The Bad And The Beautiful (1952)

The Bad And The Beautiful (1952) ★★★★★ 5/5

This movie reminds me a lot of Sunset Boulevard (1950) in many ways. Mostly because of the narrative style, and in some ways because of the underlying darkness to the film. Much like Sunset Boulevard it is a story of Hollywood. A Hollywood that the public doesn't get to see. The film is essentially three stories tied into one that all revolve around Jonathan Shields (Kirk Douglas), a movie producer paving his way through the top of the industry at the expense of other people's lives.

Shields first comes across a promising director Fred Amiel (Barry Sullivan) who he takes in and begins to collaborate with. They excel in writing B rate movies and producing them at a low cost. Together the two reach a point where they can take on a big budget film. When they go to get it made, Amiel finds himself excluded from the project. This betrayal ends their relationship.

Georgia Lorrison (Lana Turner) is the daughter of an A list movie star who has passed. She herself has ambitions to be a star. Her auditions and screen tests are flops. Nobody wants to hire her with the exception of Shields. He fights to get her a starring role and with his coaching she becomes a huge box office star. Stardom at this point is no longer her real concern. She has fallen in love with Shields and he leads her on to believe he loves her. Little does she know he is just making her feel this way to get a solid performance from her. When the film is released, she leaves the premier to be with Shields only to find he has moved on to the next starlet aspiring for success. From that moment on she refuses to speak to him.

The third story is that of a prominent screen writer James Lee Bartlow (Dick Powell). Shields buys his most successful piece of work and brings him and his wife to Hollywood to write for him. Bartlow is often distracted by his wife (Gloria Grahame) and so Shield arranges her to fly to Mexico with sexy actor Victor "Gaucho" Ribera (Gilbert Roland) in order to give Bartlow some time alone. However the plane Gaucho and Bartlow's wife were in crashed and the two killed. In the years to come, Shields is quite about the fact he arranged for the two to be on that fatal plane ride. When Shields slips and reveals it was his ideal, Bartlow walks out.

The film closes with Bartlow, Lorrison and Amiel all listening to Shields on a phone. His career has tanked and he is looking for help from the three people who he used to build his career. All of them are highly successful despite Shield's betrayal. This final scene is fantastic as it recalls an earlier scene in the movie where Shields tries to take his hand at directing and is told that the less dialogue is in a scene the more imagination the viewer has in imagining what is being said. In this final scene, we can not hear what Shields is saying over the phone, but the expressions on the three listening allows the viewer to think about what may have been said. It is a brilliant ending.

Lana Turner was wonderful in this film. To see an actress acting as if she didn't know the first thing about acting is very intriguing. We see her character develop from an insecure, alcoholic girl into a graceful, exquisite movie star. She is graceful and beautiful on the screen. Kirk Douglas is also perfect in his role. While he is completely despicable in his actions, his character still retains a suave likability to him.

I absolutely loved this film. The plot, the story, the narration and the behind the scenes look at Hollywood were all highly enjoyable. This is a movie worth seeing, especially for the final scene where the audience is reminded that sometimes no dialogue does in fact say more then what any actor could. I also liked reminding my self that Kirk Douglas is still alive and that he is one of our last links to the Golden Age of Hollywood. Great movie!

Forrest Gump (1994)

Forrest Gump (1994) ★★★★★ 5/5

Forrest Gump was, and still is for that matter, unlike any movie that has ever been released. Tom Hanks brought Forrest Gump to life and we followed his story from boyhood to manhood. But this movie is more then the story of a man's life. This is an American story. It encompasses the most memorable aspects of the later half of the 20th century. Cleverly, the film breathes life into history. Gump teaches Elvis to dance, inspires Lennon to write "Imagine," breaks Watergate open, becomes a hero in the Vietnam War and an inspiration to the nation.

What I really like about this film is how is says so much, but at the same time leaves the viewer to think. There certainly is a lot to think about with this movie and it is up to the viewer to connect with the film. First of all, there is the feather that drifts in at the beginning of the movie and flies out at the end. There have been several theories as to what the feather represents. I feel that the feather represents man's individual journey. It floats around alone, much like man in his journey. The feather might land in a situation where there is greatness, or it may fall somewhere undesirable. In the case of Forrest Gump it falls in the hands of someone who takes care of it and cherishes it. It is much like the life that Gump lives. He floats about aimlessly on his own. During his journey he falls into the hand of both those who treat him with car, and those who do not. Likewise, Jenny (Robin Wright) floats about aimlessly and wild. Even more like at a feather at the hands of fate. While Gump floats through life hitting moments of greatness, Jenny floats through life on a complete polar opposite. Gump affects and is involved in mainstream America, but Jenny is consumed in counter cultures and the underground of America. From sexual abuse, to drugs, life threatening disease and single parenthood, her storyline gives a completely opposite version of American life in the 20th century. It makes the movie even more amazing in the amount of topics it covers.

