Out of the Past - Jacques Tournier (1947)

I new absolutely nothing about this movie. I did 'cheat' and read the little blurb on the jacket of the DVD. I found out that Robert Mitchum and Kirk Douglas were in it. That it is considered a classic of the Film Noir genre. And was later made into the film 'Against All Odds'. 

This was definitely a gem. I never would have seen this film in a million years. And I am really glad I did.

It was the old story, man with a shady past trying to re-build his life anonymously. Gets found out then has to answer for his past. That would be the character played by Robert Mitchum (who I have to say, was quite handsome back in the day!!). There are a lot of twists and turns in the plot. A femme fatale (as usual). Snappy and clever dialogue:

Whit Stirling: You just sit and stay inside yourself. You wait for me to talk. I like that.

Jeff Bailey: I never found out much listening to myself.

And my personal favourite:  "You know, a dame with a rod is like a guy with a knitting needle."

(Rod in this case is a gun...get your mind out of the gutter.)

Overall, good flick. I recommend it.

One word to describe 'Out of the Past': Smokey

Night of the Living Dead - George Romero (1968)

I was not really looking forward to watching this one. Generally speaking, I don't go for the zombie/horror flicks. I figured it wouldn't be too graphic, being that it is from 1968. And I was a tiny bit curious, since I have seen 'Shaun of the Dead' a bunch of times, (and quite enjoyed it), to see what the inspiration to it was.

I have to say, it was a good film. A little hokey on the acting (especially in the beginning). Although, it got high marks since one of the main characters names is Barbara.

I have said it before, it is difficult to watch films that started a genre, or were the first of their kind, since the story has been told a bunch of times, or the style has been copied over and over. This falls into that category, to a certain extent. Having said that, I was surprised that it does hold up very well to the ravages of time. Which I guess is a testament to Romero's film making ability.

I am glad I watched this one. I do think that is a part of popular culture and it's always good to have stuff like that in your wheelhouse.

One word to describe 'Night of the Living Dead': Brains

Scarface - Howard Hawks (1932)

This isn't your Tony Montana 'say hello to my little friend' Scarface. This is the original from back in the day. And the Tony Montana version was a remake of this one.

This movie was actually surprisingly good. Not sure why I say surprisingly. I guess because I am familiar with the more recent version, I wasn't quite sure what to expect. This is a movie with a solid and compelling story. I guess what makes this (possibly) better than the remake is that it is a simply told story. And there are not as many of the distractions (violence, sex, swearing) that take away from the story.

The subtitle of this movie is 'Shame of a Nation'. It was a cry for government and people in general to try and do something to stop the violence that was gripping the nation. And at the time, this was a pretty violent movie. Truth be told, Bugs Bunny cartoons are more violent than this is. For the time, and what was acceptable, this was pretty out there.

One of the cool things about this movie, (or at least I thought it was cool), was every time someone was killed in the movie, there was an X somewhere. In one scene there was an X on the apartment door (where the apartment number would be). In another scene, the roof beams were in the shape of Xs. Apparently on the set (at least according to Wikipedia), Hawks had a contest to see if people could come up with ideas on where and how to place the Xs. Like I said....I thought it was cool.

Not much to say on this one. Was a good movie and I enjoyed it.

One word to describe 'Scarface': X

M - Fritz Lang (1931)

This is one of those films that snobbish cinema types probably say you need to see. Kind of like '8 1/2' and 'Citizen Kane'. I am always suspicious about films with that much hype.

This was a really good film in a total non snobbish way. I was pleasantly surprised. It was kind of like watching CSI Berlin (the 1930s version). This was the first kinda sorta psychological thriller mystery type movie. And even though this has been done thousands of times, this film still felt fresh. I guess that is a testement to Lang's movie making skill. Not only that a movie that is over 70 years old can feel fresh, but one where this was the prototype. Nicely done.

