1 Year…100 Films, #47: A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE (1951)

“Stella!” – Stanley

Alright, these are about to be some rapid fire, brief posts. Going to try to get as many as possible done before the end of the year! (I only have two films left, btw)

Basic Premise of the Film: Scarlett O’Hara is going through some shit so she moves in with her sister and her husband. Based on the play of the same name.

Here was a movie I had never seen and had only heard great things about. I was very excited to watch it but wasn’t ready for how I was going to be affected. Now, I’m writing this post from a different mindset than the one I had when first watched the movie. Mainly because I was ready to praise Marlon Brando for his performance but as of late a certain story has been circulating about some stuff that went down during filming of a certain film. I’m not going to link to it or anything. I’m not ignoring it but, I’ve decided, that these film reviews isn’t going to be the place or discuss it – even if this movie does include a rape scene. Oh, the irony of it all.

Anyways, I’m going for rapid fire here…

This was such a great film. I can see why Blue Jasmine was compared to it when it first came out a couple of years ago. Vivien Leigh as astounding as Blanche. Marlon Brando was kind of a douche, but his head was in the right place – most of the time. I really felt sorry for Blanche’s sister, Stella, she was the one who really had it bad the entire movie. The story was also very depressing as well which is why I was kinda not myself when it was over. I felt as if I was put through the emotional rollercoaster that was Blanche’s downward spriral, and then with Brando’s Stanley pulling Stella in all kinds of directions I was just so absorbed by it all. I mean, I guess that’s what we want great films to do, right? To move and touch us.

Awards-wise it got the acting awards it most definitely deserved: Best Actress and Best Supporting Actor and Actress. It was also nominated for Best Picture, Director and Actor (Brando lost to Humphrey Bogart in “The African Queen” in case you were wondering).

When the list first came out, the film was ranked at #45 and 10 years later it dropped two spots to where we are now. I expect it to remain fairly the same whenever an updated list is made solely because it contains some of the best acting I have ever seen.

I viewed this film online. CLICK HERE to watch it.

No time for the for funsies…sorry y’all.

 

1 Year…100 Films, #48: REAR WINDOW (1954)

“A murderer would never parade his crime in front of an open window.” – Lisa

Basic Premise of the Film: Dude with broken leg is stuck in his apartment. Peeps at his neighbors through his window. Thinks one of his neighbors may have murdered someone.

Well, here it is – we are officially in the Top 50. Technically, “Lord of the Rings” kicked off the Top 50 but since I’ve seen that one so many times it didn’t count and we all know how it went when I tried to watch “Intolerance.” I had never before seen this one and, as it was the second Alfred Hitchcock film on this list, hopes were really high. A couple of weeks before I saw it, I mentioned it to a friend who proceeded to tell me that that movie with Shia LaBeouf, “Disturbia” was actually based on this one. That movie was actually kinda good, so I figured this one had to be really good. I was not let down at all. The overall premise of the story is pretty simple but the payoff is in the build-up and overall suspense as we get to the climax. That was some great stuff. I know I’ve had my moments during The French Connection and In the Heat of the Night, but this was some next level suspense. I can’t say this brought some new insight to the ways movies were filmed or made, but I guess the fact that a semi-simple plot, with surprisingly well-developed characters can go a long way. I will say that I’m surprised that it took us this long to get Grace Kelly in a film. I’m not even going to talk about James Stewart (not yet, at least) because he’s still got several appearances left on this list – I will say though, he was great as the incapacitated protagonist of the film. While, I have yet to write my post about “North by Northwest,” I’ll save a good talk about Alfred Hitchcock until I make it to his highest appearance on the list as well.

Awards wise it wasn’t no charging rhino, but it was nominated for and won for some of the technical categories. Grace Kelly’s performace was applauded as was Stewart’s. I think what has made it so enduring is that is shows what city life can be like for people – lonely, stressful, always changing and it showcased that we all really do like to be nosy on the low. Don’t act like you’ve never peaked through your blinds when you’ve heard something going on outside! Also, as I said before, the way the suspense kept building was great! If you’re looking to watch a good Hitchcock movie, I would highly recommend this one!

Shout-out to Mark in “Love, Actually” for keeping a copy on his shelf!

