The Big Screen Bulletin 11.12.07: The Best Movies of the Alphabet (Part 4)
Posted by Chad Webb on 11.12.2007
This weeks letters are P, Q, R, S, and T. These picks were the most difficult to select so far. Click to find out what they are!
Here we are with part four of The Best Movies of the Alphabet. We are starting to wind down to the last batch of letters now, and the picks remain interesting. This week brings some of the hardest decisions as R, S, and T have a huge amount of titles to choose from. Read on and enjoy the column!
Directed By: Quentin Tarantino Written By: Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary Starring: John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, Bruce Willis, Ving Rhames, Eric Stoltz, and Amanda Plummer Release Date: October 14, 1994 The Plot: The lives of two mob hit men, a boxer, a gangster's wife, and a pair of diner bandits intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption. Oscar Victories: Best Writing (Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen) Alphabet Trivia: What was the original title Quentin Tarantino envisioned for this film?
The first time I saw Pulp Fiction I was 12 years old, and was too young to absorb the genius. I had not watched it again for many years, and always kept the opinion that it was one of Quentin Tarantino's weaker pictures. Truthfully it is not my favorite of his cannon, but after viewing it several more times, I found myself increasingly appreciating the intricacy, irony, hilarity, and profundity. This film was released in 1994, a decisive time period for cinema with The Shawshank Redemption, Forrest Gump,and Trois Couleurs: Rouge all impressing audiences.
Tarantino shook Hollywood to pieces with this seminal motion picture. Now, anytime an aspiring filmmaker comes close to using his style, critics jump on them like a hungry jaguar. The plot of Pulp Fiction is not what draws us in like a magnet. By examining it on paper, the storyline would surely seem monotonous. The dialogue is where the mastery lies. The screenplay by Tarantino and Roger Avary is so disheveled, yet coordinated, that whenever I sit to relive the film, I always locate new qualities of certain conversations to adore. On a side note though, some lines never get old: "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and a finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee." Jackson's line is immortal.
Every single component of Pulp Fiction was accomplished by methodical means. Tarantino expands the scenes by delving into the lives of the characters and determining each personality. Because the dialogue is not strictly plot driven, but character motivated, and veers off into zany tangents of dark comical relief, it allows the audience to react differently than they intended, or were prepared for. Consider the scene when Jules and Vincent have just left the building with Marvin. The two are still talking about whether or not the shots that missed them was divine intervention. Vincent turns around to ask Marvin, and he accidentally gives him a bullet to the skull. It was funny because we were already amused by Jules and Vincent jabbering on about Jules retiring due to this potential act of God. It is all about the set-up.
Pulp Fiction's non-linear, intertwining story threads uncoil in no particular order, but are circular in the end. The dialogue is the basis of everything that occurs, and that is an extraordinary effect. Not only was it innovative, but also fascinating as if being swept up by a whirlwind. The first is "Vincent Vega and Marsellus Wallace's Wife", then "The Gold Watch", and finally "The Bonnie Situation." This structure can be perplexing initially, but with patience, a sort of symmetry soaks all the elements together in one spotless tale of "lurid subject matter." The middle segment with Bruce Willis is my personal favorite as it comes complete with captivating discourse, bizarre rapists, and of course Christopher Walken.
Some great movies have one memorable scene which stands out after a substantial amount of time has passed without revisiting it. Titanic had Jack and Rose at the front of the ship, American History X exposed "curbing" to the world, and Singin' in the Rain displayed Gene Kelly frolicking around in the water. Pulp Fiction holds countless scenes of irreplaceable brilliance that never departs from the corners of your brain. Even when I was 12, anytime Tarantino's sophomoric effort was brought up, more than a few moments stuck out like a sore thumb. Almost all of Tarantino's submissions are like this. Pulp Fiction showed John Travolta boogying with Uma Thurman, Mrs. Wallace taking an adrenaline injection, Jules's Biblical quote, and the list goes on.
