"Rear Window" (1954) - RE-WATCH

Rank on the AFI List: #48

Synopsis (according to AFI)
When a broken leg forces photographer Stewart to become wheelchair-bound in his New York city apartment, he amuses himself by spying on his neighbors and soon becomes obsessed when he thinks he has witnessed a murder.  Kelly, as his fashionmodel girlfriend, helps with amateur detective work.

LET ME EXPLAIN...
This was the first film my wife and I watched since I began My Quest that we had actually both already seen before.  But it's so good (and I wanted to blog about it) that we couldn't resist another viewing.

Before it started, I remembered that it was a great thriller.  I remembered the plot.  I also remembered Grace Kelly (my wife would probably kill me if I say anymore about her).  However, what I did NOT remember was how voyeuristic it is.  You spend the majority of the film looking into people's windows, watching them live their lives, completely unaware that someone is looking at them.  That's just creepy in general, but I think it adds to the overall suspense and nervousness of the film.

I also have to add that I think one reason this is such a popular movie is that it's a detective story (just look at how many crime-drama TV shows there are and tell me that people don't get into them), but the investigation is done by average people.  This gives the audience a chance to feel like THEY could solve a murder and do detective work, too.

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
First, there's the fact that it's got some great suspense.  Second, that suspense consistently builds up as the story progresses (its crescendo is as steady as any film I've seen).  And to top it off, the entire film (except for one short scene) is set in one room.  To be able to create such a great thriller while only using one set is a great testimony to Hitchcock and how "Rear Window" is one of the best - and most unique - films ever made.

Complaints
In my opinion, the love story saga between Jimmy Stewart and Grace Kelly tended to "get in the way" of moving the plot along.  It didn't really add anything to the story.  Of course, it was a reason to have Grace Kelly in the film, so I can't really complain too much (on that note, my wife's complaint would probably be Grace Kelly is in this movie).

LET ME SUM UP...
Classic Hitchock film with great suspense, though it's a tad uncomfortable to watch because it's so voyeuristic.  Nevertheless, it's a great movie and quite entertaining.

MY RATING: 8/10 (1 lower from my previous rating)

"The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" (1948)

Rank on the AFI List: #38

WHAT I ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE MOVIE:

Only that it had the famous line "We don't need no stinking badges!" (actually, the quote is "Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges!")

LET ME EXPLAIN...
Having not read the synopsis for this film before watching it (I've done that for a handful of these movies because I sometimes like to go in with a blank slate), I was surprised that it's not so much an adventure film as it is a statement about what greed can do to a person.  I was expecting to see a lot of action, but instead I got a lot of thought-provoking situations and performances, and those are what make this a good movie.

Humphrey Bogart, in particular, is phenomenal.  In fact, this is my favorite performance of his (comparing that to his roles in Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon, and The African Queen, all of which are also on the AFI List).  I was shocked to discover he wasn't even nominated for an Oscar.

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?
Besides being an all-around well done movie, "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" is a great examination of what greed can do to people, and (maybe even more importantly) how a person's response to financial gain or loss can shape his or her entire life.  This illustration of one of mankind's most primal and sinister desires is why I think it's considered one of the best films ever made.

Not really a complaint, but...
I wasn't sure how much I was liking this movie as I was watching it.  While I expected an adventure, I got something else, and it wasn't until after the movie ended and I talked about it with my wife that I started to really like it.  It's the examination of the characters and their actions that I really liked about the movie, and not so much the film itself.

LET ME SUM UP...
This is a well done and thought-provoking illustration of greed.  It's also the best performance by Humphrey Bogart that I have seen so far.

MY RATING: 7/10

TOTAL # OF FILMS WATCHED: 70

"Swing Time" (1936)

Rank on the AFI List: #90

WHAT I ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE MOVIE:
Only that it was a musical.

LET ME EXPLAIN...
This is considered one of the best films by famous dancing pair Fred Estaire and Ginger Rogers.  And for me, it's the first and only film I've seen of theirs.  I'll say this: they are incredible dancers.  One of the most impressive things to see in this movie is how they move together, as if they're one graceul person rather than two separate people (specifically, watch how in sync they bounce together).  And I have to point out that the number they do in the dance class is easily my favorite part of the whole film.

There's some good humor in this as well (which right there makes it better than A Night at the Opera), some famous songs that are fun, and an unexpectedly large amount of gambling.  But it's the dancing of Estaire and Rogers that make this movie. 

What makes this a "Top 100" Movie?

Fred Estaire and Ginger Rogers are a very famous dancing couple who made ten films together.  "Swing Time" is considered by many to be their best.  I have to think this is the reason it's on the AFI list.

Complaints:

A well conceived plot and good storyline are lacking, to say the least.  I found myself thinking throughout the film: "I don't get that character's motive for doing what they're doing in this scene", but I eventually realized that this movie is about the dancing and not the story.  Nevertheless, I like a good story and would prefer a little more effort in establishing motives for the actions of characters.

Another complaint: there's a big dance number in the middle of the movie with Estaire and a bunch of other dancers, but it was boring, odd, and too long (which, strangely enough, reminded me and my wife of the extended dance number in "Singin' in the Rain", which drags on for 10 minutes and is also more weird than enjoyable - was this a requirement for musicals back in the day or something?).

LET ME SUM UP...

This is a better than average movie, if for nothing more than to see some great dancing by Fred Estaire and Ginger Rogers.  It's certainly not worth watching for its plot or character development, but it's a lighthearted musical that doesn't try to be something it's not.

MY RATING: 5.5/10

TOTAL # OF FILMS WATCHED: 69