Rebel Without A Cause

"Rebel Without A Cause", #59/removed, 1955

So this is a pretty famous movie because it stars James Dean. Most people know the story of James Dean because he's referenced in a whole bunch of songs like "Vogue" by Madonna and "We Didn't Start the Fire" by Billy Joel, and I feel like he shows up in a lot of TV programs that look back movie stars and what not. But, in case you don't know, James Dean was in a crap ton of movies from 1951-1954, but just had minor roles. Then he started to get leading roles, and his biggest role was in this movie. He had just been signed to be the star in nine movies. And then he tragically died when his car collided with another at age 24 in 1955. (Ironically he had just made some Drive Safe PSAs). So, even though he only starred in three movies, the combination of a sudden, tragic, ironic death at a young age while he was very much on top made him on of the actors that will long be remember. (Also a side note, the movie Giant was released after his death, so Heath Ledger is not alone in that).

So, this movie starts late one night when three teenagers are at the police/juvenile center all for independent reasons. And then either the next night or soon after, they all go to school. And the movie follows them throughout the day, and into that night and probably early the next morning. Other than that, you really need to watch this movie because it is the role that James Dean will also be remembered by, and it is a good movie.

The first thing that I noticed was when the teenage girl came on screen. I recognized her, and after checking imdb.com (the best website ever and the one that makes writing this blog so much easier) I verified that it was the same actress who played the lost/captured girl in The Searchers - Natalie Wood. She, like James Dean also died tragically, but not quite so young. She was out on a yacht with her husband and friends when she fell into the ocean and drowned (in 1981 at age 43)

And the actor who played the third main character in this movie was Sal Mineo, who also died tragically. He was stabbed and killed in 1976 at age 37.

Sorry this blog post turned so morbid, but I just really find it interesting that these three actors played the three main characters in Rebel Without A Cause and they call died tragically, but James Dean is the only one who is really remembered.

Oh, also I have no idea why this movie was dropped from the anniversary list. Yeah, really not sure what that's about.

Okay, so to sum up... watch the movie-it's pretty good.

A Streetcar Named Desire

"A Streetcar Named Desire" #45/#47, 1951
This movie was not so great. It's about this girl, Blanche, who goes to visit her sister, Stella, in New Orleans. And Blanche clashes majorly with Stella's husband, Stanley, played by the very studly Marlon Brando. First of all, I loved the old names in this movie. The fact that I actually remember them is something, because I honestly don't pay much attention to character names. But, the old names were just about about all I loved. One thing however, is that I couldn't guess what was coming. At first, Blanche is kind of flirty with Stanley, and I was very worried that some kind of horrible affair was going to happen, but it did not. So it probably was a good film in that it keeps the audience guessing and whatever, but it is not one I plan on watching again. So, since I'm not really recommending that you watch this one, I'm going to ruin the ending for you. You can stop reading if you have any major objections to that. In the end, Blanche goes crazy. Like, literally crazy, and they bring people from the insane asylum to take her away. Except, instead of it just being Stella and Stanley at home, there is like a party going on... it's Stella, Stanley, two of Stanley's friends, including the guy she dated in the movie, the neighbor. It was weird. It tied up a lot of things character wise and it did save some time because instead of the news being passed from person to person and seeing each of the reactions individually, the audience saw it all at once and it wrapped up nicely. But, if anyone ever calls the insane asylum on me, please promise that you will limit the number of people around when they come to take me away.

It Happened One Night

"It Happened One Night", #35/#46, 1934

This was a really good movie. There are a lot of ridiculous parts that seem to go along with the movies from the 30's/40's. But, it's a cute romantic comedy. The movie starts as the main girl is fighting with her father on his boat. He doesn't want her to marry this boy, and she's all made at her father over it. So she jumps overboard and swims away. The entire movie is about her trying to make her way to New York with out any money and trying to not get caught by the detectives her wealthy father hired to track her down. In order to get there, she makes friends with the guy who is also traveling. And, as this is not really giving much away, the love story that the audience is routing for is not between the girl and the boy that her father hates, but between the girl and the new guy friend. The absolute best part of this movie (and the reason why I'm considering buying it) is the Wall of Jericho. But, explaining that will give it away, so you should just watch the movie.

