ChristophCinema Reviews

Scream 4 (2011)

Takes the fun out of the genre

[5/10 · 21 June 2013]

I think it's no news to anyone that the horror genre has been slightly lacking in recent years. All we see is sequels, prequels, and remakes anymore, and fans are sick of it. Thank God there's movies like Scream 4 around to remind us how terrible modern day horror films really are. Now, the first Scream was a pretty clever horror flick. A slasher movie where the main characters know the rules and clichés of past slasher movies. It's no wonder people call this "the film that brought an end to the slasher genre". Then part 2 came out, and I really enjoyed that one too, maybe even more than the original. Then the 3rd one came out, and we thought, "This is getting kind of old". Then, like most franchises of the 80s and 90s, we got the delayed sequel, Scream 4 (or Scre4m for those who are impressed when the sequel number is fused with the title), which people should be calling "the film that brought an end to the horror genre in general". I thought that this was a very entertaining movie, and I only watched it because I knew it was going to be dumb, but my God, there is so much this movie gets wrong.

First of all, I'd like to say that I didn't hate this movie, I found it pretty entertaining, and there are definitely worse horror movies out these days, I just want to point out what's wrong with this film, because it belongs to a famous franchise.

First of all, I immediately lose interest from the opening scene. Phone call, "Who is this?", "What's your favorite scary movie?", stab stab. But there's a twist; it's all just a movie. Then one of the people watching the movie stabs the other one in another twist. But oh no, it's two girls watching two girls watching two girls get murdered. It's a movie within a movie within the movie. Next, the killer comes in and kills the girls, but why should we care. All the excitement was already faked out twice, so who cares if these two girls we don't even know get killed in forgettable ways? Moving on.

One major flaw this movie has is that it's just predictable and forgettable. After the opening scene, I had this movie figured out. I knew exactly what was going to happen, and I could even predict what some of the characters were going to say next. Also, there is not one memorable kill in this movie. Say what you want about the "Nightmare on Elm Street" and "Friday the 13th" franchises, but at least they make their kills different from the previous films. I get it; it's making fun of slasher flicks. Well in slasher flicks, the killers usually use more than a knife. It takes all the fun out of the genre, and it gets old real fast.

The main thing I hate about this film is how pretentious it is. It's big on bashing remakes and reboots, and it acts like it's this groundbreaking, intelligent, post-modernism horror film with something to say, when really, it's just all the same crap we've seen before. This film acts as both a sequel and a remake, but this movie doesn't really add anything new. You've got Sidney, the friends, the expendables, the family, the press, the cops, the horror movie nerds, the "obvious" suspect, and the killer, add a few classic horror references and horror fake outs, and that's it. Yes, just like every other movie in this franchise. Even the "climax" is a rip-off of the first film, and it comes off as lazy rather than clever.

And possibly the worst thing about this film is the killer's motivation. I know I'm spoiling it, but I have to say something about this. First off, there are two killers, and their reasons for killing is probably the stupidest in the whole franchise. The one guy wanted one of the victims to "show interest in him", and the girl was jealous of Sidney's fame from her encounters in the previous films…really? That's it? That's why these people kill? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. That's not the motivation of a slasher movie villain, that's the motivation of a Scooby Doo villain. And what makes it worse it that the Scream movies are supposed to be more realistic than other slasher films. These villains aren't at all believable, and their motivations don't make them the least bit sympathetic. I would buy it if they were portrayed as mentally unstable, but no. They killed because they wanted something they could've easily gotten if they had just spoken up.

The problem with the Scream franchise is its refusal to change. The heroes never change, the fact that the killer is always someone new makes the villain very uninteresting, and the whole self awareness aspect of it all just takes the fun and charm out of all slasher films. I think the film tried to say something about how our society is obsessed with tragedy and violence, but all I got from it was, "All horror movies today suck, and audiences are too stupid to see that". Only one problem Scream 4…that's exactly what you are. It's a cliché, unoriginal, bad (yet still enjoyable) horror movie talking down to other cliché, unoriginal, bad horror movies.

Detour (1945)

"On the road again....."

[8/10 · 19 December 2012]

Detour in another one of those movies that I didn't expect much from, but it really surprised me. Usually with b-movies from the 1940s, they're really not that good. The sound is usually bad, the picture is kind of faded, and the story usually sucks; but Detour is a very well done movie, and shouldn't be overlooked. The movie has a great story (and I won't spoil it), and the actors do a great job, but the movie does have flaws. For one, it's very short. I actually wished it were longer because I was enjoying it so much (that's not really a flaw). Also, it is very low budget, so the sound and picture is far from perfect. Another thing is the narration. In the movie, the main character is narrating in his head. I actually find that very odd. I mean, in Double Indemnity, the main character narrates while confessing what he did, and in Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the man is telling his story to the police. In this movie, he's kind of just talking to himself, but he talks as if he is talking to someone. Now what about the movies strengths? For one, the main character is very likable. It's cool seeing what he's like in the start of the movie, and how the events that happen change him through the course of the movie. Second, I like the personality given to the female lead. Usually the leading ladies in this genre are smooth, sexy, and mysterious; in this movie, she's just an awful person. She isn't very beautiful, she's very bitter, and you just want her to get what's coming to her. It's funny, with a few changes to the script, this movie could've been a romantic comedy road trip movie. I also very much enjoy the story, how one little mistake can spiral out of control and turn into such a mess. Detour is a very good movie. It may be short, it may be low budget, and it may be flawed, but for a 1940s b movie, it's very well done.

