Category Archives: Top 250 Films

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?-1966

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? -1966

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton

Top 250 Films #51

Scott’s Review #200

1120753

Reviewed December 3, 2014

Grade: A

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? This dark film, directed by Mike Nichols (The Graduate), is based on a play from the early 1960s.

Thankfully, the Production Code had been lifted by 1966, allowing edgier, darker films to be made—think The Wild Bunch or Bonnie and Clyde from the same period.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is dreary, bleak, and with damn good acting by all four principals.

George and Martha (Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor) are associate history professors and the college president’s daughter, respectively. They live in a small town in New England.

They have a complex, often bitter love-hate relationship.

One night, they invite young newlyweds Nick (George Segal) and Honey (Sandy Dennis), a new professor and his wife, over for drinks at 2:00 a.m.

From this point, a destructive night of verbal assaults and psychological games ensues with damaging and sad results for all parties involved, as their personal lives are exposed and dissected.

At the forefront are George and Martha, whose relationship is characterized by insults, neediness, secrets, and alcohol. After an evening out, they return home and have a vicious fight.

When their young friends arrive, the tension is thick.

Eventually, the young couple becomes sucked into the older couple’s web of dysfunction, aided by endless drinks throughout the night.

The film is shot in black and white, like a play, which I found highly effective. Most scenes occur in George and Martha’s house.

While all four actors are great (and were all Oscar-nominated), my standouts are Taylor and Dennis.

In my opinion, this role is Taylor’s finest acting performance. She is overweight, bitter, angry, frustrated, drunk, and, at times, vicious to her husband. This performance differs from many of her other film roles and is truly dynamite.

As her anger flares up, the heat and intensity oozing from the screen can be felt. She goes from vulnerable and soft one moment to a grizzled, bitter woman the next.

Conversely, Dennis is pure, innocent, kind, vulnerable, impressionable, and somewhat naive. Having had too much brandy and spent more than one occasion in the bathroom, Dennis successfully plays giddiness and innocence to the hilt.

Both Martha and Honey harbor dark secrets, which eventually are revealed.

The ambiance is just amazing. The black-and-white cinematography gives the film a hot, suffocating feel. It feels like a quiet little college hamlet, and the setting of the eerily quiet wee hours of the morning is conveyed successfully.

Each story, told mainly by George and Martha, is captivating in its viciousness (both usually belittling the other), and the film becomes mesmerizing in its shock value at the insults hurled.

What will they say or do next?

I loved the scene where Honey awkwardly dances at the late-night bar that the four of them go to. Also, the shotgun scene, where George obtains the gun from the garage during one of Martha’s insulting tales, is disturbing – what will he do with the gun?

The stories involving George and Martha’s son are sad and mysterious- the viewer wonders what is happening.

The final reveal still gives me chills.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) is one of the most significant film adaptations of a play I have ever seen.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Mike Nichols, Best Actor-Richard Burton, Best Actress-Elizabeth Taylor (won), Best Supporting Actor-George Segal, Best Supporting Actress-Sandy Dennis (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Original Music Score, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White (won), Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (won), Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing

Cabaret-1972

Cabaret-1972

Director Bob Fosse

Starring Liza Minnelli, Michael York

Top 250 Films #52

Scott’s Review #975

Reviewed December 31, 2019

Grade: A

If not for the mighty and powerful The Godfather (1972) blocking its path (but who’s complaining?), Cabaret (1972), with eight Academy Award nominations, surely would have won Best Picture in its year of release.

The film thus has the dubious honor of receiving the most nominations of all time without whisking away the ultimate trophy, but no matter, the Oscars are not everything.

The production, acting, and story are inventive and envelope-pushing, both serious and fun, and proof that 1972 was one of the greatest years in cinema.

The story envelopes a circle of friends enjoying the decadence and jovial nature of the decade, although they have their struggles. Energetic Kit Kat Klub performer, Sally Bowles (Minnelli) takes a shine to British scribe, Brian (Michael York) when he moves into her boarding house.

Despite having night and day personalities, they become deeply bonded and best friends. Rich playboy baron, Maximilian (Helmut Griem) woos the pair with money and travel and beds each of them separately, eventually dumping them both.

In a supporting yet important subplot, Fritz Wendel (Fritz Wepper) is a German Jew passing himself off as a Protestant. He falls madly in love with Natalia (Marisa Berenson), a gorgeous and authentic German Jewish heiress.

Their love story is comic relief, but a dangerous aspect of the film given the foreboding political events. The safety of the cabaret serves as a haven while the outlandish Master of Ceremonies (Joel Grey) appears throughout the film performing risque numbers.

Adapted from the popular Broadway stage show, the musical drama is set in 1930s Berlin, and the story begins in 1931. Historians will realize that the decade of 1930s Germany was frightening, giving rise to the deadly and hated Nazi Party.

While the film never goes full-fledged dark, there are snippets of beatings and ridicule at the hands of the Nazis, powerful stuff and tough to take, especially given the Jewish religion of some of the principals.

Liza Minnelli has never had a better role as she simply becomes Sally. The character is vivacious, zesty, and emotional and Minnelli dives in head first and wins viewers’ hearts. Beneath her bubbly exterior Sally is wounded, yearning for love and peace of mind.

She pretends that she is close to her wealthy father, but this is far from the truth. The most powerful scene is when a pregnant Sally comes to terms with the heart-wrenching decision to abort the baby.

For both the time-period setting, the 1930s, and the year the film was made, 1972, the sexuality dynamic is powerful and worth a nod. Brian, openly bi-sexual, and at a different time certainly gay is a great character.

He beds Sally more out of friendship than anything else while delving into admiration (or lusting) for the suave and dashing Maximilian. The fact that his sexuality is embraced and explored is to be celebrated and respected. It’s also a damned interesting part of the film.

Of course, Cabaret being a musical, the performance numbers are superlative. With gorgeous choreography by the director, Bob Fosse, (and who would expect anything less from the seasoned artist), the sets and costumes are stylish.

The conclusion, featuring “Cabaret”, is done grandly as Sally performs on stage with precision and bombast. “Willkommen” and “Maybe This Time” are also dynamic favorites.

Cabaret (1972) is a spirited, intelligent experience, never glossing over the historical period, nor assuming viewers are too dumb to have a handle on those events.

The film plays best to smart audiences able to appreciate artistic merit and enjoy the robust musical numbers.

Carefully, the film is designed to never shy away from the crucial Nazi power that was creeping up and leading to a generation of despair and repercussions.

Oscar Nominations: 8 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Bob Fosse (won), Best Actress-Liza Minnelli (won), Best Supporting Actor-Joel Grey (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Scoring: Adaptation and Original Song Score (won), Best Sound (won), Best Art Direction (won), Best Cinematography (won), Best Film Editing (won)

Suspiria-1977

Suspiria-1977

Director Dario Argento

Starring Jessica Harper, Joan Bennett, Alida Valli

Top 250 Films #53

Top 40 Horror Films #11

Scott’s Review #339

60037424

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Suspiria is a horror masterpiece, made in 1977, by my favorite Italian horror director, Dario Argento.

A combination of complex storytelling, glossy colors, and a unique art direction makes this film a treasure and an influence in “the look” of a film attempting to achieve an interesting art direction choice.

The color red is highly prevalent throughout Suspiria, which is fitting given the film’s subject matter of witchcraft and demons. The musical score is brilliant and chilling.

This film is perfect and one of my favorites.

The film takes place in Germany, and the opening sequence is fantastic. We meet our heroine, Suzy Bannion (Jessica Harper), an American ballet student, as she arrives in blustery Munich to attend a prestigious ballet school.

The shot of the driving wind and rain as she exits the airport is a great example of the ultimate style of this film.

Suzy meets a creepy taxi driver who drives her to the school, where she witnesses a frantic student, Pat Hingle, fleeing the school. Suzy is then denied access to the school by a mysterious voice over the intercom.  The focus of the film then shifts briefly to Pat’s perspective as she meets a sinister fate when she stays with a friend.

One fantastic aspect of Suspiria is we know something is wrong with the ballet academy, we just do not know what or who it involves. With great creativity, Dario Argento builds a set that is modern, and sophisticated but laced with an underlying menace.

As we meet the supporting characters, Madame Blanc (Joan Bennett) and Miss Tanner (Alida Valli), we know something is not right with them either. Blanc is kindhearted; Tanner is a drill sergeant, but both seem to have something to hide and claim to know nothing of Pat’s terror.

There is also Daniel, the blind piano player, whose seeing-eye dog suddenly turns vicious.

The plot is complex and does not always make perfect sense, but the elements of Suspiria make it a masterpiece.  Pat’s death scene is laced with greatness as she dangles from a high glass ceiling dripping blood. Her hysterical friend is sliced to bits by the falling glass.

This is the best double-death scene in horror film history.

When creepy maggots invade the school leaving the girls feeling for safety, the film goes all out. A later scene involving Suzy’s best friend and fellow student, Sarah, attempting to flee the school via the basement, only to struggle in a pit of razor wire is splendid.

Much of Suspiria is dubbed in English mainly due to the actors either speaking German or Italian, but Jessica Harper and Joan Bennett have distinguishable voices, which lend texture and richness to the dialogue.

Suspiria (1977) is a grand horror film, not solely for its mysterious story, but for all the added components that Argento throws into the mix- strange characters, weird sets, and the heavy dose of blood-red- pretty fitting.

