"2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968)

Rank on the AFI List: #15

Synopsis (according to AFI):
Kubrick's science fiction epic puts mankind in context between ape and space voyager.  The film created a stir for its special effects, the computer HAL, and the debate about the meaning of the film's final sequence.

LET ME EXPLAIN...
The only other time I watched this movie was in an 8th grade classroom.  I was confused by it way back then, and after another viewing I still think it's a trippy movie.  The effects are great and groundbreaking for 1968 (that's nine years before Star Wars came to theaters and wowed audiences with its special effects).  But there really seems to be no clear thread of connection throughout the movie except for the big black slab.

I have been to a rave before (believe it or not, but there was a rave on campus while I was in college and my friends and I checked it out), and it was pretty weird.  The ending of this film reminded me of the rave for one reason alone: you have to be on acid to appreciate either.

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
Well, it's considered to be the first "real" science-fiction movie, so that right there would be a major reason.  Also, as I mentioned above, the special effects (for which this film won its lone Academy Award) are quite impressive.  And I'll admit - somewhat begrudgingly - that perhaps the absolutely crazy ending which spawns so much debate over its meaning adds to this film's acclaim.

Complaints:
I'm with the popular opinion here that the film is too slow.  Yes, I realize things take awhile in space, but show us once that it takes a long time to get from A to B as opposed to showing us EVERY time.  Other complaints I mentioned earlier: connect the story more and don't be so entirely off-the-wall with the ending.  It's no use to me to even analyze what it might mean if I don't think the creators even bothered to think about what it might mean (this is the exact same reason I hate "modern art").

LET ME SUM UP...
Impressive special effects, but a slow moving film with a ridiculously weird ending.  Too ludicrious to even try to analyze.

MY RATING: 4/10 (2 lower from my previous rating)

"Network" (1976)

Rank on the AFI List: #64

WHAT I ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE MOVIE:
1) It was about a TV network
2) It stars Faye Dunaway
3) The famous line: "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!"

LET ME EXPLAIN...
I found it sadly funny that, being a movie that satirizes TV executives doing anything they can for better ratings, this didn't seem too far off from what television (specifically TV news) has actually become.  Regardless of your opinion on cable news (or which channels are fair and which are biased), this movie illustrates a transition from straight news to opinionated political grandiosity that is present on cable news today.  It was fascinating to watch this satire from 1976 in 2010.

Something that made this movie stand out to me was all the monologues.  I think every character had at least one major monologue pertaining to their view on life, the media, and the messy web that entangles them.  Several characters gave multiple monologues.  I appreciated these because you really got to know who the characters were, and one monologue toward the end helped sum up the point of the movie, which really helped me enjoy it more than I would have had it not been included.

I also thought the film was poignant in having characters without heart and soul; they're people going about life without any real care or compassion for others.  It's as if working in television has taken away what makes them truly human.  Sounds a bit like what happens when we watch too much television, doesn't it?

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
For one thing, it's a very well-done satire on a topic related to cinema (television).  It also seemed like it was an "anti-establishment" film that focuses on waking "a sleeping giant", which I could see might be considered significant and controversial for America (especially in the 70's).  It also had good acting (though I wasn't that impressed with Peter Finch as Howard Beale, though he won the very first posthumous Academy Award for Best Actor).  It was nominated for 10 Academy Awards, winning four: three for acting and one for writing.

Complaints:
I can't really put my finger on it, but how the movie moved along seemed a bit slow and dull at times.  And like I said earlier, had it not been for a monologue toward the end, I would have been a bit lost on the point of the movie.

LET ME SUM UP...
"Network" is an interesting film to watch in today's media climate because what was satire in the 70's is very close to reality in the 21st century.  It was well acted (Faye Dunaway's performance was my favorite) and well written with a TON of character monologues.  Not exactly the most entertaining film, but it's an interesting statement about the media.

MY RATING: 6/10

TOTAL # OF FILMS WATCHED: 74

"The Graduate" (1967)

Rank on the AFI List: #17

WHAT I ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE MOVIE:
1) It stars Dustin Hoffman.
2) It's about a young guy having an affair with an older woman.
3) It had the song "Here's to You, Mrs. Robinson" in it.

LET ME EXPLAIN...
I liked this movie.  Despite the fact that it is an entire web of sexually immoral situations, it had some of the best humor, best writing, and far and away best cinematography I've seen in a comedy on the AFI List.

"The Graduate", while considered a comedy, sometimes felt like a comedy-drama.  And I found it easier to enjoy the comedy if I thought of the film as a drama (which I thought it was before watching it).  And for those moments when I felt the development of relationships and characters wasn't very strong, I reminded myself that it's a comedy, and comedies tend to not focus as heavily on developing characters and relationships.  This really helped me enjoy "The Graduate".