The Big Combo (1955)

Should not be overlooked

[8/10 · 19 December 2012]

The Big Combo is one of those film noirs that's built on clichés. By 1955, everything in the genre had been done, so what does The Big Combo have to offer that sets it apart from the other movies of its kind? It has the look of every other film noir, it has the pacing of every other film noir, it has the characters of every other film noir; so what makes this one so special? I would have to say the hero/villain relationship. Out of all the film noirs out there, this movie has the best rivalry between protagonist and antagonist I've ever seen. The film has all the genre clichés, but the outstanding performances by Cornel Wilde and Richard Conte really make this movie so much stronger. Lt. Diamond is a great character, and very complex. I love how he's a good cop, but at times he lets his emotions get the better of him. I like Diamond a lot, but it's Mr. Brown who steals the show (for me). He's just a perfect villain. It's one of those characters that you love and hate at the same time. I love how suave he is, I love how egotistical he is, I love evil he is and how much he loves it; he's just an amazing character. I really love villains that are extremely full of themselves. Watching these two play cat and mouse with each other is the highlight of the film. One's good, and one's evil; but they go above and beyond the average hero and villain. The Big Combo really surprised me. At first I thought it was going to be an average detective movie, but then it really picked up and through a lot of curveballs. It got much darker than I expected, and it ended up actually being unpredictable. And even though the film is built on clichés, it's still a great movie. Some of the shots are just amazing (especially the last one), and the side characters are great and memorable as well. This is a very underrated film, and I think it should be more well known. It may be cliché, but it sure is awesome.

Psycho (1960)

Best Horror Movie of All Time

[10/10 · 18 December 2012]

I don't have much to say about Psycho because it's already so well known, and I'll probably ruin it for those who haven't seen it; so I'll keep this brief. Psycho is probably the greatest horror movie of all time. It broke new grounds in film violence with its famous shower scene, and launched the slasher genre. No more atomic age, bring on the psychopaths. Now, this movie isn't like The Exorcist or The Shining, where you'll have nightmares over it; but unlike those movies, this movie keeps you on edge constantly. The whole time, there's just this nervous energy, and you never know what to expect. Hitchcock always believed that there's no terror in the bang, just in the anticipation of it. There are these long scenes that just have you biting your nails the whole time. By the end of the movie, you'll be wondering what happened to your fingers. The movie doesn't rely on cheap horror movie gimmicks. It's not gory, it doesn't use jump scares; the horror lies in the dialogue, the performances, the cinematography, the lighting, the music, and the story. This isn't the scariest movie I've ever seen, but I still believe it's the greatest horror movie of all time. Why? Because it's the classiest the genre has to offer. Today, the horror genre is so dumbed down, and so unoriginal, that it's nice to look back and see that the horror genre can be done well, and respected for something other than blood and nudity. Psycho is one of the greatest, most suspenseful, most controversial films of all time, and I love it. Hitchcock really knows how to bring on the scares.

Annie Hall (1977)

The ending always makes me cry

[10/10 · 18 December 2012]

I love Woody Allen. He's one of my all time favorite filmmakers, and one of my main influences. What I love about Woody Allen's films is that they're so simple that they're ingenious. Annie Hall is the prime example of that. The film is simply about the relationship between Alvy Singer and Annie Hall, and that's pretty much it. But here's where Annie Hall differs from other romances; it goes into great detail about relationships in general. This movie gets how relationships work down perfectly, and captures every little detail. Any one who's been in a relationship can relate to what happens in this movie. It's definitely not 100% realistic. This movie bridges together Allen's early, over the top, cartoony films, and his later, more dramatic, realistic films. Which is why a lot of people say this will always be his best movie. The film has a realistic tone and setting, but there are a few moments that contrast perfectly with the realness of it. Woody Allen talks to the camera, he becomes a cartoon character, the characters enter flashbacks, and at one point, there are subtitles that show what the characters are thinking while they're talking to each other. It's moments like that that make this movie so fun to watch, and Woody Allen's classic social commentary dialogue really brings up some good points about love and relationships. I also love how this movie's paced. It's only an hour and a half long, but it gets so much done in so little time. A whole relationship condensed into a little over 90 minutes, and it's still one of the greatest on screen romances of all time.

Do the Right Thing (1989)

Hard to watch, but a must see

[8/10 · 18 December 2012]

Do the Right Thing is one of the most obnoxious movies I've ever seen. The cinematography is extremely surreal, the characters are very over the top, and there isn't much of a story. But who says that's a bad thing? First of all, I love the cinematography in this movie. It's very unique, and really puts you in the madness of this film's world. A lot of the time, it feels like a music video, and it keeps you on edge throughout the whole thing. Second of all, I love that the characters are over the top. Like I just said, it really puts you into this mad world. Most of the characters are obnoxious, a lot of the characters are racist, and a lot of the characters aren't really likable; but then again, so are most of the people on Earth. Third, there isn't much of a story, but then again, why should there be? This is another one of those movies where it's all about the experience. This movie doesn't have a three-act structure. We're not rooting for anyone, we're not taking sides; we're just sitting back and letting the message sink in. What I love about this movie is how it doesn't tell the audience how to feel. It doesn't force people to take sides. It just presents you with racism, and lets you decide how to feel about it for yourself. I've heard people say they hate this film because the characters are unlikable and mostly racist…Hi, welcome to planet Earth. Can I take your coat? Um, hello, these are real issues people. Racism is real. Police brutality is real. Riots are real. You can't hate this movie just because you don't like being shown what the world is really like. I'm not saying you have to like this movie; but I can't stand when people completely miss the point of a movie. Of course there's racism in the movie. It's a Spike Lee movie. I'm not really big into Spike Lee movies, but I appreciate what he puts into his movies. He's not forcing us to identify with or like these characters. He's not saying, "Whites on this side, blacks on this side; let the games begin". He's just letting us know that stuff like this happens everyday, and it could happen at anytime and anywhere. It's a very hard film to watch, but that's what makes it so memorable. I can't even think of another movie about racism like this. Oh well, bottom line; I think this is a good movie, and addresses the issue of race in a very interesting way. I would say this movie is for everyone, so you can hate this movie if you want; just don't hate it for stupid reasons.

Taxi Driver (1976)

Dark, disturbing, and bloody...Just the way I like it!