Women in Love-1969

Women in Love-1969

UPDATED REVIEW

Director Ken Russell

Starring Glenda Jackson, Oliver Reed, Alan Bates

Top 250 Films #54

Scott’s Review #766

Reviewed June 2, 2018

Grade: A

Women in Love (1969) is a British romantic drama film that stands out as truly one of a kind. The film is quite cerebral and requires a bit of thought, which will undoubtedly lead to good conversation with film connoisseurs everywhere after a viewing.

The four central characters are complex and flawed, and they dramatically intersect in each other’s lives, making the film a “thinking man’s” feast.

The film is adapted from a popular D.H. Lawrence novel of the same name.

In 1920, set in the Midlands section of central England, sisters Ursula (Jennie Linden) and Gudrun (Glenda Jackson) attend the wedding of an acquaintance, Laura Crich. The Crich family is enormously wealthy and owns a large share of the mining town.

During the ceremony, Gudrun and Ursula fantasize about Gerald Crich (Oliver Platt) and Rupert Birkin (Alan Bates), respectively. When the foursome cross paths again at Rupert’s pretentious girlfriend’s party, attraction and conflict arise.

The film is described as “character-driven,” but it does not begin to do it justice. Each of the four principal characters is richly written with intelligence and gusto. All of them are either flawed or insecure in some way, while the fact that Gerald and Rupert share a sexual attraction for each other is another nuance explored throughout the film.

Rupert is confident and outspoken about his bisexuality- extremely rare for a 1969 film. In this way, Women in Love is ahead of its time.

The significant themes in Women in Love are commitment and love, and how each character handles them, sometimes embracing them and sometimes running away from them.

Gudrun and Gerald are in love with each other, as are Rupert and Ursula, but only one couple reaches any bliss. The characters possess a bevy of emotions, making their happiness almost impossible, and they feel doomed to failure from the onset.

This is an example of Larry Kramer’s tremendous writing and of bringing the characters to the big screen in a memorable way.

Jackson’s Gudrun and Bates’s Rupert are my favorite characters because they seem to have a bit more depth and feel like standouts. Gudrun appears to have love-hate feelings toward Gerald and is often downright cruel to him.

As they vacation in the Swiss Alps, Gudrun purposely and inexplicably flirts with a gay artist, leaving Gerald extremely jealous, which results in tragedy.

Counter-balancing Gudrun’s anger, Rupert showers in fun and zest for life, happily bisexual and thinking nothing of it, enjoying his sexually charged affections for both men and women.

The supporting characters, specifically snobbish Hermione and mentally unstable Christianna Crich, are examples of perfect casting. Eleanor Bron plays Hermione as mocking and teetering on the edge of unhinged. As she psychologically bullies poor Ursula, even though it’s clear Rupert prefers the more innocent woman, Hermione becomes frightened.

Actress Catherine Willmer takes Christianna to a new level of creepy. Already appearing psychotic, when her daughter tragically drowns, the woman goes over the edge, unleashing vicious dogs on any visitors to her estate.

Both actresses give unforgettable performances.

Women in Love contains a scene that may very well be the most homo-erotic scene in film history. As Rupert and Gerald decide to partake in a Japanese-style wrestling match one evening, they strip completely naked and grapple in front of a roaring fire.

In this lengthy sequence, both front and rear nudity are provided, leaving nothing to the imagination. When Rupert suggests they swear eternal love for each other, Gerald cannot commit to the emotional union.

One wonders if this outstanding scene influenced 2007’s Eastern Promises.

1969’s Women in Love is a fantastic film with terrific acting all around. Taking romantic drama to an entirely different level and setting a new standard for cinematic complexity, the work of director Ken Russell is peppered with nuance, making it rich with great storytelling and character development.

The fact that one couple ends in bliss and the other in tragedy is sheer excellence.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Director-Ken Russell, Best Actress-Glenda Jackson (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Cinematography

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre-1974

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre-1974

Director Tobe Hooper

Starring Marilyn Burns

Top 250 Films #55

Top 40 Horror Films #12

Top 10 Most Disturbing Films #5    

Scott’s Review #209                                                      

15815343

Reviewed December 31, 2014

Grade: A

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) is one of the grittiest, rawest, and most frightening horror films I have ever seen, and it still holds up incredibly well in the present day.

Featuring a documentary-like look, it is horrifying due to its grainy, visual, and realistic feel. It is not psychological horror- it is in-your-face, brutal horror.

The perception of an incredibly hot, sticky, backwoods Texas summer is incredibly well done and only adds to the terror.

A group of five teenagers travels to the vast fields of Texas — aka the middle of nowhere —presumably on a road trip. On their drive, they pick up a strange hitchhiker who ends up stabbing one of the teens and cutting his arm.

Spooked by this odd occurrence, they stop for gas and directions, but veer off course and accidentally wind up at a slaughterhouse owned by cannibals.

The group of teens is led by Sally Hardesty, played by Marilyn Burns.

As the teens are chopped off grotesquely, similar to a slew of similar fashioned, but less interesting horror films to follow, Sally winds up the lone survivor of the group.

Burns plays the first “final girl”, a title made famous in horror films as the last female remaining alive- it was almost always a female- to take on the maniacal killer.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre features one of the horror genre’s best villains- Leatherface.

The viewer knows little about him since he does not speak- is he mentally disabled? Is he an intelligent man? He is disguised behind a mask made of strewn-together human skin and wields a scary chainsaw.

We know nothing about him- only that he loves to kill.

The ambiguity is immeasurable.

Besides the way that the film is shot, another shocking element is the reality of the story. Could this happen to the viewer? The answer is yes of course it could. How many times have we been driving and gotten lost in surroundings unfamiliar to us?

There are no supernatural beings or CGI effects in this film- only a group of youngsters crossing paths with maniacs and this could happen in real life. This realization adds to the fright.

The famous- or infamous- dinner scene is revolutionary in disgust and distaste. The family attempts to serve Sally as dessert to the elderly patriarch and as he begins to suck blood from Sally’s finger, it will force the squeamish to turn away.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a short film, running at only 84 minutes, but the breathtaking finale- Sally running through the endless woods followed by Leatherface, seems interminable. Will he catch her? How can she possibly escape?

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) is dirty, ugly, and intense. It is no-holds-barred brutality. It is one of the best horror films ever made.

Salo-1975

Salo-1975

Director Pier Paolo Pasolini

Starring Paolo Bonacelli

Top 250 Films #56

Top 10 Most Disturbing Films #1    

Scott’s Review #183 

70099045

Reviewed October 9, 2014

Grade: A

 Salo is a disconcerting, highly controversial Italian art film from 1975 that is not for the squeamish nor the prudish. Many people will revile this film for its distastefulness and despise it entirely —that is, if they even give it a chance, which, unfortunately, many people will refuse to do.

But beyond the filth, perversion, and hatefulness that are themes of Salo lies a film that is a work of art and must be experienced by the most open-minded of cinema lovers.

The film is a dreamlike experience that centers on four wealthy Fascist Italian men of great importance and power, circa 1944, who decide to kidnap eighteen teenage boys and girls- the youngsters must be the cream of the crop and flawless in appearance, only the most attractive will do- one girl missing a tooth is immediately cast aside as a reject.

Whether the girl flaunted her marred appearance is open to interpretation.

The youths are then taken to an enormous palace where they are stripped of all clothing and forced to endure four months of torture, sexual perversions, and humiliations at the whim of and for the entertainment of their captors.

Finally, at the end of their terms, most are tortured to death by way of scalping, removal of tongues, or having their sexual organs burned off.

Also living in the palace are four aging prostitutes who enthrall the men, along with the reluctant prisoners, with tales of kinky and perverted sexual encounters from their younger days mostly involving anal sex.

The film is divided into four sections based on Dante’s Divine comedy: the Anteinferno, the Circle of Manias, the Circle of Shit, and the Circle of Blood.

In one sadistically disturbing scene, one of the young girls is forced to eat human excrement by one of her wealthy captors.

In another, during the Circle of Shit, everyone dines on a meal consisting of human excrement where lewd sex occurs.

One of the female prisoners is tricked into eating food laced with nails- a contest to determine who has the best buttocks results in the winner being brutally murdered.

Everyone in the film is bisexual and there are repeated scenes of extreme, almost pornographic, violent sex scenes.

On a side note, most of the youngsters (non-actors) reported having a ball while filming Salo and knew not what the film was really about, so the feeling on the set was light-hearted, nothing like the finished product.

While deeply disturbing, Salo is a film that some, or many, will simply not get or look beyond the obvious for a deeper message. It is a masterpiece in its ugliness, rawness, and political statements and is quite artistic once one gets past the brutality and rawness of the film.

Salo contains much political symbolism- the excrement serves as the filth of Nazi Germany and authoritarian figures throughout Europe such as Hitler and Mussolini, the abuse of power that was rampant during the time of the film (World War II era), and the entire film is about the abuse that powerful people (the wealthy fascists equate to powerful Germans) inflicted on the weak (the innocent boys and girls mirror the Jews and the weak).

Is Salo a disturbing, grotesque film? It is. Is it mindless torture for the sake of torture like movies as extreme as Saw and Hostel? It is not. It is an art film, not a horror film.

Banned in many countries for decades due to the extreme content of rape, murder, and torture of individuals thought to be under the age of eighteen, it remains widely banned to this day in several countries.

Many filmmakers, actors, and historians struggle to maintain the artistic merit of the film.

To fully get Salo, one must delve into the mind of the filmmakers and recognize that it is a statement film, filled with symbolism that challenges and questions the politics of its time.

Director, Pier Paolo Pasolini, was brutally murdered by a male prostitute shortly before the film’s release.