Through the film there are several other key characters. Bubba (Mykelti Williamson) takes Gump on as a friend when he is headed to Vietnam. Bubba also guides Gump in the direction to become a multi-millionaire after the war by entering the shrimping industry. Lt. Dan Taylor (Gary Sinise) is Gumps commander in the war, whose life Gump saves and brings another aspect of American history to the film when he comes back from the war and is essentially thrown away for what he has done. Gump saves his life once again as the film progresses and he offers Lt. Dan a position in the shipping industry. Of course no character is more touching then that of Forrest's Mother (Sally Field). Field is amazing in this role and it suits her so perfectly. She is an absolute delight in every appearance she makes on the screen. And although briefly in the film, Haley Joel Osment appears as Forrest Gump Jr.

This is one of those films that is expected to be on the list of films to see, and if it wasn't, it would be a disgrace. I can remember seeing this film in the theater. It was one of those films that was so epic and touching. The sight of the historical footage mended into the film made it amazing, and I can still remember walking out of the theater, my head in a daze for hours trying to completely grasp everything I saw. Powerful, beautiful and perfect in every way.

8 1/2 (1963)

8 1/2 (1963) ★★★★★ 5/5

Federico Fellini directs and co-writes this incredible film which seems to be quite autobiographical. The film centers around Guido Anselmi (Marcello Mastroianni) and his struggle to overcome a creative block in his film making. After awaking from a dream, he is treated by doctors who recommend he go to the springs to drink Holy water and relax in the steam baths. Guido takes the advice and brings his writer along with him. While he is there, he meets up with his friend Mario Mezzabotta (Mario Pisu) and his mistress Gloria Morin (Barbara Steele).

Barbara Steele, although a minor character in this film, is exquisite. Every moment on screen, she is glamorous and exciting. The movie is worth seeing for her performance alone!

Guido soon meets up with his mistress Carla (Sandra Milo). When he returns to his hotel, he finds his entire production crew is there, as well as actors and actresses hired for the film he is writing. Little do they all know, Guido has not written anything. He is conflicted as to what to write and what he should convey. He is pulled in every direction by the cast and crew who all want to know their role in the movie.

Guido calls for his wife Louisa (Anouk Aimée) and she meets up with him. At first she is happy to be there, but soon becomes distant when she learns of his mistress.

Guido dreams and fantasizes about all the women he has loved and how it would be if he were able to live with them all.To have the joys each has brought him through his life consistently. He is haunted by childhood images. Religion questions his direction. A giant spaceship built for his unwritten film pressures his team financially.

All at once everything comes together right after the press has hounded Guido on everything from his writing technique to his political views and his love life. After that incident, Guido makes the film he wants. He creates and brings together images that mean something to him.

The film is artsy and complex, yet understated at the same time. It is dubbed with subtitles which makes it that much more artistic in feeling. The imagery is beautiful and quite ahead of it's time. The black and white production make the imagery even bolder. There is so much going on in this film that it never really dulls at all. The dreams piece together the reality, and the reality is somewhat unreal. A beautiful film and quite a pleasing one to watch.

Full Metal Jacket (1987)

Full Metal Jacket (1987) ★★★★★ 5/5


This is the first time watching this movie for me and upon reading over the case to the movie I found myself immediately resistant to it. Not because of the content involving the Vietnam War, but because of one of the actors starring in the film. Vincent D'Onofrio, best known for his role as Detective Goren on Law & Order: Criminal Intent. In my opinion he is one of the worst actors to ever appear on television. I cringe with every line he delivers and he annoys me so greatly that I can not even watch 5 minutes of the show. Seeing him as a main actor in this film immediately made it a challenge for me to even put in the DVD player.

