he throws the bit with Christopher Walken in it.  Seriously.  Jimmie's dialogue SUCKS.  I'm not even sure a better actor could have saved it.  "I'm gonna get a divorce.  You can't convince me I don't love my wife."  OK.  I think I got that last bit wrong, but it's so bad, I don't want to get it right.  It's a shit speech, and it doesn't belong.  Speaking of shit...do we have to keep hearing about how Butch's dad's watch wound up people's asses?  It's not funny.  It's not necessary.  It doesn't do anything except make me wonder why the hell this piece of crap scene got stuck in an otherwise terrific film.  

Now.  Harvey Keitel is great.  I love the fact that everyone compliments him on how great it is to watch him work...and he doesn't do a fucking thing.  Not a fucking thing.  I'm cursing a lot in this review.  It's fucking Pulp fucking Fiction.  It uses the words.  I will, too.  

One other thing this time through.  I really dug Fabienne.  She had left me flat before.  She's so natural.  Of course, I got a thing for European women.  That's the subject of another day.  

Tim Roth and Amanda Plummer also deserve mention for their work as Ringo and HoneyBunny as the framing pieces of the film.  I love Tim Roth.  Know why?  He's never taken an acting lesson, like me.  Somehow, that speaks to me.  

So.  "Pulp Fiction."  It's "Pulp Fiction."  It's important.  It's great.  It's not as bloody as you remember, but it's plenty violent.  Watch it.  It's required.  

Soon I'm going to get to numbers 21-25.  They are films I hadn't seen previously.   Already watched one.  

I really hate this.  

The next five...

...are watched and ready for commentary.  This is actually a whole lot of fun.  I hope you've enjoyed the first three installments of this little journey, and I hope you will stay with me throughout the balance of the year.

As you may know, I've watched 50 of the films on the AFI Top 100 (2007 version) prior to the undertaking of this project.  That means, conveniently, that I can do these in chunks of five, starting with five movies I hadn't seen, then going to films I had, and so on.  I may come to a point toward the end where I realize I got my math wrong...but so what?  I'm going to be close.

We are on films 11-15, which means these are films I hadn't seen prior to this time.  I suppose that's all the preliminary information we need.  No sense in beating around the bush.  Oh. One other thing.  I am admitting to not having seen these films previously.  Please don't beat me for it...

Films 11-15


11.  "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington."  Jimmy Stewart, amazing, likeable, everyman actor takes another star turn on this list.  Look.  I'm no film student.  I've watched another Capra/Stewart film a whole bunch of times, and I guess so have a lot of other people.  I'm not going to classify something as "Capraesque" because I cannot speak to that with any authority.  I'm just a guy with a DVR, a Netflix subscription, an Amazon Prime subscription and a collection of DVD's.  Oh, and thank GOD for TCM, or this quest would be EXPENSIVE.  Well, not steakhouse EXPENSIVE, but expensive.

I've gotten off the rails.  I'm not really certain how I feel about "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington."  I can certainly understand its importance, and have enough knowledge of eras to view it with perspective...but...I prefer a little subtlety.  I know, this is Randy Knott saying he prefers subtlety, but I do.  Jimmy Stewart was wonderful in this, as was Jean Arthur, and everyone else.  I could sit and watch Claude Rains do just about anything, I bet.  Yet, this film left me a little flat.  The good guy was impossibly naive and good.  The bad guys...well...they ran kids off the road in one scene.  Come on.  Then we have the corruption, the deals, everything that Congress is STILL guilty of to this day...and I don't know.  It just felt too black and white.  I prefer my villains to be painted with a little grey.  I think the chemistry between Jean Arthur and Jimmy Stewart was phenomenal.  It is always great to see a really good female character...then...she falls in love with him, and writes it in a note?  Huhwhat?! Come on.  Just...come on.  This is a big, important film.  It belongs in the top 100.  I get it.  And I don't.  Oh.  And the ending sucked.  Just...sucked.

The bit at the Lincoln Memorial was stirring, though.

One other thing.  As Robert Osborne was introducing this on TCM, he said that many think that Jimmy Stewart won his Oscar for "The Philadelphia Story (1940) " for his work on this film (1939). He was nominated for his work in 1939, yet did not win.  I disagree.  I'm not going further than that, but I believe the next year's accomplishment was a greater achievement.