This movie was part of a movement called German Expressionism (which heavily influnced the Hollywood Film Noir genre). Is this important to know to enjoy the film, no. It's just me showing off and being a film snob.

This was Lang's first talking picture (or should I say non-silent film)? And to his credit he doesn't fill the film with endless chatter. In some places, he actually uses silence (while the action on the screen is still going on). And, one can't talk about this film without mentioning Peter Lorre. He is really good at playing the creepy dude (see 'Casablanca' and 'The Maltese Falcon').

One word to describe 'M': Expressionist.

Rear Window - Alfred Hitchcock (1954)

There are more movies on this list by Hitchcock than any other director. At first I was like....really?? When I thought about it though, I can't quite figure out what one should be dropped. All 4 of them all have a place in popular culture.

I had never watched this film before, although heard a lot about it. (Who hasn't?) So I wasn't sure exactly what I was in for.

The first thing, this is a pretty impressive movie. The entire movie takes place in such a small area. One wouldn't think that could be interesting. But it was. It taps into people's voyeur tendencies - spying on your neighbors.

The other thing, Hitchcock definitely has a formula. I am sure I'm not the first one to figure this out. Handsome lead man with a past, beautiful leading lady and they get caught up in a seemingly normal situation with bad consequences. I think that's what makes his films compelling. The situations that people find themselves in, aren't extraordinary. They could happen to you. And that's what makes them so suspenseful and frightening.

I really liked this film. It draws you in quickly and you get caught up in the 'action' of what's going on. Hitchcock definitely knew what he was doing.

One word to describe 'Rear Window': Voyeuristic.

Nashville - Robert Altman (1975)

Another one bites the dust...

I watched this movie early on in this journey, I got through about half of it. (It's about 2 1/2 hours.) I couldn't get into it. I thought I would put it back on the list and watch it later. It came in the mail via my film rental place this week. I was filled with dread. Okay....not dread. I just really didn't feel like finishing it. And I figure that since this is my list, I get to do what I want.  And if I don't want to watch a movie, I don't have to.

So why didn't I like this movie? Well, I found it confusing and hard to follow. I suppose you would call this an ensemble film. It made me think of another movie I had watched, 'Gosford Park', which is also directed by Altman. Oh yeah...I didn't like that one either. There were just too many people to keep track of, and there wasn't really a linear story (or one that I could decipher...in 'Nashville', not 'Gosford Park').

The film is about the country music scene in Nashville (obviously) in the 70s. It brings together all these characters, who kinda know each other. But really don't have anything in common. Except that they have something to do with the Nashville music scene in some capacity.

I watched a documentary on Altman. So I get why this movie is on the list. He was a maverick (I hate that word...not sure what a better word is) in the world of film-making. And he made the movies he wanted to make his way. I totally respect that. I just don't have to like them.

One word to describe 'Nashville': Headache.

Lawrence of Arabia - David Lean (1962)

I had never seen this movie before. I had heard of it (obviously) but really didn't know much about it.

First, it's 4 hours long......FOUR HOURS!!! Complete with an intermission. So needless to say I wasn't super enthusiastic about seeing this one.

The thing about this film is, it was meant to be viewed on a big screen. (It was one of, if not the last film to use 70mm film vs 35 mm. Which means that it doesn't loose quality when projected on a large screen.) I think it's a disservice to the film to watch it on a television screen. The story is a simple one, with sparse dialogue. Much of the film focuses on the desert and the expanse of it and the desolation of it. And that is so lost on a small screen. It's the visuals plus the audio together that makes this impressive. The soundtrack is pretty amazing. I liked this film, but I am sure I would love it given the opportunity to view it as intended.

The wikipedia entry for this film says: "It is widely considered one of the greatest and most influential films in the history of cinema." I do see that. It is a beautiful film. 

I can see why this film is on the list. And my suggestion is, if you have a chance to see it on the big screen, do so. I definitely will.

One word to describe 'Lawrence of Arabia': Epic.