Salo (1975) is one of the most disturbing films I have ever viewed.

The Graduate-1967

The Graduate-1967

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Dustin Hoffman, Anne Bancroft

Top 250 Films #57

Scott’s Review #335

555221

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The Graduate is an immeasurable success and highly influential comedy from 1967- a time when films were gaining creative freedoms and pushing the envelope in new, edgy ideas and risqué subject matters.

Almost scandalous at the time of release, the film holds up exceptionally well after all these years and remains fresh and cutting-edge.

It is slick, sophisticated, and quite funny, though peppered with dark humor.

Thanks to Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft, the film succeeds and remains among my all-time favorites.

Hoffman plays Benjamin Braddock, a nervous and insecure recent college graduate who returns home to sunny California, unsure of what his future holds.

His overbearing parents throw a lavish celebration at their home, where Benjamin is flocked by well-wishers, most of whom have a materialistic edge to them. His parents live in a very affluent community where wealth and items are of great importance.

All Benjamin wants to do is be by himself. At the party, Benjamin is pursued by the much older and glamorous Mrs. Robinson (Bancroft), who lives nearby and asks Benjamin for a ride home.

Her attempted seduction of him sets the film’s narrative in motion, as their relationship unfolds, particularly when Mrs. Robinson’s daughter, Elaine (Katharine Ross), enters the picture and captures Benjamin’s heart.

Director Mike Nichols successfully sets the right tone for the film, and we see the style and the sophistication of wealthy California in the 1960s.

Fashion, style, and glamour are prevalent, but they go against what Benjamin and Elaine stand for.

The film is also an exploration of generations. Benjamin’s parents and all their friends are into material things, such as cars, houses, and parties.

The triangle between Benjamin, Mrs. Robinson, and Elaine is the heart of the film. At first, we find ourselves rooting for Benjamin and Mrs. Robinson. There is a sweet nature to their romance. She is the aggressor- mature, in control, and confident, whereas Benjamin is insecure and shy, yet enamored with Mrs. Robinson.

Their awkward exchange in the hotel bar and their liaison in the hotel room are fantastic scenes.

Slowly, once Elaine emerges, Mrs. Robinson becomes more manipulative, taking on a villainous character, as the youngster’s love blossoms, and we begin to root for their happiness.

A fantastic aspect of The Graduate is its musical soundtrack, which was composed entirely by Simon and Garfunkel, a central musical duo of the late 1960s, from the opening chords of ‘The Sound of Silence’, to the appropriate ‘Mrs. Robinson’, the music adds much life and energy to the film and was successful at attracting young viewers at the time.

The featured soundtrack was highly influential to other films released after The Graduate.

Still fresh today, The Graduate (1967) launched the very successful career of Dustin Hoffman and emerged as an inspirational film that, though controversial in its day, seems tame now; however, the writing remains as crisp as it ever was.

A film to watch over and over again.  

Oscar Nominations: 1 win– Best Picture, Best Director-Mike Nichols (won), Best Actor-Dustin Hoffman, Best Actress-Anne Bancroft, Best Supporting Actress-Katharine Ross, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Cinematography

The Getaway-1972

The Getaway-1972

Director Sam Peckinpah

Starring Steve McQueen, Ali MacGraw

Top 250 Films #58

Scott’s Review #439

539604

Reviewed July 3, 2016

Grade: A-

The Getaway (1972) is a classic action film by director Sam Peckinpah, known for works such as Straw Dogs and The Wild Bunch.

His films are known as “guy films” and are a rather violent experience.  The Getaway is no exception, though it is not immensely brutal either. Still, there is more than one macabre scene and one dastardly villain.

For fans of Peckinpah, The Getaway is a must-see.

The film features Steve McQueen and Ali MacGraw, who are perfectly cast as lovers Doc and Carol McCoy. Inescapable was their chemistry, and art mirrored life as the two were embroiled in a torrid love affair during the shooting, and later, they were married.

We meet Doc in a Texas prison, where his parole has just been denied. Doc and Carol decide to make a deal with corrupt businessman Jack Benyon to ensure Doc’s release. One stipulation is for Doc to participate in a bank heist with two of Jack’s men (Rudy and Frank).

The heist goes off, but things go awry, and Doc and Carol head for El Paso with a large sum of money, being pursued by Rudy and a double-cross attempt by Jack.

Rudy kidnaps veterinarian Harold and his young wife Fran (Sally Struthers) to aid him with his injuries, taking them along as he pursues Doc and Carol.

Mixed in with the already complicated plot is a con man who attempts to steal Doc and Carol’s money.

Doc and Carol are clearly the heroes of the film and are meant to be rooted for, and the characters work very well together. Yes, they are criminals themselves, but they are portrayed as nice and not hurting anyone who does not deserve it. Doc does spare Rudy’s life at one point, and I think this only reinforces his appealing anti-hero character.

The love story is also a significant aspect of the filmmaking, making Doc and Carol likable. A few sweet, tender scenes of their romance are mixed in, adding a nice balance to the otherwise testosterone-fueled events.

The Getaway features spectacular editing, particularly at the beginning of the film, where we watch Doc in prison, going through his day-to-day rituals, which are seamlessly interwoven with other stories in the movie.

The musical score matches perfectly with the editing, adding a provocative element of intrigue. These components add the necessary elements to a film like this- edge-of-your-seat!

I love the Texas setting.

Characters are constantly traveling to get somewhere- either by train, by car, or on foot- so we see much of the Texas countryside, almost giving The Getaway a Western flavor.

It is certainly a hot and humid environment, though McQueen always has a sophisticated suit on and MacGraw looks stylish and put together.

And from a prop perspective, I never tire of seeing those early 1970s sedans driving at high speeds.

Unfortunately, as with most Peckinpah films, women are not portrayed in a positive light, though Carol is one of the strongest of his female film characters. Yet, in one tough scene, she is smacked around by Doc after he realizes she slept with Jack to ensure his release from prison.

The most confusing and weak character is Fran. In a strange bit of writing, she inexplicably falls madly in love with her kidnapper, Rudy, even as he abuses and humiliates her- while her husband is around. This is odd and tough to watch and not the best part of The Getaway.

Her character is not developed well and it is head-shaking why she feels any passion for Rudy.

The heart of the film belongs to Doc and Carol as they are on the lam for much of the time and this is a successful part of The Getaway- hence the title. Will they get caught, will they escape?

The characters remind me of Bonnie and Clyde, so we wonder if Doc and Carol will meet the same fate, but of course, we like them so we do not want that.

The Getaway is a fast-paced, down-home, red-blooded sort of action film. It is stylized, gritty, and sometimes violent. The chicken wing scene between Rudy, Fran, and Harold starts light and turns ugly, adding to the unpredictable nature of the film.

A supreme offering by Peckinpah.

The Exorcist-1973

The Exorcist-1973

Director William Friedkin

Starring Ellen Burstyn, Linda Blair

Top 250 Films #59

Top 40 Horror Films #13

Scott’s Review #326

14546619

Reviewed January 5, 2016

Grade: A

Making a lasting mark on cinematic history and impossible not to be familiar with through some form of pop culture, The Exorcist (1973) is a classic supernatural horror film that transcends the genre to become a Hollywood success story.

Along with Rosemary’s Baby (1968) and The Omen (1976), these three films have similarly haunting “religious” subject matters and deal with dark and sinister topics such as “god versus the devil” and “good versus evil”.

The Exorcist is a masterpiece on every level and is adapted from the 1971 hit novel of the same name.

The story centers on “demonic possession” and was quite simply a shocking subject when The Exorcist was released in 1973, scaring the wits out of those brave enough to see it (especially Christians) everywhere.

Some abhorred the subject matter and refused to have any part of the film; their loss.

Ellen Burstyn stars as Chris MacNeil, a noted actress who relocates to Georgetown to film a movie. In tow is her twelve-year-old daughter, Regan (Linda Blair).

As shooting on the film wraps, Regan begins acting very strangely —making noises, becoming belligerent, and urinating on the floor during a dinner party. Worried, Chris enlists the assistance of priests (Max von Sydow and Jason Miller).

Things progress from bad to worse as Regan spirals out of control, and Chris and the priests determine that an exorcism is the only resolution to the problem.

The Exorcist-mainly director William Freidkin sets up the film in a clever way by using various technical elements to build the tension.

For starters, the eerie musical score is highly successful at scaring the audience and the score is similar to that of Rosemary’s Baby. The film is also lit very well, so it appears dark with dim lighting- the cinematography and the windy rustling of leaves in the exterior sets are great.

The cover art of the film should give an indication of the unique style used- black and white, a man with a hat and suitcase peers up at the second floor of a house where a glowing light is illuminating- the image is intriguing and haunting.

Enough cannot be said for Linda Blair’s performance as Regan, especially in the final act. During the “pea soup” and the “Jesus crucifix” scenes a different voice was used, but the facial expressions and the emotions that Blair uses are admirable.

As Regan is bed-ridden, angry, scared, and emotional, there is no limit to Blair’s range. Throughout a large part of the film, she is a sweet, young girl- innocent, so much so that her transformation is both shocking and disturbing to witness.

The final act of the film- the “exorcism” is riveting and a groundbreaking aspect of film history. The terrifying scene all taking place in one child’s tiny bedroom elicits fright and is nail-biting beyond belief.