[9/10 · 18 December 2012]

Taxi Driver is just an awesome movie. I can't really think of what else to say about it. It's an awesome movie, and everyone knows it. But what makes it so awesome? Well for me, there are a lot of things. First of all, Robert De Niro is always awesome. This was the movie that really kicked off his career, and he's what makes this movie. Second of all, I love how dark and gritty this movie is. I know there were movies in the late 60s and early 70s that were really violent, but Taxi Driver took it to the next level with its gritty cinematography, realistic setting, and amazing performances. This movie feels so real, that it's actually kind of disturbing. Just like Midnight Cowboy, this is an ugly movie, but that's where a lot the appeal comes from. Third, I love low budget movies that become iconic. It doesn't have the perfection and class of The Godfather movies, but that's what makes it so effective. The low budget look and ugly tone make the movie seem all too real, and not to far off from reality. It's actually very inspiring for anyone who wants to become a filmmaker. Fourth, it was one of the first movies to show the hardships veterans of the Vietnam War had trying to fit back into society (the dark tone of the movie emphasizes how tragic a thing it is for soldiers who have returned home). Soldiers who fought in the Vietnam War were often protested, so I'm glad this movie addressed how difficult it really is for them. Taxi Driver is just an all around great movie. It may be dark, it may be bloody, it may be a little too "real" for some people, and it may have almost gotten President Reagan killed; but if you're looking for a movie that defines awesome, then Taxi Driver is that movie.

The Graduate (1967)

"Well, I want you to know how much I appreciate this. Really"

[10/10 · 18 December 2012]

The Graduate is one of my all time favorite movies. I saw this movie for the first time in high school, and I've always just been drawn to it for some reason. Actually, the first time I saw it, I was really confused, but I still loved this movie. At the time, I never watched a movie like it. The subtle comedy was something I never saw before, the story through a lot of curve balls my way, and it's somewhat depressing; but this movie just has this hypnotic effect on me. Now that I'm older, I can see why I love this movie so much. I'm Benjamin Braddock. Never before have I related to a movie character so much. If you want to know what I was like in high school, just watch Dustin Hoffman's performance in this movie. I know exactly what he's going through. Feeling alone as the future approaches faster and faster, hoping all the answers will come fast and easy, making decisions without thinking of the consequences, and having a new outlook on life; this character is so identifiable, that it's scary. I also love the music and the cinematography. They complement each other perfectly. They really enhance the mood of the film, and make it feel so much more real. The movie also has a lot of awkward moments. I've seen this movie so many times, but no matter how many times I see it, those awkward moments are still just as uncomfortable. And why shouldn't they be? The film deals with a very heavy, very real, and very uncomfortable subject, so those scenes are very necessary. The scenes may be awkward, but hey, so is life. It's a great movie, and I really can't think of another movie like it. It has a great, subtle, dark sense of humor; it has very heavy emotions, the main character is great, the side characters are great as well, and it takes a lot of risks. It's another one of those movies from the late 60s that definitely broke new ground, and paved the way for modern day cinema. It may not appeal to everyone, and its unique style may throw a lot of people off, but to me, this is one of the greatest movies of all time, and it'll always be one of my favorites.

Easy Rider (1969)

Get Your Motor Runnin'

[9/10 · 18 December 2012]

Easy Rider is another one of those movies that changed a lot in the late 60s. It's definitely a movie that's more of an experience, rather than a traditional story. It's basically a road trip movie, but it doesn't have the traditional three-act structure. It was very anti establishment, and must have been very shocking for the time. Making the main characters hippie bikers, showing nudity, and having people tripping out in a cemetery is pretty hard-core, but that's what makes this movie so great. It's one of those movies that needed to be made, and it brings up a lot of thought provoking things about freedom, the American Dream, and society. It's a movie that's fun to watch, but at the same time also very hard to watch. What keeps you watching are the characters. Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper, and a very young Jack Nicholson are all amazing, and after a while, you feel like you're on the road with them. The film doesn't glorify the biker lifestyle, but it doesn't portray them as horrible people. The film isn't saying that this is how you should be; it's saying you should be whoever you want to be. One of my favorite quotes from the movie is, "'All we represent to them, man, is somebody who needs a hair cut'. 'What you represent to them is freedom'". And the ending is another one of those endings that's very unsettling, but it makes the message of the movie so much stronger, and leaves a bigger impact on the audience. Easy Rider is a great movie, and definitely one of the most necessary movies of all time. It's so different from any other movie that came out at the time, and just watching it makes you feel rebellious. I don't think it's a movie for everyone, but I think most people can get behind what this movie is saying.

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967)

Guess Who's Writing Another Movie Review

[10/10 · 18 December 2012]

To me, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner is one of those movies that stand between Classic Hollywood and New Hollywood. It has a cheesy, lighthearted tone to it, but it also broke new grounds for the modern age of cinema. Before this, movies about race were much darker. You had The Intruder (1962), To Kill a Mockingbird (1962), and In the Heat of the Night (1967); which are all amazing movies, but a little dark for the everyday moviegoer. Guess Who's Coming to Dinner deals with the issue of race, but it does it in a way that isn't intimidating, and it doesn't force the message on the audience. It's a lovable movie, and it has an amazing cast. Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn are amazing as the parents. These are two of my favorite actors of all time, and just like Bringing Up Baby, there's just a grand presence to seeing two legends work off each other. Sidney Poitier is perfect as the daughter's boyfriend; and I love how he's portrayed as the perfect man, but at the same time, he has that "I can explain" look for most of the movie. Katharine Houghton is amazing as the daughter. She's so energized, and so naive that it's hard not to love this character. One thing I really like about this movie is how race neutral it is. The parents aren't racist, they're just afraid of how their children will be treated in society; which is something I think a lot of people at the time can relate to. The times were changing, and this was the perfect movie to address this issue. It's funny, it's dramatic, it's touching, and it's smart; it's just an all around great movie. It may be corny to some people, but to me, it's a timeless movie that still holds up to this day. It's just one of those movies that brings a smile to my face, and reminds me of the important role movies play in all our lives.