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
First, it's a funny movie, and unlike many comedies, it doesn't rely on sight gags or goofiness (as opposed to Tootsie, which ironically enough, is another film on the AFI List starring Dustin Hoffman).  Rather, the wit of the script and the talent of the cast are what drive the humor.  On top of that, the intro and wrap-up of the film on Turner Classic Movies (a TV channel I recently discovered as a goldmine of AFI Top 100 films) pointed out how the content of "The Graduate" was so taboo back in the 60s that it was somewhat groundbreaking in going where no film had gone before.  It was also nominated for 7 Academy Awards including Best Picture, Actor, Actress, and Supporting Actress.  It won Best Director, and in my opinion should have definitely won Best Cinematography (Bonnie and Clyde won it that year, much to my dismay).

Any Complaints?
Well, like I mentioned above, the film sometimes lacked in illustrating the development of one particular relationship.  Also, the scuba diving scene - while funny - was confusing and I didn't get why it happened.

LET ME SUM UP...
"The Graduate" is a well written comedy that is very well acted.  It also has some of the best cinematography I've seen during My Quest.  The content isn't the most moral, but if you don't mind that, this is a classic comedy worth seeing.

MY RATING: 8/10

TOTAL # OF FILMS WATCHED: 73

"Bonnie & Clyde" (1967)

Rank on the AFI List: #42

WHAT I ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE MOVIE:
1) It stars Warren Beatty
2) It's about a real-life couple from the 1930s who robbed banks

LET ME EXPLAIN...
This movie wasn't exactly what I was expecting.  For some reason, I thought it would have a fair amount of humor and really glamourize the gangster, robbers-on-the-lamb lifestyle.  It did the latter somewhat, but it also portrayed the couple and their lifestyle as being rather tumultuous and unhappy (at least, that's the impression I got while watching it).

Now as far as the style of this film, it reminded my wife and I a LOT of Easy Rider, though this was certainly more enjoyable (of course, that's not saying much).  These two films had such a similar style in terms of film editing, sound, and lack of connectivity between scenes.  All this to say: I'm not a fan of this style.

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
I'll let the American Film Institute answer this question because I couldn't figure out why this is considered one of the best films ever made until I read the description on their website: "We rob banks!"  Dunaway and Beatty star in this story of real-life 1930s bank robbers Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow, a film that mixed romance, adventure, glamour, comedy and violence in a way never seen before.

While I agree with the violence and glamour, I thought the romance was odd and somewhat awkward, the adventure was lacking (I would have preferred more bank robbing scenes), and the comedy just wasn't very funny.  This may have been a groundbreaking blend of different genre elements, but I wasn't overly impressed with it.

Complaints:
1) It seemed a bit slow at times and lacked a lot of the action I was expecting.
2) Buck's wife has quite possibly the most irritating voice/scream EVER!
3) The style of this film is too similar to "Easy Rider".

LET ME SUM UP...
I was somewhat disappointed with this movie because I was expecting more action, better humor, and a different overall style.  However, I thought the acting was terrific, the action scenes were quite intense and very well done, and it was interesting to learn more about the infamous duo of Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow.

MY RATING: 5/10

TOTAL # OF FILMS WATCHED: 72

"Shane" (1953)

Rank on the AFI List: #45

WHAT I ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE MOVIE:
Only that it's a Western.

LET ME EXPLAIN...
This was only the second western I had ever seen (the other one being Unforgiven), and if there was ever a movie that encapsuled EVERYTHING I thought a Western film would be, this was it.  Take, for instance, the following: it was set in a wide open range with cowboys and homesteaders; it had quick-draws, spurs rattling, a saloon fight, a guy falling from a balcony after being shot, another guy get up from his chair and leave the saloon before the guns started firing, etc.  It even had a tumbleweed blowing across the screen!  I think the only thing it didn't have was John Wayne, but it did have a young Jack Palance for all you City Slickers fans.

In fact, some of my favorite movies that spoof on the Western cliches include Three Amigos! and Back to the Future III.  It was cool to see a serious Western utilizing (and perhaps introducing?) things these films and plenty of others have copied and spoofed.

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
I already mentioned how this movie is an all-around classic Western.  I don't know what other films are out there that carry as many elements of the Western genre that this one carries.  On top of that, it's about something that I think is ingrained and timeless in America: the right to own property.  Much like The Grapes of Wrath, this film grips you with the anger/sadness/hopelessness of watching people lose their home which they've put so much effort into building for their families.  Furthermore, there was great acting, and it was overall a very well-done movie (it won an Oscar for Best Cinematography: Color, and was nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay, and two Best Supporting Actor awards)

Complaints:
About two-thirds of the way through the movie up until about the last 10 minutes, it seemed to slow down a bit.  The story was progressing well up until that point, but then scenes seemed to drag on a little longer than necessary.  Not a big complaint, but something I noticed.

LET ME SUM UP...
As someone who has only seen two Westerns in my life, this is what I'd consider to be a classic Western.  It had a ton of recognizable Western elements (making it seem like one giant cliche, except that this may be where most of those cliches came from), but it also had a good story that gets the audience invested in what's going on and caring about what happens to the characters.  It's well acted and a well done movie overall.

MY RATING: 7/10

TOTAL # OF FILMS WATCHED: 71