The Graduate

"The Graduate" was made in 1967 and directed by Mike Nichols. It stars Dustin Hoffman as a recent college graduate with no well-defined aim in life who is seduced by Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft). This scene, and the line "Mrs. Robinson, you're trying to seduce me, aren't you?" is widely known, referred to and parodied. Mrs. Robinson has become a name for any seductive older woman after the success of the film.

The film is the highest ranked on the AFI list that we have seen so far. In 1998 it was ranked at number 7, and in the updated list it is down ten places to number 17.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

I have to agree with Max; I was disappointed with the film and feel that the "Raindrops Keep Falling on My Head" sequence was particularly hard to watch. It felt as though a whole shift of mood had taken place, and although I'm all for musicals, in which songs break the dialog frequently, this was so out of place in terms of the tone of the film that it felt like the director was just tripping and decided to add it in for his own amusement.

This movie was reminiscent of "Easy Rider" and also harkened back to the first film we saw for this blog, "Treasure of the Sierra Madre," and in a funny way seemed like a mixture of these two. I say that because the whole premise of the film is, just like in "Easy Rider," the thrill of two men abandoning all responsibility and taking off across the American landscape. The scenes in which they scour over the terrain get old quickly, as was the case with "Treasure."

I struggle to imagine what has kept "Butch Cassidy" in the hearts and minds of film buffs for all these years. Perhaps if I were to revisit the film I would begin to understand, but I know I won't be able to bring myself for a little while...

A mullet of a movie...

First, sorry for the looooong absence, my partner in crime was jetting around the world.

Secondly, the title of this post says it all. I suspect that the only people who enjoy this film where those born before 1980. There is of course nothing wrong with old films- I happen to enjoy many black and white movies. But, the problem with this one, is that the film is just so boring. This movie is like a mullet, at one time it had to have been popular, and maybe there was even some merit to getting a mullet; but, now is no time to don a mullet, and there is nothing cool about Butch Cassidy.

What makes this movie even more difficult is how the screenwriters clearly threw out one liners, but they all fall flat on the audience. In fact, I cannot think of one time that the script made me laugh. And, oh God, don't ever make me watch that god awful bike scene again.

As a reviewer, I am obliged to come up with one at least one good thing to say about this movie...Besides the scenery, the effect of having the unstoppable pursuers chasing them through the desert is pretty cool. But, other than that, watch HBO's John Adams and avoid this movie.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Yeehaw...

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is ranked 73 on AFI's 100 Greatest Movies. On the tenth anniversay list, it fell twenty-three places, but is still ranked as one of the best westerns of all time.

The film follows the antics of two infamous train robbers: Butch Cassidy (Paul Newman) and his partner The Sundance Kid (Robert Redford) as they attempt to escape from the law. The film came out in 1969, and received almost immediate acclaim; according to Wikipedia, "...Adjusted for inflation, the film ranks among the top 100 grossing movies of all time and the top 10 for its decade".

Oh Titanic...

I cant say that this movie had the same effect on me that Holly describes. I was 14 years old when I saw this movie in theaters; my friend Kevin and I saw it because we had heard about the lines of teenage girls and wanted to see what the hype was about (neither of us said it, but I am sure the teenage girl factor was also a motivation). Although the love story aspect did not captivate us and Celine's booming voice came off as slightly annoying- the film still carried much weight with us.

When I watch Titanic now it seems that the movie was just destined to become the phenomenon that it was. As Holly pointed out, the film became the highest grossing film of all time, and that record does not seem likely to change.

Everything about this movie is big, even on the small screen Titanic carries more power with it than most action movies. All of the actors do a fine job. If I had to come up with a complaint, I would have to say that the film's script is the weakest part; much of Kate Winslet's diauloge comes across as just overly pretentious, and not in a good way. Winslet's character comes across like an Emo kid who just read Sylvia Platt in modern poetry class and quotes it to their parents when forced to do dishes. I guess this is what they wanted the character to sound like, but it comes off like they are trying way too hard.