When the AFI list was first released in 1998, “Rear Window” was ranked at #42, ten years later it fell to where we find it at now. It fell some spots, but still solid showing I think that it was able to stay in the Top 50. When, and if, this list is ever revised I think we should still expect it be floating around the name numbers – Top 60 for sure. I’m going to go ahead and say that “North by Northwest” might even pass it! We shall see.

I actually bought this film from a used store before viewing so I didn’t look up anything for you guys – sorry about that.

And now for fun…

Did you know that this movie was remade in the 1990’s? I sure as hell didn’t so here’s a trailer for the remake which starred the likes of Christopher Reeve (post his tragic accident) and Darryl Hannah. Have any of you seen it? How was it? Let me know, yeah? I’m asking for me and not for a friend this time.

1 Year…100 Films, #49: INTOLERANCE (1916)

So colossal, guys.

Quick Update: While I haven’t posted about my film viewing in a while, rest assured, I’m still making progress on the list! I’m so determined to finish it by the end of the year it’s a little ridiculous. I’m in the mid 40’s now but just life has been hectic with work and school so any movie post between “In The Heat of the Night” and this one (#74-50) will be dated between the two posts so the reviews stay in chronological order. I WILL GET TO THEM!! 

Okay guys, I can’t even give you a basic synopsis of this film. I tried on four different occasions to watch it but I just couldn’t do it. It wasn’t that it wasn’t good (my opinion thus far is that it wasn’t) but just the way the flow of the story was set up didn’t cut it for me. There are four separate stories being told but they all were just overlapping and I thought it was hard to get a complete hold of how each story was being told. The running theme was that each of the four stories  — that were set during four very different timelines — would show some sort on intolerance going down. Seemed interesting enough but I just couldn’t do it.

There’s like 20 different versions of this film (okay, maybe more like 4) and they all have a running time of roughly three hours. WHHYYYYYYY!?!? I just really could’t. I tried. I hate myself a little bit for having skipped but if I couldn’t watch ONE movie in a month’s time it wasn’t going to happen.

Real quick though: let me say that it was not lost on me that I was watching a hundred year old film. My husband and I were both like, “Wow, this is cool.” The version we were watching was remastered and restored beautifully, but obviously there’s only so much that admiration will help you get through a movie. Overall, I just can’t. How is this one of the first movies we have to kick the top 50 off with? In 1998, this movie wasn’t even ranked! This means that #49 is the debut spot for this film. HOW?! Someone please explain this to me and point me in the direction of the version in which we get one complete story at a time. KTHNXBYE.

I tried watching this film on Hulu – CLICK HERE to be directed there.

Here is the version of the film that’s on YouTube (it’s in the public domain so it’s a decent copy). If you make it through, let me know how it is, yeah?

1 Year…100 Films, #78: MODERN TIMES (1936)

Basic Premise of the Film: Man is just trying to make it through life in the depression era with his sanity. Shows we all deserve a second chance.

Now, I’ve only ever seen one Charlie Chaplin film before and even then I wouldn’t have considered it a movie. It was more like an extended short, I guess? Or at least it felt like one – so I was excited about this one. I really liked this one. It was funny, cute and sad all in one. I feel like it was talking how much the industrialization of the workforce really affected people lives. Chaplin’s character was having anxiety/panic attacks and shit because of work – he couldn’t hang with this new modern world. No good. It was also sad because it covered a lot of what happened during the depression and didn’t try to make it seem unrealistic at that either. I think what I liked the best was how the two main characters were brought together. The female lead (too lazy to look up her actual name) was a victim of the depression and Chaplin’s Tramp character was just trying to help her out. Obviously, shenanigans ensued. It was cute. Chaplin did a great job directing this film  – he had a vision and he went with it. Honestly, I would say the social commentary it made is still relavant today. Not in the same sense as in “Do the Right Thing” but still relevant nonetheless. What is very unique about this film, I mean I was suprised AF, is that Charlie Chaplin sings in it! I mean, it might not be him doing the actual singing, but there’s SOUND in this silent film. Further research (wikipedia, lol) uncovered the fact that this is the only occasion in which The Tramp is given a voice! I think that’s pretty awesome.