Tarantino is another filmmaker who can evoke the very best performance from even the most unstable of talent. In 1994, John Travolta was a prime example, but he dazzled us as Vincent Vega not just by his dance moves, but by the manner in which he carried himself. Harvey Keitel is calm and collected as the Wolf, Samuel L. Jackson is a scorching delight as Jules, Ving Rhames is intimidating and cool as Marsellus Wallace, Maria de Medeiros is rippling with innocence as Fabienne, Uma Thurman is fabulously sexy as Mia, Eric Stoltz is the smart and engrossing as Lance, Rosanna Arquette is literally piercing as Jody, Tim Roth is steadfast and quick as Pumpkin, Amanda Plummer is passionate and restless as Honey Bunny, and Bruce Willis is gutsy and mesmeric as Butch. I'm out of breath, but I covered most of the big ones. The point is, the talent all hit homeruns.
So what is in the briefcase? Truthfully, I had assumed for almost a decade that it concerned some strange angle involving the Devil and the band-aid on Marsellus Wallace's neck. I know better now. It is whatever we want it to be, and depending on how vivid your imagination is, perhaps the contents to you enhances the overall feel of the film. I am sticking with a light bulb and/or a MacGuffin. It is not important what the identity of the briefcase is, but what happens because of it that matters. Pulp Fiction is not about a briefcase with a 666 combination, but about redemption and coincidence, crime and drugs, sexual misconduct and luck. You can't pinpoint one theme, message, or purpose, except entertainment.
Quentin Tarantino took his obsession for all things cinema, and used it to his advantage by generating one of the most influential movies in history. He twisted the medium inside out and exposed its guts. I think the popularity and constant arguments over Pulp Fiction have only aided its reputation. Tarantino supplied the Citizen Kane of this generation. The intense action, the three-dimensional characters, the novel techniques, the snappy writing, and the vital music selections all render this as a landmark, but what really deserves credit in Pulp Fiction and never receives it are the small pleasures like the "Fox Force 5", the "Bad Mother Fu**er Wallet", and "Big Kahuna Burger."
2nd Place
3rd Place
Q is for…
The Quiet Man
The Quiet Man
Directed By: John Ford Written By: Frank S. Nugent Starring: John Wayne, Maureen O'Hara, Barry Fitzgerald, Ward Bond, and Victor McLaglen Release Date: August 14, 1952 The Plot: A disgraced American boxer retires to Ireland, where he finds love. Oscar Victories: Best Cinematography (Hoch and Stout), Best Director (Ford) Alphabet Trivia: How many puffs does it take Sean Thornton to finish a cigarette?
With over one hundred films completed, four Best Directing Oscar wins, and a pile of bonafide classics under his belt, John Ford is being recognized on this list for The Quiet Man, his most personal work, and in my opinion, one of the most satisfying efforts of his career. Ford is primarily known for his Westerns, although none of his Academy Awards came as the result of that genre, The Quiet Man included. Ford's resume is filled with Best Picture triumphs and other treasures ranging from all categories, but 1952's The Quiet Man sticks out. The question is why? Some might claim this is nothing more than average romantic melodrama. I would ask those people to check their pulse. This is a stunning film that has so much more happiness and poignancy than it is given credit for.
I knew the "Q's", with a limited number of titles, would come down to only a few. This, Quiz Show, and perhaps The Queen. It had been awhile since I saw The Quiet Man or Quiz Show, so prior to making this decision, I watched them again, back to back. Quiz Show is an exemplary film, but after seriously contemplating what was best, and weighing the pros and cons, in my heart, The Quiet Man stood strong because of the warmth, compassion, and pleasurable qualities it contains and exudes. Not only that, but if it came down to which offering is ageless or superior in terms of repeated viewings, The Quiet Man is easily on top of the mountain. I have always thought that Terrence Malick was responsible for the most beautiful pictures in cinema, but the lush scenery John Ford captures in Ireland is breathtaking on a baffling level.
Amid the relatively simple storyline and the straightforward structure are several unforgettable scenes of sheer splendor and staggering skill. The plot follows Sean Thornton, a boxer who killed someone in the ring, as he returns to his birthplace of Inisfree, Ireland to reclaim his family's property. His arrival immediately stirs up the tiny community, and along the way he falls in love with fiery-tempered redhead Mary Kate Danaher. Unfortunately, this maiden has a brother named Will who got off on the wrong foot with Sean. His spite and stubbornness keep the couple apart. On paper, this does not sound all that appealing. Rather, one would guess it is no different than half the trash Hollywood pumps out these days. It does not unfold that way though. The material is handled with heart and acumen by the cast and crew. The Quiet Man overcomes the obstacles of mediocrity with elegance and ease.