Either way, this is small potatoes to the whole film, which is still a great flick eleven years later.

Titanic

"Titanic" is one of the movies that marked my passage from childhood into the teenage world. In fact, it was the first movie I saw in theaters without parents - a significant milestone for me at the age of eleven. Even though the film, and the Celine Dion song with which it has become inherently linked, is more than a little cliche today, I cannot underestimate the impact it had on me and on many others of my generation who saw it in 1997. When my two friends and I left the theater in tears, we returned home only to turn on the radio and hear the haunting opening of "My Heart Will Go On." Immediately, the tragedy was felt all over again, and inspired a fresh bucketload of tears.

What is it about "Titanic" that created such a storm? You could say that it is the baby-faced charm of Leonardo di Caprio, the timelessness and captivating quality of the historical event, or the breathtaking computerized ship horribly vertical in the Atlantic ocean with the ant-like figures clinging desperately to it. But I think what really captured moviegoers' imaginations and hearts was the classic love story between Jack and Rose. As corny as it may be, the romance is as poignant here as in "Casablanca". Set up as polar opposites, the couple's overriding affection for one another perhaps proves to us what we romantics love to see reaffirmed - that love conquers all, and always perseveres. Although it's corny, I will not deny that I can't help but sob and sigh as Jack freezes to death while telling Rose "don't let go!"

Titanic

James Cameron's "Titanic" was made in 1997 to dramatize the sinking of the RMS Titanic in 1912. It features Leonardo di Caprio and Kate Winslet as Jack and Rose, lovers who meet on board the ocean liner but are separated by class. The film was both a critical and commercial success, tying with "All About Eve" for the most Academy Award nominations, 14. It won 11, including Best Picture. "Titanic" became the highest grossing film of all time.

The film also stars Billy Zane, Frances Fisher, Gloria Stuart, Kathy Bates, Victor Garber and Bernard Hill.

Who hasn't seen "Titanic"?!

The Heat of the Night

I agree with everything that Holly said. In the past I had heard much good about this film and knew of the spin off television show. I loved everything about this film: the story, the characters, and especally the acting. Everyone pulls their role of magnificently. This is especally true of Sidney Poitier, who comes across with serious gravitas.

I loved the film and would recommend it to anyone- best one so far!

In the Heat of the Night

Loved it!

I have to say, this film is my favorite of the ones we have seen so far. Of course, many of us have heard the famous line "they call me Mr. Tibbs" and the less cultured among us at least recognize the Lion King spoof "they call me Mr. Pig! AAAAHHHHHHH!" Although many famous lines from AFI movies seem a let-down or just plain cheesy when you actually view them in context, this one is an exception. I thought Poitier's delivery of the line was nothing but powerful, along with the movie itself.

The story sheds light on the differences between the North and South and the ways in which prejudice is still deep rooted in many small southern towns. When Mr. Tibbs (called "Virgil" by the disrespectful police officers investigating a murder), a black Philadelphia police officer, proves to be yards ahead of his white counterparts in small-town Mississippi, they are forced to face their blatant racism and challenge their preconceived notions of African Americans. Tibbs is smooth, efficient and clever, in contrast to the other police officers' clumsy and clueless approach to solving the murder case.

At parts, the film was extremely moving, especially when Tibbs visits a cotton plantation and is slapped in the face by the white owner, a motion which he quickly returns, much to the recipient's horror. I was blown away by Sidney Poitier's skill and effortless performance. This was my first encounter with him as an actor but he certainly lived up to his great reputation. I am itching to see "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" after thoroughly enjoying this performance. An excellent story, excellent acting, excellent film. Truly an American classic.

The Heat of the Night

In the Heat of the Night was based off of a book by the same title by John Ball.

The film takes place in the fictional town of Sparta, Mississippi. A prominent man is murdered in a small southern town, and the police must find the killer. To solve the murder, the town police must get the help of a Northern Policeman, who happens to be an African American, who must deal with the racist attitudes of a 60s southern small town.

It came out in 1967 and it won five academy awards: Best Picture, Best Actor (for Rod Steiger), Film Editing, Sound, and Writing Adapted for a screenplay.