I love the opening of the film. The Marine recruits are getting their heads shaved as Johnnie Wright's "Hello Vietnam" plays in the background. I love it when a film opens with a song that is reflective of the time being addressed. I think this type of opening establishes the time, setting and mood of a film better then any other introduction. Immediately, we are thrown into the training of Gunnery Sergeant Hartman's (R. Lee Ermey) recruits. Private Leonard Lawrence (D'Onofrio) is immediately singles out by Hartman and given the nickname Gomer Pyle. He is driven harder and treated more cruelly then any of the other recruits. Private James T. "Joker" Davis (Matthew Modine) is assigned to mentor and train Lawrence. Lawrence seems to improve in his military skills, however he gets caught with a jelly doughnut in his footlocker. Enraged by this, Hartman decides to punish every member of his platoon whenever Lawrence makes a mistake. As retaliation, the platoon beats Lawrence with bars of soaps wrapped in their pillow cases one night. Lawrence noticeably changes. He becomes isolated. He doesn't recite chants. He talks to his gun like it's a friend. Davis becomes worried. Before you know it, Lawrence snaps. In a suicide murder, D'Onofrio delivers an amazing performance.

In his short time on scree, D'Onofrio manages to completely defy everything I had once thought of him. His character goes through such amazing transformation. From a giddy, insecure private who clearly doesn't belong and raises empathy from the viewer to a growling, menacing murder. The performance is movie gold. Sadly, it does not make me like anything about his performance on Law & Order: Criminal Intent, but now I may at least be able to acknowledge that his acting is not reflective of his abilities, more more so of a poorly written character.

Following the death of Lawrence, we are taken directly into Vietnam where Joker is now a Corporal. He has become a journalist of sorts and travels through the country gathering stories. Private Rafterman (Kevyn Major Howard) is assigned to assist Joker and travels with him as a photographer. The two come across the realities of the war. Joker takes interest in the slaughter of civilians. Footage of war is shot. Commentaries by the soldiers are recorded. Journalism soon turns into combat and the platoon finds themselves ambushed by a single sniper who begins to take the men out one by one. After nearly killing Joker, the sniper is shot, but not killed. The surviving members of the platoon gather round and Joker kills her to put an end to her suffering. At that moment, he no longer has any insecurity about his existence as a Marine. The film ends with the army marching onward singing the theme song to "The Micky Mouse Club."

Initially I had not seen this movie because it was a war movie. I have nothing against the visuals or war movies. I had always had the preconceived notion that there was little difference from one war movie to the other. Two sides fight, they cope with their loses and celebrate their wins. How much different could they be from one film to the other with the exception of the year it took place and the color of the uniform. This movie is much more then that. While it takes place during a war, it goes beyond the war. The film portrays the mindset of American soldiers in one of the most controversial wars in American history. The views of the soldiers further prove that the men serving there didn't have any idea what they were fighting for other then to win. It also serves as a character analysis of Joker. He conveys the dual nature of man through his dress and his actions. He wears a peace button while his helmet reads "Born to Kill." He is there to fight, yet is clearly disgusted by death. In the scene, when Joker kills the sniper, he stares at her as "Born to Kill" prominently fills the screen. It is a deep message. Is that the moment for which he was born? Was that the kill he was born for?

Oh, let's not forget that this film also gave us these classic lines:
"What is your major malfunction?"
"Me so horny. Me love you long time."

Adam's Rib (1949)

Adam's Rib (1949) ★★★★★ 4/5

Amanda Bonner (Katharine Hepburn) and Adam Bonner (Spencer Tracy) are a husband and wife team who find themselves on opposing sides in a trial where a woman (Judy Holliday) has shot her adulterer husband (Tom Ewell). Amanda takes interest in the case when she reads about it in the paper and feels that the woman is being treated as a criminal while if it had been a man in her position the woman would still have been viewed as the criminal. Adam is a prosecutor and the case lands on his desk. It is his job to prove her guilty.

The movie starts off fast paced and fun. The two are seen at home, happy and in love. They have an ideal marriage and are quite happy in their lives. Their playful banter transcends time and is very easy to relate to even 70 years after the film's release. Even the themes of the movie hold relevant 70 years later. Equality between men and women has not changed all that much when it comes down to how each sex is perceived. While there have been changes in women's roles in voting, politics, work and so on, double standards still exist.