The journey from script to screen was a bumpy one for John Ford. He bought the screen rights from Maurice Walsh, author of the short story featured in the Saturday Evening Post, for a mere $10 in 1933, and promised him more money if the project became a reality. None of the studio heads thought The Quiet Man would succeed, so they passed, and called it a "silly little Irish story that won't make a penny." Luckily, John Wayne had a contract with Republic Pictures, a B-movie studio at the time. The chief in charge there said he would make Ford's pet project providing he direct something else first that would make money. He kept his word with Rio Grande, and before long, The Quiet Man was underway.
Ford surrounded himself with friends he was familiar with. Had he not chose this course, who knows how this would have turned out. For his compadre John Wayne, this marked a departure from his normal portrayals. He had no military uniform, no cowboy hat, he wasn't battling Indians, and the Cavalry was not behind him. As Sean Thornton, Wayne supplies arguably his finest performance next to The Shootist and True Grit. Wayne applies a subdued, sensitive, and internally beaten approach to Thornton. Admiring The Quiet Man because Wayne is not dressed in his usual attire is an enormous reason why it is so superb. Wayne was conveying his range that had always been there, but never fully expressed.
Maureen O'Hara was an Irish born actress, who along with Wayne, agreed upon a hand shake deal to do The Quiet Man whenever the occasion arose. O'Hara is simply gorgeous as Mary Kate Danaher. She had excellent chemistry with Wayne, and it is evident in each argumentative scene. O'Hara never permits Wayne to carry the load. She holds her own, and controls the screen with those looks of disdain. If anyone steals any sequences, it is Barry Fitzgerald, the diminutive character actor who hands in hysterical lines as Michaleen Oge Flynn. His presence is jovial and full of life as the romance ignites. Ward Bond appeared in his fair share of John Ford films, and as Father Peter Lonergan his practical beliefs are extremely influential to the townsfolk. Bond is wonderfully restrained as the moral guidance. Victor McLaglen is simultaneously nasty and amusing with his obstinate harangue as Red Danaher. McLaglen is compelling because he is a believable villain with principles of his own.
John Ford demanded that he be allowed to shoot in Ireland, and with Technicolor. These were granted, but by electing both methods, it elevated the event's importance. The camera equipment had to be taken special care of, the cast had a strict schedule, and many took nurses or family members along. Nevertheless, Ford celebrates his Irish heritage by encapsulating truly astonishing sights of endless green pastures, cozy cottages, and vivid beaches. Ford understood that the audience needed to fall in love with the country, in addition to caring about the characters. We needed to appreciate that this was not America; hence different customs were the way of life. Ford achieved this with perfect precision. You'll want to purchase a plane ticket instantly. On a side note, some of the close-ups were filmed in Hollywood, but if any are noticeable, it does not diminish the rating. Ford and company did an exceptional job of blending them.
The Quiet Man is inundated with cherished moments. The horse race is unique, exquisite, and intense. O'Hara's reaction when no man grabs her bonnet is priceless. One of the genuinely earnest moments of infatuation occurs when Sean and Mary Kate have left Michaleen, their chaperone. The rain pours down as they run through a cemetery for shelter. Sean wraps his jacket around her like a true gentleman, and both are soaked. The couple clutches together, and embraces for a memorable kiss. Wow. Towards the end,The Quiet Man builds to an incredible conclusion. Sean retrieves his wife, and proceeds to drag her forcibly over the hills and through the forest. He is fed up with her perceiving him to be a coward and a disgrace. He would prove just how manly he is during the climactic brawl, which will go down in the annals of cinema as legendary.
I do have one problem with The Quiet Man. I want to know what Maureen O'Hara says to the Duke at the very end to provoke such a surprising reaction from one of the toughest men to grace the silver screen. I suppose the point is that it was a private exchange between them, and is better left unknown. The spoken Gaelic, the jubilant Irish songs, the cheerfully moving score from Victor Young, and Winton Hoch's irresistible cinematography are just a few incentives why The Quiet Man is so precious. It is a delicate and preeminent tale of tradition, respect, pride, and love.