Critical reception to this film, from what I read, was lukewarm. I think what also affected is that it was a silent film released in 1936 – when “talkies” had already taken over. So, while it wasn’t this big awards contender I think people are so fond of it because it’s just downright hilarious. I wasn’t dying but I was surprised at how much I was laughing. Some of his gag have been reused – kind of like the stuff in the Marx Bros. films – but it’s cool to see them when they were fresh.

Alright, so when this list came out this movie was at #81 and ten years it saw a three spot climb. That’s actually not bad. That slight climb shows that it’s a film that’s aging well and it’s excellence is not soon to be forgotten. I think at the next update it might climb another couple of spots as well because it’s definitely a movie everyone should watch. I mean it ain’t no “Sunrise” but if you’re looking for a good silent comedy, I don’t see why this one shouldn’t be it.

I lucked on this one that it’s streaming on Hulu – which means I don’t know if the other streaming services have it or where it’s available free. 

For funsies, here’s that musical/singing number that I was talking about earlier in the post.

1 Year…100 Films, #79: THE WILD BUNCH (1969)

Basic Premise of the Film: Older outlaws are trying to make one last go of that outlaw life. Find out their last heist was a set up, have to hide in foreign land and work their way back out of that life. Totally a shoot ’em up western.

I have to be honest guys, if these are the kind of westerns that await me further up the list, I’m not going to be a huge fan. Not to say that this movie isn’t good, I just didn’t care for it. I will say though, that this did feel like an authentic western. Not too hokey or anything. The movie lived up to its title – they really were a wild bunch. Half of the film took place while they were hiding out in Mexico. There’s nothing wrong with it having taken place there, it was refreshing to hear a different language being spoken for a change. I actually speak Spanish fluently (being Hispanic and all) so I enjoyed that. This was also my first William Holden movie – I’d seen him on an episode of “I Love Lucy” once, but other than that, nada. Don’t really recognize the names of anyone else in the case except for Ernest Borgnine – and that’s only because he did the voice of “Mermaid Man” on Spongebob, haha. Other than that, everyone’s acting matched up pretty well with how their assigned characters were supposed to be. The scenery was great – definitely felt like you were where they were.

Critically this movie was praised. Awards-wise not so much. The only Oscar nominations this film received were for Screenplay and Score and it lost both of those to a movie we will be coming across further up the list. As for the film’s longevity I think it’s because of how well it fits into its genre. It seems to have been the Pulp Fiction of it’s time – according to Wikipedia at least. Crazy good but lots of violence. Lastly, as I already mentioned, this was some of William Holden’s best work according to material that I read. I wish I had something to compare it to but maybe I might further up the list, we’ll see.

When the list first came out this film was ranked at #80. Ten years later it moved up a whopping ONE SPOT. I guess that’s better than nothing right. All things considered, if and when this list is updated I fully expect it to still be floating in the low 70’s. I didn’t find this film to be amazing or great. It was okay – in my opinion. I will say though that it was better than “Easy Rider” so as long as that one is ranked lower than this one, we’ll be good.

I viewed this film on a hosted site. Forgot to write down the link. OOPS. Available for rent on YouTube, Amazon and VUDU from $2.99.

I couldn’t think of anything intersting to do for this movie’s “for fun” section, so a questions: Have you seen this movie before? Did you like it? Why/Why not?

Update on the “1 Year…100 Films” Series

Hey there!

So, I just finished and posted the entry for the #80 film on the 100 Greatest list but that’s not where I’m at viewing wise. I actually watched the film at #62 this evening which means that there’s about a 20 film lag – so I have some serious catching up to do. The big lag in posts isn’t because I don’t have adequate time to get them done, it’s just that I tend to get lost in the direction that I want to take my conversations on each film in that seems to be my problem. Mainly, I just want to make sure that I touch up on the things that I feel are in line with the reasons why I wanted to work my way up this list. In order to try an accomplish this I’ve come up with some points that I want to touch up with every post going forward so there’ll hopefully be some flow and consistency between the posts.

Each of the following points will have a paragraph dedicated to them:

1. Basic premise/plot of the film.
2. My general thoughts on the film including, but not limited to, overall plot, acting, setting, direction, similar films, previous thoughts on the film, and anything that is relatable to these points.
3. How the film fared when it came to awards and why I believe it has had an enduring legacy.
4. Why I believe the film is where it is on the list, where it might be at the update, and how it holds up against the movies that have come before it (or after it depending on how you look at the list).

