When
I got to see Mark Harris’ epic documentary The Story of Film: An Odyssey(2011)
last year, like everyone else who has seen it I am sure, it opened a lot of new doors
for me. I always knew a lot of areas that I lacked exposure, like silent films
for example, but what this doc did brilliantly was gave me starting points to eradicate
those anomalies in my film knowledge. I am still working on many of those areas
but it is always good to know where to start than just grapple with all the
options. One such area was classic comedians and it introduced me to Harold Lloyd, probably the last of classic comedians
that I was introduced to. I checked off lot of names from my watch-list over the last year and inclusion of Safety Last(1923) in this year’s
blind spot line-up was to get rid of that last dark spot around the corner as well.
It is convenient for us viewers too but it's rather convenient of director to name characters in this film as 'The Boy', 'The Girl' or 'The Pal' and 'The Law'. So 'The Boy' and 'The Girl' are in love with each other and want to get married but he wants to become responsible first. So he leaves his small town, goes to a big city to get a job and make sure he can provide for his girl. After being in the city, 'reality' strikes and he has to share a room with his 'pal' and can only get a job in De Vore Department store as a salesman. Off course, he can not tell this to his girl as this would mean he can not hold his part of bargain. So he lies that he has a great job that pays sumptuously and will be able to get married and bring her to the city pretty soon.
Keeping this illusion alive takes lot of work. And Money. And if they had that, it wouldn't be an illusion. So he has to pawn almost everything they own to buy gifts a manager of his fabricated stature could afford like lavaliere and almost his entire paycheck for a chain to wear it. Though such gifts convince his girl of his well-being, they also convince her mother that a young man should not be left alone in big city with so much money. And 'The Girl' decides to surprise him by visiting. This puts our boy in a rather precarious situation and presents us with a long but well done sequence even though we must have seen similar scene played out many times before. And during this sequence, his real manager declares that he will give $1000 to anyone who will come up with an original idea to promote their store. This culminates into that iconic scene which most of us watch Safety Last for(see picture above).
It is actually a very simple story of boy and girl. Nothing specifically wrong with that especially since it is rather enjoyable. It's just that it is too straight forward and set up in a way that the whole thing is leading towards one big gig at the end. It largely depends for all the laughs on talents and physical humour of Harold Lloyd and his roommate, Bill Strother. Again, nothing specifically wrong with it either since lot of comic films did that in the day and considering how well choreographed and performed that one last, big stunt is, it's also worth it but it's just too old school. 90 year old, to be precise. And we being The Dark Knight(2008) generation and all, might have been a bit too used to a fight or an explosion or to at least whip smart one liners every second of every minute. If you can curb that instinct of yours, you can lean back and certainly enjoy this one. I did!
If you thought that I was making fun of its simplicity, let me remind you again - I enjoyed this film! As for its simplicity, it was a reminder to watch films with their time frames in mind. I am sure many things it does, like that iconic climb of Tower in the end or sequence in which he juggles multiple roles during impromptu visit of his wife-to-be, were rather difficult to film and to stage in 1923. They may not be today with technology so far advanced but that's why you need to keep in mind that it was made in 1923 and it is still quite enjoyable, if not exactly novel. Standing the test of time for almost a century, that in itself is quite notable achievement. I fail to imagine how many of today's films would pass that test in 2100.
The other day, someone shared a quote from Man of Steel(2013). In the middle of General Zod giving a pounding to whole New York and Superman trying to save it from that, he finds time to get Lois Lane somewhere alone and kiss her. Now how he was able to do that in the middle of shitstorm is matter for another post but he IS Superman so... Anyways, I digress. After their kiss Lois i.e. Amy Adams says "You know, they say it's all downhill after the first kiss". I can apply that analogy to all classic comedians and my affairs so far with their films.
In all reality, that makes Chaplin nothing short of Superman. His reply to Lois above is something on the lines of 'I am pretty sure that only counts when you are talking about Human' and Chaplin has proved his super-human abilities with every film. I don't even remember the first time I saw a Chaplin film; I must have been single-digit old. We have had our ups and downs, mostly ups though, but it hasn't hit a rough patch yet and after all these years, there is still something to look forward to i.e. Limelight(1952). Buster Keaton, based on analogy above, turns out to be very human. The first kiss was The General(1926) and it has been by far the best one. I have taken it forward from that and I genuinely enjoy the company but it has certainly been downhill since that first kiss.