The film is ranked number 75 on AFI's 100 Greatest Movies, it is a new addition to the list from the 1998 list. It also has the distinction of being on AFI's 100 Movie Quotes list as well, with, "They call me Mister Tibbs!" as being number 16 on that list.

Jaws

To be honest, I was excited when I found out we were going to be watching Jaws. I have attempted to watch it about four and five times, but I had never been able to complete the movie. It always got to the part where they were going to find the shark- but I always had to turn it off! Usually this was because my Dad had to go on some kind of a business errand or my Grandma had just finished cooking dinner. So, the prospect of finishing the elusive Jaws was an exciting prospect for me!

I found the film to be good, but not exactly to my liking. The first half of the movie begins like a Hitchcock film, that is, it is suspenseful and mysterious. Spielberg never shows the vicious shark and leaves you wondering what will happen next; when the movie gets to a point when the heroes must board the ship to defeat the monster, it is then that the film begins to lose its luster. I had never experienced the latter part of the film, and I don' t know if I would want to again. It is not bad or uninteresting, just that it seems to go on for far to long. The characters shoot the shark to no avail, and battle it with with nature. And, just when it seems that they are about to give up or take the shark down, the movie just goes on another twenty minutes....

All of the characters are great and the special effects are wondrous for their time. I just wish that Spielberg had cut the movie down by fifteen to twenty minutes.

Jaws

I was surprised at how much "Jaws" reminded me of the 50s/60s Hitchcock thriller. I confess, I had not known it was made in the seventies and thought it was an eighties movie when I caught it on TV growing up. In all probability, I had only seen the second half of the movie, which I found very different from the first half. It was as though for the first hour Spielberg drew from "Psycho" or "The Birds", and for the second he focused on a model that would inspire the likes of "Armageddon" - the "mission" film.

"Jaws" is a sort of mish-mesh of the two styles of film, making me think of it as a bridge between one era and another. Being a classic movie fan, I enjoyed the first half more; I liked the way he built up suspense and dread in the viewer with the several shark attacks, first the girl swimming late at night and then on the beach in broad daylight. The shots were very Hitchcock, including one that Max pointed out debuted in "Vertigo." Once we had seen the shark, I lost most of my interest in the film.

I can see how, after seeing "Jaws," audiences at the time would have been afraid to go swimming. It is really terrifying in parts. However, once we see the men on the boat attempt a hundred times to kill the shark, I just start to hurl something at the screen to kill it myself. How many times can a shark be shot before it dies? Just for the fact that this film was a hallmark in its day, though, and probably ushered in a new type of filmmaking/distribution pattern, it does deserve to be on the list.

Jaws

Jaws (1975) was directed by Steven Spielberg, and based on a bestselling novel inspired by the Jersey Shore shark attacks of 1916.

It is regarded as a watershed film in motion picture history, the father of the summer blockbuster movie and one of the first "high concept" films. It was the first time that a film was ever "widely released" (opened nationwide all at the same time.)

It stars Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss, Robert Shaw, Lorraine Gary and Murray Hamilton.

Jaws was nominated for Best Picture, and won Academy Awards for film editing, music (original score) and sound. It is no. 2 on AFI's "100 years... 100 thrills" list, and no. 56 on the "100 Greatest Movies" list (down 8 from 1998).

Easy Rider

Wow, I agree with Max. The film really was painful to watch. From the first frame, the protagonists (what were their names again?) were already taking drugs. It felt that not only the characters, but the filmmakers themselves, were pretty drugged up throughout the experience. I started to wonder if I had taken something myself... or wish I had...

Max mentioned the scenery of the film being beautiful, and I agree. Throughout the hour and a half, I could not help but wonder how much of the success and popularity of the film is due to the novelties it would have presented to an audience in the late sixties. I imagine that, before this, few films had been shot almost entirely in the outdoors, and with such freedom to explore America's terrain from a biker's perspective. There is also the cultural aspect; how did "Easy Rider" look by the end of the sixties? It was probably representative of a society that moviegoers recognized and identified with. Yet today in the 21st century, such distinctions are merely commonplace, and have even rolled into the category of "cliche."

