The Birth of a Nation

"The Birth of a Nation", #44/Removed, 1915

Via the trivia available on imdb.com, I found out that after director D.W. Griffith made this film (which has some racial overtones-I'll get to that), he was criticized as being racist, and he was very hurt by this. So, he then made "Intolerance", which is also on the top movie list.

Now, this movie really is rather racist. It shows the American Civil War from the point of the South. And it shows the start of the KKK as a way to protect the southerns from the horrible new black-supremists that were terrorizing the place. In true 1910's style, this is a three hour long silent film, and D.W. Griffith didn't write a script or screen play at all. He came up with all the shots in his head, and simply explained to all the actors prior to each shot what was going on. I'm sure it really helped that it was a silent film, since he could then shout to the actors in the middle of scenes what he wanted them to do.

One of the things I liked the most about this was the soundtrack/score. Each character had their own theme music that would come on when a scene focused on them. So, it was probably the same eight songs played over and over again, with maybe a couple extra songs thrown in.

The first part of the movie shows two families who are long time friends - the Northern Stonemans and the South Camerons. They show them visiting each other prior to the war, and how much the two families care for each other. [[Major spoiler alert... but really, you probably won't be watching this movie ever, so who cares if I spoil it]] Then there is a really interesting scene where two men of the families (close friends) meet up on the battle field (fighting each other). One man is wounded on the ground, and the other man is approaching and about to stab him with the bayonet attached to his musket, and then he realizes who he is about to stab, and then embraces him as a brother and attempts to help him, but then they are both shot down, and die in each others' arms.
It was a very interesting scene that contrasted how much the North hated the South in general terms, but there was still a brotherhood love between individuals who were friends.

Good film, but a long, racist movie. I won't be watching it again, nor would I suggest it to anyone.

From Here to Eternity

"From Here to Eternity", #52/removed, 1953
So is a war movie, kind of. It's about a bunch of soldiers stationed in Hawaii in 1941. It's an interesting movie. A lot of the plot is about a new soldier to the unit who doesn't want to fight (box), and all of his fellow soldiers harassing him about it, except for one friend, played by Frank Sinatra. The movie has all of the good plotlines... romance, bullying, friendship, love, lust, pride, integrity, murder, singing, dancing...
And, a very surprising ending that, even though it is really odd, it is actually kind of perfect.
I would be up for watching it again, but I wouldn't say that I particularly recommend it, so if you watch it and don't like it, don't blame me.

Frankenstein

"Frankenstein", #87/removed, 1931
So, first off, the monster is not Frankenstein, the name of the doctor who created the monster is named Frankenstein. But really, who cares? And i don't think me mentioning it on this blog will change the last 80 years of everyone saying it wrong.
This movie was awful. It's bad dialogue, and a poor plotline.
However, everyone should see this movie.
I mean, come on, it's Frankenstein. And it's only 90 minutes. You can totally sit through that. So yeah, watch it and laugh at it's horribleness.

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?

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.

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.