The Searchers

"The Searchers", #96/#12, 1956
Oh yes, a John Wayne western. Well, it was alright. Maybe the western thing is growing on me? Now that I'm actually the one choosing to watch it. Maybe it was that I hated westerns because I always wanted to be watching something else. Who knows? Well anyways... this movie lapses a few years, and it's all about searching for this little girl who was captured. The characters in it are all very amusing. It's got adventure, love, cowboys and indians, and a happy ending. So, if you like westerns, watch it, but if you're not really a big fan, then it's probably not worth your time. The thing that intruiges me the most about this is the huge jump this movie made. On the orinigal list, it was number 96, and on the anniversary list, it was number 12. How can it jump 84 places like that? I'm not quite sure why it's the movie that rose the most between the two lists, but that must mean it's a good film.

Rocky

"Rocky", #78/#57, 1976

This movie is another one that is shown on television all the time. Then again, since there are about eight-five sequels, who knows what movie is actually on TV when I flip through it. And, I've never really been interested in this movie, so I've never made a point to watch it. There's probably not a lot to recap, other than to say it is a boxing movie where Rocky is the underdog everyone is rooting for. The one thing that surprised me is I didn't realize there was a love story in the movie. And I'd have to say that the diologue was amazing. Some lines were repeated- not a word for word thing, but like one character repeats the same thing on a couple occasions. It was great since that how people generally act. And of course, the absolute best part was when "Eye of the Tiger" came on.
So, if you haven't seen the movie, you should watch it. It's actually a pretty good movie, and since it's got the boxing thing and the love story, most poeple could find something they enjoy about it. And anyways, "Eye of the Tiger" is a lot better stuck in your head that "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?"

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

"Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?", New/#66, 1966
This is another movie that was added to the anniversary list even though it was around well before the original list.
This movie takes place all in one night, one very late, very drunken night. It's about two couples, one old(er) and one young. Both the men are professors at the same college and they just meet at a faculty & spouse get together. The young couple comes over to the old couple's house, and even before they arrive, we get to witness the old couple screaming at each other and the audience learns they're in this crazy, bitter, hate-filled, but also somehow loving marriage. At the beginning, the young couple seems like the perfect happy little couple, and then you learn little by little that they have issues too. The best part was when the young women went on this little rant about how she drinks very carefully not to get drunk, and then, naturally, three minutes later she gets very drunk and stays pretty plaster for the rest of the movie. The entire movie is just the couples chatting, drinking, and sharing deep, dark secrets with people they've just met.

One thing I found interesting is that I watched the whole movie without recognizing what actor was the young husband. He's name's George Segal, and I knew him from when he played Jack Gallo on Just Shoot Me. This is not important information or anything, but the fact that after watching this movie, the most interesting thing about it is that I didn't recognize that actor pretty much tells you this was not a good movie. So, I would suggest not watching it.
The last thing is that the title doesn't have anything to do with Virginia Woolf. She's not a character in the movie at all. It comes from a joke at the faculty party, so the movie audience doesn't even really know what the joke is, but it singing "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf, Virginia Woolf, Virginia Woolf" to the tune of "Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush". And the movie audience gets to hear the couples talk about what a riot that was at the party. So, that's been stuck in my head for a while...

Intolerance

"Intolerance" New/#49, 1916
It's always intriguing to me when a movie not on the original list is added to the anniversary list, especially considering the movie was around when the original list was made. So what is it about the movie that made it qualified to be added to the list.
Well anyways...
I was not excited for this movie. It had three strikes against it before I even started the movie. 1) It's a silent film, 2) it's a silent drama, and 3) It's three and a half hours long. So that was a great set up. However, somehow, I enjoyed it. The movie is a 'drama of comparisions' and it's shown in two acts. Probably so that the people in the movie theatre could have a bathroom break. I think I watched it in about four chunks. The movie is a bunch of overlapping stories-I think there were four. There was the "Modern Story" (keep in mind modern still meant early 1900's) in America, one from ancient Babylon around 500BC featuring King Belshazzar, one around the 1500's in France, and the crucifixion of Jesus circa 30AD. The main story was the modern one, we also followed that one the longest, I think it spanned three or four years, while the Babylonian story spanned three or four days. Luckily, this movie (generally) clued the audience into which story it was. I really loved that none of the characters really had names. I mean, there was Belshazzar, who was the King of Babylon. But, the girl in the modern story was The Dear One and she met (and then married) The Boy. And the girl in the french story was Brown Eyes. The girl in Babylon who lived out in the mountain was, The Mountain Girl. I think using those names made it a lot easier to keep track of what story was about to be shown. When the audience sees "The Mountain Girl", they know it's the Babylonian story. Had they said, "Mary & John", the audience may have been confused if it was The Dear One and The Boy from the modern American story, or Brown Eyes and The Prince. I mean, the audience may have figured it out, but I just watch The Sing-Off (an a capella singing competition) and even though I'd watched five episodes, I have no idea what the first name of the main singer of my favorite group is, so really, it's also very probable that the audience would be confused throughout.
As you probably guessed, the movie is about intolerance. It showed every type of discrimination... religion, sex, social class, age, etc. And, by jumping between the modern story and the three older stories, it artistically showed that nothing has changed, intolerance still ruins the lives of people.
So, as I said above, I actually really enjoyed this movie. Even though you still have to deal with the epic background music and the extreme overacting, I think this movie is worth watching. I think any silent drama film that is 3 1/2 hours, that I still consider to be a good movie, is probably a really good movie. So, if you have a chance to watch it (probably in at least two, maybe four sittings), you should!