2nd Place
3rd Place
R is for…
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Directed By: Steven Spielberg Written By: Lawrence Kasdan, Philip Kaufman, and George Lucas Starring: Harrison Ford, Karen Allen, and Jonathan Rhys-Davies Release Date: June 12, 1981 The Plot: Archeologist and adventurer Indiana Jones is hired by the US government to find the Ark of the Covenant, before the Nazis. Oscar Victories: Best Sound, Best Film Editing, Best Effects (Visual Effects), Best Art Direction (Set Decoration) Alphabet Trivia: What was the name of Harrison Ford's character before the first day of shooting?
One issue that probably didn't strike anyone else was where to place Raiders of the Lost Ark based on title. Some websites list it under "R" for Raiders, the original title, however the DVD box set lists it as Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Furthermore, some sites have made this alteration and alphabetized it under "I". The revisionism was unnecessary. I told the staff before they revealed their opinions that it was up to them. All chose to wait for "R", and that time has arrived. It might have been a bit easier for this to win for "I" due to fewer selections, but no one can deny that Raiders is a top contender no matter what "best of" or "Top #" countdown is being constructed. It is a grand and supreme homage to Saturday matinee serials that is stuffed with adventure of the highest caliber.
If you had asked me what Steven Spielberg epic would have made this list, I would never have guessed Raiders of the Lost Ark as my initial choice. Indiana Jones is a character that everyone loves. The public went bananas over him, and critics reveled in the excitement with rave reviews. This series systematically changed the action/adventure genre from the brittle formulaic pieces, to those of suck-your-breath-in-suspense and fist-clenching stunt work. In the hands of anyone other than Spielberg, this blockbuster might not have been so passionately determined and impeccably structured. This is the definitive escapist venture, one that surpasses anything the James Bond franchise has dished out.
George Lucas and Steven Spielberg agreed on this idea while making a sandcastle in Hawaii. Lucas preferred to vacation in order to avoid the hullabaloo of his films' releases, at that time Star Wars. Before he knew it, Star Wars was a hit, and with that pressure off his mind, he could discuss some other topics with his buddy who had accompanied him. Spielberg wanted to direct a James Bond type story, and Lucas countered with a proposal of his own, involving a courageous archaeologist. The rest as the cliché goes…is history. The two deviated on who should star. Before Harrison Ford signed on, Tom Selleck and Nick Nolte were unable to commit. Apparently, Selleck parodied Indiana Jones in an episode of Magnum P.I., but who could imagine the role without Ford swinging the bullwhip?
The key to Raiders, the factor that pulls us back for that 10th or 20th viewing is timing and pacing, which is as perfect and deliberate as any movie I've ever witnessed. This is not a non-stop array of explosions, gunfire, and collisions like something Michael Bay would concoct. Spielberg understood that the action had to be spaced out accordingly to the scenes of dialogue and crucial plot development. By inserting enough time to allow a bond to form between the audience and the characters, the entire experience is promoted from solely entertainment to entertainment we care about. As many death defying escapes as Indy lives through barely, we always worry about what will happen to him during those close calls. Not many movies achieve that. I could watch this a hundred times, and still be on the edge of my seat praying for Indy and Marion to survive.
Spielberg and Lucas collaborate and inject their intellect into an affable hero, and mold his surroundings, his speech, and the events he partakes in, to form a creation where all the puzzle pieces slid together not by luck, but due to the relaxed atmosphere of the shoot, and supportive attitudes of the filmmakers. Raiders was different in 1981 because Spielberg and Lucas implemented a string of cliffhangers and narrow getaways. Again, this technique has come to be abused in recent years, but it can be crafted with such unblemished brilliance, and Raiders of the Lost Ark introduced the world to how transfixing, meticulous and bold cliffhangers could be.