Lastly, I will provide info on how I watched the film (if I don’t own them) as well as where you can view the film is you don’t own it and still do something “for funsies”.

Now, let the catching up commence!

 

1 Year…100 Films, #80: THE APARTMENT (1960)

 

“Mildred! He’s at it again.” – Dr. Dreyfuss

Basic Premise of the Film: Ambitious guy loans his apartment to the higher-ups so they can have their rendezvous. As he climbs the corporate ladder he falls for the elevator operator gal and wants his apartment back.

I’ve seen a few Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine films before this one but this is the first film I’ve seen with a super young MacLaine. She is just beautiful. Not that she isn’t in her later years, I’m just saying it’s like “WOAH!” when you see people when they were young. Also, minus the film “Terms of Endearment,” I’ve only seen the two leads in comedic roles. Not that this isn’t comedic, but I would consider it more of a Dramedy – a nice little hybrid of both – and it really delivered on both fronts. Jack Lemmon, who can play a serious role very well (as was apparent in “Glengary Glen Ross“) still delivers some of the laughs, but when he needs to get down to it, he really does – which is why this film garnerned him a nomination for Best Actor. Ms. MacLaine for her part is also funny but she plays the vulnerable side chick down (who has a little crazy in her) brilliantly as well which also landed her a Best Actress nomination. Let me not forget the supporting cast because this wasn’t a two person show, they were great and really brought the whole thing together – even if their characters were all dick bags.

I think that one of the things that I loved the very most about this movie was that it was in black and white. By this point on the list, I’ve seen quite a few of them but I just like that while this could have been in color I think it was elevated a bit more by being in black and white. A couple of posts ago I talked about how no film had won an acting Oscar for a silent film until “The Artist” – in regards to this film, no other film completely in black and white had won Best Picture until “The Artist” did so back in 2012. Obviously, Billy Wilder – the director – knew what he was doing when he made this film (he also had a hand in writing it).  Overall, this movie was great, the plot was definitely unique and not one I have seen in any other film since and I think everyone should check it out.

When the AFI list first came out in the 1990s, this movie was ranked at 93, at the update it landed here at #80. I think that’s pretty good for a movie thus far, a 13 spot climb – it’s the biggest jump we’ve seen thus far for a film that was previously ranked. I’m guessing at the update (if and when that happens) it’ll probably be floating around here give or take a few spots. It’s definitely better than “Spartacus” so it deserves to remain ranked higher than that one. We shall see.

I saw this on a hosted site. CLICK HERE to watch. As usual, available to rent on Amazon, VUDU and YouTube from $2.99

And for fun today, here’s the trailer for you. I just love the font!

1 Year…100 Films, #81: SPARTACUS (1960)

“I’m the real Spartacus.” – All the guys.

Basic Premise of Film: Story of titular character. Leads a failed rebellion against owners who use them for slave labor/gladiators/whatever they want.

Okay, not gonna lie. When it comes to the older movie epics, “Ben-Hur” set the standard really high for me. So, because of that pre-set standard, the bar was really high for this film. I had initially first seen this one in sixth grade when we were covering the greek/roman period in history. I found the movie long and boring — I mean, it did take two class periods to watch the whole thing. I figured not having seen it since I was 12 I should give it another go and try to appreciate it now that I’m mostly grown-up. Let me tell you, where I was blown away by “Ben-Hur”, I was not as blown away with this one. I think my main issues were with how the passage of time was handled. Like I couldn’t tell if we were within a months’ time or a years’ time. It was a little confusing. I had to wait for someone to actually say how long it had been since some big event so I could get a good grasp on the timeline. I was also very underwhelmed with the overall plot. After reading about the real life Spartacus to see how accurate this movie was, I feel like there still could have been a little more. I’m just saying, the higher on this list I get the more I’m expecting from movies. Just wait until we crack the top 30 – I’m expecting to have my mind blown by each single film at that point.