Pulp Fiction

"Pulp Fiction", #95/94, 1994
When I pulled this movie out of the Netflix envelope, there was a guy with shoulder-length hair, and after a moment of starring at it, my thought was, "Is that John Travolta?" Well, turns out it was. "Pulp Fiction" also stars Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, and Bruce Willis as the main characters, and a whole slew of actors like Christopher Walkins, Steve Buscemi, & Kathy Griffin, who play these really minor roles like waiter or pedestrian. I think the main reason why I was so surprised by the actors is because I'm so used to these old movies from the 40's or so.
Okay, so the movie... The movie doesn't really follow any one storyline. It shows Samuel L, John Travolta, Uma, and Bruce in this kind of overlapping, connected storyline. The coolest part of the movie is that the audience doesn't see things in chronological order. And you also see the same event from different points of view. I just attempted to explain the order that it takes place... Like 3a, 2a, 4a, 5, 4b, 1, 2b... but, I got confused, so, I gave up on that. And, what I think was kind of sweet is that the movie does not tell you what order it is, the audience just has to figure it out. The only thing the movie tells the audience is the title of 'section' like "The Gold Watch" or "The Bonnie Situation", so you know it's kind of this contained storyline that fits into the whole picture.

I don't know... maybe that does make any sense. But, it was very cool, and that's probably the reason why this movie is on the Top 100 movie list, because the content is not really original. My favorite parts of this movie are the hair styles that Samuel L & Travolta had and the soundtrack. There is this scene where one of the characters is driving along, jamming out to "Flowers on the Wall". It just funny and rather realistic. I mean, if you heard "Flowers on the Wall" on the radio, wouldn't you just be jamming out as well? I know I would. There are other soundtrack moments that are just awesome. It's almost as if they just picked fun songs, and not necessarily ones that were specifically chosen to match the situation.
Oh, and the title of the movie... I don't know why it's called "Pulp Fiction". Pulp fiction points to a time in comic books when they printed on this old, recycled paper called pulp.
And other thing I forgot, there are a couple times in the movie where Samuel L quotes Ezekiel 25:17 as a passage from the Bible that he has memorized. He says: "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy My brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon you." Now, go look that up on biblegateway. ((Hint: Don't get your theology from pop culture))
So if you can look past the fact that is has bad theology, a lot of violence, drugs, sex, and the fact that it holds the record for most use of the "F" word in any movie (Netflix says 271, imdb.com says 265, I don't care to count) along with a huge slew of other swear words and derogatory terms, I think it is good movie, and you should consider watching it. Just make sure there are no kids around.

It's a Wonderful Life

"It's a Wonderful Life", #11/20, 1946
This movie probably doesn't need a review, because most people have seen this movie. However, I was not one of these people. I have seen a few pieces of it because it's always on TV, but I had never made an effort to watch it because it's always on TV. I'm not going to recap the movie, because the normal people know it well and the people who haven't seen it, should. That said, I really enjoyed this movie.
It stars James Stewart who was in The Philadelphia Story and is in at least two other movies I've yet to watch. He is becoming one of my favorite actors. Also, I found out he starred in a movie called "It's a Wonderful World" about seven years before "It's a Wonderful Life." Hmm... Interesting.
The best part of this movie was watching while wraping Christmas presents with a good friend! (She is one of the normal people who has seen the movie many times). If you are like me, and haven't actually watched it, you should! And you should definitely watch it while doing something Christmasy.