The performances had a part in bolstering the success and timelessness of Raiders also. When he is at the top of his game, Harrison Ford can embody a semi-strapping hero like no other actor. Lately, Ford has gotten into a routine of playing his thrillers with the same tired approach, but in the late 70's and early 80's, he was unstoppable. This professor of archaeology is not only book smart, but he can handle himself in a fight or touchy situation. Ford's delivery of intriguing data and tongue-in-cheek humor is what catapults his character to a remarkable conquest of inscrutable bravery. Karen Allen will never exceed the blood, sweat, and tears she spilled as Marion Ravenwood. She is a hard-drinking, butt-kicking, tomboyishly attractive female sidekick for Indy. Do not discount the supporting cast either. Jonathan Rhys-Davies is magnificent as Sallah, and Paul Freeman is cunningly nasty as Belloq.
The set design and lighting from Spielberg and cinematographer Douglas Slocombe is a masterstroke of measured elaborate locations for Indy's exploits. The screen emits the pre-World War II environment as if we stepped through a time machine. Each new terrain Indiana Jones explores is enthralling and arresting from the booby trap-filled chamber in the beginning South America chase, to the wintry blaze in Nepal with Marion. The crew was depicting particular areas of a specific stage in time, and they realized that goal immaculately. Entrances heighten the anticipation and expertise of the proceedings. When Indiana steps into Marion's bar for the first time, his shadow is seen on the wall, and his voice then heard. Shortly thereafter, the Nazi enemy Toht enters with goons close behind. These are just two examples of unparalleled directing!
Besides the fact that Raiders of the Lost Ark is equally as fun as any film ever produced, two things stood out for me personally, and kept my interest all these years. As a history buff, I was constantly drawn to the relics Indiana was pursuing. The Ark of the Covenant which held the Ten Commandments and the Holy Grail in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade make for ripe story boosters any day of the week. The Sankara stones in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom were less electrifying, but that prequel was still marvelous. Incorporating absorbing history is a great tool when utilized suitably. The second reason is undoubtedly the infectious hook created by John Williams, a theme which captures the elation of the escapade flawlessly.
Raiders of the Lost Ark was momentous for its category. National Treasure, The Mummy, and Romancing the Stone owe this a debt of gratitude for attempting to recreate this mystical sensation that raked in millions at the box office and certifiably causes the world develop a crush on any quest Spielberg and Ford embark on. At this point, I sincerely hope Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is as enjoyable as the three previous installments, but even if it isn't, the status of Raiders is permanently etched as classic.
2nd Place
3rd Place
S is for…
Star Wars
Star Wars
Directed By: George Lucas Written By: George Lucas Starring: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cushing, and Alec Guiness Release Date: May 25, 1977 The Plot: Luke Skywalker leaves his home planet, teams up with other rebels, and tries to save Princess Leia from the evil clutches of Darth Vader. Oscar Victories: Best Music (Original Score), Best Sound, Best Film Editing, Best Effects (Visual Effects), Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction (Set Decoration) Alphabet Trivia: What language does Luke's Uncle inquire if C-3PO can speak?
I don't think anyone has a clue how vexing it was to choose the winner of "S". Up until the last minute before beginning this review, I was prepared to name Seven Samurai as the top film. What deserved to be highlighted? The most popular film, or the pure masterpiece? I kept going back and forth, unsure of what to do. I assumed correctly that Star Wars would receive the most votes and nods from staffers and friends, but the amount of great movies under this letter is astronomical. Well, not to devalue Star Wars, because I love it, and it is a definite classic, but the years have not been kind to it. Less than stellar prequels and constant alterations from the Lucas camp were hard to endure. Seven Samurai, The Shawshank Redemption, and Schindler's List are surely better by judging without the hype. However, one science fiction extravaganza changed the world, and that is Star Wars. In all truthfulness, no other reason is necessary.
Writing a review about Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope in 2007 is almost the same as doing one for Citizen Kane. What could I write about that the legions of fans haven't already researched, and where would I begin? Do I analyze the title changes, new footage, or the various cuts? No, I'm going to confine my essay to the virtuosity of the film as much as I can. I realize that just about everybody under the sun has written about this space opera that rocked the industry. George Lucas created a watershed of special effects, spawned a generation of dorks that dress up like storm troopers, and streamlined an entire genre. Star Wars is one of those ultra rare film experiences that like a major news event, moviegoers all have fond memories of where they were and how they felt when it was introduced to them.