The Killing (1956)

Good Ol' Kubrick

[7/10 · 18 December 2012]

Stanley Kubrick is one of the greatest directors of all time. He's made some of the greatest, thought provoking, controversial films of all time, and his style is out of this world. But before The Shining, before A Clockwork Orange, before 2001, before Dr. Strangelove, even before Spartacus, there was The Killing. It's a very good movie, but it's not one of Kubrick's best; and I was sort of expecting that. Rarely is a director's first movie his best, and even though it has some flaws, it's still a great movie. One problem I have with this movie is the unnecessary narration. I know that wasn't Kubrick's idea, but it's bad, and it's noticeable. It's actually pretty insulting to the audience's intelligence. I think Kubrick trusted his audience to be smart enough to follow the film, and I wish they would just remove it from the film. Another thing is that the movie feels very lopsided. The first half isn't bad, but the second half is definitely stronger. We get a lot of dialogue for the first half, and then we see the action in the second half. It's very well written, and it does keep my interest, but the scale is totally tipped. It's similar to Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill movies. The first movie is non-stop action and wildly entertaining, and the second movie has very minimal action, and is mostly talking. Like I said, I love dialogue (especially when it's well written), but I wish it was more balanced with the action. So what's good about this movie? Well, the characters are great. You can tell Tarantino took a lot of inspiration from this movie when he made Reservoir Dogs. It's one of the first instances where the main characters are bad guys, they're very mean spirited, but you cheer for them anyway. Also, the ending is unique for the time. Just like I Am a Fugitive From a Chain Gang, the ending is just very haunting, and leaves you with a dark feeling. I think the best thing about this movie is the cinematography. Kubrick is known for his incredible cinematography, and it's really cool to see where it all started. You can just see the future genius that lies within. The Killing isn't a perfect movie, but it's still really good. For a low budget crime drama from the 1950s, it's amazing. And even though it's so low budget, you can still see that Kubrick style slowly growing. It may not be one of his best, and it does have its flaws, but it's still an engaging, dark, intelligent movie.

Singin' in the Rain (1952)

I can't stop smiling,,,Help!

[10/10 · 6 December 2012]

Singin' in the Rain is one of those movies I think of when I think "classic". I have a question; who can hate this movie? Just like Wizard of Oz, this movie is so full of life, so colorful, so upbeat, so happy, what's not to like? The songs are great, the characters are great, the art direction is great, everything is just great. This movie brings such a big smile to my face that I have to go to a surgeon to fix it. If you're ever feeling down, Singin' in the Rain is the perfect movie to watch. I love the story, and how it tells of the tragic time when movies went to sound and a lot of actors couldn't make the transition. It's like The Artist, but much happier. The acting is typical 1950s musical acting, and there's a lot of corniness to the whole thing, but that's what makes it hold up so well today. Just like Wizard of Oz, this is a movie most people see at a young age, and grow up loving it. It doesn't seem realistic, but this is classic Hollywood. We don't watch movies to see our own lives, we watch movies because they're the opposite of our terrible reality, and they allow us to escape for a short time. It may be a little silly at times, but it just shows how much fun making movies can be. Singin' in the Rain is a classic, and one of the greatest films of all time. It really is one of the most lovable classics in American cinema.

Mildred Pierce (1945)

She Don't Need No Man

[9/10 · 6 December 2012]

Mildred Pierce is just an amazing movie. To me, it's one of the movies that define the 1940s. The cinematography is dark and mesmerizing, and the whole story being told in flashback is very engaging. I can't think of another film noir at the time like it. What makes this movie so great is the characters. This is one of the best casts I've ever seen in a movie. The characters are so well written, so different, and so complex, that the emotions just leap off the screen. There are a lot of great characters, but the best performances come from Joan Crawford and Eve Arden. Eve Arden is amazing as Mildred Pierce's greedy daughter. She's such a horrible person, but that's what makes her so interesting. Joan Crawford is great as the title character, giving possibly the greatest female performance of all time. She's intelligent, she's hard working, she's loving, she makes her own decisions, and that's a breath of fresh air. She's a strong female character, but she doesn't come off like she's trying to prove something to men. That's a problem a lot writers have to this day; not being able to make a strong female character. Either they're horribly stereotyped, or they're only strong to prove a point to men. It's very rare to see a strong female lead that's just doing what she does naturally. I think the best thing about this movie is the relationships the characters all share. Like I said earlier, the characters are all very complex, and their on screen relationships feel all too real. You really get to know these characters, and you know where each of them is coming from. Some of them are kind of terrible people, but you understand why. In the end, Joan Crawford defends her horrible daughter, and you wonder why; but then you realize if you were in her position, and you had the same experiences as her, you'd do the same. It really is one of the greatest set of characters of all time, and great characters make a great movie.

North by Northwest (1959)

A fun film for everyone

[10/10 · 26 October 2012]

When I was a kid, I was a huge Alfred Hitchcock fan. Even though most of his films were complex and I didn't understand a lot of the big words the actors were using, I just always loved watching them. As a child, I wasn't into older movies. I loved the classic Disney movies, I loved the Universal monster movies, but anything else, I didn't care for. It wasn't until I was about 12 that I began getting into all the classics. This is when my obsession with Hitchcock films began, and continued for years to come. It's hard to pick a favorite film of his because he's made so many classics, but I'm going to ultimately say that North by Northwest is my favorite. Why? Well there are many reasons. First of all the characters are just classic Hitchcock. When I was a kid, I really looked up to Cary Grant's character. I love how he comes off as so smooth, yet so over his head. It's been said that Grant's performance had a great influence on the character, James Bond, and I'm not surprised. Cary Grant just steals the show here. Just the way he talks, and the way he handles things, you believe that something like this would happen to him. The villains are kind of cliché, but that's what makes them so great. And of course, there's Eva Marie Saint as the beautiful female lead. Hitchcock's female characters were always awesome, because on the surface, they just seemed like a pretty face, but as the films unravel, we find out there's a lot more to them. You never know what to expect with these women, and that's what makes them so addicting. The last thing I must mention about this movie is how big it is. Every Hitchcock film has a certain look to it. They're all visually appealing (which is one of the reasons I liked them so much as a kid). Vertigo has a surreal, dream like world. Rear Window has an enclosed, claustrophobic world. North by Northwest just has this grand scope. From the city, to the fields in the middle of nowhere, to Mount Rushmore, this film just has a grand look to it, and goes perfectly with its grand story. Like I said, North by Northwest is just a fun movie. With its great characters, great story, great comedy, great suspense, and great visuals, it feels just like a comic book. I think this is a movie that anyone can get into. If you've never seen a Hitchcock film, North by Northwest is a good place to start (it's what got me into Hitchcock). And one last thing; this movie has my favorite Hitchcock cameo. That is all.