Fargo

"Fargo", #84/removed, 1996

There were a few things I knew about this movie before I watched it. Originally, I thought this movie was a comedy, because people always makes jokes about it. Turns out, it's a drama. The reason it's so funny, is because it takes place in Minnesota, and therefore the people in the movie have Minnesotan accents. And, they speak like Minnesotans in how they phrase things, and what they say. Based on people's reactions to my accent, I can understand why this movie is funny to other people. I'm not going to really recap it, because it would give too much away. You can gather a general idea since the tag line of the movie is a "a homespun murder story."
The only other thing I'm going to comment about this movie is the fact that people from Minnesota get upset because everyone makes fun of the Minnesotan accent in the movie Fargo, when Fargo is in fact in North Dakota. Well, these people are either idiots, or haven't actually watched the movie. The movie is called Fargo, and the opening scene takes place in (as displayed on the screen) "Fargo, North Dakota", but then the rest of the movie takes place in Minnesota, Brainerd, Minneapolis, and some in the more generic Twin Cities. However, that said, people who actually do live in the Twin Cities can get a little upset over the accents since these are the 'up nort' accents.
Along that line, there is a scene where two guys are traveling from Brainerd to Minneapolis, and they show a snapshot of the skyline and the highway signs. Sadly enough, I recognized this as a piece of 35W that you would see as you drive into the Cities from the south. And Brainerd is North of the Cities. So goof up on the part of the movie makers, but seriously, how on earth did I notice this?
The beginning on the movies says it's based on a true story, but after a little research from Wikipedia, it's not any one true story, but bits and pieces from many true stories strung into the one.
Overall, I actually liked this movie. I would probably suggest watching it, or at least chunks of it when it's on TV. And people who live in Minnesota, or Fargo, North Dakota should definitely watch it. However, it does get a little long, but, it's Minnesota after all, don't we move at a slower pace?

Duck Soup

"Duck Soup", #85/60, 1933 This is a Marx Brothers film. The Marx Brothers were a vaudeville comedy act. They are five brothers with ridiculous names:  Chico Marx, Groucho Marx, Gummo Marx, Harpo Marx, and Zeppo Marx. Then they took their vaudeville act and transitioned to movies. Naturally, with those names, they are in the comedy business.
The title of the movie has absolutely nothing to do with happens in the movie, but Groucho's explaination for it is: "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."
The movie's plot is really only there for necesity because it's a movie. But the movie is essentially just for their gag comedy. It's a pretty short movie, only a little over an hour, and it is pretty funny. The best scene in the movie is where two of the brothers (the two in the background) dress up like the brother in the front. And two of them do this hilarious mirror scene, so if you have at least three minutes you should watch the clip on youtube. And if you have an hour, you should watch the movie.

Shane

"Shane", #69/45, 1953
I wasn't very excited to watch this movie. It's a western. And I do not appreciate westerns. However, it was a pretty good movie. The basic set up is about a group of men who are farming/ranching and just making a small living, but they are getting all sorts of grief from a big ranch who think they are the shiz and deserve the land of the small farmers. And naturally there is a whole big fight thing going on, and everyone has to take matters into their own hands as the nearest law enforcement is 3 days away. Shane is a stranger to the town. He was a gunslinger, but wanted to get away from that, so he stays with the main leader of the small group of farmer/ranchers and trys out the farmer/rancher thing while offering moral support to the group. In the end, Shane becomes the hero by returning to his gunslinger ways, taking care of the bullies so that the famer/rancher heros can raise their family in peace.
So, not a bad movie, especially for being a western.

City Lights

"City Lights",  #76/11, 1931
This was a great movie. It was Charlie Chaplin's last silent film and one of his last films in general. I've already mentioned that I'm not a big fan of silent films, but this is a good one. Charlie Chaplin always puts a lot of physical comedy into his films, which makes them fun to watch. Maybe I just don't like silent dramas, because silent comedies are typically alright. This movie is funny, but also very heartwarming. Chaplin, in his ever famous character-The Tramp (in this time period tramp refered to a homeless person, not a skanky girl, so think Lady & The Tramp). He falls in love with this blind girl, who mistakes him as a rich man. Chaplin also meets a rich man and they become friends... or at least they are friends while the man is drunk, but then when he sobers up, he can't ever remember Chaplin and is mean to him, until the next party. Then the blind girl has a surgery and is no longer blind, she waits for her 'rich' suitor to come, but the 'rich' is actually homeless and incredibly poor. But she recognizes him anyways and they love each other! So heartwarming :)  And it's really funny. So, this is one of the few that I am actually recommending that you watch.