Mine are not all that fascinating actually. I was not born when this revolutionary oeuvre was bestowed upon the universe. I saw it first off pre-recorded compilation tapes from free HBO/Cinemax cable weekends that belonged to my parents. Honestly, I did not grow up worshipping the video cassette. I watched it once or twice, had some action figures, and went on with my life. Not until DVD was invented did I seriously examine it from an adult perspective. Not everyone enjoys science fiction entertainment, but they like Star Wars. Why? The setting has nothing to do with it. It is the posture, tone, and mood that fulfills us, despite how incredibly corny the whole show is. Regardless of how old I am, Lucas crafted a triumph that will never "feel" or "look" aged. It will never grow a cinematic gray hair, or display wrinkles. People will be enthusiastically mocking "May the Force Be with you" for centuries. Some of us probably recite it in our sleep as a form of prayer.
The realm of existence that Luke Skywalker ascends to greatness in is so intriguing and hypnotic to watch. The creatures of all shapes and sizes, the heroes, the villains, and the environment are spellbinding in a manner that cannot be verbalized. Every part of Tatooine, the Death Star, Alderan, and so forth is scrupulously detailed, and most of all neat. It had to be neat right? Let's be honest though, while it is, was, and always will be a cool fantasy, the premise is anything but original. Lucas was inspired by Akira Kurosawa for a hefty portion of Star Wars. This is not a crime however. Lucas harvests the Japanese mastermind, and reshuffles it to form his personal version. Lucas predominantly drew ideas from The Hidden Fortress, and the similarities are unmistakable from the first frame. Lately, remakes, or anything related are instantaneously judged negatively, but when comparing Star Wars to The Hidden Fortress, I think the reverse effect happens. You get that special sensation of reverence that this is where it all began in Lucas's brain.
Star Wars borrows from Westerns, and space serials as well, namely the adventures/quests of Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers. While the special effects were indeed mind-blowing in 1977, George Lucas did not rely on this as the power of his experiment. It was the depth of his conception that was so refreshingly inventive and surreal. The journey was an enlivening rollercoaster ride through the cosmos, but it was the eye-popping design of R2-D2 and C-3PO, the imaginative light sabers as weapons, and all the distinctiveness of each and every extra-terrestrial our heroes encounter. Every character, even those who are seemingly insignificant, are rich in description and contagious in the execution of their eccentricities. These planets, cities, and aliens that inhabit them are enticing to explore with each subsequent viewing, and as I recall, a video game was released that allowed fans to do that at their leisure.
To rate the performances is meaningless. The acting scope of Star Wars has reached an echelon in which it is invincible and impenetrable to criticism. With certain acclaimed milestones, it is better evaluate the cast as a group, rather than individually. Words that do not illustrate the talent are touching or nuanced. All the major characters, Princess Leia, Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Grand Moff Tarkin, and Chewbacca, fall under the cartoonish, yet engrossing file. Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Alec Guiness, and Peter Mayhew had to portray these identities in a playful manner, otherwise how could children have become so obsessed with this galaxy? Kids needed to own every trinket, lunchbox, poster, and game because Lucas sculpted the harmless themes so they were easy for youngsters relate to, yet also pleasing for adults. The exception is Darth Vader with David Prowse in the suit, and James Earl Jones as the voice. What Jones instills to Vader is the very epitome of evil and intimidation.
George Lucas's script began as a 13 page treatment, and evolved into a gargantuan 200 plus page screenplay. Since its arrival in theaters, many of us joke about the dialogue Lucas pens, such as the excruciating romance between Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman, and while the lines in Star Wars Episode IV are indeed silly, at least the cast communicates them in an sanguine way to the point of being endlessly quotable. As for the story aspect of the screenplay, it underwent what seems like years worth of changes until the final product was churned out. Luke's name was Starkiller, his parents were dwarfs, Han Solo was a green alien, and the Wookies were called Jawas. Lucas even forgot how to spell the names of his fabrications. It is inconceivable to ponder Star Wars differently now, but it is humorous to wonder if audiences would have responded the same.