"Easy Rider" is probably a good example of a film that doesn't hold up in its own right today. Being squeamish and overly timid, I found it difficult to watch the often explicit and downright disturbing drug and sex scenes; but even putting those personal reactions aside, I found little to enjoy as a viewer in 2008. The film's message of freedom and promotion of the hippie lifestyle is outdated, and its technical features are unspectacular too. A decent plot and universal values might have saved the film, but alas, here too, it fails to deliver.

Easy Rider- Not so easy...

In order to be cultured in todays world, it is essential to have knowledge of cinema. Movies have effected every aspect of our culture and to be ignorant of them is a profound mistake. At the risk of sounding like a philistine, it is just as important to expose yourself to Hitchcock as it is to Beethoven.

Thankfully, The American Film Institute has given us a valuable guide to viewing the "great" movies; Unfortunately, to do this, it involves watching movies like Easy Rider. I originally saw this movie back in 2000 when I was seventeen, then I thought the movie was boring and unenjoyable. After discussing it with my video production teacher I came to the conclusion that the movie was simply too advanced for my taste. Now, eight years later, after giving the movie another try, I have concluded that it is not only unejoyable but it is unwatchable.

The only way anyone could possible enjoy this movie is if they saw it in theaters back in 1969. But, its important to note, the film is not bad because it is dated; It is bad because there is no plot, no characters, no nothing...It is just two drug dealers riding motorcycles through the desert while stoned. All the events that take place in the 93 minutes of the film seem irrelevant.

In fact, the only meaningful part of the film, is Jack Nicholson (who joins halfway through) diauloge with Billy:

George Hanson: You know, this used to be a helluva good country. I can't understand what's gone wrong with it.
Billy: Man, everybody got chicken, that's what happened. Hey, we can't even get into like, a second-rate hotel, I mean, a second-rate motel, you dig? They think we're gonna cut their throat or somethin'. They're scared, man.
George Hanson: They're not scared of you. They're scared of what you represent to 'em.
Billy: Hey, man. All we represent to them, man, is somebody who needs a haircut.
George Hanson: Oh, no. What you represent to them is freedom.
Billy: What the hell is wrong with freedom? That's what it's all about.
George Hanson: Oh, yeah, that's right. That's what's it's all about, all right. But talkin' about it and bein' it, that's two different things. I mean, it's real hard to be free when you are bought and sold in the marketplace. Of course, don't ever tell anybody that they're not free, 'cause then they're gonna get real busy killin' and maimin' to prove to you that they are. Oh, yeah, they're gonna talk to you, and talk to you, and talk to you about individual freedom. But they see a free individual, it's gonna scare 'em.
Billy: Well, it don't make 'em runnin' scared.
George Hanson: No, it makes 'em dangerous. Buh, neh! Neh! Neh! Neh! Swamp!

This paranoid style of thinking is prevalent throughout the film. All of the characters are either on the side of the free (ie. good) or the reactionaries (ie. nearly everyone else). The problem with this is not only does it make for uninteresting cinema, but it also plays into the fact that the film is so dated; when Hopper (who acts and directs the film) shows us a hippie commune that is presumably the "ideal" lifestyle , it looks absolutely ridicules to anyone who who is not on a hallucinogenic drug. In contrast to this, the villians are cardboard cutouts of every redneck stereotype imaginable. They prevent Captain America and Billy from staying at motels and throw them in jail for "parading without a license". When the bikers visit a roadside cafe, they are mocked and driven out by the square good ole boys; while it is hard to sympathize with them, how could any objective person really feel anything for Captain America and Hopper? Days before, they had just sold cocaine and used the profits to finance their trip to Mardi Gras. And, moments before being mocked, the riders openly flirt with underage girls. Although the rednecks are supposed to be bad for their prejudice against long hair- are they wrong? Do the bikers have any redeeming qualities? And, would you feel comfortable with your daughter bringing one of them home for dinner?