The Philadelphia Story

"The Philadelphia Story", #51/44, 1940
This movie was a real struggle. I started it one night, and I couldn't handle it, so I had to stop it and started another day. The female lead was Katharine Hepburn, who played the mom in "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner". Apparently, she was a really big star in her day, which I didn't really know. There were a few male leads in this film, but the most noteworthy ones were Cary Grant and James Stewart. All three of these actors show up a few more times on the Top 100 movie list, and I bet that you would at least recognize  their faces. The only recap I'm going to give is to say that it's about multiple guys chasing after one girl. But, don't watch this movie. You can definitely find a better movie that's stars these people, maybe even together.

The Apartment

"The Apartment", #93/80, 1960
So, I haven't blogged in a while... I haven't watched too many movies off of the list lately because I got very distracted by catching up on television shows. I watched all of Veronica Mars and the entire series of The Office-bringing me up to speed with the current season, and I just have just started watching NCIS. The NCIS episode I finished referenced this movie, which was kind of awesome to hear a vague reference to a movie and know what it was about.
I'm going to give away some things here, but most of it is explained in the first few minutes, and then a lot of it is very predictable, so I don't really feel bad about giving it away. This movie is about Baxter, who works at some company at a low level, and he is trying to move up by helping out the top executives. The way he helps them out is by lending out his apartment to the top executives so they can bring the girls they are having an affair with for a few hours. Which is just weird and gross. Baxter has a crush on this girl in the office who runs the elevator, which really made me smile. Then there are a couple twists that I won't reveal.
Then Baxter gets the job and he cuts off everyone from using the apartment, except for his new boss. And then his new boss wants to take the girl to the apartment. And Baxter quits because he would rather have no job than have a job since it means letting the boss use his apartment with the girl. Then the girl finds out and chooses Baxter. So, happy ending all around.
It was a little difficult to watch the movie, it got kind of long, and I just felt so bad for Baxter for most of the movie. However, if you are going to watch all of NCIS, you should watch this movie first.

An American In Paris

"An American In Paris", #68/removed, 1951
This movie was pretty good. It is a musical featuring Gene Kelly. He is a really good dancer and pretty good singer, so most of the movies he made were musicals, or he played a musical character in them. Right away, the movie starts with this voice over of Kelly's character. He explains that he is in Paris, he is an American, and he's a painter. Then we heard his good friend explain that he's also an American in Paris, but he's a pianist. Then it switches to a Paris native who is a famous singer. So, being good friends with a pianist and a singer leads to a lot of songs in the movie. Although these beginning voice overs gave the audience a lot of interesting information, it went on for a long time and was getting really annoying. I was worried that the entire movie would be like this, but no worries, the characters soon started talking to each other.
The story line in a classic girl meets boy, boy meets other girl, that girl is with a different boy story. So, kind of a z-shaped love diagram going on. Then, the climax of the movie happens at this party, and the girl chooses the other boy and we're all kind of sad. Then, there is a random 15, maybe 20 minute long dream sequence that is just dancing. There are lots of dancers and many bright costumes going on. It was all good choreography, but it just went on too long. It lost my interest and I really like dance, and bright colors. But then the dream sequence ends and the audience returns to the party, and wouldn't you believe it, the girl comes running back to the boy.
Overall, I liked this movie. A friend who was watching it with me got a little squimish about the love Z going on, so there is that to consider. And there were some very interesting side notes throughout. However, if you don't have to pay a rental fee to watch this movie, you totally should.

Cabaret

"Cabaret", New/#63, 1972
Cabaret is probably the worst movie I've watched so far. I think the major of the film was spent with a look of shock or surprise or "what the flip is going on?" Maybe if I had any clue what the movie was about beforehand, it would not have been so horrible. Instead, I was shocked by the Nazi Germany film about a club singer who is dating this guy then both of them start sleeping with this rich millionaire, name Maximilian, which I have always considered kind of a ridiculous name. I mean really, Maximilian?

Then, throughout the story of the really weird love triangle, songs from the night club were shown, which always featured the MC of the club- this ubber creepy & very weird man. He had ridiculous make-up on too. I was, however, surprised that I knew so many of the songs, since I had no clue about the movie. So, sorry I gave away the plot if you haven't seen it, but I'm okay with that since I don't recommend you watching it, in fact, I kind of recommend that you don't watch it. Okay, maybe that's a little harsh, and the choreography in there was really good. Bob Fosse if a very talented choreography (he was the director of this movie). But, at the same time, I'm never going to watch this movie again.