Citizen Kane (1941)

I tried hating this movie

[10/10 · 19 October 2012]

When I first saw Citizen Kane, I hated it. Why? Because it was called The Greatest American Film of All Time. The first time I saw it, I was 12 years old, and I didn't even care about the movie. I just watched the movie and pointed out all the reasons why this movie sucked. To me, Citizen Kane was The Worst American Film of All Time. Then I saw the film again when I was like 16, and it was a little better. I then saw it the following year, and then I finally understood why it was called the greatest. After that third viewing, I finally had that appreciation for it that most film buffs have. There are many things that make this film the greatest. First of all, the cinematography is jaw dropping. This movie is so beautiful to look at; it almost brings a tear to my eye. The shadows, the angles, the camera movements, everything is just perfect. This may be the main reason why this film is considered to be the best, but there are other reasons too. Another great thing is the acting. This isn't typical 1940s acting; this is stuff that could still win Oscars today. The acting is so good, and the writing is so realistic, that it keeps you hooked from beginning to end. In fact, that's what made me love this movie. The story of Charles Foster Kane is just fascinating, and it's really interesting to see his story told through various flashbacks. The last thing that makes this movie so incredible is the impact it had. When this movie came out, it didn't do too well. In fact, it was like a cult movie years after its release. The film was based on the life of William Randolph Hearst, and he wasn't too pleased with what Welles was showing about his life (like his affair). Hearst wanted to have every print of this film destroyed, but Welles fought for it, and the rest is history. This really pushed the boundaries of freedom in cinema, and just knowing that makes it so much better. What I find very remarkable about this movie is legendary filmmaker, Orson Welles. This was his first movie, he was only 26 years old, and he wrote, directed, and starred in it. The man was a genius, and a true inspiration. Even if you don't want to admit this is the best movie ever made, that's fine. Even if you don't think it's the best, I don't think you can say it's a bad movie. Don't look at it as the best movie, just look at it as a movie, and maybe you'll appreciate it more. Greatest Movie of All Time? Yeah, it's kind of hard not to like it?

The Women (1939)

"Girls just wanna have fun"

[8/10 · 17 October 2012]

Now here's a movie that surprised me. In the Golden Age of Hollywood, most of what you see is a man's, man's, man's, man's world. Men were the detectives; women were the secretaries. Men were the explorers; women were damsels in distress. Well if you're tired of the sausage fest that is early Hollywood, here's a movie for the ladies. The Women is the first movie to have an all female cast. Literally, every character is female (maybe some of the animals were males, but I neglected to check), which is pretty groundbreaking in it's own right. Now even though it's an all female cast, the characters in this movie don't really break free of the Hollywood female stereotype; which may not please too many feminists. But to me, that's what makes this movie so fascinating. If you ask you grandmother what life for women was like in the post depression, pre WWII era, she'd probably tell you something like this movie. Yes, the women just talk about men and fashion, but like I often say, it's the 1930s; what do you expect? In this time period, American women were basically not allowed to have interesting lives. Men made money; women stayed home and counted it. I think what makes this movie really unique is that it's not really telling a story (even though it is), but rather showing the female culture of the time period. And you know what? That's really interesting. And these aren't just women, these are high society women. And the writing is so well done, that you actually care about these people who probably wouldn't even look at you. It shows that people of high social status live glamorous lives, but also very lonely lives. This is a world where everybody talks about everybody, and social status is the most important thing. I think this is exemplified perfectly when the one character says if a man divorces a woman, her reputation is destroyed. But if a woman divorces her husband, than she is well respected. It just shows how important social class was back then, and how reputations were seen as more important than love. This is just a great movie, and a great study of the culture. I love (most of) the characters, I love the story, and I even love that pointless color sequence in the middle of the movie. The only flaws I find with this movie is sometimes the dialogue moves to fast, and there are so many characters, that I found myself lost a few times watching this movie. But overall, it's a very interesting, funny, and intelligent movie.

The Maltese Falcon (1941)

"The stuff dreams are made of"

[10/10 · 17 October 2012]

I'm just going to say this right now; I love film noir. It's always been one of my favorite genres for it's stylish cinematography, engaging stories, and overall dark tone. It's really fascinating seeing how this genre has evolved over the decades, and how they're just as big as they were years ago. But with all the great film noirs out there, I consider The Maltese Falcon the trendsetter of this genre. I don't want to say too much about this film, because knowing me; I'd probably give everything away. So I'll just keep it simple. Well it's everything I just described that makes this genre great. It has great cinematography, great atmosphere, great story, and great characters. It's just so classic it already seems like a cliché. This is one of Humphrey Bogart's best roles; he's one of the main reasons this movie is so great. He keeps it entertaining with his great performance; and I consider it his second best role (Casablanca being the best). Another reason I love this film is the villains. Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, and Sydney Greenstreet as the villains are just classic bad guys, and I think they're equally as good as Bogart. Like I said, this is just a classic detective story; and it's great seeing these classic staples of the Golden Age of Hollywood. I love these kinds of movies for the cinematography, and watching the story unravel. I do think there are better mystery movies out there, but The Maltese Falcon is absolute Hollywood perfection. And much like the falcon statue itself, "it's the stuff dreams are made of".