Easy Riders glorifies an abstract notion of "freedom" that is largely undesirable for anyone who who values sobriety. As a film, it has some beautiful scenery, and as a period piece it has some interesting qualities; but, like the late-sixties, the film is should be forgotten as a whimsical and ridicules moment in time.

Easy Rider

Easy Rider (1969) is the quintessential sixties film! It deliberately breaks away from the traditional studio films, and chronicles the new generation of "anti-heroes". The film is considered one of the first- "post-classical Hollywood" productions, created by the "new" generation of directors, writers, and actors.

The film is directed by Dennis Hopper (who also stars in it) and was written by Peter Fonda (co-starring in the film), Dennis Hopper, and Terry Southern. It also stars Jack Nicholson.

It was nominated for two academy awards: Jack Nicholson for Best Supporting Actor and for Best Writing, Story and Screenplay Based on Material Not Previously Published or Produced.

This film is also ranked #84 on AFI's 100 Greatest Movies, it has moved up four spots in the past ten years.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre

I apologize for the delay in my response- real world issues have prevented me from focusing on my review. But, to be honest, I do not have much to add from Holly's review; having heard much about this film, it was a minor disappointment.

The film revolves around three vagabonds who attempt to strike it rich in the mountains of Mexico. The two primary treasure hunters are Americans named Curtin( Tim Holt) and Dobbs (Humphrey Bogart. Early on, they meet an old man named Howard (Walter Huston) who tells them of his previous adventures digging for gold. The three men form a partnership, and spend the rest of the movie searching for treasure arguing about their shares. Being the most experienced of the three, Howard warns the two younger fortune seekers about the negative effects of gold; and, as soon as the characters are warned of this, Dobb's transforms from bumbling vagabond to greedy monster.

This perhaps was the weakest part of the film, John Huston never casts Dobbs in a sympathetic light, and so his madness is never a shock the viewer. There is never a point where you can feel anything for Dobbs, other than boredom at his actions. Granted, this is partially because the film has been influential, but none of Dobb's characteristics are exclusive to film, anyone who has read literature can find similar instances of greed and paranoia. And, as Holly said, this is said to be one of Bogart's best roles, but for me it was quite forgettable.

And, one cannot review this movie without mentioning the line about the badges, which I have heard countless times; sadly that was even disappointing. But, again, I suppose this is because it has seeped so deep into our culture, sort of like: "Where's the beef?".

I would recommend this movie to anyone interested in seeing a classic. But, only if your Netflix queue is on the empty side, and you have a lot of time on your hands.

Treasure of the Sierra Madre

So, it's been a while until I got around to posting my response to this movie, which was due to a number of things. The film seemed incredibly long, and, to be honest, it didn't hold much of my attention after the first half hour. One thing we should note is that the film is said to be one of Humphrey Bogart's best roles... in this role he is cast out of the usual mold, and stars as a money-hungry gold-digger who experiences a psychological downfall. The line "Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges" could be the leading reason why those at AFI consider "Treasure" to be up there in the top 100. It seems to be one of those catchphrases that has been parodied, and before you know it, ends up a classic. But does the film in itself hold up? Sadly, I know of countless contemporaries of "Treasure" which could take its place. "Cultural impact", one of the several judging criteria at AFI, seems predominant in the decision to place this film in at number 38 (down 8 since 10 years ago) on the list.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre

Background information:

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) was based on the novel of the same name, written by B. Traven in 1927.

The film is directed by John Huston, and stars Humphrey Bogart, Walter Huston, Tim Holt, Alfonso Bedoya, and Bruce Bennett.

John Huston won the Academy Award for Directing and Academy Award for Writing Adapted Screenplay in 1948 for his work on The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

Walter Huston, John Huston's father, also won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his role in this film, the first father-son win.

The film is #30 on American Film Institute's AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movies and #67 on AFI's 100 Years... 100 Thrills.

The famous quote, "Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges! I don't have to show you any stinkin' badges!" comes from this film.