Guess Who

"Guess Who's Coming to Dinner", #99/removed, 1967. This movie may be familiar to you if you've see the 2005 remake with Ashton Kutcher and Zoe Saldana (the girl from Avatar and the new Star Trek movie before she was the girl from Avatar and the new Star Trek). I've seen the remake before I watched the original, so I spent a lot of the movie making comparisons between the two. The common set up the parents of a girl meeting her boyfriend, who is of a different race. The biggest difference I noticed between the movies, is that in the remake, the boy is white, and in this original, the boy is black. I was pretty surprised by this, but there are a lot of reasons why the remake needed to make this change. The original was made and takes place right in the middle of the Civil Rights Movements. The couple in "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" is engaged, and ready to be married quickly. One of the lines in the movie explains that the two of them getting married would actually be illegal in 16 states. That shocked me. So in that movie, it made sense for the parents to struggle with this idea, and they fought many internal battles throughout the movie trying to accept it. These parents actually wanted to accept it. In the remake, they had to switch the racial roles because in the remake, the father was adamant against the boy, which is why the dad had to be black and the boy had to be white. In 2005, it was funny for a black dad to be against a white boyfriend, and it would have been considered horrible for a white dad to be against a black boyfriend.

So, that's my rant on the race issue of it all... now, on to the actual movie critique... this movie was not great. It was pretty slow, and the entire movie took place in one day. There were a few gems in there. Like when this one girl appeared in about three insignificant scenes, and then didn't reappear in anything significant later on. Or the fact that the climax of the movie was a dinner, and more and more guests were added to the dinner, which resulted in the phrase "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" actually being said throughout it. The daughter's reaction when her mother's coworker shows up at the house. But, even with those few gems, I would suggest watching the funnier remake of it before you watch the original.

Ketchup

Here's a catch up of all the movies I watched before starting the blog...

The first movie I watched was "The Maltese Falcon", #23/#31, 1941. There really wasn't any good reason why I chose that one first, I was just able to borrow.

It starred Humphrey Bogart who was more of a heartthrob in his day than Zac Efron, the Jonas Brothers, and Taylor Lautner put together. He was pretty much the star of a movie or two each year during the 30's, 40's, and 50's. But then he died of throat cancer, probably from all the smoking he did in his films which was still allowed back then.
Anyways, onto the movie... Bogart plays the private eye in this one. The film's style is called film noir. Which is one of the terms I actually remember from my film class. It's essentially a dark film, (it's actually French for "black film" -- okay, that one I googled...), these films are dark in how they actually appear on screen, and their content.  It frequently has a private eye and some murders, although they don't actually show all the gore of the murders-something that current films should think about going back to.

What exactly Bogart is investigating jumps around a little bit. Throughout the entire movie, the audience doesn't have a clue what is really going on or who we (and Bogart) can really trust. Everyone is just searching for this black bird statue- The Maltese Falcon. Apparently it's worth a lot of money, although I don't think anyone could pay me to put that on my mantle. It the end, of course Bogart wins out and all the bad guys go to jail. A lot of the movie was spent in confusion over what each character's roll was, and who was lying about the events, and what things were actually true. However, I would definitely be up for watching it again. Especially because I think if I were to watch it again, knowing how it turns out, that I would enjoy it a lot more. 

The second movie I watched was a new addition on the anniversary list. "The Sixth Sense", New/#89, 1999. The one was watched as part of an eviction party. It was the last night that we spent in a really big house, and it was already kind of a creepy house, but since we were moving, it had no furniture, and therefore even more creepy. So the three of us girls decided that it would be a good idea to spend our last night watching scary movies, since none of us would ever live there again. We choose this one because I (and another girl) had never seen it, and it was on the list!

I'm sure many of you have seen this one, and if you haven't, it's probably a good one to see. I even enjoyed it, and I'm not a big horror film person. I guess this probably qualifies more under the suspense genre. Of course, whether or not you've seen the film, you know the famous line "I see dead people" from the little boy (played by Haley Joel Osment, who I just realized is older than I am... weird...). And while the boy's 'ability' is not news to anyone, there is a twist at the end, which I, unfortunately, knew beforehand. However, if you don't already know the give away, I think the movie needs to be watched twice, because I really enjoyed watching the film already in the know, because it made what happens throughout the film is so much better.

Then it was time to watch "Toy Story", New/#99, 1995. I watched this because "Toy Story 3D" was coming out (and I know this blog is about the top 123 movies, but I just need to say that Toy Story 3 was amazing and was done perfectly.) I don't think this movie needs much of a recap because if you've never seen Toy Story, you're crazy & should immediately go rent it.