Now for the logistics of the film — we’ll start with Stanley Kubrick. This is the second Kubrick film I have ever seen. The first one was The Shining, and I didn’t really care for it because I had read the book before watching it and just loved the book so much. But back to this movie…From what I read this is the least Stanley Kubrick film of all the ones he directed. It is the “least Kubrick film” because he solely directed this one whereas in all his other films he also had either written them or had some major creative authority over the end result. In this one, not so much. I figured there’d be some of that Kubrick-ness considering what his other films are, but I didn’t see any of that. The reason there wasn’t much of Kubrick’s style in here was because Kirk Douglas, who was playing Spartacus, seems to have been the one running the show. Now, Kirk Douglas did a good job, in my opinion, in the role. He was fit AF and angry and calm all at the same time. His love interest as played by Jean Simmons who I quickly recognized from this little mini-series called “The Thorn Birds.” Did anybody else watch that one? No? Just me? Okay. Tony Curtis even managed to make a minor role in the film. Lastly, let me say that this was my first Laurence Olivier film. While the wasn’t THE lead, he was the antagonist of the film. I expect to see him in a more central role somewhere further up the list.

When the AFI list first came out this film wasn’t even ranked; fast forward 10 years later and it makes its Top 100 debut at 81. I mean, I guess it might still be on the list at the next update but it might get bumped down a couple of spots. It wasn’t this big award winner but the production was amazing. I’m still holding a torch for “Ben-Hur” but one might go down for sure, I don’t see it getting any higher on the list.

I viewed this film on a hosted site. CLICK HERE to watch. Available for rent and/or purchase on YouTube, Amazon, and VUDU from $2.99.

For fun today, I only have a question: DID YOU LIKE SPARTACUS? Tell me why.

1 Year…100 Films, #82: SUNRISE – A SONG OF TWO HUMANS (1927)

“This song of the man and his wife…”

Basic Premise of the Film: Man is bored with wife and life in the country and madly in love with some hussy from the city. Man and paramour plot for him to kill wife so they can run off together. He rethinks plan and instead man and wife fall in love all over again.

Guys, this is my first legit silent film. I mean I’ve seen Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin films before, but not a sincere silent MOVIE. You know, like an extended one. Well, actually, all of that was a lie. I saw the “The Artist” and that was a silent film except for the last second when we hear the guy say “Okay,” or something like that. But to get back on topic…After watching this movie, the only word I was able to come up to describe it was BEAUTIFUL. It was so beautiful. Honestly, amazing and great just don’t cut it. Not even wonderful. The only other time that I’ve used beautiful to describe a film was after I saw “12 Years a Slave” – but that’s a story for another time. I think it took me like three days to get over how much I loved this film. After the travesty (for me at least) that was “Easy Rider,” I’m glad this one worked out so well. The thing with silent films – besides the no talking part – is that you’re only listening to music. In order to keep you interested the score has to be great. Sunrise’s score: TOP NOTCH. It helped to convey the mood of the film from it’s darkest points to it highest points. I’m already planning to find out if they have released the music to his film in either CD or digital form. I need that in my life.

When the movie begins (after the credits roll) we get the cast listing along with a little intro story to set it up. I recognized the name of the actress who plays the lead role of “The Wife,” but it took me a good 20 minutes into the film to realize why. The actress, Janet Gaynor, was the recipient of the first ever Oscar for Best Actress. Only then did I actually begin to appreciate the superb acting job that was done by the leads nearly 90 years after the fact. Yes, I just realized that I watched a near-90 year old film. Let me not forget Gaynor’s co-lead, George O’Brien, as “The Man.” What they did was just beautiful. I can’t say that enough. The acting these silent actors had to do back then is incomparable to the acting that is done today, with the exception of Jean Dujardin. They couldn’t use words to express what they were feeling, they had to solely rely on their body language and face and especially eyes to convey all the feelings and emotions of their characters. I don’t know what else I can say about the acting job, except beautiful. Yes, you’ll probably be tired of the world by the end of this post. I also want to give a quick shout out to the cinematography because that is what really helped to make this beautiful film. It was wonderfully filmed. Every shot and angle was honestly so good.

Lastly, I feel like I can’t finish this write-up without talking about the film’s director, F.W. Murnau. He happens to be guy who directed this other little film by the name of Nosferatu. So because of that masterpiece we got this even better masterpiece — well, actually, I’ve never seen Nosferatu but I hear it’s one of the best horror films ever, even if it just Dracula — so I can’t exactly call it a masterpiece myself, but I’ll take the world’s word for it. ANYWAYS, Murnau helped create such a spectacular film that I’m so glad many of us are still around to enjoy it’s beauty some 90 years later. I honestly don’t think I’ll ever get over how wonderful this film is.

