Tag Archives: AFI

AFI #58: The Gold Rush

Posted on by Len

The Gold Rush is the second Charlie Chaplin silent film on the AFI Top 100 list and there’s yet one more down the line. This one finds our hero the little tramp on the Alaskan frontier trying to make it big during the gold rush. This one is really slow for my money and not nearly as funny as Modern Times and I suspect not nearly as good as City Lights (at least I hope). I really don’t see why AFI had to include three Chaplin films in the list since they are all pretty much the same. But hey, it’s not my list.

I got bored with The Gold Rush and gave up after an hour.

Next Up: Rocky

AFI #59: Nashville

Posted on by Len

I have a love/hate relationship with the late director Robert Altman. On the one hand, he made some films I really loved including MASH, Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean, Fool For Love and one of my all-time favorites The Player. On the other hand, he also made some piles of dung including Popeye, Dr. T and the Women and Pret-a-Porter. He made Short Cuts, in which he pretty much ruined some of my favorite Raymond Carver short stories and gave us full frontal nudity by both Julianne Moore (thank you) and Huey Lewis (yuck). And then there was Nashville, which I watched for the first time this weekend. Nashville makes the AFI list, as does MASH. How can the AFI be so inconsistent?

For me, Nashville was 159 minutes of WTF! I can’t say I hated it, but I definitely didn’t like it. Again, we find ourselves in the early 70s where for some reason film directors feel compelled to shock and confuse us with so-called art. Nashville revolves around a handful of people in Nashville over the course of several days. The characters are interconnected, but it’s not always clear how or why. There’s the aging country singer trying to stay relevant. There’s a television producer working on a concert for a non-traditional presidential candidate (we see vans for the candidate throughout the film and hear his ramblings over a loud speaker but never see him). There’s a gospel singer with two deaf kids and a husband who has political aspirations. There’s a BBC reporter wandering around town interviewing everyone she thinks is important. There’s a young hippie woman visiting home from Los Angeles. There’s a guy who shows up in town to make it in the music business. There’s a woman hiding from her husband also trying to make it in the music business. There’s a beautiful but untalented singer trying to make it in the music business. There’s a young rock band on the verge of breakup. There’s a famous country singer teetering on the edge of sanity. And of course there’s Jeff Goldblum riding around on a three-wheel motorcycle picking up and dropping people off for no apparent reason. You get the idea — pure Altman madness.

The film shuffles back and forth between the characters and the conversations in dizzying fashion. Random people have sex with each other. There are many painstakingly complete musical performances from the characters (awful if you don’t care for Grand Ole Opry style country music — and who does?). I don’t have a problem with the sort of slice of life style of this film in which the viewer quickly bounces back and forth between scenes, but for me the trouble with Nashville lays in the lack of character depth. I don’t have a clue about the motivations of these characters.

WARNING: SERIOUS SPOILER ALERTS

I don’t know why Barbara Jean is so tortured. I don’t know why Tom wants to sleep with Linnea so badly and I don’t know why when they finally do sleep together she simply walks out afterward and he could give a shit despite hounding her for days to meet him and declaring his love for her. I don’t know why L.A. Joan is in Nashville nor why she doesn’t seem to care that her aunt is dying. I don’t have a clue where presidential candidate Hal Phillip Walker stands on issues beyond his hatred of lawyers. I don’t know why Elliott Gould and Julie Christie make random cameos as themselves. I have no idea if Opal actually works for the BBC or if she’s just insane and I don’t know why Jeff Goldblum is riding around on a motorcycle and doesn’t have any lines in the film. And most of all, I have no flippin idea why Kenny randomly decides to shoot Barbara Jean! I don’t even know if she’s dead when the film ends. At least in Days of Our Lives we have some context. This is just random weirdness.