The Exorcist (1973) is a very influential film that inspired filmmakers for decades to come and still resonates with audiences to this day.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-William Friedkin, Best Actress-Ellen Burstyn, Best Supporting Actor-Jason Miller, Best Supporting Actress-Linda Blair, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Sound (won), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

The Ice Storm-1997

The Ice Storm-1997

Director Ang Lee

Starring Kevin Kline, Joan Allen, Sigourney Weaver

Top 250 Films #60

Scott’s Review #850

Reviewed January 1, 2019

Grade: A

The Ice Storm (1997) is a brilliant film directed by Ang Lee of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000), and Brokeback Mountain (2005) fame.

The film is based on a 1994 novel of the same name, written by Rick Moody.

The brilliance lies in the rich way the characters are written with coldness, repression, and loneliness being central themes. The film is astonishingly genuine and fresh with an authenticity rarely felt so wholly in adult family dramas.

The period is 1973 and the events take place in New Canaan, Connecticut, a wealthy suburban town.

Two dysfunctional families, the Hoods and the Carvers co-exist during the Thanksgiving weekend as each deals with repression and escapism amid alcohol and sexual experimentation.

Both the adults and the children’s lives are prominently featured in the story. Ben and Elena Hood (Kevin Kline and Joan Allen) and Jim and Janey Carver (Jamey Sheridan and Sigourney Weaver) head the families.

While Ben and Janey carry on a secret affair, Elena lives an unfulfilled existence, craving more from life but not knowing how to get more and reduced to consulting self-help books for support.

Wendy Hood (Christina Ricci) enjoys sexual escapades with multiple boys while Paul Hood (Tobey Maguire), home from boarding school, takes the train into New York City to see a rich classmate Libbets Casey (Katie Holmes).

The most wonderful aspect of the film is that the story is a slice of life but with clever nuances. Since the families are rich why should the viewer feel sympathy for any of the characters let alone root for them?

Ben and Janey lounge in bed after sex, he is chatty about nonsense, and she is bored and depressed. During a holiday neighborhood gathering a kinky “key party” develops, where participants swap spouses for the night, resulting in titillation and excitement.

The bold and controversial writing is exactly why The Ice Storm scores so many points. The characters are cold and frozen, unlikable and selfish, but might that be the point? All seem unhappy and tired of their dull, small-town existence and craving what little excitement they can muster.

Written similarly to American Beauty (1999) the films could be watched in tandem for evenings of Gothic and macabre story-telling.

My favorite character is Elena as she has the most sensibility. She is lonely and ignored by her husband dutifully going about her day with little emotion. She feels temporarily excited when she develops a romantic crush on a neighbor only to quickly realize the most she can ever hope for with this man is a fling.

Her character is fleshed out as she yearns for more than she has. The other characters are largely selfish and pampered.

The film’s conclusion, however, is monumental as it changes the perceptions of some characters and softens them. A tragic death brings characters together in a powerful way.

Again, the writing in The Ice Storm is the most interesting and compelling appeal. The acting among the entire cast is professional, heartfelt, and brazen, but the written dialogue and interesting situations make this film rise above others of a similar genre.

Lee’s direction is brilliant as the blustery winter atmosphere is central to the story- in more ways than we might originally think. The frozen power lines and slick windy country roads elicit a cozy feeling nestled between harboring family secrets and scandals.

The bitter yet beautiful ambiance is a soothing and compelling aspect of the entire film and Lee portrays these elements with precision.

Of the independent drama genre, The Ice Storm has a low budget and big-name stars. The film could easily be performed as a play, but the cinematic elements and fantastic writing make it a memorable and storied piece of film-making.

Ang Lee frequently incorporates astounding character development in his works and The Ice Storm (1997) has all the qualities to be considered a masterpiece.

The Night of the Hunter-1955

The Night of the Hunter-1955

Director Charles Laughton

Starring Robert Mitchum, Shelley Winters

Top 250 Films #61

Scott’s Review #351

804679

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The Night of the Hunter (1955) is a fairy tale for adults. Although it is categorized as a thriller, it certainly teeters on the edge of being a horror film. In addition to being well-written, it also contains breathtaking cinematography.

Made in the mid-1950s, it is shot in black and white and tells the tale of good versus evil in a small town. The film is a masterpiece and one of my all-time favorites.

The film is both creepy and intelligent, and director Charles Laughton is responsible for its considerable success. Although it was not a success upon release, it has only finally received its due admiration as the years pass.

The film is way ahead of its time.

It is based on the 1953 novel by Davis Grubb.

The time is the 1930s, and the setting is rural West Virginia along the Ohio River. Ben Harper, a local family man, robs a bank and hides the stolen money inside his daughter’s doll.

His son and daughter (John and Pearl) are central characters in the story. Caught, Ben is out of the picture, leaving his wife, Wilma (Winters), vulnerable and alone.

A serial killer, Reverend Harry Powell (Mitchum), a misogynist, is on the loose disguised as a preacher. In prison with Ben, he knows the money is hidden and is determined to find out where it is. He has designs on wooing Wilma.

When dire events occur, John and Pearl are left along the river to seek refuge with a kindly older woman, Rachel Cooper (Lillian Gish).

The film is majestic, haunting, and artistic. Each scene seemingly glows as the dark black-and-white colors mix gorgeously with tranquility despite the dark tone of the subject matter.

The Night of the Hunter also has a dream-like visual quality. In one pivotal scene, we see a dead body submerged at the bottom of the river. The scene is horrific, with bulging eyes and bloating beginning to set in, but it is also creatively beautiful.

The flowing hair of the victim and the posture are mesmerizing scenes that stick with you for some time.

Poetic and a sense of good versus evil, this is clearly laid out as Powell has two words imprinted on the knuckles of each hand: “L-O-V-E” and “H-A-T-E.”  These words form the basis of the film, as both can be applied to the characters.

My favorite scene is when John and Pearl travel along the Ohio River, fleeing from their rival. The shapes of the trees mirrored by the flowing river are incredible, and I can watch this scene again.

A thriller, written intelligently well, with creativity for miles, is a recipe for pure delight. Director Laughton directed only this one film, encouraging creative collaboration and participation from his actors, which is evident in the resulting masterpiece.

The Night of the Hunter (1955) has had a profound influence on numerous directors.

Supervixens-1975

Supervixens-1975

Director Russ Meyer

Starring Shari Eubank, Charles Napier

Top 250 Films #62

Scott’s Review #361

220px-Supervixensposter

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

I first watched Supervixens in 2008, and, if I am being sincere, I did not much care for it, or rather, I was very perplexed by it. I did not know what I had just viewed and was caught off guard and blown away- I have since realized that this is part of my love for the film.

Is it a comedy? Is it too over-the-top and shameless? Is it trying to degrade women? Now, a mere eight years later, it lands firmly ensconced on my Top 100 Films list, and it is similar to a fine wine- it just gets better and better with age.

Never before did I think I would fall in love with a sexploitation film, but I have.

Directed by Russ Meyer, noted for his series of 1970s sexploitation films, Supervixens is set somewhere in the desert of eastern California.

Gas station attendant, Clint Ramsey, a handsome young man, is found irresistible to a series of sexy and large-breasted women, all with names beginning with “Super”.

We are introduced to his steady girlfriend, SuperAngel, a bored, horny, feisty woman played by Shari Eubank. Jealous and possessive, she commands Clint to leave his job and come home to her immediately, which leads to hilarity as they spar outside utilizing an ax as they wrestle and fight.

Their nosy neighbor looks on, both tantalized and frightened.

Others who make appearances during Clint’s journeys are SuperLorna, a horny gas station customer (strangely appearing in only one scene, but gracing the film cover packaging), who sets her sights on Clint much to SuperAngel’s chagrin.

SuperCherry is a buxom girl who picks up Clint hitchhiking, SuperSoul, an Austrian farmer’s wife, seduces Clint at the farm, SuperHaji, a bartender at the local watering hole, and finally, SuperEula, who is black, deaf, and with a white father.

Supervixens, as well as some of Russ Meyer’s films, have influenced countless other famous films to come, and I continue to note the overall influence Supervixens has had on Quentin Tarantino, specifically.

With the bloody violence mixed with cartoonish characters, as well as Nazi references (a frequent theme of Tarantino’s) and German marching music, Supervixens has a sly sense of humor- wicked almost, but never apologetic.

Tarantino uses a similarly outrageous style.

Carrie (SuperVixen bloody in the tub), The Shining (Harry breaking down the bathroom door amid a screaming SuperVixen), Friday the 13th- Part 3 (the camera angle at the top of the hayloft panning down on the approaching climber) are just a few film comparisons that I have noticed during repeated viewings.

My love of the film is its outrageousness and I find the film to be empowering to women most of all and not degrading. There is also male nudity and reference to the male anatomy numerous times so it is not a one-sided exploitation film.

Each female is a superhero, of sorts, and despite the sexploitation aspect, the film is quite romantic in spots- the tenderness between Clint and SuperEula is one of my favorites.

I also love the romance between Clint and SuperVixen (a dual role for Eubanks), as she is a reincarnation of SuperAngel. Working side by side at a roadside gas station that she owns, they pump gas and prepare burgers together, while running through the desert in a happy, lovely way.

Of course, their romance is threatened by the sinister Harry, who has returned for revenge.

Hilarious, outrageous, and in-your-face sexual, Supervixens (1975) is a camp classic that is so much more than that. Influential and creative, it simply must be seen to be believed.

I hope it is never forgotten.

Carrie-1976

Carrie-1976

Director Brian De Palma

Starring Sissy Spacek, Piper Laurie

Top 250 Films #63

Top 40 Horror Films #14

Scott’s Review #325

352989

Reviewed January 5, 2016

Grade: A

Carrie is a 1976 horror film adapted from Stephen King’s novel of the same name.