When the AFI list first came out in 1998, this film wasn’t even in the top 100! LIKE HOW!? I sincerely doubt this movie wasn’t as good then! I guess it’s nice that when it did crack the Top 100 ten years later, it came it at a rather nice #82. I fully expect this film to be ranked higher whenever this list is updated next because it is an important one (in film history) and a really good one as well.

I watched this film on YouTube. This is the first film on this list in which copyright has expired on it, so it is now in the public domain. 

And now, for fun…

This time for fun, I’m not going to include some random clip from the film, the trailer or some short documentary. Instead, here’s the movie. I just really want you all to watch it and fall in love with it the same way I did.

1 Year…100 Films, #83: TITANIC (1997)

“I’m the King of the World” – Jack Dawson

Basic Premise of the Film: Two star-crossed lovers meet and fall in love on the ill-fated ship’s maiden (and only) voyage.

Honestly, what can I say about this film that hasn’t already been said? It’s very hard to say. Like “Ben-Hur” before it, this could be called the film epic of my generation. Maybe it has, I don’t know — haven’t actually looked into it. As I’m sure you can tell, I’ve seen this movie several times before and I absolutely love it, not in my personal Top 10, but Top 20 for sure. When this movie first came out I was 8 so obviously I didn’t fully understand how much of a “big deal” it actually was. This thing was a cultural phenomenon. It was everywhere. I distinctly remember how Celine Dion‘s song from the soundtrack, “My Heart Will Go On” was pretty much on loop on every single radio station. That song did not go away for a good 6 six months, I swear. The times I’ve seen it as I’ve gotten older have helped me to understand why people went back and saw it 4 or 6 times in theaters. Yes, it has a running time of three hours but you don’t feel it. It is not only just about the events surrounding the ship but we were given people who we want to root for which is why this film was propelled to the great success it was.

Now, before we get anything further we have to talk about James Cameron – the writer and director of this film. Without this man we wouldn’t have this film. He was  obsessed with this ship and the story surrounding it which is why this film was made. He loved this story so much that he ensured that no expense (and detail) was spared to ensure that it was as accurate as possible and boy did he knock it out of the park. Before someone corrects me on it, I know the story of Jack and Rose is fictional, but I was referring just now to the story of the ship. In the film he covers the details of what factors lead to this tragedy. So, instead of watching just some basic story of this tragedy, we also got a romantic story thrown in there to keep us interested and to add to how great this tragedy was about to be. When you throw all of this in the same pot you can completely understand why this film is the second-highest grossing film of all time without adjusting for inflation (it was the highest grossing film of all time until it was passed by another Cameron film: Avatar). James Cameron had had a very successful career prior to this film, but this is one the that will definitely be the one that will always be mentioned when he’s referred to.

Lastly, if it wasn’t for this film we probably wouldn’t have gotten Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio as soon as we did. What I mean by that is that had this film not propelled them to super stardom, we wouldn’t have fully paid attention to their work until years later. They played these characters from opposite ends of the social spectrum so well we rooted for them to get that happily ever after. We almost got it too, but as always, we can’t have our cake and eat it too. Besides the acting (of everyone involved), the editing and pacing of the movie was excellent. James Honer‘s music score is definitely one of the best ones of all time! I actually got to see this film in theaters last year and, honestly, I was blown away. My husband went with me somewhat reluctantly but even he was blown away by how amazing the movie was on the big screen. It was made to be watched on a giant screen!

When the list was first introduced in 1998, while eligible, I think this film was just too new for it’s significance in film history to be felt. 10 years later it significance and brilliance was noticed enough for it to make it’s debut at #83. Awards-wise it was nominated for a record-high 14 Oscars (tied for most with “All About Eve”), it won 11 of those including for Best Picture and Best Director. Those 11 wins tied it for most Oscar wins with “Ben-Hur”. Funny how it all came back full circle, huh? I fully expect this film to remain on this list whenever it is updated next. I also expected to climb a bit higher in the rankings – I say it can make it to 78 tops. We shall see, though.

This is another film I didn’t have to watch because I’ve seen it several times – totally still rolling with my 2-VHS box set. 

And now, for funsies…

Here’s the original trailer for ya!