The Marx Brothers, on the other hand, have been extremely unlucky. They haven't gone much further than second date and even that second date was to ensure I didn't brush them off with one false step. There are certain things you just can't do in affairs like these, you know! Jacques Tati, though not contemporary of others in these ranks and it is too soon yet to seal his fate but, is another one that might end up with fate similar to Marx Brothers. Second date I will soon arrange might do the trick for him. I don't know much about Harold Lloyd but based on all these encounters is it wrong if I expect him to be at least Captain Freaking America? I mean he is sort of lame but he is still a super hero. Or... am I having just too many affairs?
Around Christmas, I will post my entry for this month's Blind Spot and
with that 2013 Blind Spot Series will come to a conclusion. Blind Spot series is designed to motivate us into scratching off the names from our to-watch lists. We do that with every film we watch but these are meant to be those big, glaring omissions that are certain to attract some stares if you admit not having seen them in public. At this time of the
year last year, I was little skeptical about being a part of it because first of all, there are just too many of them and secondly if I
did participate, I wanted to take it seriously and look at the finish line. I am happy that
I am at least looking at it now but as usual, others are way ahead of me. Most others have
already published next year's entries. I might be lagging but I ain't a
quitter! This is what I intend to check off for this series in 2014.
Off course in compliance with my OCD, movies are spread almost evenly
over the time period ranging from silent era to contemporaries. 2 silents, 1
Halloween special, 1 previous Best Picture winner, 4 foreign films and one
Satyajit Ray as a bonus should hopefully give me a lot of variety. Majority of
the movies I saw this year were for their directors. I ventured into Tarkovskiy territory for the very first time and will encounter Ozu in December, went deeper into Kubrick and Bergamn filmography. I see the trend continuing
next year as well with likes of Scorsese, Coppola and Bunuel but there are few here I have included based on their own
accord. Biggest change from this year, however, would be me abandoning the question-answer format I used this year for these posts. I think I am about ready to do straight up posts for them. We'll see how that goes!
This year was a great hit considering that I ended up loving almost all
the movies I saw for this list. I really don't
like writing negative reviews so I really hope next year will be the same. Huge thanks to Ryan McNeil for organizing this, compiling the links every month and
championing it throughout the year. I hope to be at the finish line this
time next year as well.
The first time ever I put a Top 100 list on this blog was sometime in
March 2012, little less than a month after I got into LAMB. Since the start of
this year, I have been meaning to update that list and I finally found an
opportune time for it on the second anniversary of this blog in June 2013. A
lot changed over the year. Countless many films jumped up or down in the list,
many I saw last year made into it for the first time and as a result, some of
the earlier entries had to make way for them. However the one that made the
biggest lip was Chaplin’s City Lights(1931) which I only saw for the
first time last year. It found its way straight into my Top 10 films of all
time. I had not added an entry to my ‘Favourites’ feature since I updated the
list and so when I thought about doing so, it only felt right talking about one
that the biggest splash in that update.
Like all his other films, City Lights is about Chaplin’s tramp and
two more people in his life – a wealthy man who tries to kill himself in his
drunken stupor but tramp somehow manages to save him and a sweet but blind
flower selling girl that mistakenly takes him as a wealthy man. After getting
to know her a bit, he comes to know that an operation can save bring her
eyesight back. The catch is if she gets her eyes back, she would know that he
is not a wealthy man she thinks he is and that may change her feelings for him but
on the other hand, she will remain blind. But off course, he sets out to get
that money she will need for it and in a typical Chaplin fashion, his path is
filled with many gigs. On the other hand, wealthy man he saves feels quite
indebted to him for saving his life but seems to forget everything as he gets
sober. His butler also seems very suspicious of tramp and his motives and keeps
on trying to get him out of the house. This on-and-off nature of their
relationship makes for some hilarious moments.
Starting from the very first scene of tramp sleeping on the statue to be
publicly inaugurated in the city square to one of the most well-known endings
in the history of cinema, City Lights is full of iconic moments that
even those who haven’t seen the film might know about. I am sure we all also
remember the boxing fight he gets himself into to get the money for girl’s
operation or the restaurant scene during one of the drunken spells of his
wealthy friend. Scenes like these are filled with many small gigs that he does
to perfection and almost certainly, to hilarious results.