Many King adaptations have failed, but Carrie (along with The Shining) is among the best.

Going beyond the scope of horror and receiving more than one major Oscar nomination (largely unheard of in horror), Carrie influenced films and filmmakers for decades beyond its release.

This is due mainly to the dream-like and breathtaking direction of mood master Brian De Palma.

By this time (2016), the film and the character of Carrie White were legendary.

Carrie (Sissy Spacek) is a lonely suburban teenager, ostracized by her classmates for being “weird”. Her mother (Piper Laurie) is a devout Christian who spreads the word of god amongst the neighbors.

Carrie has a special ability to move things, usually during anger- this is called telekinesis.

After a humiliating incident in the girl’s locker room when Carrie begins menstruating, one of the nicer girls in the class, Sue Snell (Amy Irving) feels sorry for Carrie and convinces her boyfriend, Tommy Ross, to take Carrie to the prom.

When others in the class take revenge upon Carrie with a sick joke, things take a horrific turn.

Betty Buckley as the empathetic gym teacher, Miss Collins, and John Travolta and Nancy Allen, as dastardly Billy and Chris, also star and are perfectly cast.

The direction in the film is second to none. De Palma adds interesting camera work throughout the film.

During a tender, lovely prom dance between Carrie and Tommy, the camera circles the pair repeatedly, giving a spellbinding, but not dizzying quality.

The use of slow-motion in the important “pig blood” scene is immeasurably effective.

The seemingly eternal time it takes for the blood spilling to occur, and the camera (in slow motion) goes from Sue to Miss Collins to Chris to the bucket of blood is fantastic.

The list of inspired and intense scenes goes on and on- from the climactic scene between Carrie and Mrs. White to the “jump out of your seat” final scene.

The acting is also worthy of high praise. Spacek and Laurie deservedly received Oscar nominations for their work. Spacek elicits so much rooting value into her role with a shred of psychosis bubbling just beneath the surface.

Carrie wants to fit in and have a happy life so the audience is immersed in her corner and celebrates her short-lived happiness with Tommy at the prom. Spacek is just perfectly cast.

Laurie on the other hand exudes crazy in every sense, but we do feel pangs of sympathy for her. We largely believe she cares for her daughter and wants to protect her from the dangerous world.

Carrie (1976) is a masterpiece that continues to hold up well and influence generations who can relate to school bullying,  taunting, and the desire to see the nasty popular kids get their just desserts.

More than a great horror film, it is a revered classic with a dreamy, moody vibe.

One of my all-time favorites.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Sissy Spacek, Best Supporting Actress-Piper Laurie

The Silence of the Lambs-1991

The Silence of the Lambs-1991

Director Jonathan Demme

Starring Anthony Hopkins, Jodie Foster

Top 250 Films #64

Top 40 Horror Films #15

Scott’s Review #320

14546747

Reviewed January 3, 2016

Grade: A

The Silence of the Lambs (1991) has the honorary achievement of being one of only three films to win the top five Oscar statuettes, having been awarded Best Picture, Best Director (Jonathan Demme), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor (Anthony Hopkins), and Best Actress (Jodie Foster) at the 1991 Oscar ceremonies.

This is no small feat, especially considering the film was released in March (not an Oscar-happy month) and is a horror film. These elements speak volumes for the level of mastery that is The Silence of the Lambs and the film holds up incredibly well as the years go by.

The film was a sleeper hit at the time of release and gradually built momentum throughout the year, becoming a phenomenon and forever a classic.

The film is adapted from the novel of the same name- written by Thomas Harris and, despite being a horror film, contains little gore. The film stars Foster as Clarice Starling, an FBI trainee, sent by her superiors to interview the infamous Hannibal Lecter.

Hannibal, “The Cannibal”, is a highly intelligent former psychiatrist who has been banished to a maximum security insane asylum after having been found guilty of killing and eating his victims.

The FBI hopes that Hannibal will aid them in a current case involving “Buffalo Bill”, a serial killer who skins his female victims.

Hannibal and Clarice embark on an intense and strange relationship in which he gets under her skin and questions her unhappy childhood in exchange for information about “Buffalo Bill”.

This relationship leaves Clarice vulnerable, though the pair develop a strong connection. As Hannibal makes more and more demands in exchange for information, he eventually escapes from custody and a chilling and bizarre escape.

The psychological elements and the intense relationship between Hannibal and Clarice are of monumental importance and Hopkins and Foster share an amazing chemistry.

Hopkins gives a top-notch and downright creepy performance as the cannibalistic killer. His mannerisms are stiff and calculating, his tone of voice monotone, and he simply embodies his character, making him a legendary and recognizable presence in film history.

Two memorable lines that he utters are, “I do wish we could chat longer, but I am having an old friend for dinner.”, and “I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti”.

The character of “Buffalo Bill” is as terrifying as Hannibal Lecter.

Portrayed by Ted Levine, the character is maniacal, sexually confused, and otherwise downtrodden. A tailor, he aspires to make a full “woman suit” costume out of his victim’s skin. His current hostage, a Senator’s daughter, is kept confined in an old well and terrorized by Bill’s antics.

His famous line, “It puts the lotion on or it gets the hose again” still terrifies me.

Highly influential, mimicked for years to come, and containing multiple lines and characters permanently etched in film history, The Silence of The Lambs (1991) is a classic not soon forgotten.

The film was followed by multiple sequels, none of which come close to the power and psychological complexities of the original.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Jonathan Demme (won), Best Actor-Anthony Hopkins (won), Best Actress-Jodie Foster (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published (won), Best Sound, Best Film Editing

Blue Velvet-1986

Blue Velvet-1986

Director David Lynch

Starring Kyle MacLachlan, Laura Dern

Top 250 Films #65

Scott’s Review #343

319022

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Taken from a 1963 Bobby Vinton tune of the same name, Blue Velvet (1986) is an independent thriller noir film directed by the master of the weird and the unusual, David Lynch.

It is surreal in look and so mysterious- almost a pre-cursor to Lynch’s fantastic television series, Twin Peaks. I adore the film and find new facets to it with each passing viewing.

Though it’s not an easy or mainstream watch- the payoff can be big and you know you are watching a deep, layered, film.

The story can be tough to completely understand with only one show, but it goes something like this- Under the guise of a cheerful, suburban surface, evil is lurking somewhere. College student, Jeffrey (MacLachlan) discovers a severed human ear lying in an abandoned lot delivers it to police detective John Williams, and reconnects with the detective’s daughter, Sandy (Dern).

Sandy, being privy to secret information about the case, reveals that a mysterious woman, Dorothy Valens (Isabella Rossellini) resides in an apartment key to the case. Jeffrey and Sandy decide to investigate further and get themselves in over their heads as the mystery deepens.

The dreamlike quality of the film is very compelling and intriguing. Layers upon layers come to the forefront as the story unfolds and very few answers are ever provided- this adds to the mystery and is really the point of the film.

Many aspects are open to interpretation.

The relationship between Jeffrey and the much older Dorothy is fascinating, but what about his chemistry with the innocent Sandy? And who is the Yellowman? When the youngsters see Dorothy perform “Blue Velvet” at her nightclub, it is a great moment in the film.

The character of Frank Booth, played by Dennis Hopper, must be one of the strangest in film history as the man is maniacal and bizarre beyond measure. With his unusual sexual tastes- he enjoys inhaling gas, and sadomasochism, he is a unique character. He is also quite abusive to Dorothy.

The film is a throwback to classic film noir from the 1950s and a clear femme fatale in Dorothy is central to the film.

I find the film so compelling since its subject matter is secrets. Many secrets and dark corruption or various forms of left-of-center dealings reside in this small North Carolina town- it is the audience’s challenge to put all the pieces of this puzzle together.

Oscar Nominations: Best Director-David Lynch

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Feature, Best Director-David Lynch, Best Male Lead-Dennis Hopper, Best Female Lead-Isabella Rossellini (won), Laura Dern, Best Screenplay, Best Cinematography

Fargo-1996

Fargo-1996

Director Joel Coen and Ethan Coen

Starring Frances McDormand, William H. Macy

Top 250 Films #66

Scott’s Review #366

493387

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Fargo (1996) is a treasure as far as I’m concerned, and the role that deservedly propelled Frances McDormand to the forefront of the film audience’s minds, not to mention a gold statue for Best Actress.

The film epitomizes dark humor and zany freshness during a time in cinema when originality was emerging and independent films were growing in popularity.

Fargo led the pack.

The film suffers from some derision by locals in and around the upper Midwest U.S.A. for its depiction of accents —perhaps overdone, but hysterical all the same.

Set against the snowy and icy locales, the film effectively conveys a harsh and small-town atmosphere.

The introduction of a crime, initially done innocently, escalates out of control.

Fargo is a part caper, part thriller, and part adventure, and is a layered, cool film.

The fact that the time is 1987 is excellent. The cars, the Oldsmobile dealership, all work particularly.

McDormand plays a local Police Chief- Marge Gunderson, very pregnant, who stumbles upon the crime and slowly unravels the mystery.

All the while, the character keeps her cool, cracks jokes, and emits witty one-liner after another, presenting a slightly dim-witted image, but brilliantly deducing the aspects of the crime.

William H. Macy, in 1996 largely unknown, is perfectly cast as a car salesman, Jerry Lundegaard. Nervous, and shaky, yet with down-home respectability, he hatches a plot to have his wife kidnapped, the ransom to be paid by her wealthy father, enabling Jerry to pay off an enormous embezzling debt, and splitting the money with the kidnappers.