Casablanca (1942)

11 out of 10 Stars

[10/10 · 16 October 2012]

What can you say about Casablanca? I'm serious. What can be said about it? It's one of the greatest films of all time and everybody already knows it. This movie is so perfect, that it actually brings tears to my eyes. The acting, the characters, the story, the quotes, the humor, the drama, the atmosphere; everything is just perfect. This is what classics are made of. Picking my favorite thing about this movie is almost impossible because everything goes together hand in hand. But if I had to pick 2 things that make this movie great, it would have to be the two main characters, and the world the movie transports you to. First of all, the two leads. Humphrey Bogart is the man. He's always the man. I've never seen a movie where he wasn't the man. Why is he considered the "Greatest Actor of All Time"? Because he's Humphrey Bogart, that's why. I think Humphrey Bogart perfected the concept of an "imperfect hero". From the very beginning, you see that people would die for him, but he wouldn't do the same. He claims to be neutral, but you're never sure which side he's really on. He's so calm and mysterious, but his decisions are based mostly on his unpredictable emotions. He has such a presence to him, but you're constantly wondering if he'll do the right thing in the end. Ingrid Bergman is also amazing playing opposite of Humphrey Bogart. Just like Bogart, she is very mysterious, and you want to know more about her. She also goes above and beyond the typical 1940s female performance. She gets so into the role, it may actually be the most emotional performance I've ever seen from this time period. These two are just perfect together. I love how most of the movie, we're left in the dark about their relationship. All we know is that these two knew each other at one point, and that they once had something. I love how most of the backstory can be seen in the faces of the two main actors. The movie doesn't even need that flashback scene, because you can see how important these two are to each other just by looking at their faces. The flashback scene is great, but I think it would've been cooler if the whole movie, we didn't know their history together. The last thing that I love about this movie is the world. This movie is classic Hollywood fantasy world, and it sure knows how to suck you right in. This isn't real life, it's the movie world; and that's what makes this movie so classic. Even though it has that 1940s acting, and many of the clichés of the time, it still remains timeless. It's all fun, from beginning to end. You may feel like you're watching a movie, but that's just because you are. This is what movies are all about. They're not about showing us what life is really like; they're about letting us escape to a world where life is more interesting. Like I said, this movie just defines "classic". The characters are unforgettable, the scenes are so memorized, and the quotes are so recognizable (it's no wonder this film may be the most referenced/spoofed/quoted film of all time). This film is so perfect, it gets better and better each time I see it. It's so classic; it kind of hurts. So bottom line….it's alright.

Stagecoach (1939)

"I know all I wanna know"

[10/10 · 15 October 2012]

In one of my previous reviews, I said that Rio Bravo was the best John Wayne movie in my opinion. I've just always thought that it held up the best over the years with its engaging story, great characters, and genuine suspense. But now, my previous statement is being tested, because I've just been reminded what an amazing classic Stagecoach is. I saw this movie when I was a kid, and always seemed to dismiss it amongst other John Wayne movies. It was probably because it was in black and white (I watched a lot of black and white films when I was a kid, but I still preferred John Wayne's colored films) and most of it was dialogue. It wasn't until I was older that I realized how great a movie this is. As a kid, I was very big into action, but now as an adult, I'm much more into good characters and good writing. And that's what Stagecoach is all about. We spend so much time with these characters, and the writing is so good that you feel like you're there with them. Now this movie is very light on action, but I think that's what makes it stick out from other westerns. It's not about revenge, it's not about saving the girl, and it's not about protecting a small town. It's about the characters we meet, and how the journey they take changes them. The characters we're given are unforgettable. Some may be more flat than others, but the whole cast is just great. I've always loved movies that put character and writing in front of everything else. One of my favorite films of all time is 12 Angry Men, because even though it's non-stop dialogue and takes place in one room for an hour and a half, it has great memorable characters, great writing, and it's great watching these characters work of each other. And that's what makes Stagecoach so great; the interactions between the characters. You got funny characters, serious characters, nice characters, mean characters, over the top characters, and mysterious characters. These characters are all completely different, and that's what keeps it interesting. The whole cast is great, but it's the young John Wayne who steals the show. He just has this presence to him, and you can see why he's one of the greatest movie stars of all time. Now like many classic films, the only flaws in the film are the ones that are just a product of their time. One thing I can't stand is when people watch a classic movie, and take offense to every little out dated thing. Yes, the women faint and ride off with the man, the Mexican characters eat nothing but beans, and the Native Americans are bloodthirsty savages. But it was the 1930s, what do you expect? America just got over the Great Depression and there was a war overseas. Movies like this were made to boost the spirits of the American people. It was a dark time, and the people wanted to see a brave American hero rise up against their oldest enemy, which at the time were the Native Americans. Yes, today these things seem very outdated and offensive, but it's what the people needed. If you want to whine and complain about every "product of the time" moment, and make an argument about why today's racism is so much better than the racism of yesteryear, then go right ahead. But if you can appreciate the film for the time it was made, and realize how important it was to audiences, then you truly know what cinema is all about. Stagecoach is one of the Golden Age classics; don't let the dated elements blind you from how great this movie really is.

Dracula (1931)

Bats all folks!