I think AFI has its head up its ass on this one. As for Altman, MASH deserves its high place of honor on this list…but The Player is so much better than Nashville. Not even close. Oh, and the Academy Award judges are clueless as well. Nashville was nominated for Best Picture and Best Director. It won for Best Song, a slow little ditty performed by that “well-known musical genius” Keith Carradine. Here, see how much of this garbage you can stand:

Next up: The Gold Rush

AFI #61: Sullivan’s Travels

Posted on by Len

One of the reasons I decided to watch and blog about all of the films in the American Film Institute’s list of the Top 100 American films of all time was to discover some gems I hadn’t ever seen. Nearly 40 films into the list, I hadn’t really been blown away yet — until last night. I had never even heard of Sullivan’s Travels, No. 61 on the list. Admittedly, I was skeptical for that very reason, plus it was made all the way back in 1941. I held out some small hope only because it was made just a year after one of my favorite films, The Philadelphia Story. Not only did I enjoy Sullivan’s Travels, the screenplay reminded me of The Philadelphia Story because of its lovely sarcastic wit.

Sullivan’s Travels is the story of wealthy Hollywood director John L. Sullivan, who is tired of making fluffy comedies because America is in a depression and they deserve to feel the emotion of the times. When his studio points out he has no idea what it’s like to be one of the downtrodden, he foolishly decides to go undercover as a tramp to see what it’s like. He sets off in dirty and torn clothing with only a dime in his pocket to learn enough to make a “commentary on modern conditions, stark realism, the problems that confront the average man.” Along the way he meets a discouraged young actress who is ready to give up on her dreams, leave Hollywood and return home. Hilarity and powerful lessons about the human spirit ensue.

There is so much to like in this film. Sullivan is played by Joel McCrea, well-known for his many roles in Westerns. McCrea provides a real charm to the character that is reminiscent of Cary Grant and the dialogue is brilliantly funny and even edgy. The scene where his butler first sees him dressed in rags is classic:

Burrows: I don’t like it at all, sir. Fancy dress, I take it?
John L. Sullivan: What’s the matter with it?
Burrows: I have never been sympathetic to the caricaturing of the poor and needy, sir.
John L. Sullivan: Who’s caricaturing?
John L. Sullivan: I’m going out on the road to find out what it’s like to be poor and needy and then I’m going to make a picture about it.
Burrows: If you’ll permit me to say so, sir, the subject is not an interesting one. The poor know all about poverty and only the morbid rich would find the topic glamorous.
John L. Sullivan: But I’m doing it for the poor. Don’t you understand?
Burrows: I doubt if they would appreciate it, sir. They rather resent the invasion of their privacy, I believe quite properly, sir. Also, such excursions can be extremely dangerous, sir. I worked for a gentleman once who likewise, with two friends, accoutered themselves as you have, sir, and then went out for a lark. They have not been heard from since.

This sort of exchange is repeated throughout the film and caused me to laugh out loud more than once. The screenplay was written by Preston Sturges, who directed the film as well. I have heard of Sturges, but when I looked up his filmography on IMDB I saw that I have never seen any of his films. I now plan to check out quite a few others! By the way, this is also the first film on the list that was available in its entirety for free on You Tube. I actually streamed it to my tablet.

Sullivan’s Travels was also my first introduction to actress Veronica Lake. The only thing I knew about her prior to seeing this film was that a model was “cut” to look like her in the film L.A. Confidential so creepy men could pay to have sex with her. Nice. Veronica Lake is absolutely beautiful and had quite an interesting life. She made nearly 40 films and TV shows before dying at age 50 from hepatitis. She was also the daughter-in-law of Sen. Joseph McCarthy. She was well-known for her beauty, particularly her long blonde hair which she often wore covering one eye and giving her the nickname The Peek-a-boo Girl. She is classic 1940s Hollywood glamour.

Another interesting fact about Sullivan’s Travels is that the film Sullivan was going to make about America’s poor was to be called O Brother Where Art Thou? Yep, the Coen Brothers used the name as an homage for their 2000 masterpiece starring George Clooney. The things you learn when you do a little homework! Also, Sullivan’s Travels did not garner any Academy Award nominations, maybe because it came out the same year as a little film called Citizen Kane. By the way, Citizen Kane lost most of that year’s Oscars, including Best Picture, to How Green Was My Valley. Ah, hindsight.