Predictably, things go awry and spiral out of control.

I love how the film crosses genres and is tough to label- is it a crime drama, a thriller, or a comedy? A bit of each which is the brilliance of it.

Fargo (1996) is an odd, little piece of art, and is remembered as one of the best films of the 1990s, making a star out of Frances McDormand.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Joel Coen, Best Actress-Frances McDormand (won), Best Supporting Actor-William H. Macy, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen (won), Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 6 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Joel Coen (won), Best Male Lead-William H. Macy (won), Best Female Lead-Frances McDormand (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Cinematography (won)

Magnolia-1999

Magnolia-1999

Director Paul Thomas Anderson

Starring Tom Cruise, Julianne Moore, John C. Reilly

Top 250 Films #67

Scott’s Review #777

Reviewed June 21, 2018

Grade: A

Paul Thomas Anderson is one of my favorite modern directors. In my opinion, his best film is Boogie Nights (1997), but he has also created other dark offerings, such as Phantom Thread (2017) and Inherent Vice (2014).

Arguably, his most distinctive effort might be Magnolia (1999), a cerebral film that explores themes of forgiveness and the meaning of life.

An ambitious effort, featuring a stellar ensemble cast, makes the film a fantastic experience.

Set in the San Fernando Valley (a mountainous area of Los Angeles), the film resembles David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive (2001) in area and oddness, along with unusual dialogue and offbeat characters.

A narrator explains three situations of extreme coincidence and surmises that chance may not be the only responsible party. Anderson then carves an intricate tale involving numerous characters, intersecting lives, and a riveting final climax during one rainy California day (an oddity in itself!).

The plot begins when we meet Jim Kurring (John C. Reilly), a police officer who is called to investigate a disturbance.

After finding a woman’s body in an apartment closet, events turn bizarre as a children’s game show host (Philip Baker Hall), his estranged daughter (Melora Walters), the show’s former producer, Earl (Jason Robards), who is dying from cancer, his drug-addicted wife Linda (Julianne Moore), Earl’s male caretaker (Philip Seymour Hoffman), a former game show champion (William H. Macy), and finally, an intense motivational speaker (Tom Cruise).

Quite a bevy of talented actors!

As the plot moves along mysteriously, the connections of each of the characters are not only revealed, but their peculiar motivations start to take shape.

For example, Linda, who married Earl for his money, seems to have an epiphany and demands her lawyer change Earl’s will. Later, a character may have a connection to Earl and Linda, but is it all as it seems?

In the case of Magnolia, the film is so wonderfully strange that it leaves the audience guessing throughout most of its running time.

Bizarre scenes are commonplace throughout the film. My favorite one is a marvelously creative scene. Suddenly, frogs begin to fall out of nowhere from the Los Angeles sky with numerous consequences for the characters.

The incident causes a ripple effect, of sorts, as many of the character’s fates are determined. Though one may not be able to make heads or tails of this scene or take complete logic from it, it’s enthralling all the same.

Magnolia has an overall quirky tone- sometimes upbeat-sometimes melancholy- that I adore. Films that are tough to figure out and that add an interesting musical score are so rich with flavor.

Aimee Mann is responsible for composing many of the songs on the musical soundtrack, so much so that she received a title credit on the soundtrack itself. Mann infuses richness into her music that is moody and diverse with ambient essentials.

Many actors make frequent appearances in Paul Thomas Anderson’s films. Magnolia alone seems almost like a Boogie Nights reunion with Moore, Walters, Macy, Baker Hall, and Philip Seymour-Hoffman to name just a handful.

The amazing aspect is that all of the aforementioned actors play vastly different, and arguably even more complex roles than they did in Boogie Nights.

Similar to Quentin Tarantino’s actors appearing in many of his films, what a creative treat this must be for them.

There is no doubt that Magnolia (1999) is a complex, dream-like, film. Open to interpretation and reflection, I find it to be a film that feels brilliant and that I would like to revisit and dive into even more and more with further viewings, for hopefully a better understanding and an even deeper appreciation.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Tom Cruise, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Original Song-“Save Me”

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?-1962

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? -1962

Director Robert Aldrich

Starring Bette Davis, Joan Crawford

Top 250 Films #68

Top 40 Horror Films #16

Scott’s Review #193

70048556

Reviewed November 14, 2014

Grade: A

Baby Jane kicked off a trend, prominent throughout the 1960s, of aging Hollywood actresses starring in horror films (interestingly, Bette Davis and Joan Crawford each did two—the others being Dead Ringer and Strait-Jacket), with varying degrees of success.

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane (1962), directed by Robert Aldrich, stars Davis and Crawford as, ironically enough, two aging Hollywood actresses, Jane and Blanche Hudson.

Jane (Davis), a child star in the 1920s nicknamed Baby Jane, with an adorable signature song, “I’ve Written a Letter to Daddy,” has long since faded from the spotlight but continues to dress in her Baby Jane costume, consisting of a little girl dress with hair in curls and ribbons.

Blanche, however, achieved success as an adult in the 1930s until a tragic accident left her wheelchair-bound and subsequently ruined her career. She then became a popular film star, much more popular than Jane.

Blanche and Jane now while away the years in a crumbling mansion in Los Angeles. Blanche is entirely dependent on her unbalanced sister for care. Jane is resentful of Blanche’s success and popularity and plans to relaunch her career in her once-famous alter ego.

The film has macabre comedic elements but never veers too far over the edge into camp or foolishness. It is also a very psychological film, as Jane mentally abuses Blanche and plays mind games with her to gain the upper hand.

Davis had a ball with this role, as her appearance alone is frightful – a grown woman of a certain age in blonde curls, pancake makeup, and a baby doll dress – she looks hideous!

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane reminds me quite a bit of Billy Wilder’s masterpiece Sunset Boulevard in several ways. For example, both feature successful stars of years past with delusions of returning to their former fame, both feature older women who are more than a bit unbalanced, and both films are set in sunny Los Angeles.

Two of the film’s supporting actors are well cast, adding significantly to the film, and deserve recognition. Victor Buono, later made famous for his role of King Tut in the popular late 1960s television series Batman, is highly effective as the opportunist sloth, Edwin Flagg, who aids Jane in her comeback attempt.

Maidie Norman as the Hudson sisters’ black housekeeper, Elvira, loyal to Blanche but never a fan of Jane’s, slowly becomes wise to Jane’s sinister plot and does a fantastic acting job when she stands up to the manipulative sister- for 1962, a black maid verbally assaulting a white woman employer was still somewhat taboo and kudos to the film for bravely going there is a highly effective scene.

The fact that Davis and Crawford famously despised each other in real life gives the audience an edge in scenes where the two women physically and verbally clash.

The film features wonderfully quotable dialogue. “We got rats in the cellar,” Jane utters matter-of-factly as she serves Blanche a cooked rat on a bed of lettuce for lunch one day, and cackles fiendishly when she hears Blanche scream in disgust.

One aspect of the film that has taken me three viewings to become aware of and that I love is the musical score throughout the film- it features multiple and creepy versions of Jane’s signature song, “I’ve Written a Letter to Daddy,” with varying tempos.

This film must use suspension of disbelief. Why does Blanche not pound and scream at her bedroom window to alert the neighbor of trouble instead of casually tossing a note out the window?

Blanche struggles to descend the steps by sliding down them and then cannot slide across the floor to escape the mansion, which is silly. The film is so gripping that I happily overlook these errors and instead enjoy the suspenseful film, which features two actresses, rivals both on and off-screen, that make this film a bit too realistic —a realism that makes for delightful film-watching.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actress-Bette Davis, Best Supporting Actor-Victor Buono, Best Sound, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won)

Grease-1978

Grease-1978

Director Randal Kleiser

Starring John Travolta, Olivia Newton-John

Top 250 Films #69

Scott’s Review #354

60000577

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Grease (1978) is the ultimate musical fantasy that comes to life and can be appreciated by anyone looking to re-live their high school days through song, or merely escape life’s stresses with a fun, bright, musical, that is very well made.

Is it realistic? Not, but sometimes escapism is just what the doctor ordered, and Grease is one of my favorite films that meet that criteria.

It is light-hearted and sweet, and above all contains wonderful legendary musical numbers.

The time is the 1950s, and we meet Danny and Sandy on a windswept beach with cascading waves and bright sunshine. It is summer break for the two high school students, who meet in California, she vacationing from Australia, and he is a local boy.

They say their goodbyes and return to normal lives, but cannot forget about each other.

Suddenly, Sandy arrives at Rydell High in Los Angeles, coincidentally where Danny goes to school. Her parents (whom we never see) decided to stay in California.

Danny is a “tough guy” in high school, much different from who he was on the beach with Sandy. He is the leader of the infamous T-birds, a group of boys who love their black leather jackets and cars.

Torn, he continues his tough image and he and Sandy find their way back to each other through classmates, songs, and dancing, intermingling fun supporting characters who encourage each of them to find true love.

Travolta and Newton-John have magical chemistry, which allows this film to work.

Grease has appeared on stage numerous times, but these actors are fine together. I bought them as teenagers in love, although both were well beyond their teen years.

The supporting cast is excellent- specifically Stockard Channing as the lead Pink Lady, Rizzo, and Sandy’s kind-hearted friend Frenchy.

Interestingly, no parents ever appear in the film as it is not about the adults.