[8/10 · 5 October 2012]

Just like "Frankenstein" (1931), Tod Browning's "Dracula" from 1931 is often criticized for not being faithful to the book. And just like "Frankenstein", fans could care less. Once again, this is a movie that is so classic, and so iconic, that it doesn't matter if it does justice to the book or not. Just like how Boris Karloff set the popular image of Frankenstein's monster, Bela Lugosi set the popular image of Dracula. His clothing, his haunting stare, his rhythmic voice, Bela Lugosi is Dracula. This movie also has one of my favorite movie quotes of all time: "Listen to them. Children of the night. What music they make". Now since this movie was the first sound horror movie (well technically it was "The Cat Creeps", but that film is lost), there isn't much sound other than dialogue. The lack of a soundtrack may bother people, but to me, that just makes the movie much more haunting. Even though I love this movie, I still know it has its fair share of flaws. A lot of the side characters aren't very memorable, and the ending is kind of rushed, but those flaws don't really bother me. For the first sound horror movie, it's still great. I love the over the top acting. I love the fake bats. I love the Gothic sets. I love classic monster movies like this. This movie may not be for everyone, and I would have to admit that there are better vampire movies out there ("Nosferatu", "Let the Right One In", the Hammer "Dracula" series, and "Spanish Dracula"), but this is a must see for any classic horror buff. Bela Lugosi and Dwight Frye steal the show with their haunting and over the top performances, but the rest of the cast is still very good. I don't think this movie is a good as "Frankenstein" (1931), but it is still one of the most iconic and most innovative horror flicks of all time. It may be flawed, but that's OK with me. I understand the time it was made and how there were limits on what they could do with their budget, so I think it should not be overlooked. There may be vampires in it, but this film definitely does not suck!

Frankenstein (1931)

Wait, there's a book?

[10/10 · 5 October 2012]

One of my least favorite complaints about movies is "it's not accurate to the book". I hate when people say that because that's not being fair. Books and film are two completely different forms of media. Of course it's not going to be 100% accurate to the book, unlike a book, a film has dozens of people working on it, and it has to be made to fit the film format. A movie based on a book doesn't need to be 100% accurate to be good, and I think James Whale's "Frankenstein" from 1931 is the perfect example of that. It does baffle me that people complain that this particular movie had very little to do with original Mary Shelly novel, because the original book is one of the darkest, most jaw dropping story ever written. Besides, they made a more accurate version in the 90s, and look how that turned out. Anyway, back to the movie. From beginning to end, this movie is just fun. The opening with the guy coming out and warning the audience that this movie might be too scary for some people, that just sets the tone for what you're about to watch. Every scene in this movie is just classic. There's Dr. Frankenstein and Fritz digging up bodies in the graveyard, the laboratory scenes, the little girl by the pond, the angry villagers, and so on. As a kid, I saw most of these scenes for the first time parodied in Saturday morning cartoons; and it's really cool seeing where it all began. Even if you think this movie sucks for being unfaithful to the book, this is the classic "Frankenstein". This is what people think about when they hear the title. Sure, there can be other versions, but they'll never be as iconic as this one. When you hear "Frankenstein's monster", do you think of Boris Karloff or Robert De Niro? Obviously you think of the classic, with the Jack Pierce make-up. To me, there will never be a Frankenstein to match this one. It's just so classic, so creepy, so entertaining, that it's impossible not to enjoy. Who cares if it doesn't do the book justice? The movie was made, and it has become so iconic that people are starting to accept it as the classic it is. P.S. This applies to the first three "Frankenstein" movies by universal. To me, "Frankenstein", "Bride of Frankenstein", and "Son of Frankenstein" are all equally good, so the sequels should definitely not be overlooked. "Frankenstein" is the most classic, "Bride of Frankenstein" has the most heart to it, and "Son of Frankenstein" is the creepiest. They're all great movies, with some underrated performances, so don't miss them if you're a fan of classic monster movies. They're movies that bring out the mad scientist in all of us. Muhahahahahahahahahahahaha…..

My Man Godfrey (1936)

Brings a tear to my eye

[10/10 · 5 October 2012]

"My Man Godfrey" is one of the most underrated classic films of all time. Yes, I'm aware it was a big hit when it came out, and I know it was nominated for several academy awards (first to be nominated for all four acting categories), so why is it constantly overlooked when it comes to classic comedies? To me, this movie did something that not a lot of screwball comedies from the 1930s could do; it gets you invested. Usually these movies are too goofy and over the top for you to take them seriously, but "My Man Godfrey" has a very mature feel to it, which makes it stick out from the bunch. It has the right amount of drama to keep us invested, and it has the right amount of laughs to keep us entertained. I can't really think of another movie from this time period that has this perfect mix of comedy and drama. A lot of that is because of the intelligent writing, but where this movie's real strength lies is in its characters. The film is great in its way of spoofing high society during the depression era with the Bullock family. This is an unforgettable cast of characters. You have the scatterbrained mother, the spoiled, mean daughter, the kinder, but more naive daughter, the blowhard father (who doesn't seem to understand his own family), the wise cracking maid, and the mother's mooching protégé. But what completes this perfects cast is the contrast of the character Godfrey. He's so laid back, and normal compared to the Bullock family that we're on his side. We're with him as he deals with this family that is so far removed from the real world, and that's why he steals the show. Now this whole cast is amazing, don't get me wrong (it wouldn't work as well if the rest of the cast didn't contrast with the main character), but the main reason to see this movie is for William Powell's performance as Godfrey. Usually in this genre, characters like Rufus T. Firefly ("Duck Soup") or Susan ("Bringing Up Baby") steal the show, but here, it's the more down to earth character who steals the show. He's just one of those characters you want to be. He's so cool, so mysterious, and you know he's always one step ahead of the other characters. He reminds me of other famous characters like Mary Poppins, or Willy Wonka, who are also very mysterious characters who leave a lasting impact on the others around them. The film is only a little over 90 minutes long, but it accomplishes a lot in that time. It feels longer than it really is (in the good way), and by the end, you'll wish it were longer. This is a great movie, and one of the great classics of the 1930s. The only flaws it probably has are the ones that only apply to the time it was made. If you can't stand the classic Hollywood stereotypes, or the over the top acting, then get the fudge out. But if you like all that stuff and you want to travel back to a time that was more carefree and fun, then this movie is a must see.