Next Up: Duck Soup

AFI #62: American Graffiti

Posted on by Len

I think a lot of so-called great films are fully dependent on the generation of the viewer and as I make my way through the AFI Top 100 there have been several examples of this generational bias. American Graffiti is definitely a film that reaches a certain demographic. Set in the early 60s and made in 1973, the film is not much more than a nod to that mythical time known as “the good old days.” For director George Lucas, the film is a bit of a love letter to his teenage years growing up in small town Northern California when kids cruised the streets and pranked each other with shaving cream and the biggest issue was whether or not they should leave this Rockwellian dream for the big city (or in this case, college “back east”). American Graffiti captures that moment in time quite well, and it obviously had an impact on viewers of a certain age.

That being said, for my money American Graffiti is just an average film that isn’t even among the best of its genre. The Hollywood Knights is basically the same plot but a much better film overall. Barry Levinson’s Diner also delivers the same emotion and is one of my favorite films of all time. I think American Graffiti gets more recognition because it’s Lucas’ first film and because it stars young actors who later become very famous, including Richard Dreyfuss and Harrison Ford. It’s an enjoyable little film, but it’s certainly not one of the 100 best American films of all time.

Nostalgia is a great film genre that has delivered some amazing films. Last year’s wonderful Super 8 comes to mind. But nostalgia films are by their nature going to be more meaningful to those who lived during a similar time and can therefore relate to the nostalgia. I’m not a baby boomer, and I can appreciate how cool it must have been in the 50s and 60s to cruise your car up and down the street and have burgers delivered to your car by a hot girl on roller skates, but I’m not going to be moved by a time period that I didn’t live through. I imagine baby boomers don’t feel the same way I do when I watch Sixteen Candles or The Breakfast Club. And that’s okay, but don’t tell me American Graffiti is one of the best films ever. It’s not.

By the way, I’ve seen bits and pieces of American Graffiti before but this is the first time I’d ever sat through it beginning to end. There are some memorable scenes (like the one in which Toad tries to buy some whiskey and ends up in the middle of a hold up). But seeing it all the way through — the damn thing has a really depressing ending. Cindy Williams almost dies in a car crash, Toad gets killed in Vietnam, Milner gets killed by a drunk driver, Steve ends up selling insurance in Modesto because he doesn’t go to college and Curt moves to Canada. Geez…good times.

Next up: Sullivan’s Travels

AFI #63: Cabaret

Posted on by Len

I get it. Cabaret is a metaphor for the decadence that leads to the rise in nationalism that makes it possible for the Nazi Party to rise to power in Germany. Sounds like a good plot for a musical (insert sarcasm here).

I’d like to dismiss this film because I’m not a big musical guy, but the truth is I don’t mind a good musical. I love the film version of The Music Man. I loved Evita with Antonio Banderas and Madonna. A Chorus Line with Michael Douglas is one of my favorites. Hey, I even like Sound of Music which also includes Nazis so that’s not a good enough reason for me to have not liked Cabaret. I just found Cabaret to be too wannabe 60s, theater of the absurd, experimental trash. Not my cup of tea. That being said, it was a huge hit in 1972 and won eight damn Academy Awards so what do I know.

Cabaret is the story of cabaret performer Sally Bowles (Liza Minnelli) and takes place in Berlin circa 1931 just as the Nazi party is coming to power. Sally is an over the top dreamer trying to make it big with thoughts of becoming a world-famous actress, but she’s really just using her body to make a living. She meets an English expatriate (Michael York) who turns out to be bisexual and both he and Sally fall for the same German baron. Meanwhile, the Nazis are gaining power and the mood of the city is “narrated” by the master of ceremonies of the cabaret, a creepy and pansexual dude played by Joel Grey. The musical numbers are raunchy and loosely tell the tale. The musical version of the show won eight Tony Awards including Best Musical in 1967.

Again, not my kind of musical and it was filmed during a film era that I don’t typically enjoy (there was something about the late 60s and early 70s that didn’t do it for me). Oscar disagreed with me and awards were handed out for Best Actress (Minnelli), Best Supporting Actor (Joel Grey), Best Music and Best Director (Bob Fosse). It did not win Best Picture…thank god. That rightfully went to The Godfather, but what it does mean is that Francis Ford Coppola not win Best Director for what was in my opinion one of the greatest films ever made. Joel Grey also stole the Oscar from the likes of Al Pacino, Robert Duvall and James Caan (who perhaps split votes leading to Grey’s win). Minnelli actually beat Diana Ross for Lady Sings the Blues which is also quite a crime.