However, Rydell’s female principal, Mrs. McGee (played by Eve Arden), and her dotty Vice Principal, Blanche (Dody Goodman), are simply marvelous as comic relief.

Rizzo is an interesting character and can be argued is the only one who threatens to steal the thunder from Danny and Sandy. Containing a tough exterior, she is also vulnerable as she fears she has become pregnant mid-way through the film.

Unwed and pregnant in the 1950s was quite the scandal and Channing gives layers of emotion during her solo number, “There Are Worse Things I Could Do”.

The wonderful high school dance scene is choreographed amazingly well. The excitement of the student body at being filmed for a special television show is apparent as dance numbers and dance contests, some raunchy, follow.

The musical numbers are intrinsically memorable from “Grease”, “Greased Lightning”, “Hopelessly Devoted To You”, and “Beauty School Dropout”, all of which are personal favorites of mine.

Grease (1978) is a film that is not meant to be analyzed but rather enjoyed for the fantastic chemistry and energy in which it has.

Sometimes in a film, all of the elements simply come together perfectly and Grease is an excellent example of this.

Oscar Nominations: Best Song-“Hopelessly Devoted to You”

Harold and Maude-1971

Harold and Maude-1971

Director Hal Ashby

Starring Bud Cort, Ruth Gordon

Top 250 Films #70

Scott’s Review #208

60000591

Reviewed December 30, 2014

Grade: A

Harold and Maude (1971) is the bravest and most left-of-center film that I have ever had the pleasure of viewing. A subject matter so taboo that it had never before been explored in cinema and, to my knowledge, has not since.

The film challenges so many mainstream views of aging, sex, and relationships.

Ruth Gordon and Bud Cort give performances of a lifetime.

The film tells the story of an unhappy, wealthy teenager named Harold (Cort) whose mother- hilariously played by Vivian Pickles- is a cold socialite attempting to reform Harold of his rebellious adolescent behavior.

Harold frequently plays suicide pranks on her and the numerous females she tries to set him up with, reducing them to tearful exits from the family mansion in frightened hysterics.

Obsessed with attending funerals for fun, one day Harold meets Maude (Gordon), an elderly woman, at a funeral, and it turns out that both share the same fascination, but for vastly different reasons as the story shows.

They embark on a tender romance despite their age difference of over sixty years.

In many ways, Maude is the real adolescent of the film, which I love. It is a role reversal of sorts. On the cusp of age eighty, she has a pure zest for life, living each minute as if it was her last, unconcerned with the consequences of her actions- she is a true free spirit.

She gleefully steals cars that happen to be parked on the street and her erratic driving is comically brilliant.

Harold becomes the more responsible one despite being the tender age of only nineteen. He cares for Maude and her shocking revelation towards the end of the film floors Harold.

It will also shock the audience.

Harold and Maude deal with death but the film is not a downer. It is hilarious at times, brilliantly written, and Maude, a Nazi prison camp survivor, does not fear death- she has seen her share of it and almost embraces it.

Harold is just beginning his life and the contrast of the characters and their growing bond is what works best in this film.

The aforementioned Vivian Pickles knocks it out of the park with her portrayal of Harold’s mother- her comic wit and timing are excellent- she callously hosts a dinner party and boasts of her travels to France to the guests while Harold sits ignored, bored, and depressed, staring at his mother in disbelief.

He wants nothing to do with her or her trivial lifestyle. She makes an unimportant phone call while Harold dangles from the ceiling in a faux suicide attempt- clearly a cry for attention from his mother.

This is a total black comedy.

The implied intimacy between Harold and Maude was too much for many viewers in 1971. I find it sweet and quite tastefully done. They simply fall in love and it feels wonderful for both of them.

I would be remiss for not mentioning the wonderful, lively soundtrack by Cat Stevens.

Edgy, laugh out loud, unusual, and witty are words to describe Harold and Maude (1971)- one of the most intelligent comedies in film history.

The French Connection-1971

The French Connection-1971

Director William Friedkin

Starring Gene Hackman, Roy Scheider

Top 250 Films #71

Scott’s Review #342

60011660

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The French Connection had the notable distinction of being the first R-rated film to win the coveted Academy Award for Best Picture in 1971.

This praise, similar to The Silence of the Lambs being the first horror film to win Best Picture in 1991, is well worth pointing out and is quite honorary.

The film succeeds, both for me and other critics, due to its unique camerawork style, shot in a documentary manner, and the use of quick edits.

It is much more intricate in every way than the traditional crime thriller.

Gene Hackman stars as the feisty detective, Jimmy “Popeye” Doyle, who along with his partner, Buddy “Cloudy” Russo, (Scheider) are determined to crack the case of a massive heroin smuggling syndicate from France.

The narcotics are flowing into New York City and the duo is determined to get to the bottom of the drug ring, figuring out who is the mastermind and defeating their foe.

The primary culprit is a suave French drug lord named Alain Charnier, brilliantly played by Fernando Rey.

Throughout the film, the action is non-stop, traversing throughout Manhattan and Brooklyn, via subway, and car, as Popeye becomes more and more obsessed with the case.

Director William Friedkin, who also directed the legendary 1973 film, The Exorcist, deserves a heap of praise for creating a film of this caliber. The French Connection can be enjoyed by all and is well beyond the limitations of a “guy film”- it is much more than that.

The editing and frenetic pacing work wonders for the film, all the while not ruining the experience or overshadowing the good plot. Quite simply, the film is a chase across New York City.

Friedkin distinguishes the boroughs by making Manhattan seem sophisticated and stylish, and Brooklyn dirty, grizzled, and drug-laden.

The settings are perfect.

The best scene in the film is the well-known car chase throughout New York City. Popeye is determined not to lose his man, the man riding in a subway on an elevated platform. Popeye steals a car and proceeds to chase the subway narrowly missing pedestrians, including a woman with a baby carriage, as he recklessly weaves in and out of traffic at a high speed, to keep pace with the train.

This is a phenomenal scene as the excitement and tension continue to build.

The conclusion of the film and the final scene is cynical and also leaves the audience perplexed and unsure of what has transpired.

The French Connection is open to good discussion and even interpretation, a novel aspect of the action film.

Providing a tremendous glimpse into 1970s Manhattan and Brooklyn, The French Connection is an exciting film that oozes with thrills, car chases, and a good story.

The film is unique in style and still holds up incredibly well- one of my favorites in the action genre.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Richard Friedkin (won), Best Actor-Gene Hackman (won), Best Supporting Actor-Roy Scheider, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Sound, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing (won)

The Virgin Spring-1960

The Virgin Spring-1960

Director Ingmar Bergman

Starring Max von Sydow, Birgitta Valberg

Top 250 Films #72

Scott’s Review #243

60011418

Reviewed May 15, 2015

Grade: A

The Virgin Spring is a quiet masterpiece by director Ingmar Bergman.

A Swedish film, it won the Best Foreign Language Oscar in 1960, which is surprising for such a dark film.

I have heard about this film for years, but it has eluded me until now. I am finally glad I viewed it. It is breathtaking and mesmerizing.

A unique film for many reasons, it inspired “revenge” films to follow, specifically The Last House on the Left and I Spit on Your Grave, which is a horror film, while The Virgin Spring is an interestingly artful film.

The film also explores morals, the main character’s religious beliefs, and the theme of guilt.

The film is shot in black and white, and the first thing that struck me about it was its gorgeous cinematography and lighting. The brilliant, deep contrast of black and white, with the illumination of a character’s face against a deathly black background, is bold and reminiscent of Citizen Kane (1941).

It gives the film warmth and glow that contrasts perfectly with the bleak subject matter.

The story of The Virgin Spring is a tragedy, yet the filming is so magnificent that it was not until the film concluded and I pondered the actual story that I realized just how horrific it truly is. And that is what Bergman was going for-provoking a thought.

This is not a film to watch while munching on a tub of popcorn. It is a film designed to prompt thought.

An affluent Swedish couple owns a farm and lives a peaceful, quiet existence. They are stellar members of their community and church. Although they are humble, they can afford to have servants.

They have a beautiful and pampered young daughter named Karin, who is sent to deliver candles to their church one sunny day. Karin is a trusting, virginal, and proper girl. She meets a trio of males- two adults and a young boy.

At first, gleefully sharing food with them and enjoying her newfound friends, they soon turn on her, and she is viciously raped, robbed, beaten, and murdered.

The look of surprise, pain, and horror on Karin’s face is monumental. As this occurs, a pregnant and spiteful servant, Ingeri, watches in horror from a hiding place. A rival of Karin’s, Ingeri, wanted misfortune to be thrust upon Karin, but as she sees in horror, her expressions portray regret.

As the family hopes and prays that they can find the missing Karin, the men and boy show up at the farmhouse in need of food and shelter.

Unbeknownst to the family, they are Karin’s rapists and killers, and once the truth is known, the once-sweet parents are out for brutal revenge. The young boy of the trio is guilt-ridden and physically sick from the circumstances.

Is the family’s revenge justified, or should they (as good Christians) forgive? This is the moral point of the story.

The conclusion is powerful as the father begs God for forgiveness. He questions his actions. But is he a changed man?

Bergman uniquely and intelligently shoots these scenes with only the father’s back in view as he throws his hands to leave. In these moments, we, the viewers, become one with the father, which makes for powerful storytelling.

Influential to many subsequent films, The Virgin Spring (1960) is a powerful tale reminiscent of a fairy tale that prompts viewers to reflect on its ending.