When watching the film however, some differences between 1949 and 2012 are nearly forgotten. Hepburn is well known for her feminist position in life. She was an avid sportsman (or sportswoman) and this is touched on in the film. She advocated woman's rights and demonstrated that women could do anything. In this case, she demonstrated that women could also hold prominent positions in the working world. During one scene in the courtroom, she brings other women on the stand to further prove the prominence of women. One was a renowned scientist, another a circus performer with the strength of a man, and a third with multiple degrees. This aspect of the film defies the notion that women of the 40's were confined to homemaking.

The tension of the case and the difference of opinions regarding the case begins to affect the couple and they almost end up losing each other. It doesn't help that their neighbor, Kip Lurie, (David Wayne) is in love with Amanda and writes a song that ends up being a huge hit on radio. Kip is most unlikable and obnoxious.

Hepburn and Tracy are delightful in this film, but Holliday is magnificent. She plays the blonde bombshell beautifully. One of the highlights for me in the film was when Amanda first met with her. Her naive attitude and retelling of how she shot her husband was flawless and far more gripping or smoothly portrayed then anything you would see on a current episode of CSI or Law & Order.

This film is worth seeing and is a fine look at the social dynamics of men and women in 1949. The story is well done and enjoyable.

Gangs of New York (2002)

Gangs of New York (2002) ★★★★★ 4/5

New York, 1846. The city is wrought with tension. Much of the tension stems from the immigration of Irish into the city. There are the Irish and the American born and they come together to fight for power. "Priest" Vallon (Liam Neeson) leads the Irish. Bill "the Butcher" Cutting (Daniel Day-Lewis) leads the natives. The battle ends with Cutting taking the life of Vallon. As Vallon dies in the street, his son clinging to him.

16 years later we catch up with Vallon's son Amsterdam Vallon (Leonardo DiCaprio). It is now 1862 and the city is in no better shape then it was when Amsterdam was a child. The Civil War has the city divided politically. Geographically the city is divided by nationalities. The disdain between the groups is so strong that it even resonates in the municipal workers. The firemen are corrupt, the police are corrupt, and the city is lawless.

Amsterdam befriends Johnny Sirocco (Henry Thomas) and finds himself in the midst of Cutting's underworld where he quietly awaits to avenge his father's death. Cutting does not know who Amsterdam is and quickly takes him under his wing.

Amsterdam also comes across Jenny Everdeane (Cameron Diaz). To call her a pick pocket is to say the least. She is a professional thief. Sly and cunning. Her performance is delightful and in my opinion she steals the film. How she was not nominated for an Academy Award is beyond me. To see her step away from romantic comedy and take the risk of appearing in serious drama was quite surprising. While I did not expect anything spectacular from her, I found myself captivated by her performance every moment she was on screen. Diaz wasn't the only treat in the film either. Henry Thomas, best known as Elliot in E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, put on a worthy performance as Sirocco. Of course it goes without saying that Day-Lewis and DiCaprio deliver.

The film intensifies as Sirocco becomes jealous of Amsterdam's ability to win the affection of Jennie. Sirocco betrays Amsterdam and informs Cutting that he is in fact Amsterdam's target. He also reveals Amsterdam is the son of "Priest" Vallon. Shortly after this revelation, Cutting and Amsterdam have a showdown of sorts. Amsterdam is quickly taken down and mutated by Cutting. Cutting labels him worthy of being in P.T. Barnum's circus as the only man allowed to live by hand of "The Butcher." After the mutilation, Jennie takes him to the underground caverns and cleans him. Once well and better, he begins to plot revenge. Before long Cutting and Amsterdam are striking at each other by murdering those who were close to the enemy.

In addition to the acting, the sets and costumes are meticulous. Every detail is attended to from the stitching of a dress to the wall paper in the brothel. The task of recreating New York in 1862 was not taken lightly. It is a fine look at American life in New York during the Civil War. Not often do we get to see the impact of that event in films unless it is on the battlefield or if it is examining a family directly affected by the war. Here, the war is not central to any main character in particular, however it's political implications do have an immediate effect on society and how these gangs are further divided based on their beliefs. It also is reflective that the civil unrest is not limited to just the country, but tears the city of New York apart. I love the historical aspect to the film and how it is depicting life in America at that time and expanding on the beliefs of the public. Also intriguing is the actual look into New York at that time. The heathen lifestyles, the disregard for those who are different, the entertainment of the time and the interaction of the groups.

The true highlight of the film is the final scene. The riot is brilliantly depicted and we watch New York crumble as the news wires are delivered. We see looting, murdering, lynching and finally Union troops slaughtering the mob. Cutting and Amsterdam end up face to face in a silent moment, and Amsterdam is finally able to find the closure he has sought for 16 years.