Life may indeed be a cabaret old chum, but I hope my cabaret is a little more fun with fewer Nazis.

Next up: American Graffiti.

AFI #64: Network

Posted on by Len

A couple of year’s ago I stopped watching television news because it had become a cesspool of crime and horror. My New Year’s resolution last year was to stop paying attention to politics because it was bringing too much negativity into my life. Yesterday a friend of mine reported that he too has limited his intake of “news” because it was far too negative. Television in general has become a wasteland of “reality” that is anything but real. These days save for a couple of solid cable shows  and a whole lot of sports I use TV purely as background noise…I doubt I’ll ever be one of those people who claims to not have a television or says they don’t watch it, but I get it. Soothsayers have been saying since its inception that TV was a beast that would eventually control us, and while that seems farfetched it’s hard to argue that we haven’t become a society of slaves to the tube. Some people argue that TV is simply a reflection of society. If that’s true, god help us! Network was released in 1976 and it caused quite a stir. It’s dark humor explored what would happen if the accountants took over the news department and TV news became beholden to ratings and profitability and was run by corporations. Yep, it came out nearly 40 year’s ago even back then the disease of corporate control was under scrutiny. There’s nothing new under the sun.

The film is most famous for the iconic character of network news anchor Howard Beale, who because his ratings were slipping had a breakdown on live television and because his meltdown was good for business he was given the green light to continue to proselytize about the demise of society and the devil inside the box known as TV. His famous line “I’m mad as hell and we’re not going to take this anymore” became a national catch phrase and Peter Finch’s portrayal of Beale won him an Oscar for best actor (albiet posthumously). I’m not going to share that famous scene, but rather I’d like you to take a few minutes to watch this scene that I think sums up the spirit of Network‘s message:

I don’t think I’ll say much about the film itself other than to say it was ahead of its time and its message was eerily prophetic. But I would like to comment on where we have found ourselves in 2012 in terms of the sort of television this film considered satirical. Have you spent much time flipping through the proverbial dial on your cable box these days. Most of us are guilty of watching some of this so-called programming (I have my guilty pleasures). What the hell are we watching? Hoarders Buried Alive. To Catch a Predator. Celebrity Rehab. Hillbilly Hand Fishing. Strange Sex. Cops. Toddlers and Tiaras. Bad Girls Club. Kourtney and Kim Take New York. I Didn’t Know I Was Pregnant.

These are real shows…not satire. Network was supposed to be satire. Showing the assassination of a newscaster on live television was a joke. The “Mao Tse Tung Hour” in which a left wing terrorist group filmed themselves committing crimes was a crazy idea. But honestly, how close have we come? Would anyone be surprised if the next big reality hit was a live broadcast of an execution?

What I’ll say about Network is that it was a film that made you think about the state of the media and society in general. Not too shabby for 1976. I also think a great sequel to the film (or a perfect complement for a radical double feature) would be Natural Born Killers! That’s one of my favorite films and it too takes the reality TV concept to its potential horrific end game.

Next Up: Cabaret

AFI #66: Raiders of the Lost Ark

Posted on by Len

It was June 1981 and I had just gotten out of school for the summer. Ninth grade was behind me and I was moving to a new school for high school following the summer. I was looking forward to more than two months of riding my bike, going to the beach and just hanging out. Of course, I was also looking forward to summer blockbuster movies. That summer was stellar for films, especially for a 14-year-old. Clash of the Titans. Superman II. Cannonball Run. Stripes. For Your Eyes Only. Escape From New York. Arthur. Heavy Metal. An American Werewolf in London. Even Zorro the Gay Blade! I saw them all and more…but summer 1981 will always be about one film — Raiders of the Lost Ark.

It was the dawn of the summer blockbuster. The year before Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back took in $290,271,960 in the U.S. In 1982 E.T. raked in $435,110,554. In 1983 Return of the Jedi brought in $309,205,079. Prior to 1980 only Jaws ($260,000,000) and Star Wars ($460,998,007) had ever taken in those kinds of numbers. Stephen Spielberg and George Lucas had changed the game forever. You may have a favorite from these great summer blockbusters, but mine was, and still is, Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Indiana Jones was the perfect hero for a young teenager. He was smart, capable of amazing physical feats, had a wicked sense of humor and of course the ladies loved him. Not only that, he was fighting the Nazis! This film made Harrison Ford the biggest movie star in the world. Sure, he was Han Solo, but he was just a supporting character in that. In Raiders of the Lost Ark he was the leading man and action hero.