I have grown up watching Chaplin; though most of them were shorts or I
only saw parts of them, so it felt like shorts. I only got to his feature
length films in 2011 but unlike many other of his contemporary comedians, I was
at least introduced to him and his work very early in my life. Laurel-Hardy are
the only others I can say the same about. I still haven’t seen anything of
Harold Lloyd’s or Jacques Tati’s work though films like Safety Last(1923)
or Playtime(1967) and Mr. Hulot’s Holiday(1953) are pretty high up on my
watch-list. And although I inducted myself to Keaton and Marx Brothers right
around the time I got into Chaplin films, I didn’t even know about them until I
started this blog. So as much as I love Keaton and others, Chaplin will always
hold a dear place in my heart and the more of his films I watch, the more he
cements that position.
Chaplin, even though relies heavily on the physical comedy aspect of his
films, transcends further than that. There is always something more, something
deeper in his films than the obvious comedy we see on the screen. In Modern Times(1936), he comments on the human life getting more and more dependent
on machines which is even more relevant now than it was then. In The Great Dictator(1940), while making fun of Hitler and Nazism, he also gives a
message about humanity. In The Kid(1921), there is this beautiful
father-son relationship at its center. In City Lights, it is unadulterated
and undemanding Love.
His tramp, even though almost always at the lowest pedestal of the food
chain, is always about hope, about giving, about being more humane. I don’t
think it is more apparent anywhere else than it is in City Lights where
he gives pretty much everything he can; he gets into the boxing ring, he gets a
job in garage, he even goes to jail; just to help out this blind, flower-seller that
he loves but who doesn’t even recognize him when he stands in front of her
after all this. And this is the prefect segway for me to break into something I
love the most about this film.
I rarely cry at the movies. I don’t even remember the last time I did. I
don’t mean to brag or flaunt my 'Man' Card but it assures that when I do, the
film leaves its impression on me. Bicycle Thieves(1948) did and so did Grave of the Fireflies(1988). Result? Both are very high up in my Top 100. City Lights did too and it also makes the list but there is something even more
beautiful about it which makes it even more special. I have always been sucker
for the moments that can make you laugh and cry at the same time and this film
offers one such moment.
There are moments that warm your heart but what makes some of them extra
special is when one sneaky tear slips from the corner of your eye and rolls
onto your chick. There is danger in them either being too cheesy or falling
flat but when someone gets it right, it works wonders like that last scene when
the dejected tramp slowly walks away from the girl. It gets everything Just right.
But then she finally recognizes her benefactor and that tear manages to break off the boundaries
and roll down. I have seen this film 3 times and it
happened every. single. time. Even writing about this right now makes me go
“Awwww”. That scene is everything good, nice, pure and innocent about
this world personified in one moment. It could very well be my favourite onscreen moment ever. It will
never, ever get old for me.
Until Vertigo(1958) took the top seed in the last year's Sight and Sound list displacing Citizen Kane(1941), City Lights was the only movie ever to top that list besides Kane. Over the years, it has gone down up to #50 but is till one of the best films made ever. Personally, with so many iconic scenes and favourite moments, it is not only my favourite Chaplin but also favourite silent film of all time.
Past Favorites:
Bicycle
Thieves(1948)
Wall-E(2008)
Another month, another wrap-up post full of this month's viewings. It was a curious month, especially considering everything that was going on behind the scene. I would have expected to have a serious dip in the number but I have done much, much better. I will let you know little bit more about that sometime next week. For now, let us get into the month that was, in terms of my movie-watching.
July
The Son's Room(2001): The first time I even heard of this movie was during Cannes earlier this year when I just browsed through previous Palme d'Or winners. I will be honest that the subject of family dealing with the loss of their son is not exactly a new topic. We have seen this done before but what's good about this film is the poignancy with which the topic is handled. It was great seeing the whole family being there for each other while processing the grief in their own way. But for some reason, the daughter made more impression on me than either of the parents.
Midnight Cowboy(1969): For the longest time, this was the last Best Picture winner I had not seen. Not any more, though we don't have to go far back to find the next in line - Oliver(1968) and I have my reasons to believe it will be a while before that changes. As my introduction to John Voight was through his many supporting stints in the recent years, idea of him in the lead in the movie hasn't quite sunk in yet. His character was pretty dumb but he was excellent. However, as good as he was, Dustin Hoffman was even better.