My biggest issue with this movie, is I can't ever remember who voices Woody & Buzz. (The answer is Tom Hanks & Tim Allen, in case you can't remember either). I always spend a while trying to figure it out.

I always remember that Hamm is voiced by John Ratzenberger, because he has been in every Pixar film. Seriously, the Toy Story movies, a Bug's Life, Monster's Inc., Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Cars,  Ratatouille, WALL-E, Up... 

The first movie I watched using my Netflix was "The Jazz Singer", #90/removed, 1927. This film is most famous for being the first talkie every made. A talkie (another term I remember) is a non-silent film. When people in the theaters saw this, they went crazy over the songs and partial dialogue that they could actually hear instead of read. And, considering a lot of this movie was still a silent-film, I completely know why. I can't stand the facial over-acting that goes on in silent films and how much time is wasted by the actors first over-acting what is happening, and then what the characters are 'saying' being placed on screen for about three times longer than it takes to read it. 

In short, this movie was bad, and I really didn't enjoy it at all. It's pretty easy to see that the people who put together the list felt obligated to put the first talkie ever made on the list, but the fact that it's ranked #90, and then was removed on the anniversary list kind of says a lot about the quality of the film. 

The plot was very shallow and drawn out much more than it needed to be. Not to mention, the little kid at the beginning looks very creepy... (Okay, he doesn't look that creepy in this picture. I tried hard, but I couldn't find one of him in the film. Just imagine this boy, but with dark circles under his eyes, and all of this features much more distinct and dark)

One thing I did find very amusing throughout the whole thing was how race played into it all. The main character was Jewish, and he was a Jazz Singer, which didn't sit well with his Jewish Cantor father. His mother was worried that he was falling in love with a shiksa. And, in the big show at the end, the Jazz Singer paints himself and puts on a wig so he looks black. Which, having grown up in the 90's, really surprised me. But, it's true that in 1927, white people played black people on stage, and movie makers didn't have to worry about being politically correct.

"Forrest Gump", #71/#76, 1994, came next. This is one of the movies that convinced me that I needed to watch all the movies on the list regardless of if I had previously seen it. Because, I have seen this movie so many times on TV, but I realized that I never actually watched it. I always seemed to tune in to the beginning when he's a kid and the girl keeps shouting "Run, Forrest, Run", or near the end when he runs across the country for three years... which are really not the strong points of the movie, and so I would generally change the channel. I really enjoyed watching the whole movie, and thought how the scriptwriters weaved Forrest Gump into so many big political or pop-culture moments was wonderful.

This movie also has Haley Joel Osment in it, and he's even younger & cuter than when he was in "The Sixth Sense".

Most likely, you've actually watched this movie at some point on TV, but in case you haven't, I think it's actually worth watching the whole thing.

Then came "Raiders of the Lost Ark", #60/#66, 1981. I have frequently watched Indiana Jones, but apparently not this movie. Whenever I wanted to watch Indiana Jones at my parents' house, I'd dig through the VHS's and pick one. But I could only find two of the movies. I always thought that I could only randomly find two of them, but I've realized that we actually lost the first movie in some move of ours. So all the time, I would find "The Temple of Doom" and "The Last Crusade", and, since I don't really have a big interest in human hearts being pulled out of people's chests, I generally always chose "The Last Crusade". So, it was really interesting to me that as I watched "Raiders of the Lost Ark", I had no clue what was going to happen.
The things that jumped out to me the most were actually the pieces of the first movie that were resurfaced for the forth Indiana Jones, The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Specifically, the character of Marion & the government warehouse.

I really enjoyed this movie. It's always a pleasure to watch Harrison Ford be a heroic action film star and make his "I'm so overwhelmed and shocked by what is happening" face. (Okay, again I tried really hard to find a picture of this, but I couldn't. So, just go grab any Indiana Jones or original Star Wars movies, and wait for the parts when Indy/Han is running some direction, and the face that he makes when he pauses, right before he starts running the other way ((after he has seen a lot of bad guys)) is the face I'm talking about)

As I've been writing this post, I've been watching "Stagecoach", #63/removed, 1939. From the title and the opening credits, I could tell this was a western. My dad loves westerns. And I frequently watch them with him. But, that doesn't change the fact that westerns are probably my least favorite type of movie. Ever.

Which is why I reasoned that I could type and watch at the same time. At first I almost regretted the decision as I found it hard to keep the characters straight. So I stopped, paid attention for five minutes, and realized that it wasn't that I was distracted, the audience was just introduced to about thirty characters in the first fifteen minutes. So far the movie is really boring, and just as I was thinking this movie is going to be exactly like every other western I've watched, a new character was introduce- a young John Wayne.