What I love so much about the film is that it’s non-stop action from the moment it begins. The first scene where he tries to steal the idol from the natives is one of the most memorable action sequences ever filmed and the scene with the boulder rolling after him has become iconic. Indiana Jones made archaeology exciting, which let’s be honest is not an easy thing to do. Another iconic scene is when Indy is chasing the ark and is jumping back and forth between the Nazi trucks trying to steal the truck from the driver. When he loses his grip off the front of the truck but slides under and hangs on by his whip it’s pure Hollywood. And of course, the final scene with the ark getting lost in the rows and rows of boxes in that giant government warehouse…spot on political commentary. My favorite scene is when he comes face to face in Cairo with the huge guy with giant Arabian swords and instead of fighting him a just reaches down for his gun and shoots the guy. LOL.

For me Raiders of the Lost Ark is the ultimate adventure film, and while many have tried to imitate it none have captured the greatness of this Hollywood classic. It’s just as cool and exciting today as it was in 1981 and the proof is that my son and I watched it recently and he loves it too. I suspect sometime 20 years or so from now his kids will love it as well.

Next: The African Queen

AFI #67: Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

Posted on by Len

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf is about a train wreck. Well, okay, it’s about a husband and wife who seem to get off on verbally abusing each other, but it felt like a train wreck…the kind you don’t want to watch but something deep inside you makes you sneak a peek. The film is a big screen version of the Edward Albee 1963 Tony Award-winning play by the same name and it’s not a a comedy despite the play on words that it its title. The thing is you can’t really tell if the husband, George, or the wife, Martha, is the big bad wolf!

I wanted to dislike this film after the first 10 minutes, but I couldn’t seem to stop watching it and as it went on I took some sick pleasure in how abusive these people were to each other. Just when you think maybe their relationship is playful, the booze continues to pour and the repartee gets harsher and harsher. Damn…these two fucking hate each other. It’s one thing to verbally beat each other up by themselves, but they do it in front of a couple they don’t even know. Poor Nick and Honey just wanted to stop by the house for a quick drink, but they get dragged into this heavyweight bout and they barely survive. There is so much going on between George and Martha it’s hard to keep track, but the gist is that he is an assistant professor and she is the daughter of the college president and neither of them have lived up to each other’s expectations. Add to that their inability to conceive a child and a ridiculous amount of alcohol and what you get is a marriage that makes Frank and Estelle Costanza look like June and Ward Cleaver.

Did I like the film? I did, but sort of in the way you like a good crash at a car race. One thing that is certain though is that the acting is tremendous. All four characters were nominated for Oscars and both Elizabeth Taylor (Martha) and Sandy Dennis (Honey) took home a trophy. So much for the men, though Richard Burton was intense and brutal as George and a young George Segal was wonderful as Nick. This was Taylor’s second and last Academy Award for acting (she also won in 1961 for Butterfield 8), though she was nominated three other times. She’s a bit older and thicker around the middle in this film, but her performance is mesmerizing as the boozy Martha. I understand the film was also a bit risqué for 1966, but mostly for language. If you want to see people who have a co-dependence on each other’s cruelty this is the film for you.

Next up: Raiders of the Lost Ark

AFI #68: Unforgiven

Posted on by Len

I enjoy a good western, and Unforgiven is a good western. But in my opinion it’s not a great western, which is why I remember not loving it when it first came out in 1992 and also being very disappointed when it won the Oscar for best picture. Looking back at the list of nominees that year it’s clear now why I was upset — Unforgiven beat out two films I loved that year in The Crying Game and Scent of a Woman (hoo ha!).