The Grapes of Wrath(1940): John Steinback has been one of the authors I have been meaning to read for the longest time. But as it happens, I got around to see the movie first. I think I can take respite in the fact that at least it was a good movie, sad but good and I think we can take some comfort in the family had something going right for them by the end, even though they had to part with one of them.
Reds(1981): Sweeping epic in every sense of the word. Even at 3+ hours of its length, the biggest success to me was I never got bored. Throughout 3 hours of it, there was something interesting going on that kept me into it. I would have loved to see who's who of all the people talking about Reed and Bryant but I actually liked that documentary-like background of it. And Diane Keaton. I am not a big admirer of Annie Hall(1977) but even those who are will probably agree that she's better here. That was a beast of a performance!
Who Framed Roger Rabbit(1988): Why aren't there more movies like this? I
don't really know if this tanked completely at the box office or
something else happened that prevented making more such movies but I
thought this blend of animation and live-action was rather genius.
Overall story of film was more like children films with some dark tones
to it. They might be able to improve on that but I really would love to
see more films like this.
Spring Breakers(2013): I'll be honest that despite getting many rave reviews from fellow bloggers, I was little apprehensive of How I will like it? I have never seen a Harmony Korine film before and from trailers, it looked like sleazy, stylized, sexed-up version with no real content. It was all that but I liked it went to places that I never thought such a movie would and the darker it became, more I liked it. And I have heard many people talking about James Franco who was good but to me, the real standout was Ashley Benson.
This Is England(2006): I had seen few people talk about this movie a long while ago but going into this, I had no idea what I was in for. Even while watching the film, I had no idea where it was coming from and where it was going? but I don't mean it as a complaint. It takes so many different turns that I never expected and I like it about this film. Another thing different about this film was Protagonists in such films have non-functioning families but Shaun had a loving and caring mother.
Che Part One and Part Two(2008): I usually try not to bring politics into this blog but talking about a movie like this one without bringing your own political inclinations into it is almost impossible. I think this is a good film and it should at least be appreciated by almost everyone for the effort both Soderbergh and Del Toro put into it to make it and look really authentic. Beyond that, whether you like it or not will most probably depend upon political views and your ability to put them aside while watching a piece of art. Full review of both films here.
Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow(1963): Granted, I have seen only a couple of Vittorio De Sica films but when I see his name on the screen, I expect nothing good to happen to any characters. With that impression in my mind, this movie was the biggest surprise I can get. De Sica making a Comedy? and then you get to the very first story which is wackiest story you would see. They were all quite funny and of course, Sophia Loren and Marcello Mastroianni can do very little wrong.
Andrei Rublev(1966): I feel almost stupid for rating this. It is absolutely insignificant - rating I mean. Only certain thing I can say about it is after watching Solaris(1972) last month and almost hating it, I found a lot to like in this film. Apart from that, I am still processing it. There are so many dots here that I haven't connected yet that I feel stupid talking about it but it was my Blind Spot film for this month. So, more here.
Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani(2013)(Hindi): A very typical Bollywood film but it was very fun movie to watch. Walking into a Dharma Production movie, you should know what you are signing up for and as long as it doesn't make me groan in disgust every once in a while, I am fine with it. But in reality, I actually got something more - few catchy songs and all 4 leads giving fine performances, including Deepika Padukone. I never hated her but I think this is her first memorable performance.
Pi(1998): Even though it is a very first feature film Darren Arofonsky ever did, it was last of his film I saw. If I can find some of his shorts somewhere, I would love to profile him sometime soon. With extreme close-ups, jarring imagery, constant cuts, rotating camera and loud, high pitch background music, it has that typical Arofonsky feel to it. It is a good start to his already great career but it is just that - a start. He not only perfected his craft in later films but also got better actors, something this movie dearly lacked.
Steamboat Bill Jr. (1928): After loving the hell out of The General(1926), first Buster Keaton I saw, I was still looking for a next one I like as the next two I saw were kind of a miss for me. I don't know if I can count this as a hit as the last 15 minutes of tornado were kind of absurd and a little over the top but it did have its moments even within those last minuted like him getting over that wooden fence. As usual, Keaton's timing was awesome and it definitely gave me some great laughs. That should count for something as well.