The theme of John Williams no longer necessitates no praise. It is instantly recognizable by just about everyone not living under a rock. Lucas initially wanted classical music in the vein of 2001: A Space Odyssey for the score, but that would have been a mammoth mistake. Thanks to Spielberg introducing him to Williams, the result dazzled viewers as an mental anchor, and forced them to fall under an undeviating spell. The music we all know, but I must also commend the exceptional mixtures of sounds brewed to attain Chewbacca's call, or the light saber swoop. These are not usually complimented, but they are a part of our lives. Star Wars reformed the means of which we make movies. The prices of the cameras operated would jump, and the effects from Industrial Light and Magic pioneered today's standards. That company might have labored firmly in panic mode due to devising completely novel shots, and even though they blew half the budget on scenes Lucas rejected, what ILM accomplished will be venerated for centuries.
What does this review prove? Well, that Star Wars most certainly quaked the base of cinema in multiple ways. Perhaps the most renowned of those is the birth of summer blockbusters, the motivation we all have for standing in line and piling into theaters during the months of May, June, July, and August. In the army that is film, Star Wars is a vanguard, a leader whose age will not diminish its dominance, and one that no amendments from Lucas can tarnish. Furthermore, the Star Wars saga was just eclipsed by Harry Potter as the highest grossing series of all-time. Record or no record, Star Wars forged the shadow to which all other franchises kneel in.
2nd Place
3rd Place
T is for…
Toy Story
Toy Story
Directed By: John Lasseter Written By: John Lasseter, Joss Whedon, Andrew Stanton, Joel Cohen, Alec Sokolow, Peter Docter, and Joe Ranft Featuring the Voices of: Tim Allen, Tom Hanks, Don Rickles, Jim Varney, John Ratzenberger, and Annie Potts Release Date: November 22, 1995 The Plot: A cowboy toy is profoundly threatened and jealous when a fancy spaceman toy supplants him as top toy in a boy's room. Oscar Victories: Special Achievement Award to John Lasseter Alphabet Trivia: What was an early title for this film?
The monstrous waves that Disney and Pixar's Toy Story caused in the animation kingdom are resolute, tenacious and extraordinary. This is the film that derailed hand-drawn techniques to the point it holds less that 5% of the annual animated releases. That is not an exact statistic, but you get the point. The visuals are a demonstrative feast for making ones eyes pop out of your head. Toy Story was an overwhelming experience, one I will never forget.
Why this is a veritable classic, and why Pixar continues to reward children and adults alike with such indisputably pristine pieces of art is not just the awesome CGI, but the depth, heart, and soul of the story. The toys in a little boy's room come to life when he is not around. How can this not stir up memories from our youth? Who has not thought about this while playing with action figures or dolls? Up until 1995, Walt Disney Pictures had reached a turning point with regard to their animated section. The studio would still give us heartwarming family tales in the abiding hand-drawn method, but it was sporadic, and occasionally lacked the spirit and intelligence of the old masterpieces.
Toy Story would usher in a whole new line of imagination, but it would take three more years for the next Pixar flick to land in theaters. Disney was continuing the hand-drawn movies, but was concentrating immensely on live-action, and if a hand-drawn offering was made, it was a Direct-to-DVD sequel that was not worth paying attention to. Pixar was the pathway to the future, and their resume speaks for itself. Toy Story was the first ever computer animated feature, and Pixar's full length debut. It is ranked as the greatest animated film of all-time by the Online Film Critics Society, and has a 100% freshness rating on Rottentomatoes.com. The American Film Institute even added to their Top 100 list during the recent 10th anniversary.
Why mention all these accolades? Because it is important that people understand how Earth-shattering this movies is. When I was little, I grew up on Pinnochio, Cinderella, Snow White, and other Disney contributions revered as treasures. Back then it seemed like one masterwork after the other was made. That streak stopped. Where and when I can't precisely say, but Toy Story brought a new streak to life, one that that is persisting with Ratatouille. The director and puppeteer who breathed new, exhilarating air into Disney was John Lasseter. He should be a house-hold name. He took the innovative process of CGI, and combined them with tales of ingenious optimism and new-fangled artistry.