That's me.  I'm glad I watched it, but I'm also glad I don't have to do so again.  I'm also glad this duo made that other film.  I like that one a whole lot better.

You may boo me...

now.



12.  "The General."  I must admit, although painfully, that I am not that versed in the work of Buster Keaton.  Yes, I've seen lots and lots of clips of him doing amazing work in individual gags/stunts...but I hadn't sat and watched a whole film of his before I watched "The General."  Ever.  That will be changing soon, I can assure you.

This is a tremendous film.  I watched it twice, once by myself, and then I showed it to my sons.  They loved it.  It held their attention throughout, and I think they even laughed harder than I did.  That's probably because I couldn't laugh with my mouth agape.  I've seen the clip of Buster Keaton standing as a house collapses on him, with him, conveniently standing in the open window.  That clip has fascinated me for a long time.  This film...well.  There were a lot of those moments.  Keaton jumps from car to car on a moving train, he stands atop it, he uses his own body (briefly) as a connection between two MOVING FUCKING TRAIN CARS.  And the whole time, he never flinches.  No double takes, no wild, bug-eyed looks.  Just that stone face.  Amazing.

There was more about this film that I loved.  The scale of it thrilled me.  The armies of men, all uniformed, marching back and forth across the country...and the final...big moment.  I'm not going to spoil it.  It's spectacular.  I cannot imagine who said...yeah, we can *REDACTED* and I'm sure it will work great.  Especially if we don't tell the extras.  Apparently, the extras were not informed of the *REDACTED.*

This is a great film.  It wasn't on the inaugural Top 100 list, but was slotted on this one in the top 20.  Yup.  That's just about right.  Take an hour and a half and entertain yourself.  Screw that.  Let Buster Keaton entertain you.  I guarantee he will.



13.  "Chinatown."  Hey, Jack Nicholson is back.  A couple of films ago, I mentioned that the ending of a movie sucked.  This one is guilty, too.  I'm going to talk plot, etc. on this one, because it's vital to my case that the ending sucked.

A neo-noir film, "Chinatown" is the twisted story (p'raps a mite too twisted) about a private eye who is hired to spy on a woman's husband whom she is sure is being unfaithful.  Except that's not the wife.  Then, lots of people get involved, and eventually Jake is paired with Faye Dunaway as they try and stop her evil father from...what...controlling the water in Los Angeles?  Oh, and on the way, we learn that the "mistress" of the now dead aforementioned husband is, in fact, Faye Dunaway's sister. And daughter.  This is another film founded on a whisper thin story, that just happens to contain some absolutely brilliant acting, and as such, is worth watching.  It might even be great.  Except the ending SUCKS.

The final line in the film, after Faye Dunaway is killed trying to escape from her father with her sister/daughter, and the daughter is dragged away by the father...is "Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown."  Chinatown is BARELY PART OF THE MOVIE.  There is no reference to it EXCEPT THAT IT'S THE SETPIECE FOR THE LAST LITTLE BIT OF THE MOVIE. But, incestuous fathers can drag away young women after their other daughter has just been shot through the eye...and the lead character is supposed to somehow chalk that up to some mystical force that Chinatown possesses?  Bullshit.  Just bullshit.  That's a cheap ending.  It's a copout.  It sucks.  Know what?  I wouldn't do this normally, but check out the FAQ page from IMDB about this film and the question about what the last line's significance is.  That is just stupid.

I liked the movie, otherwise.  Although I think the plot is way too convoluted, and takes too many twists on the way, Nicholson is terrific.  As is John Huston.  As is a lot of the cinematography.  It's just that damned ending...

I guess this is an important film.  It's #21 on the list.  I'd rather see "The Exorcist" or "Amadeus" on this list.  I don't know that "Chinatown" belongs.



14.  "The Maltese Falcon."  Yes.  I'd never seen "The Maltese Falcon."  I have now.  Another film noir.  As I look on it, "Chinatown" is everything that "The Maltese Falcon" is...twists and turns, escalation of the original action into a plot that...well...where the hell did that come from?  Lots of people wanting to get at the leading man...and...well.