Bringing Up Baby (1938)

"I've got my head, I've lost my leopard"

[10/10 · 28 September 2012]

"Bringing Up Baby" is one of my favorite movies of all time. I saw it on TV when I was very young, and back then, I only watched it because there was a leopard in it. But as I got older, I realized the (obvious) reason why this movie is so perfect: Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn. Two of Hollywood's greatest stars of all time, combined with the brilliant writing of Howard Hawks; this movie is so classic, it's intimidating. It has all the elements of a classic screwball comedy and never lets up. I know I may be taking a risk saying this, but "Bringing Up Baby" is the greatest movie in this genre. I know people would say movies like "It Happened One Night" or "The Philadelphia Story" are better, but I'm still sticking with "Bringing Up Baby". The movie is that classic "opposites attract" story (which has been done dozens of times even up to present day comedies), and it's done with two of the most likable characters in film history. Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn work off each other perfectly in this movie. Cary Grant is the nervous, spineless stick in the mud who can't ever seem to get a break, and Katharine Hepburn is the eccentric, fast talking wild child who seems to be in control throughout the whole movie. This movie has too many great moments, too many great characters, and too many great lines to count. If you were to ask me, "What's the best moment in "Bringing Up Baby"?", I would probably respond "The first 102 minutes". The writing and acting in this movie is so funny, I could watch it a hundred times in a row and not get tired of it. The romance in this movie is really good to. It is a 1930s "I just met you a few days ago; let's get married" romance, but it is the most believable I've seen in this genre. And back in the 30s, marriages did happen like that. People were being shoved off to war every day, so some marriages did happen that fast. There's just something about these two characters that make a perfect match. Their chemistry is something that can't be explained (which is the case of a lot of romances), and that's what makes it feel so human, and that's why we want these two to end up together.

Katharine Hepburn does steal the show, but she wouldn't be able to do so if it wasn't for her working off the everyman, Cary Grant. I don't think I'm taking a risk in saying this; Katharine Hepburn is the greatest and most important actress of all time. Yes, there were big important actresses before her, but Katharine Hepburn showed that women could be just as funny, if not funnier than men in the Golden Age of Hollywood. What really makes Hepburn stick out is how she was never written as a woman, she was written as person. And not only in "Bringing Up Baby"; in "The Philadelphia Story", "His Girl Friday", and "African Queen", she's a person first, and a woman second. This was over 70 years ago, and Hollywood still can't get female characters down right. You just watch Katharine Hepburn, and you immediately want to be just as witty, just as carefree, just as nice, and just as diverse as her. There's just so much life in these characters, they leap right off the screen. Did I mention there's a leopard? Like I said, this is one of the greatest movies of all time. It has great characters, great writing, great acting, great story, great slapstick, great everything. "Bringing Up Baby" is one of those movies that is so great, I feel the need to bow down to the screen every time I watch it. We are not worthy of this film's greatness.

Scarface (1932)

Say "hello" to my 30s friend

[10/10 · 27 September 2012]

Whenever someone brings up the movie "Scarface", right away they think of the 1983 Al Pacino version. That movie has become so iconic, and so famous in pop culture with its insane violence and "Say hello to my little friend" line, that people often don't realize that it's a remake of a 1932 gangster movie. It's a shame to, because Howard Hawks' "Scarface" may be the greatest gangster film of the 1930s. Howard Hawks is one of the greatest writers in film history. He had such range, that he could write for various genres and come out so original. He's written sci-fi classics like "The Thing from Another World" (another great movie that gets overshadowed by its remake), comedies like "His Girl Friday" and "Bringing Up Baby", and westerns like "Rio Bravo (which I think is John Wayne's best film). You could just give him a genre, and he would never disappoint. "Scarface" (1932) is definitely one of those classic movies that pushed the boundaries in movie violence. It is pretty tame by today's standards, but if it wasn't for this film, the 80s version wouldn't get to be as violent. This is one of those instances where you can like the 30s version and the 80s version equally. They're both very similar, but also very different. It's actually really cool watching the 80s one, and seeing which parts are original, and which parts were lifted straight from the 30s one. The two films definitely have two different messages they're trying to convey. The 80s version is a dark, bloody version of living the "American dream", whereas the 30s version is about being a rebel and upsetting the establishment. But both films are connected by one thing; the characters hunger for respect and power. Many scenes are pretty graphic for 1932; such as the scene where Paul Muni is going on a cop shooting spree. At first, the film kind of shows how fun it is to be a rebel (doing whatever you want, and getting respect for it), which could maybe influence people to do what Muni does in the film; but of course the film ends showing the price these people pay for choosing a life of crime. The 80s version is good, but the original (I think) is a lot better (and a lot shorter by an hour and 20 minutes). It just broke more ground, and represents the time it was made better. It may not have a "Say hello to my little friend", but this movie doesn't need a single quote to make it classic.

I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932)

Life Ain't Fair

[9/10 · 20 September 2012]

"I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang" is one of those movies that really made me mad. Not because it's a bad movie, but because it's a very good movie. This movie really pulls you into the story, so that when something bad or unfair happens, you feel like it's happening to you. There are many instances in this film where you just want to jump into the screen and change things around so they'll work out for the better. But if everything worked out for the better, I don't think this movie would be as effective. This is a movie that really puts you into the environment. Most of the film has this very dark, claustrophobic feel to it, and it really gets under your skin. Whenever there's a prison scene, and they show how much time has passed (through a shot of a calendar passing through the months), you feel it. Another thing that makes this film so effective is the sound. For an early talkie, this movie really goes all out. With a soundtrack of gunfire, explosions, smashing rocks, rattling chains, and moving vehicles, it really makes the movie much more effective. Even the moments with no sound are very effective, because it gives the audience a chance to breathe and take everything in. "I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang" is one of those movies that shows us a very painful reality. A reality that is very cruel, and sometimes very unfair to the innocent. By the end of the movie, you might be very mad, but in a good way. Being mad is a good sign, because it shows how engaging this movie really is. This movie is amazing from beginning to end. It may be dark and unfair sometimes, but so is reality.