Toy Story is based on the Pixar short Tin Toy. It was to deal with a mechanical drummer at odds against an evil ventriloquist dummy. Neither character was deemed close to what the creators had in mind. This would evolve into the exciting new Buzz Lightyear butting heads with the older cowboy toy Woody. They all live in Andy's room. Andy is a regular boy. Besides Woody and Buzz, Andy owns Mr. Potato Head, Rex the dinosaur, Slinky Dog, Hamm the piggy bank, and Bo Peep, among others. Buzz's arrival on Andy's birthday shakes up the routine in the room. The story itself is already intriguing and makes you smile, but factor in the talents behind the voices of these toys, and you have a match made in Heaven.
Tim Allen was about in the middle of his Home Improvement stint. Allen had already touched millions with The Santa Clause, but Toy Story would only aid his long and prosperous journey with Disney. Pixar's selection of performers, no matter how famous or unknown, has thus far been matchless, and Allen was ideal for Lightyear. His natural tone molded into an arrogant spaceman wonderfully. Buzz has no idea he is a "T-O-Y." Allen is hilarious in virtually every exchange. That brings us to Tom Hanks as Woody. He is suddenly placed into the chest where toys are forgotten when Buzz enters. He has always been the favorite, and he does not take a liking to his competition. The innocently anxious vocals of Hanks turn Woody into one of the most beloved animated characters of all-time. The chemistry these two comic masterminds possess is unassailable.
A side-plot involves Sid, the next door neighbor that breaks all sorts of toys apart and puts them back together with the wrong parts. What's funny about this is that I would play with my action figures until they busted apart into shambles. If an arm or leg was broken off, I would keep it anyway, and/or put some random ligament in its place. I wanted to get my moneys worth after all! Sid is the villain. His room is a spectacular sight for anyone aspiring to be a bully with dark lighting, rock posters, and eerie lava lamps. Somehow Sid is able to mail out for explosives. Keep away from that kid. He uses rockets and such to blow toys to smithereens. It does not take Einstein to see how Sid will grow up.
The opening scenes of Toy Story exhibit Andy in the middle of playing with his toys. The bright, vivid colors are immediately on display with the three dimensional characters. The atmosphere is set as Andy takes Woody around the house, and Randy Newman's gleeful and convivial pop tune "You've Got a Friend in Me." Handing the task of scoring over to Newman was unusual, but wise. His skewed, elegiac, and affectionate music infused a new disposition in a Disney picture. Years later, it is one of the most abounding and precious scores in the history of animation. The witty and sharp jokes start right away with Mr. Potato Head saying "Picasso!" to Hamm as he moves his accessories around his face. Then Rex attempts to scare Woody with his roar, but viewers quickly discover this dinosaur is insecure about his fearsomeness.
Sometimes critics fall into the trap of referencing the same famous sequences in articles. In Toy Story, it is normally when Buzz proceeds to prove his flying ability by jumping off the bed post. Of course this is great, but my favorite moment occurs when Woody and Buzz are searching for Andy at Pizza Planet. They had hitched a ride on a delivery boy's truck, and when they arrive, Buzz informs Woody who has been crushed in the trunk, that "the entrance is heavily guarded" with two fake robots. The duo disguises themselves in a burger case and a soda cup, and scamper inside. Nothing revealed how startling and gorgeous CGI was like Buzz's reaction to Pizza Planet. Shots cover the entire establishment from the mission control to the alien slime dispensers.
I pride myself on being a man who clings to his youth. I continue to watch cartoons I loved as a kid, and always anticipate a new family feature that catches my fancy. Unfortunately, I know many folks who dismiss this part of their lives, and scoff at the programs they enjoyed when they were young. I like to think that Toy Story would have extracted the youth in even the most stubborn people. This is not simply a buddy movie, but a perfect tale that reminds us of those times when we were alone with our toys having no worries. "From the beginning, I kept saying it's not the technology that's going to entertain audiences, it's the story. When you go and see a really great live-action film, you don't walk out and say 'that new Panavision camera was staggering, it made the film so good'. The computer is a tool, and it's in the service of the story." That was a quote from John Lasseter. I couldn't have said it better myself.
2nd Place
3rd Place
Trivia answers: P) Black Mask, Q) two, R) Indiana Smith S) Bocce T) You Are a Toy