I like this one better.  I think it's hilarious that I chose to do two films so similar back to back.  P'raps I should watch "Saving Private Ryan" and "Platoon" back to back as well.  No.  I'm not going to do that.  This was an accident.  I'm veering off the rails again...

Bogie is great in this.  His ability to seemingly think on his feet (yes, it's scripted, but that's a hard thing to do) was amazing in this.  He always had the answer, was always ready for the next thing out of anyone's mouth, always ready to get the people off his back he needed of his back.  Great role.  Great acting.  Peter Lorre was his usual creepy self, and Sidney Greenstreet was hilarious...and terrifying...and hilarious.  I'm not certain how good Sidney Greenstreet was as an actor, but he must have been a hell of a fun person.  He plays guys who laugh at themselves, while always...having a smug sense of "I'm smarter than you...", yet, there he is, once again, laughing at himself.  Great character.  He had that character down cold.

The plot, as I said, has a lot of twists.  I'm not sure they made sense.  Sam Spade always made it sound as if they did, and that was the thrill of watching this film, for me.  Mostly, this film was a study in acting.  Yes, there were some great shots, but it's San Francisco...can't we get a few shots of something besides the Golden Gate Bridge?  It's a BEAUTIFUL city...and it has a Chinatown.  Bah.  Never mind.

I'm sure you've probably seen "The Maltese Falcon."  Now I have.  I'm really happy that I did.  Plot twists out of nowhere don't necessarily thrill me, but this movie got me.  It had me from the beginning and held me until the end.  I would have liked it if Mary Astor had at least ONCE looked at Bogie in the initial meeting.  I'm all for letting the world know one is lying...but she could have looked at him ONCE to let us know she was trying to pretend NOT to be lying.

Bah.  Great film.  John Huston and Bogie.  Gosh.  That combination sounds familiar.  Oh yeah.  "THE AFRICAN QUEEN."  Seriously.  Get that film off the list.  The two are better represented all kinds of places.  This is one of them.



15.  "Sunset Boulevard."  Or is it "Sunset Blvd.?"  The title card says "Sunset Blvd.," so I think that is, technically, the title.  Bah.  Semantics.

Quick. Know what the last 4 films have in common?

The leading man is in every scene.  Well.  Almost.  Keaton is not involved in a scene with some spies from the North in "The General."  Bogie is not there when his partner is shot.  And William Holden is not in the scene (but present right outside) when Norma Desmond has her time in the studio with Cecil B. DeMille.  From what I read somewhere, that's a classic noir technique.  Keeping the main character in every scene...as the audience's eyes.

I had watched the beginning of this film several times, but had never made it past about the first half hour, usually because I tend to watch films on DVR entirely too late at night.  I finally did, and I'm exceedingly happy that I did.  This is a terrific movie.  I regret taking so long to get to this one.  I have a connection with William Holden, because...well...this is ridiculous, but I played Paul in "Born Yesterday," a film released the same year as "Sunset Blvd.," and one in which he played...Paul.  When I watched the film version of "Born Yesterday," (after the show I was in had been but a memory) I was astonished by how much I did that he did.  Or maybe I shouldn't be.  It's all on the page, right?  Anyway.  I have a connection with him, and I feel like when I watch him, I'm watching a teacher showing me how I'd do it.  Is that weird?  Yeah.  That's weird.

Gloria Swanson was a marvel in this.  I did a little research and found out that she had been a silent film star, so watching her histrionics in this were somehow more...poignant.  She conveyed a hell of a lot with those eyes.  How she ever lost the Oscar to Judy Holliday and the aforementioned "Born Yesterday" is beyond me.  This was a dynamic, powerhouse performance.  It was even a little playful...as pictured in the photo I've included above.  I'm trying to find photos that I feel sum up a very powerful moment of a movie to me, for whatever reason, when I do these entries.  This scene was one of those.  The self-loathing yet complete surrender that William Holden portrayed...wow.  Just wow.

I should also mention that scene with DeMille.  Heartbreaking and stirring and yet...happy all at once.  The star...shining in her galaxy...just one last time.  Amazing.

Oh.  And Buster Keaton was in this.  And he made me smile a great big smile.  Billy Wilder made a great film with this one.  I enjoyed the hell out of it.