Of course, that's the actor's name, and not the character's name, but let's face it, I am only ever going to refer to him (character or actor) as John Wayne. This snap shot of John Wayne only solidified my opinion that this movie would be like every other western I've watched.

Luckily, once all the passengers piled into the Stagecoach and left town, I only had about 10 characters to keep track of. The character that stuck out to me the most was the Stagecoach driver. But it was only his voice that I recognized.

Andy Devine

Friar Tuck

Another ten minutes spent thinking and I realized it was the same guy who voiced Friar Tuck in the cartoon version of "Robin Hood" (which came out in 1973??). His name is Andy Devine, by the way.

As boring as this movie was, however, I became really intrigued with the last ten minutes. It suddenly became suspenseful and I was wondering what was going to happen. But, overall, I probably wouldn't recommend it- The movie as a whole was incredible predictable. Then again, maybe it wouldn't be all that predictable if I hadn't seen so many John Wayne westerns in the past.

Starting Out

I just graduated from college and one of my requirements was taking a fine arts course. After many friends struggled through an Art or Music class, I found a better way out... a Film class. I'd also taken a film class in high school, and I knew that I would enjoy watching movies so much more than I would beading a sponge or memorizing different symphonies. Ever since this course, I've always been intrigued by the Top 100 movie list, and I decided that I wanted to watch all of the movies on the list.

However, still being in college (going to class, working, endless hours of homework, spending time with friends) didn't really allow me much time for that goal.

But, as I've already said, I just graduated college. And a year early at that. Which means I know just have work to occupy my time and since I graduated a year early, most of my friends are still struggling with the endless hours of homework, and therefore, I have some time on my hands. At least more time that I've had the last three years.

So I pulled up the list of the Top 100 Movies that the American Film Institute put out, and found out that there are actually two lists: one that came out in 1997, and an anniversary list that came out in 2007. There are 23 movies on the anniversary list that weren't on the original list. So I now had 123 movies to watch.

I've already seen maybe 17 movies, but I've decided to go all out, and watch all of the movies, regardless of if I've previously seen them or not.

Another thing I needed to decide was my strategy for this. How often should I watch a movie? I could watch 10 movies a month and be done in a year. But that seems like a lot of movies. Then again, I am able to multitask while watching movies. I can catch up on scrapbooking, work on other projects, and watch movies with friends, so maybe 10 movies a month isn't that much. Should I go in some kind of order? I tend to like order and organization, but I also thought it would be annoying to be forced to watch certain movies whether I felt like it or not. So here's the theory that I landed on: I'm going to watch all the movies in whatever random order I want, except for the Top 10. I'll save the Top 10 for last, and watch them in order, true David Letterman style.

I decided all of this a few months ago, but the reason I'm writing a blog is a little more recent. A week ago, I had felt that I wasn't making much progress on the list, so I got a Netflix. It's something I've always kind of wanted, so I tried the free trial. Two weeks free seemed like a good idea, but within a day I was pretty much convinced that Netflix is a wonderful, wonderful invention that is totally worth paying for. 

I was having coffee with some friends, and they asked what was new in my life. And, the Netflix account qualified, so I told them about my plans to watch all the movies. They suggested I write a blog about it, it would be like "Julie & Julia". At first I just laughed at the idea. I've never really been one for blogs... it always seems to be people going on their own personal rants. Plus, the idea of a blog kind of reminds me of this distant great uncle that I have. I've never met the guy, but he had problems getting his book published, so he started his own publishing company. Blogs seem to be an even easier way to self-publish my thoughts. 

Also, the thought of being like "Julie and Julia" didn't really seem that great. I came up with the idea of watching the movies all by myself, and I didn't want it to turn into a copy cat idea. But obviously, my initial thoughts did not hold out. I thought back to trips I've taken in the past. I always wished that I had kept a better journal, it's always fun to go back and reread that. So, this blog is really more so for myself than for anyone else. It's so I can reread it and enjoy. But, it is also for my friends who thought it would be fun to watch all 123 movies themselves, but knew that it would not happen, so they would enjoy reading a recap of the movies.

So, that's how this journey started. I'm still not sure how often I'll watch a movie, how long the whole thing will take me, how often I'll blog about it, or how frequently I'll use my Netflix to get a movie from the list, because honestly, there are a lot of other movies I'd like to watch as well. But, I do know that I will be watching all 123 movies and I will be blogging about it.