Planes, Trains and Automobiles(1987): I first heard about it after seeing Due Date(2010) which is essentially a remake of it. But if I have to compare the two, I liked this much way more mainly because of the trouble-makes character. All I ever wanted to do to Gilfianakis was to punch him in the face as hard as I can. Here, I liked John Candy's character. Sure he has a loud mouth, sure he got them into trouble all the time but I can understand Steve Martin going back to help him. And off course, Steve Martin.
Haywire(2012)(Re-watch): Because Gina Carano is bad-ass in it and that is all the reason you should need to watch this one. I don't remember if I noticed it the first time I saw it, I must have because it is the very first thing you notice but, her fights are beautifully shot and Carano takes full swing every time to land them square on the body. Every single blow Channing Tatum or Michael Fassbender or anyone else received, I swear I never would have recovered from any of those.
Shane(1953): The reason I saw this movie was because I know many people consider it as one of the great westerns. I went through some reviews and articles about it after watching the film and I am sorry to say that I don't understand what is great about this film? I am not saying this is a bad film. No, not by any stretch of imagination. It just wasn't Great. Maybe, once again, it is that Bollywood upbringing but every turn that story took, it was obvious to me that it was going there. Again, it's not a bad movie but it isn't great as everyone else seems to think.
My Left Foot(1989): Once again, DDL proved a force to be reckoned with. I really don't have anything against his performance but usually, after a film where someone like Christy Brown wins in life against all the odds, you really feel it for the person. I didn't, for him. Maybe it's a cynic in me, maybe I wasn't in the right place but I don't think I like this character very much. His mother, now that's a character I would love to see a film of.
The Thief of Bagdad(1924): Another silent film I saw because of its mention in The Story of Film(2011)
but will have more of a historical importance to me than anything else. Sure, in
terms of its Grandeur, Set Designs and visual effects were exemplary for
its time. However even by the silent film standards, I don't think
acting was and Douglas Fairbanks himself was the worst
culprit of it. Story was like a bedtime story for children which essentially it is and I really doubt if anyone would say "Thou Dog! What torments can we devise for thee!".
Intolerance(1916): You can pretty much paste first four lines above here as well. I appreciate its place in history of film and understand why it deserves it but as a film, I have lot of problems with it. First of all, did we really 'need' 4 stories? and like 75 characters in each story? Only Game of Thrones(2011) has more characters than that and he introduced them all in first 10 minutes. I was so confused who's who and from which story for a long time. Also after watching couple of D.W. Griffith's movies, I feel like he is Michael Moore of silent films. His films always have only one side.
Faust(1926): I didn't plan it that way but it is my fifth silent film of the month. And please don't think I hate silents based on the dismal ratings I have given here. Actually, there are quite a few silents I really, really love. It just happens that I didn't this month. Faust started decently and I can also somewhat get on-board with part since the innocent girl's entry but about one hour in-between was a disaster. Plus, every single character in the film was miserable. I understand the reason here but historically, I am not very fond of such movies.
Birth of a Nation(1915): So I finally understand why people hate this film so much now. Up until the Civil War portion of it, I found myself defending a lot of things in this movie but then it just went down from there. I agree that in terms of movie history, it is a monumental film. For a 1915 film, it must be the most technologically advanced but in terms of its content, it's laughably atrocious. Only genuinely good thing I can say about this film is it set the oldest film I have seen clock back by 8 years.
The Trial(1962): I am not very well-versed with either Welles' work or Franz Kafka novels but to me, this film was like one of those connect the dot puzzles where if you do, you have a nice picture. Only problem here was we were only given the dots and were not allowed to connect them to see the complete picture. Like work of modern art, you have the most bizarre, most abstract structure in front of you and are expected to marvel at its beauty. I can appreciate few things about them but I don't understand a damn thing.
Barbarella(1968): I have never seen anything like this before. I rarely see any B-Grade movies and after watching this, I realized why. I mean it is a fun film in a way, if you can take pleasure in your sufferings. Characters are stupid, acting is laughably bad, effects on which this film rests heavily are extremely dated and once again are laughable at best and story - let us not even talk about it. If you really want to deluge yourself with some stupid, campy, B-grade cheesiness, knock yourself out.
Agent Vinod(2012)(Hindi): This movie is what happens when one of the worst screenplays you can imagine gets into the hands on an equally incompetent director. Forget about the audience, it never looked like the director himself is taking the movie seriously. For an action movie that aims to make a big splash, even action sequences throughout this movie were really phony. I don't have much problem with any of the actors involved but the material itself was so bad, I am sure even the career-best performances from everyone involved wouldn't have saved this film.
Total Count: 25. 24 First
Time Watches and 1 Re-watch .
2013 YTD Count
Total Count: 158. 146
First Time Watches and 12 Re-watches.
This is actually the best month I have had this year. And to think that I expected it to be the worst quite frankly. I
am also beginning to think that I am being rather harsh of rating the
films because this is second month in a row where there is no film over 4
stars and quite a few below 2 start, which to me is pretty much a grace rating. But it is what it is!
There are two highlights of this month. One, this being such a prolific month despite my expectations being complete opposite and two, number of silent films I watched despite me being 'meh' on most of them. I think it was August last year when I sat down and finally watched my first silent film and went on to watch 6 more in that same month. I don't think I saw many more since then. But after hearing about a lot of them on The Story of Film(2011) and seeing a lot them available on Netflix for streaming, I went on another mini-binge. I won't call any of them my favourites but I was happy to have seen them at last.
So, how was your month? Did you see anything interesting? What do you think of the movies I saw? Any favorites?
Since few months ago, I started keeping
track of movies I have seen from '1001 movies' list. Just for the sake of
convenience I arranged my page according to decades. What I realized because of
this arrangement was there was only 1 pre-1930 movie I had seen. Moreover, if
we don't count any Chaplin or Laurel & Hardy movies, I had never seen a
silent movie before. While looking out for them, I found quite a few of them
available on Netflix Instant, some others were available to watch legally
online courtesy Internet Archives. Now, I had everything I needed to watch
them, a reason, a resource and time. All I needed was one final push and I knew
I will get onto it. But as usual they just sat their in my queues waiting to be seen for
well over a month. Finally, Tyler became the catalyst to start this thing when
while doing his Liebster Award post, he tagged me and asked 'What is your
favorite pre-1930 movie?' as one of the questions. I didn't have one as I have
only seen 1. But that did the trick and over the last month I went on a binge
and saw 7 pre-1930 silent movies. Believe me when I tell you this has to
be the single most biggest learning experience for me, as far as movies are
concerned and hence I had to record it in some way. Here is that record in order of personal preference.
Metropolis(1927): I saw the restored version of this which clocks in at about 150 minutes. Initially when I read the synopsis of this movie, knowing that it was made in 1927 and its a silent movie, I was little skeptical about how good it will be or rather how will it be brought on screen. Add to it the fact that it runs for almost two and half hours and I got a reason to put it further back in my queue. But then I got couple of references assuring the quality of this movie and I finally gave it a try on the last day of last month. I don't think I use this term too often but I was, by every sense of this word, "blown away" by this movie. This movie is a product of astonishing vision brought to life on grandest of scales possible to man then. I am not really surprised but rather sad to know that it nearly bankrupted the studio after failing to make a profit. For a movie made in 1927(I think I will used this term in almost every movie here but it really is true), this movie is not only a technical masterpiece but is also a lesson in great storytelling. Besides there are so many themes this movie explores that stay true even after more than 85 years. The way whole story unfolds on multiple fronts which entangles various characters to each other and leads to its eventual ending is riveting stuff. And with the all the history behind countless cuts and prints it has gone through, it also gives a whole new meaning to the concept of 'Directors Cut' and many more versions that have become fashionable in Hollywood now-a-days. I can only imagine how much this movie must have influenced cinema over the years. People usually talk about Breathless(1960) or 2001: The Space Odessey(1968) as the movies that influenced the generations of movies after them. I do not have anything against them however, if someone asks me, from today onwards I will always answer it as Metropolis.
Sunrise: Song of Two Humans(1927): I know many people who consider this as the Best Silent movie made Ever. Though I have to disagree with that, I certainly understand why people might call it that. Even I thought it to be very simple but delightful story of regular couple going through a difficult time in their relationship. In contrast to Metropolis, everything is very mundane and simple now but even then director Murnau, who makes another appearance a little down the list, kept me interested from very start to finish. I will rather compare it with Bicycle Thieves(1948) as both movies have simplicity as their biggest asset and their biggest success is they use it to invoke so many emotions in you. I laughed when they laughed, I cried when they did and I became concerned when they got in any trouble. Getting into it, knowing that it is a story of a couple where a husband falls under the spells of a seductress from the city and tries to get rid of his wife but falters at the last moment and then spends all the remaining time convincing her of his change of heart, 'And They lived Happily Ever After' story was all I hoped for but this was so much more where the real highlights were Janet Gaynor, the Wife and first ever Oscar winner for Best Actress and that crisp Black and White cinematography giving it another Oscar as well. This was first of the whole lot that I got to and it certainly set the mood right for others to come.
The General(1926): My first ever Buster Keaton. I have practically been brought up on Chaplin and Laurel and Hardy and even though Buster Keaton is usually compared with Chaplin for obvious reasons, I hadn't even heard of him until couple of months ago. So, when I decided to dip my toes in silent movies, I wanted at least one of it to be Buster Keaton and I went for The General because to my knowledge this is his highest rated movie and the one with the most past to it. I certainly know why now. There were multiple moments where I laughed out loud but what impressed me more is even though it is a slapstick comedy, it had a great structure which worked perfectly with descent story. Definitely the biggest highlights was Buster Keaton with his stone face and great automotive chase which goes on for almost half the running time of the film. Add to it the fact that he used to do all his stunts on his own which even though are done at a little slower pace are still very physical and quite dangerous and most certainly effective. I am not really surprised to know that Jackie Chan(for the record, I have immense respect for this man solely based on his dedication to do all his stunts himself) took a lot of inspiration from him, in his stunts, in his comedy. However another highlight for me was a delightful soundtrack as well. Hopefully some of his other movies will be just as good.
Nosferatu(1922): I have never seen or read any versions of Dracula but from what I know in bits and pieces, I kept on thinking this two are very similar stories. It turns out that I was right and Murnau was even dragged into the court by Stoker's wife. Despite this, if you have read my previous post you would know that I still think that this is a largely successful movie. Roger Ebert in his review said that "It doesn't really scare you but it haunts you". Yes, it did not scare me and yes, it did indeed haunt me. He goes on to say that "It shows not that vampires can jump out of shadows but that evil can grow there, nourished on death." and again I have to concur. Watching this movie 90 years after its release, it is very easy to disregard this as an inferior product and believe me, even I can certainly find 100 faults in it but what we are forgetting is the legacy of this movie which has given us so many movies with similar themes. However there is only one thing that makes me really sad and that is today we have gone from this to Twilight. Twilight fans, think like this - if it wasn't for Nosferatu, you might never had Twilight.
The Phantom of the Opera(1925): You know what, I can just copy - paste everything i said above here and it will be almost true here as well. The Phantom of the Opera probably isn't as good as previous one but the Phantom in it is nothing short of work of a Genius. It is almost sure to make you cringe in that now famous revealing scene. I certainly have never seen anything as hideous as him and I really mean it as a compliment of the highest order. It isn't as haunting or even as influential but believe me when I say that for a horror movie, being inferior to Nosferatu is not a bad thing at all. In few departments it even fairs better like in my opinion, this one has a better storyline and succeeds in holding your attention even when the Phantom is not on screen. Nosferatu suffers a little with its vampire off the screen.
Battleship Potemkin(1925): Being a propaganda movie about 1905 mutiny when the crew of battleship Potemkin rebelled against the officers of Tsarist regime, this one has a distinct feel of documentary rather than a movie. Even though I appreciate the effort put into making it, unfortunately it didn't really work well for me. I usually try and consider the time an surroundings in which a movie is made. Maybe it is my lack of much background here but I don't have much to discount here. Most of the scenes are actually good but looked way too long and the worst part is not with real reason behind it, even the famous Odessa Step sequence.
Sherlock Jr.(1925): Second Buster Keaton of the month but with quite the polar opposite results for me. All the reasons why I loved The General are exactly why I didn't really care much for Sherlock Jr. It lacks any real format to it, almost all the comedy in it is too coincidental and even a little lazy.
I still have few more silents in queue but I would love to have your recommendations as where do I go next from here. That's what comments are for.