Know what?  If I stop this project right now, I will have seen 10 movies that I'd never seen before, all of which are considered great.  Even though I don't agree with that term being used for all of them, I have expanded my knowledge and my...database(?).  That cannot be a bad thing.

Well.  That's it for this installment.  Films 16-20 are plotted out, and I'm only watching one that is in black and white.  I need a little technicolor for a while.  I may, also (spoiler!), need a bigger boat as I view something that's no moon as raindrops keep falling on my head in a jury room where, well, Zed's dead, baby.

The journey continues...

...and continues.  Know what?  100 Movies is a LOT of friggin' movies.  Thank you to those who have already read the previous two posts.  Thanks for stopping by this one.  I'm still gestating this idea, and the last film I'm going to discuss today inspires MUCH more than I'm going to write about it today, and I may do so.  Then again, I may not.  I'm not that educated.  I'm a guy with a keyboard and web access.  That doesn't make me a qualified writer.  It makes me a writer.  On my silly little blog.  About my silly little quest to watch an arbitrary list of films by the end of a calendar year.  Bah.  And again, for the record, I'm watching them all.  Even the ones I've seen a dozen times.  Part of this is the experience of immersion.

As I stated last time, I'm digesting these films and writing about them in blocks of five.  The first five were films I'd never seen, this five I had, the next five (I'm through 13 total as of this writing) I haven't seen, and so on.  I think that takes care of the preliminaries.  Let's get on with the show.

Films 6-10


6.  "The Graduate."  I love this movie.  I have for a long time.  When starting on the list of films I'd seen, it seemed like a nice starting point.  Couple of things really stood out to me when watching this film.  1.  I'm older than either Murray Hamilton or William Daniels were when the film was made.  I cannot fathom that.  I don't think either of them looked out of place as the fathers of college age children, nor as longtime business partners.  It made me think perhaps this life of mine is going quicker than I think...that has nothing to do with the film.  2.  Anne Bancroft is HOT.  Well.  Was.  I'm sorry, but the sexiness (and that is the proper term) with which she portrays Mrs. Robinson is steamy.  Steamy.  3.  Plastics.  Cliche, but it's still funny.

What were my reactions?  Mike Nichols made a really great film. He made a film, that, while decidedly of its era, is still relevant today.  There are lots of great camera techniques, there are lots of moments that are decidedly "artistic."   I love the isolation in the SCUBA suit, especially.  Also of note is the montage of Benjamin and his inability to move, blended seamlessly with scenes of himself and Mrs. Robinson and their affair.  Other great things:  Buck Henry's performance.  Seeing both Richard Dreyfuss and Mike Farrell.  Yup, BJ Hunnicut is a bellhop.  Didn't know that before.  It's kinda cool watching a film with "X Ray" by IMDB on the Wii U controller.  It's a rolling service that spotlights each actor on the screen.  Mike Farrell popped up.  I knew Dreyfuss.  Never saw Farrell.  Oh.  And the soundtrack is pretty OK.

As with any film, there are flaws, and there are a few I noticed, and bothered me.  1.  I do not believe for a second that Benjamin would come upstairs simply because Mrs. Robinson chastised him for being ridiculous in the initial seduction.  I really don't believe he'd unzip her dress.  No way, no how.  2.  I know Benjamin was trying to make Elaine have a miserable time.  I can think of a whole lot of easier ways to do it than the path he chose.  3.  The whole experience in Berkeley falls flat for me.  It kills a lot of momentum. I don't know how it could be fixed...but it's deflating. It's vital to the plot...but something about it seems out of place.  4.  The friggin' door to the church is locked.  With people inside.  I know, "Maybe they thought Benjamin would show up..." Bullshit.  It's just a hackneyed plot device to get a better shot.  I know a little bit about directing.  I've got a couple of moments like this in the show I just directed.  Things I did to make something better later.  Know what?  If someone calls me on them, I'll say, "yup, that moment was wrong.  Sorry."

I love "The Graduate," though.  If you've never taken the time to watch it, please do.  It's a great film.




7.  "Forrest Gump."  It's hard to believe that a film that is nearly 20 years old can be considered "Modern," but this is the first real "modern" film I watched.  By the way...there are precious few others on this list.  Yet "African Queen" is still here...bullshit.  Still pissed I had to watch that as part of this.

Back to "Forrest Gump."  Know what?  This is a great film.  It has been derided over the years because 1994 happened to be the year of a couple of other great films ("Pulp Fiction" and "The Shawshank Redemption" - and "Quiz Show" is pretty goddamned good, also), and people tend to think "Forrest Gump" isn't on par with the first two...and that may be true.  It may not.  I'll have to see how I feel as I watch those two again.  "Forrest Gump" won the Oscar for Best Picture over those two.  That is not the film's fault.

I assume most everyone reading this has seen this film.  I encourage you to watch it again.  Yes, the fantastical is just that...fantastical.  I'd love to meet a man who met JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Elvis and John Lennon.  I'd love to meet a man who was in on the ground floor of Apple.  I'd love to meet a man who was not only a collegiate All American Football Player, but a Congressional Medal of Honor winner, a world champion ping pong player, a shrimp tycoon, and a long distance runner.  No such man exists.  Yet...he does.  And that is what is central to my viewing of "Forrest Gump" this past month.  Forrest is all of us.

Here's what struck me this time through.  The acting in this film is really, really solid.  Gary Sinise is a dynamo. Mykelti Williamson, Robin Wright Penn, Sally Field...the kid who played young Forrest Gump (not the Hayley Joel Osment version, the kid who grew into Tom Hanks), all of them are committed, real, characters.  But mostly, it's Tom Hanks.  Want an acting lesson?  Watch the introduction of Jenny to Lieutenant Dan on Jenny and Forrest's wedding day.  I'm sorry.  That's bloody well brilliant.  See the knowing glance that passes between Sinise and Hanks, knowing Jenny's fate...yet acknowledging the happiness of the day.  It's a clinic.  I learned from it.  You can, too.

Technically, this film was right on the cutting edge.  Yes, the mouths don't move quite right, and there is a certain "Clutch Cargo" feel to them when Forrest is intertwined with old footage of actual celebrities...but holy crap, what a chance Zemeckis took.  And it worked.  It's enthralling.  It's engaging.  Hell.  I still believe Sinise's legs were really gone.  That was BRAND FREAKING NEW TECHNOLOGY when this film was made.  Kudos for it holding up 20 years later.  So.  It's no "Pulp Fiction."  I'm not necessarily convinced that's a bad thing.  It's still a hell of a movie.  Enjoyed it tremendously, and sometimes, that's what a movie needs to do.  Entertain.



8.  "Easy Rider."  This was one of the surprises on the list when I perused it.  If you sat me down, before I watched it again, and asked me to name my personal "top 100 films" list, I can pretty much guarantee that this film would not be on it.  I watched this film during my brief stay at college.  I had taken...a drug which may or may not be associated with a long stretch of road on Chicago's lake shore the night I saw the film.  It was 1986.  It was a different time.  My impressions of the film were hazy and hallucinatory...but I remember the ending really bummed me out.  "They were just trying to be free..."

That was 1986.  What do I as a sober, upstanding, nearly 46 year old man think of "Easy Rider?"  I think it's a hell of a film.  I think it's quite revolutionary, given context.  I think the ending still bums me out.  I think the choices Hopper made as a director were interesting, to say the least, and I applaud his vision.

Other impressions:  Jack Nicholson is not that great in this.  He's talked about a lot when this film is discussed, but he just wasn't that exciting to me.  It was also fun to see a young Toni Basil (yes, the woman who recorded "Mickey" - I understand he was so fine he blew her mind), now that I know she was in it.  The hallucination scene wasn't that great.  The soundtrack is amazing.  The transitions into new scenes are pretty cool, but it gets old after like 3 times.  Again, when you are trying something revolutionary, occasionally it becomes revolting.  Oh.  And the ending is a bummer.  No other word.  Bummer.

I think this film is very important.  I think sitting down with great films is making me look for things I wouldn't normally look for...I see why it is on the list.  I encourage you to watch it and find out why that is as well.



9.  "King Kong."  Awesome.  This movie is amazing.  It belongs in the top 100, hell, it might belong in the top 10.  What was accomplished in this film technically is nothing short of miraculous.

I had watched this as a child on WLS Channel 7's afternoon movie.  I hadn't seen it in at least 33 years.  Here's what struck me as I was watching it.  I calls 'em "observations:"

1.  Kong could not possibly have encountered, and defeated that many LARGE ASS CREATURES in a day every day.  That wore a little thin.  The idea of filming those scenes with stop motion...however...was thrilling.
2.  Bruce Cabot is a STIFF.  As was Robert Armstrong.  That was a lesson in BAD acting.  Fay Wray was sexy as hell, and actually quite good, considering the beasts she was asked to play opposite.  And I'm not talking about Kong.
3.  HOLY CRAP.  How the hell did they do this?  How did audiences react?  This is an amazing piece of filmwork.
4.  Um.  We've seen several people die.  Carl Denham, when identified at the end as that man by A POLICE OFFICER isn't dragged into the streets and arrested/beaten/torn to shreds?  Nope.  He just gets to say a kick ass line.  Bastard.  No acting piece of crap, getting to deliver a line like that.
5.  Damn, this movie is good.

Watch it.  Please.  It's corny.  It's not very modern.  At one time it was.  Try to keep that in perspective.



10.  "Citizen Kane."

OK.  I put the number one movie on the list in the the first 10 films I watched.  My favorite film is "The Godfather."  I also LOVE "Casablanca."

This is the greatest film ever made.  My opinion.  Shared by others.  I have a deep, abiding love of what Orson Welles accomplished with this.  This could be a whole film school.  This could be a whole entry in this blog.  Know what?  I think it's going to be.  I'll comment on "Kane" when I have an hour to write about it, and probably go scene through scene.  It's that freaking great.

Quick impressions on Randy Knott, ordinary guy:

1.  Joseph Cotten's singing of "Charlie Kane" is haunting.
2.  My GOD, this is great.
3.  Orson Welles was only TWENTY FUCKING FIVE WHEN HE MADE THIS?!
4.  I can't.  I have to go MUCH longer on this one.  I have to sit and do this while I watch it again.  I won't be sad about having to do so, I can assure you.  I'm going to "live blog" this as I watch it again.

Please watch this movie.  Please.  Please understand that not everything you will see will be spoon fed to you.  Damn.  Damn.  This is a film.

I'm one short of the next 5.  Getting there.  Thanks for reading.

And off we go...

...on my quest to watch all 100 films in the 10th Anniversary Edition of the AFI Top 100 Films.

In starting this journey, I was trying to figure out how best to accomplish the task of writing about this, while (hopefully) remaining interesting.  So, I came up with a couple of ideas.  I went through the list and checked off all the films I had seen.  Turns out the number was exactly 50.  I'd seen half...and an idea came to me...I'll watch them in sets (always with the MATH) of 5.  Start with 5 I haven't seen, then go to 5 I have, and so on.  That allows me to watch one of the top 5 as the last film, as I have seen all of them.  So.  The icing on the cake will be "Casablanca." (even though "The Godfather" is my favorite film - but it only makes sense to sit down and watch the two "Godfather" films in one weekend - and no "Citizen Kane," because although I love it, ending with number 1 is too cliche for me...)

I then pondered how to write about it.  Hmmmph.  You know what?  That whole sets of 5 thing works quite nicely for that, as well.  I do intend to live blog one night, if enough people actually take an interest in this.  Which means, of course, that you too, the reader, will be able to share in REAL TIME my thoughts on a film as I watch it.  I think p'raps I'll do that twice.  Once for a film I haven't seen, and once for a film I have.

I am doing these in no particular order.  It's starting with films I own or have access to through Amazon Prime.

Enough lead in - let's get this started, shall we?  These are in the order in which I watched them.

Films 1-5


1.  "The African Queen."  OK.  This was an inauspicious beginning.  I, for the life of me, have no idea how this film is in the top 100 and other, FAR more worthy candidates like, oh, say, "The Right Stuff," or any other number of films are not here.  I can't even justify the star power of the director (he's kinda well represented in the top 100 with "The Maltese Falcon," nor the stars...Bogie is not only in "The Maltese Falcon," but "Casablanca" as well.  Katharine Hepburn is also well represented on the list, especially with "The Philadelphia Story."  So.  What are my thoughts?  1.  The opening scene is entirely too long.  The out of sync soundtrack (the Brother character's singing never matches the music), and the overall length of the church scene just started this off badly for me.  2.  We then go to a fairly well acted scene where tea is had.  And Bogie's stomach growls noticeably throughout.  I guess it's supposed to show how hungry he is...but there is really nothing done to remedy it, nor any acknowledgement that, FUCK YES, I'M HUNGRY.  3.  The village is then burned, World War I begins, and our protagonists find themselves left all alone.  What do they do?  They decide to hop on Bogie's boat and go down the river.
 
For an hour and a half.

Now.  I'm a big believer in context.  I understand that sometimes what seems very unsophisticated to us was quite revolutionary at the time.  Not this hunk of crap.  It's an obviously drunk Bogie doing very little stuff as Katharine Hepburn pretends to have interest in him.  The film is a travelogue.  Come to Africa!  You might see CROCODILES!  OR LEECHES!  MAYBE A MONKEY!  Seriously.  That's about the only thing I can find of merit in this.  Don't get me wrong.  I think the film's story teeters on interesting at times, and Katharine Hepburn, in her day, was one hell of a woman.  And how can you not love Bogie?  (wait, didn't you just call this a hunk of crap?)  I just don't see greatness.  I did like trying to figure out where I'd seen the German Boat Captain before.  Yup.  Russian ambassador, "Dr. Strangelove."  This time the "big bored" was me.  If these films are going to continue like this...I might be pretty happy that I've only watched 50...

Boo.  Bad, bad start.  "The African Queen."  Watched it.  I can say I've done that.  I never want to do it again.



2.  "The Apartment."  Whew.  At least this film I enjoyed.  When I was in high school, my folks rented "Irma La Douce," a film pairing Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine.  I remember thinking that was a pretty damned good movie.  I had always intended to watch "The Apartment," but never got to it.  I'm very glad I did.  I don't think I'm going to spend a lot of time talking about the films' plots.  You want those?  Go to Wikipedia. This is about my reaction to what I watched.  My thoughts:  Jack Lemmon's performance in this is heartbreakingly complex.  The subtle, tiny movement that his face does when he discovers that his boss's mistress is the woman with whom he is in love is something only a skilled craftsman can execute.  Sure, there is a lot of Lemmony mugging in this, but DAMN, that man could act.  Shirley MacLaine is wonderfully natural, wonderfully naturally beautiful, and matches Lemmon in the subtlety department.  P'raps it was Billy Wilder, but a lot of the things that happen in this film could have been played for melodrama.  What I saw was real.  And real good.  This film was given the Oscar for Best Picture, and I'm not going to look up what films it beat, but I can get it.  It's a great story, a great bit of acting, and a great bit of directing.  

It's telling, I think that the film's central plot...is still somewhat sophisticated.  Watch it for your self and you can almost see this story happening today.  Well.  The drunken Christmas party orgy probably isn't quite the same now, but I think the point was made...



3.  "On the Waterfront."  Now, this, THIS is a fine film.  A young, GOD HELP ME IS HE SEXY Brando, Eva Marie Saint making her (Oscar winning) debut, Lee J. Cobb, Rod Steiger, Karl Malden, FRED GWYNNE!  This is a film.  Something that I've already noticed while doing this is just how fleeting a story is.  "On the Waterfront" is a great film...but ultimately it's just one tiny fragment of an idea that is made into a story.  That fragment?  There is corruption in the world, and occasionally those who are oppressed rise above it.  Now, we all love that story.  I watched masterful direction by Elia Kazan helping to make that story into a gritty, sumptuous film.  Another thought, on a more base level.  HOLY CRAP Eva Marie Saint was gorgeous.  Not film star gorgeous, but accessible, interesting, might actually have a thought in her head gorgeous.  She also did one hell of a job in this, holding her own against the madness that was Brando.  She was incredible, just incredible.  In fact, as an actor, that's what struck me the most watching this film.  Everyone in it was looking at the other person and speaking the truth.  Great study in acting.  Again, I think the story, ultimately, wears a little thin, but how can you not enjoy watching Brando and Steiger sharing the back of a car?  That's one of those moments where you can just see the talent/dedication/craft dripping off the screen.  It doesn't hurt that Brando is delivering one of the great speeches in film history (or was the speech made great by a gifted actor?).  Yeah, he coulda been a contender.

I wholeheartedly recommend the film "On the Waterfront."  It is what great filmmaking should be.



4.  "North by Northwest."  Hmmmmmph.  Eva Marie Saint again, and the first appearance of a Hitchcock film.  There are 3 others on the list, but I've seen all of them previously, and well, I wanted to make sure to watch a film of his as early as possible in the list.  Now.  There is something I should say at this point in the proceedings.  I've fancied that this process will be a bit like what Ebert and Siskel had to go through on a weekly basis.  I have to watch an average of 2 films a week to accomplish my task.  Wanna know what Ebert and Siskel DIDN'T HAVE TO DO?!  They didn't have to watch two "top 100" films a week.  I'm whining, to be sure, but a little of this is difficult.  I'm getting to see great film all the time.  Eventually...that will get old.

Bah.

Hitchcock.  "North by Northwest."  Cary Grant.  I must admit I've not watched a lot of Cary Grant.  He always struck me as the classic definition of someone who might say "I'm not an actor, I'm a MOVIE STAR!"  His performances seem wooden, and he always just appears a little too cool.  "North by Northwest" may start to change that perception for me.  While watching this, I perused IMDB a bit, and discovered that Jimmy Stewart thought he was going to get the role.  I love Jimmy Stewart.  The right guy got the role.  Of course, you have a lot of Hitchcock standards, the shot from the above as Cary Grant parks his car at the U.N., the brief (and TERRIBLE) cameo, the soft focus shots of Eva Marie Saint, etc.  But you also had a noticeably gay Martin Landau, James Mason playing it cool, and a really cool set piece for the film's climax.  I'm sorry, but if the idea of just walking up and saying "We're on top of the monument" at Mount Rushmore doesn't appeal to you...I'm not sure anything can.  That's a fun thought.  This film is great fun, well acted, (although someone REALLY needs to explain the auction scene to me) and gorgeous to watch.  Everything a Hitchcock film should be.  I'm very glad I put this high on the list.  We've had 3 winners so far.  I'll take a .750 batting average any ol' day.



5.  "The Philadelphia Story."  Cary Grant again.  Jimmy Stewart.  Katharine Hepburn being everything that "The African Queen" teased (but failed to deliver upon) that she was.  I was going to watch "The Bridge on the River Kwai" in this spot, but Amazon took it off Prime before I got to it.  I decided to punt, based simply on running time.  I'm glad I did.  Again, I think this a paper thin idea of a story...but somehow it makes for a compelling two hours.  It doesn't hurt that Jimmy Stewart turns in a PHENOMENAL performance.  His cynicism, his natural mannerisms, and most importantly his DRUNK are all great in this.  I've been a long time fan of "My Favorite Year" (didn't you reference that talking about "North by Northwest?").  Peter O'Toole's Alan Swann has long been my favorite film drunk.  No more.  Watch Jimmy Stewart scream, "Oh, C.K. Dexter Haaaaaven!" and see the NOT over the top nature of it, and you'll understand.  Actually, while watching it, I thought of something else as well.  See if you don't think of Sheldon Cooper talking about Amy Farrah Fowler.  It's hard not to see it.  Katharine Hepburn was beautiful in this film, not only physically, but in spirit.  I can't imagine her "Red" was that much of a stretch for her.  Indeed, I think this was Hepburn just being Hepburn.  And she's fascinating.  And beautiful. And feisty.  And desirable.  "The Philadelphia Story" isn't the cinematic piece of art that "North by Northwest" was, but it's a great film.  I'm glad I switched.  I think "Bridge on the River Kwai" is going to tickle my fancy to no end as a piece of art.  "The Philadelphia Story" just tickled my fancy.  Sometimes that's what a great film needs to do.

Whew.  That's FIVE!  I did it!  I've already gotten through numbers 6 and 7...so hopefully I'll be back in a week with 5 more.  In the mean time, thanks for reading.  I really love doing this.  I hope you enjoy it, too.

Not a lot of deep thoughts thus far.

What do you think?  Should I write more?  Do you want to know other things about the films?  Is this too vague?  Let me know.