The film closes looking over New York ablaze. There seems to be a hopelessness and that perhaps the city might not recover. However it does. We see the skyline transform bit by bit until we end looking upon the Twin Towers with U2 singing about the hands that built America. Interestingly enough, this film was released the year following the fall of the towers. This leads to thinking about not only those who sacrificed their lives in opposition of the Draft Riots, but those who were taken in modern times by the hands of terrorists. It serves as a reminder that even in the bleakest times there is still hope. It also tells us that the legacies of those who sacrificed will be remembered.

Chariots Of Fire (1981)

Chariots Of Fire (1981) ★★★★★ 1/5

There seems to be, at least for me, a period in film that seems familiar, yet completely distant at the same time. Chariots Of Fire is one of those films for me as are so many from the early 1980's. I was at the time 8 years old. I do recall watching the Academy Awards and being completely confused at the unknown movies nominated for awards and could not possibly understand how a film like Chariots Of Fire could win over Raiders of the Lost Ark. It made no sense. Who would even watch a movie like Chariots Of Fire? The 80's would continue to confuse me with the winning pictures. Movie that were slow and boring. They were all about dead people! Amadeus, Gandhi and The Last Emperor were some of the winners. Of course I was too young to understand and sit through these types of movies at the time. Somehow, as I grew older I never went back to them. So for me, this book is a great opportunity to see what I missed. Chariots Of Fire is the first of the serious 1980's movies that I am getting acquainted with.

Sadly, after watching this picture, I still do not think it should have won Best Picture. However I no longer think it should have gone to Raiders of the Lost Ark either. I think of the nominees that year, the most triumphant and deserving film from that group was On Golden Pond. I found Chariots Of Fire to be excruciatingly slow and tiresome. It hardly enthralled me or captivated me. The score was absolutely horrid, yet somehow that too won the Academy Award for it's category. I think this is probably because "Chariots of Fire: Titles" probably wasn't eligible for Best Song as it has no words. While I loathed the creepy synthesizer based score, I do like the iconic single and find that it was properly placed in the film - and properly parodied to this present day. On top of the score, which I feel would have fit better in a horror movie, was the odd editing style used. I found the edits and transitions used in racing sequences to be odd. They didn't feel right and I was not in tune at all with whatever the director was trying to relay.

The whole story of this movie revolved around two runners with a goal of making it to the 1924 Olympics. Eric Liddel (Ian Charleson) is a devout Christian and Harold Abrahams (Ben Cross) is of strict Jewish faith. Their racing techniques and goals revolved strictly around their religious beliefs. They run for God. Liddel runs to honor God and turns it into a huge deal when he finds out one of the races is on Sunday. Because of this, he won't race and has to switch which race he will run. Abrahams runs because he is "Jewish." Both win their races for the glory of God and the honor of their country.

Not impressed at all with this movie. There were some things I can give praise to. The costumes were great. Very well done. That was an Oscar the film was deserving off. With the costumes, they captured the spirit of 1924 and reflected the different styles from the different nations participating in the Olympics. I also like seeing Ian Holm as Abrahams' trainer. This was his only Oscar nomination in his career as of 2012. A long illustrious career at that!

But, my favorite part of the film was when Liddel met with The Prince of Wales (David Yelland). The reason I like this scene is because after seeing The King's Speech (2010) I had become quite enthralled with the history of the Royal Family during that period of time. The Prince of Wales would later become King Edward VIII, and leave the throne to marry Wallis Simpson. It is interesting, for me at least, seeing different historical aspects brought to life across various films. This also helps piece together history and create strong timelines. It will be interesting to see the movie W.E. (2011) and find where this falls into the historical timeline. This is part of why I feel films portraying historical events should stay true to being factual. It makes the viewing experience of not just that movie, but other movies dealing with the same characters or issues so much easier.

Other then the scene involving The Prince of Wales and the costume design, this film did nothing to spark my interest. even the scenes with the competition were not compelling to me. I feel that the characters were not very identifiable and I could not connect with them. For the first half of the movie I had a hard time keeping the characters straight. It was not easy to follow who some of the people were, or who was who. In many scenes the cast members looked very similar.

I understand this movie has topped favorite lists and is ranked with high praise. I am completely missing that and am not sure why I can not find why this movie is held in such high regard.