Subdued yet horrifying, it is meant to be viewed and analyzed.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Foreign Language Film (won), Best Costume Design, Black-and-White

To Catch A Thief-1955

To Catch A Thief-1955

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Cary Grant, Grace Kelly

Top 250 Films #73

Scott’s Review #455

60000732

Reviewed July 24, 2016

Grade: A-

Cary Grant starred in five Alfred Hitchcock films in his day, and 1955’s To Catch A Thief is right smack in the middle of Hitchcock’s prime period of masterful pictures.

Grace Kelly (her third and final Hitchcock film) co-stars, making this film a marquee treat as both actors were top-notch in their heyday and had much chemistry in this film.

While not my all-time favorite of Hitchcock films, To Catch a Thief has mystery, a whodunit, and some of the most gorgeous cinematography of the French Riviera. The breathtaking surroundings are my favorite part of this film.

Grant plays John Robie, aka. “The Cat,” an infamous jewel thief who has now gone clean. He spends his days quietly atop the French Riviera growing grapes and flowers and keeping out of trouble.

When a new jewel thief begins to strike wealthy tourists, Robie is immediately under suspicion by the police. He is forced to prove his innocence by catching the real thief in the act, as the thief uses the same style of stealing as Robie once did.

Amid this drama, Robie meets the beautiful heiress Frances (Kelly) and her interfering mother, Jessie Stevens (Jessie Royce Landis), which leads to romance.

Although Grant could be old enough to be Kelly’s father, we immediately accept Robie and Frances as the perfect couple- she is sophisticated, stylish, and rich, and he equally has a bad-boy edge.

To Catch A Thief has a strong romantic element and a glamorous and wealthy tone. After all, the subject matter at hand- jewels- equates to lavish set decorations, women dripping in expensive jewelry, and a posh resort among the gorgeous French waters.

The supporting characters are interesting, too. A triangle emerges as Frances plays catty with a young girl, Danielle, eager for Robie’s affection. Danielle, much plainer looking than Frances, though no shrinking violet, holds her own in a match of wits with Frances as they bathe in the water one afternoon.

Frances’s mother, Jessie, provides tremendous comic relief as she attempts to bring Robie and Frances together. She is always searching for a handsome suitor for her daughter.

Finally, insurance man H.H. Hughson also contributes to the comic relief by begrudgingly providing Robie with a list of wealthy visitors with jewels.

In their playfully awkward lunch- delicious quiche is the meal of the day- at Robie’s place, Robie proves how Hughson himself is a thief of sorts to accomplish what he needs to get from Hughson.

Despite all of the positive notes, something about To Catch A Thief prevents it from being among my all-time favorite Hitchcock films. Perhaps it is because I never doubted Robie’s innocence, and if dissected, the caper is a bit silly.

I get the sense that the audience is supposed to question whether Robie is truly reformed or playing a game and is back to his dirty deeds, but I wasn’t fooled.

This is a minor gripe, but To Catch A Thief is a fantastic film.

The way the film is shot is almost like being on the French Riviera. Countless coastal shots of the skyline will amaze the viewer with breathtaking awe of how gorgeous the French country is and how romantic and wonderful it is.

This is my favorite part of To Catch A Thief.

The visuals of the film rival the story as the costumes created by costume designer and Hitchcock mainstay, Edith Head, are simply lovely. And who can forget the costume ball near the conclusion?

Though the story might be the weakest and lightest element of the story,  who cares? The visuals more than make up for any of that, as To Catch A Thief (1955) will please loyal fans of Hitchcock’s vast catalog.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Art Direction, Color, Best Cinematography, Color (won), Best Costume Design, Color

(Le Boucher) The Butcher-1970

(Le Boucher) The Butcher-1970

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Stephane Audran, Jean Yanne

Top 250 Films #74

Scott’s Review #273

60026770

Reviewed September 14, 2015

Grade: A-

(Le Boucher) The Butcher is a French thriller released in 1970 that is slow-moving at first but progresses to a dramatic crescendo as the latter part of the film escalates, transforming from plodding to a cerebral mind-blower.

Mirrored after and inspired by director Alfred Hitchcock, The Butcher is surprisingly not quite horror (based on the title, one might assume it is), but rather, an intelligent, dreamy thriller.

Gorgeous schoolteacher Helene Daville is competent, confident, and filled with a zest for life. She tutors children who need extra help, laughs with them, and even lets one sip champagne during a wedding to try the taste. She enjoys living and occasionally embarking on adventures.

One day, at a wedding, she meets the local butcher, Paul Thomas, and they immediately hit it off as they tenderly walk home together. Cordial and kind, they develop a friendship and laugh together.

As time goes on, a series of killings begins to occur in the town.

Helene begins to suspect Paul of the murders and wrestles with her conflict between her budding love for him and her revulsion at the thought of being in love with a vicious murderer. Her conflict is the point of the film.

The relationship between Helene and Paul is an interesting dynamic and, I now realize, the reason for the slow pace of the picture. Helene and Paul enjoy a nurturing, caring courtship and the film successfully achieves the intended slow build.

The murder mystery is rather secondary and helps support the main plot. We know little- almost nothing- about the female victims. They are strangers to the audience and the reason for their deaths is unknown.

The killer simply kills- no motivation is revealed. This is what makes the film so cerebral and mysterious.

The Butcher is a love story intertwined with a thriller. It is not a mainstream thriller in the conventional sense and the final twenty or thirty minutes reeled me in completely and gave me great admiration for the film, which I had been hedging about throughout.

The meat of the film might have started an additional thirty minutes before it did in my opinion, but then again the slow build may have been intended to make the result more powerful. The moral conflict, love versus hate, tenderness, affection, caring, devastation, and betrayal are all explored during this relatively brief finale.

Besides, the blurry camera shots and angles from the vantage point of an automobile driver traveling down a dark, tree-lined street are highly creative and unique.

The comparisons to Hitchcock are evident.

Helene is similar to Tippi Hedren’s “Melanie Daniels” from The Birds. She is glamorous, alluring, blonde, tall, well-dressed, and the heroine of the film. Attractive and blonde are traits featured in many Hitchcock films.

Paul, on the other hand, reminds me of Rod Taylor’s Mitch, also from The Birds, though not as handsome or charismatic. Still, their relationship reminds me of the two of them as the chemistry oozes from the screen and a romance and thriller are combined.

Helene is perceived as a wholesome wonderful person by the audience, but is she truly?

In the end, we are left questioning her true feelings and are left with a distaste in our mouths. Her choices confuse us or is she simply a complex human being like each of us is?

The interesting aspect of The Butcher (1970) is it leaves one questioning how we would handle Helene’s dilemma, and more importantly, how we would channel our feelings if faced with a similar predicament.

Blow-Up-1966

Blow-Up-1966

Director Michelangelo Antonioni

Starring David Hemmings, Vanessa Redgrave

Top 250 Films #75

Scott’s Review #305

60033579

Reviewed December 21, 2015

Grade: A

Blow-up is a mysterious and compelling 1966 (the spawn of more edgy films) thriller that undoubtedly influenced the yet-to-come 1974 masterpiece The Conversation, directed by Francis Ford Coppola, as both films are tense tales of intrigue focusing on technology as a tool to witness a murder.

This film is legendary director Michelangelo Antonioni’s first English-speaking film, and what a film it is.

Set in hip London in the 1960s, it is undoubtedly a fascinating portrayal of the fashion world. The story is about a fashion photographer named Thomas, who is in high demand. He revels in bedding women so they may have their photos taken by this rock star photographer and is chased around London by gorgeous women.

One day, he aborts a photo shoot because he is bored. He is not the nicest guy in the world, but an unlikable character.

But perhaps that is secondary or even intentional. One day, while walking in Maryon Park, he encounters a couple in the distance. They appear to be having a secret rendezvous and nervously kissing, so he begins photographing the woman, Jane (played by a very young Vanessa Redgrave). Jane realizes they have been snapped and is furious, demanding the film.

This sets off the mystery and the meat of the film.

The film is a tremendous achievement in cinematic intrigue. It is pretty psychological and open to much interpretation, which is its genius. The main questions are: “What exactly transpired in the park, and who is responsible?”

We feel little sympathy for Thomas, which perhaps is intentional. And what about Jane?

Talk about a mystery!

We know little about her beyond the fact that she has secrets, but is she responsible for the crime? Throughout the film, Thomas and Jane engage in a cat-and-mouse game, seemingly trying to outwit and outmaneuver each other.

The unique aspect of the film is that the viewer will often ask questions: “Was there even a crime committed?” “Are the events all in Thomas’s imagination, or has he misinterpreted the series”? One will revel in the magnificence of these questions.

I immediately recognized similarities to The Conversation (1974). Both feature one of the senses as a means of solving or realizing the crime committed—in The Conversation, it is hearing; in Blow-Up, it is sight.

In both, the main character uses these senses for a living, and both are arguably not the most likable characters. Both films feature mimes.  Both films are pretty cerebral, and both are cinema gems for the “thinking man.”

Blow-Up has weird, little intricate moments- a very tall female Russian model experiences an odd photoshoot with Thomas. Later,  a giggling pair of young girls end up in a grappling match with Thomas after asking him to take their photos.  A topless (from behind) Jane prancing around Thomas’s apartment is an unusual scene.

As a first-time viewer, I adored this film. It is a good example of a movie that requires multiple viewings to appreciate fully, and I look forward to doing just that.

A fantastic, creative achievement, Blow-Up (1966) is a masterpiece that can be dissected with each subsequent viewing.

Oscar Nominations: Best Director, Michelangelo Antonioni, Best Story, and Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen