Skip to main content

Don't call me a mindless philosopher, you overweight glob of grease.

Movies on My Mind
Week Ending 3 September 2016

Lists

I do like a good list. But a good list. While it’s fun enough to see Edgar Wright’s 1000 favourite movies in string formation, I’d rather have a paragraph or two about why some of them are on there what stands out about a particular choice.  It’s why lists in the likes of Empire (or, grief, Total Film) tend to offer countdowns as the least satisfying kind of filler, with no one on the staff attempting to say anything fresh or different about the movie in question; it’s production line puff. There have been a couple of interesting super lists appearing in the past few weeks, Empire’s 7 Favourite Movies, open to anyone, and the BBC’s critics’ choice of the 21st Century’s Top 100. They tend to skew to readily identifiable persuasions, the populist and pseud-ish respectively, but ‘twas ever thus.

While I do like a good chin-rub, I’ve always leant more towards the anti-pretentious in terms of the perceived quality of movies. Aspirant ideas and noble objectives, pregnant on subtext and sometimes avowedly anti-commercial, are fine and good, but I genuinely don’t find art house or international (read: foreign language) fare more likely to be superior to that produced by the mainstream. Both are equally subject to destructive whims, it’s simply that on the one hand they derive unvarnished from the “auteur” and on the other they may be foisted on a filmmaker from without.

Which is leading up to: the BBC list is actually quite balanced between the two, even if the closest it gets to all-out commercial is Pixar and the (good, but still) vastly overrated The Dark Knight. I’ve seen about 70 of the BBC 100, and maybe 25 of them would be instantly vying for attention on my list of favourites. Relatively few are ones I’d actually express dislike for (Melancholia, Spring Breakers, Moulin Rouge!), or even indifference towards; most are of definite merit, just not such merit that they vie for classic status. In terms of my own choices, I don’t really hold much truck with the “Best” versus “Favourite” argument, albeit I understand why people would go that route. My picks are all favourites, and I wouldn’t really be comfortable throwing a garland at picture I merely classified as highly “worthy” in some attempt at flawed objectivity.

It’s heartening to see too that some “respected” critics are content to throw in the likes of Madagascar 3, This is the End and Revenge of the Sith, which is at least a sign that favourite wins out over best in some books. Although, I’m hard-pressed to accept A Pigeon Sat on A Branch Reflecting on its Navel as the best film of the past 16 years in anyone’s book (or Shutter Island nudging a Top 10, for that matter, and certainly not Death Proof).

Of the Top 25, the only one I’d contend isn’t really all that is Boyhood (although I don’t think Lost in Translation and The Master are quite up there, I certainly rated them). Which brings me to another point. It’s not such an instantaneous thing even thinking of 10 favourites since 2000; maybe I’ve just become harder to please.

Ones that could easily have been on what follows but aren’t (for this week): Apocalypto, Inside Llewyn Davis, Mulholland Drive (I like how the cited review of this one can basically only say it’s really good, wrapped up in nonsense-babble), Wall-E, Zodiac, The Fellowship of the Ring, Inception, The Royal Tennenbaums, Children of Men, Pan’s Labyrinth, and Amelie.

10. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

9. In Bruges

8. Ratatouille

7. The Tree of Life

6. No Country for Old Men

5. The Grand Budapest Hotel

4. Mad Max: Fury Road

3. The Prestige

2. Cloud Atlas

1. Dean Spanley


As for Empire, it’s funny seeing some of the choices, but the actual Top 15 are just what you’d expect (and none of them bad, although some require dissection – Gump – and others (Rockys and Potters) are variable.

7. The Good the Bad and the Ugly

The best western of all time? Surely. Sergio Leone’s best film. It’s that or A Fistful of Dynamite/Duck You Sucker! (which isn’t in this Top 7, but might be in next week’s).

6. 2001: A Space Odyssey

And it is a trip. This is where Kubrick peaked for me. Having pushed the envelope as far as he could on the potential, the possible and the infinite, anything else had to be a retreat, no matter how inviting/alarming/blackly comic/mesmerising his encounters with Droogs, Napoleonic wars, hostile hotels, docklands warzones and masonic rituals would subsequently be.

5. The Big Lebowski

One of those pictures that has gone far beyond cult status, and has thus reached a kind of Withnail & I level of exhaustion with its over-exposure. Nevertheless, it’s a work of genius.

4. Kind Hearts and Coronets

Still as fresh, razor-sharp and hilarious as it was nearly 70 years ago. Dennis Price and Alex Guinness were never better, and Joan Greenwood is beyond beguiling.

3. The 'Burbs

If The Big Lebowski burst the cult barriers, Joe Dante looks set to remain entirely safe in his offbeat bubble, the aberration that was Gremlins aside. This is the picture that has grown most in devotion since his heyday, however, and rightly so. Tom Hanks best performance (controversial?) but it’s Bruce Dern who rocks the most.

2. The Adventures of Baron Munchausen

Brazil will forever be Gilliam’s triumph in the eyes of those anointing general acclaim, but this is the picture that most reflects his unquenchable spirit, vaunting ambition and over-extending imagination. And for a film with mortality constantly on its mind, it might just be his most positive work.

1. The President’s Analyst

James Coburn ranks as one of cinema’s great underrated stars. With his silver locks and tooth-bound grin, he appeared in a string of classic roles (Duck You Sucker!, Cross of Iron, Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, Hudson Hawk) that ought to overshadow his better known parts (Our Man Flint, The Magnificent Seven, The Great Escape). Best of all is this very much of its era but simultaneously timeless satire of culture, counter-culture, Cold War politics and pressurised presidents. 

The Mandela Effect

So did C-3P0 always have a silver leg? Did Dolly from Moonraker once have braces? Did Forrest’s mother always say life was like a box of chocolates? In the case of the latter, and without really wanting to trawl back through the movie to check, I’d be minded to suggest the confusion arises from Gump’s momma telling him it is like a box of chocolates at one point and his recounting it at another.

But the silver leg thing… I don’t remember that. And it does make much more sense for Dolly to have braces because… well, Jaws has braces. I mean, she’s adorable either way, but it was an instant signal they were simpatico.

And if they're genuine anomalies, symptoms of the Mandela Effect, does this mean the Hadron Collider is messing with out reality(ies)? With trifling trivialities such as these, ones that inevitably leave some of us askance and others putting it all down to age, faulty memories, or not paying enough damn attention in the first place? Anthony Daniels has said C3P-O definitely had a silver leg from the get-go, but as someone at the heart of any reality warping, he’d presumably have to be able to directly affirm it. Can we ask Oliver Stone if JFK’s car had four seats or six? I know he wasn’t there (well, I don't know, maybe he was, now), but if anyone has an opinion on it, he should. I don’t pay enough attention to cars to have a strong opinion on that one; I was just going back and to the left as instructed. And Does the lion lie down with the lamb in Isaiah 11:6 or does a wolf do the job instead?

Answer: Like Darth’s “Luke, I am your father”, it appears to have forever been a popular misquote. Much as I love a conspiracy, and doubt very much the Hadron Collider is doing anything commendable (at very least, a bunch of “whacky” science nerds are play-human sacrificing in carparks, a double-double bluff if ever there was one), the biblical quote suggests one of those repeated memes that has become the established form, rather than a CERN-complicit charge satanic conspiracy to change sacred scripture. Alternatively, if you want to keep a conspiratorial theme running, it could be latest distracting psyop.

Which doesn’t mean CERN isn’t heaving with Satan-worshipping scientists enacting their latest version of a  Babalon Working, just that these glitches in the matrix do seem to tend to elicit the skeptical/not really that crucial response. The problem is, which isn’t to doubt others wholly invested in this, that you read enough cumulative references to reported pop culture anomalies in songs, movies and TV (and deaths) and it leads the initially intriguing to become less than transfixing.

But the Hadron Collider. Still a bad thing. Quit with the human sacrifices, guys. Even the fake ones.

Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds . Juno and the Paycock , set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

Do you know the world is a foul sty? Do you know, if you ripped the fronts off houses, you'd find swine? The world's a hell. What does it matter what happens in it?

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) (SPOILERS) I’m not sure you could really classify Shadow of a Doubt as underrated, as some have. Not when it’s widely reported as Hitchcock’s favourite of his films. Underseen might be a more apt sobriquet, since it rarely trips off the lips in the manner of his best-known pictures. Regardless of the best way to categorise it, it’s very easy to see why the director should have been so quick to recognise Shadow of a Doubt 's qualities, even if some of those qualities are somewhat atypical.