But I’m actually quite glad I watched it again today. Maybe 20 years have given me some perspective. When the film came out a lot of reviewers lauded it for being the first realistic western, meaning it showed the ugly side of violence rather than glorifying it. Clint Eastwood made a hell of a living playing glorified cowboys and outlaws, so there is a sort of poetic justice here in him portraying the dark side of violence. His character, Will Munny, is not a hero. In fact, I’d argue he’s an anti-hero even though he avenged a brutalized woman. He didn’t do it for justice, rather he did it for money pure and simple. He also ran off on this ill-advised adventure leaving his young children home alone to fend for themselves — with no guarantee he’d ever return alive. That is no hero. The title I think could speak not to the fate of the cowboys who cut up a whore in a brothel, but rather to Munny who should be unforgiven for leaving his kids alone and putting himself at risk.

Unforgiven is dark, and unlike the traditional western you don’t feel a sense of justice at the end — you feel like the events of the film were a waste of energy and lives. Lots of people get killed, including some innocent bystanders and several lawmen. It portrays a west that is also unforgiving and hard, which is probably pretty realistic…at least more realistic than the classic western towns of films like High Noon and pretty much any John Wayne film. I guess that sets the film apart, but it doesn’t make it great and even though I liked it I wouldn’t call it great and I wouldn’t put it in the top 100 of all time.

One highlight was certainly Gene Hackman’s portrayal of sheriff Little Bill. Hackman won an Oscar for the role, and he was devilishly good. Eastwood was nominated for best actor but rightfully lost to Al Pacino for Scent of a Woman though my vote would have gone to Robert Downey Jr. for Chaplin or Denzel Washington for Malcolm X. All in all a great year for film!

Unforgiven also marked the beginning of Eastwood’s dark and introspective directing career. For me these past 20 years have been filled with ups and downs for Clint. I hated Million Dollar Baby and Bridges of Madison County, but loved what I’d call some of the best films of the past 20 years — Mystic River, Gran Torino, Changling and Letters From Iwo Jima to name a few. He is undoubtedly one of the best filmmakers of our time.

Next on the AFI list: Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf

AFI #69: Tootsie

Posted on by Len

One way to tell if some of the films on the AFI list hold up is if Connor enjoys them. A film that translates well across generations surely must be a worthy film. Given that, 1982′s  Tootsie definitely belongs on the AFI list.

Tootsie is a funny film that doesn’t rely on the silliness of Dustin Hoffman in drag to get laughs but rather provides its laughs through the brilliant writing of Larry Gelbart and others. Sure, Hoffman is not exactly an attractive woman, and there are a few moments of physical humor thrown in because it’s always funny when a man tries to walk in heels, but the dialogue makes this film so amazing. Here’s an example of my favorite rant by out-of-work actor Michael Dorsey:

Michael Dorsey: Are you saying that nobody in New York will work with me?
George Fields: No, no, that’s too limited… nobody in Hollywood wants to work with you either. I can’t even set you up for a commercial. You played a *tomato* for 30 seconds – they went a half a day over schedule because you wouldn’t sit down.
Michael Dorsey: Of course. It was illogical.
George Fields: YOU WERE A TOMATO. A tomato doesn’t have logic. A tomato can’t move.
Michael Dorsey: That’s what I said. So if he can’t move, how’s he gonna sit down, George? I was a stand-up tomato: a juicy, sexy, beefsteak tomato. Nobody does vegetables like me. I did an evening of vegetables off-Broadway. I did the best tomato, the best cucumber… I did an endive salad that knocked the critics on their ass.

A juicy, sexy beefsteak tomato! And some of the best lines are left to Michael’s playwright roommate Jeff, played deadpan by Bill Murray. Teri Garr is classic, and Charles Durning is great as Jessica Lange’s smitten dad. And Dabney Coleman is perfect as the chauvinistic soap director. Jessica Lange was just ok, but somehow she managed to get an Academy Award for best supporting actress. You gotta feel for Dustin Hoffman being nominated against Ben Kingsley for Gandhi — he never had a chance. Gandhi also rightfully beat Tootsie for best picture.

I can’t provide praise for Tootsie though without saying something about director Sydney Pollack, who not only directed the film but acted in it as well, stealing some scenes as agent George Fields. Pollack was a great director who along with Tootsie is well known for directing Absence of Malice, Out of Africa, The Way We Were, The Firm and many more. Pollack liked to act as well and over his career he had some memorable roles, none better than George Fields. He made some cameos in Entourage, The Sopranos, Michael Clayton, Husbands and Wives, and many more. The guy was a Renaissance man and we lost him too young.

Next Up: Unforgiven