Len Gutman's Blog, page 21

AFI #82: Sunrise

Well, it was bound to happen. I'm nearly 20 movies in to my countdown and I finally had my first "WTF" moment. I can't believe Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans is on any list of top films let alone the AFI list of the 100 best American films of all time. I have nothing against so-called classics. And I don't even mind silent films — I enjoy a good Charlie Chaplin flick and understand the cinematic importance of early films like The Birth of a Nation and Battleship Potemkin.  In a 2002 critics' poll for the British Film Institute, Sunrise was even named the seventh-best film in the history of motion pictures. I get that it was 1927 and technically the film was a first in many areas. I just don't care — the film was ridiculous.

Here's the entire plot (SPOILER ALERT!): A married man who lives in the country has an affair with a sexy woman from the city. The vixen tries to convince him to kill his wife so he can run off to the city with her. The next day he takes his wife on a boat ride and as he's about to reach over and strangle her he has a change of heart. The boat docks on the shore and when she gets off she runs to a cable car…he follows…and they end up in the city. He continues to follow her until they end up at a wedding, at which the man breaks down and cries, begging his wife for forgiveness. She forgives him, and then they gallavant around the city — he gets a shave and then they take a photo — then they go to a carnival where they dance and eat a fancy meal. On the way back to the country a freak storm hits and capsizes the boat and in the morning he ends up on shore and thinks his wife is dead. A search party confirms her body is lost. The city woman is thrilled and comes over to grab her man, but he is furious and tries to kill her! Just when he's about to snap her neck the wife is miraculously found alive. The man and wife live happily ever after and the city woman presumably slinks back to the city.

It's a silly premise, but even more than that the guy is an ass. First, he cheats on his wife. Then, within one 24 hour period he tried to kill his wife and his mistress. And his wife forgives him FOR TRYING TO KILL HER and then moments later is all lovey dovey. It's so unbelievable that even if it is a landmark in cinematography I could care less because the plot had me shaking my head from start to finish. This is one of those "classics" that gets listed as a "best of" based on pure industry snobbery and high brow artistic B.S.

Next Up: Spartacus!

Filed under: AFI Top 100

AFI #83: Titanic

I have to admit that when I began this strange journey there were a couple of films that I didn't want to see again and Titanic was right near the top of the list. I remember seeing it when it came out and thinking it was a silly love story and then the hype around it made it seem even more unbearable. Titanic is the second-highest grossing movie of all time, behind Avatar (nice work Mr. Cameron). But what really made me hate the film was that damn Celine Dion song!

Well, the memory does play some funny tricks on us. I think all this time I have been selling this film short. Watching it with my son yesterday I really enjoyed it, and even the 11-year-old special effects were pretty awesome. Plus, I kind of forgot all about the cool imagery of the underwater Titanic shot by Cameron and the amazing reproduction of the ship itself. I think I read somewhere that Cameron paid so much attention to detail that even the ship's china was a realistic replica of what was on the actual Titanic.

The other thing I really liked about the film was the performance by Leonardo DiCaprio, my favorite actor. He made Jack Dawson into a compelling character with a youthful spirit that was both exciting to watch and I think true to the time period. The film also was the first major film for Kate Winslet (following Heavenly Creatures and Sense & Sensibility) and she was simply stunning in the film. I think she's a great actress, but I don't find her attractive anymore because every time I see her she seems to be smoking and that's a huge turnoff!

The real star of the film though is the ship, both the scale model and the actual Titanic. The wreckage shots at the beginning of the film are real, shot by Cameron and a crew from the Russian ship Akademik Mstislav Keldysh. It's incredible to see those shots and then when Cameron fades into his reproduction it's as if you are literally travelling back in time. The scale model was built off the coast of Rosarito, Mexico where Cameron shot the external and disaster scenes. The massive scale of the shots of the ship breaking in half and sinking are awe-inspiring.

Yes, the love story is hokey. And (Spoiler alert) when that old lady throws the diamond overboard at the end I wanted to scream! But the special effects and period work makes it all worthwhile.

Next Up: Sunrise (a silent film from 1927)

Filed under: AFI Top 100

Spotify After One Month — A Review

Sitting here listening to The Decemberists on Spotify, I realized it has been about a month since the Swedish import landed on American shores. The interwebs have been jam-packed with reviews, some enthusiastic and some…well…not so much. I really am not in the mood to discuss the  music business or the future model for which musicians will or will not be appropriately paid for their work. I simply like listening to music and I have a few thoughts on Spotify after a month. So here goes.

The Positive

The most obvious place to start is with the selection of music available on the service. Holy crap! Spotify has millions of albums from every genre and frankly it's a bit overwhelming. I have tried to "stump the band" and so far Spotify has won most every time. In fact, of all the artists I've searched for I can only think of one that wasn't available — Arcade Fire. I'm sure I will find more as I look around, but the selection is incredible. Additionally, I have found a bunch of relatively obscure albums and some different versions of albums that are not readily available on purchase sites like Amazon and iTunes.
On the technology side, Spotify impresses. I have the application running on my Mac at home, my PC at work and my iPhone and the music streams seamlessly and the apps work great. I was worried the mobile app might lose connection to the service, but so far I've had very few interruptions whether I'm listening in the car or at the gym. In fact, since I loaded the iPhone app I haven't listened to anything but Spotify and love it. I can see where I might want to listen to a radio style app now and then, so I don't have any plans to kill Pandora, but if Spotify adds a radio-like service Pandora will be in deep shit. I understand Spotify has a feature called "search operators" which allows you to create playlists based on various search terms but I have not yet had the chance to try that. I have been so obsessed with listening to bands I like that I haven't had time to explore the playlists feature at all.
I have been running a one-month free trial of Spotify premium so I've been able to use the mobile app and that has made all the difference. In order to get the full Spotify experience you really have to have the top-of-the-line service which truly lets you listen to anything, anytime, anywhere. But at $10 per month it's a no brainer…I am definitely going to subscribe once my trial ends.
Along with listening to my favorites, and digging up some blasts from the past, one great side benefit of Spotify is that I have been able to explore full albums by bands I had heard about but hadn't heard beyond a single or two. A good example is the latest from Danger Mouse and Daniele Luppi. I had heard the song "Two Against One" with Jack White on vocals, but I wanted to hear the whole album and certainly didn't want to buy it based on one song. I called up the album on Spotify, listened to it all the way through, and it's amazing. So I starred it and now I can listen to it whenever I want. And I didn't have to buy it. Cool.

The Negative

I'm unimpressed with the way you organize the albums and songs you like in Spotify. I am used to iTunes, where I can easily sort through my music by artist, genre, album or song and hit play. Spotify may have millions of albums and songs, but the interface is awkward for keeping music you like and want to listen to often. The service lets you "star" songs or albums you like, and you can click to see your starred music, but it's not easily sortable. They have work to do here.
I'm a little embarrassed to say this, but so far the hardest part of using Spotify has been deciding what to listen to. I've literally sat in my car for minutes before driving off trying to think of what to queue up. The application does not make for good browsing, so you have to search through the invisible music bin in your mind to choose what to play. It's harder than you think! One thing I love about iTunes is that it's tailor-made for browsing and then choosing what to play. The browsing process helps me decide what to play and I miss that with Spotify. To solve this issue, I have tried to think about what I'd like to hear before I get in the car or get on the treadmill, but even that is tough because there are so many choices. I know…tough problem to have!
I'm not really sure what to do with the social pieces of Spotify. On the right side of the app I can see all of my friends who also have Spotify, and I can see what they are listening to and can "subscribe" to any of their playlists and listen to them. I haven't fully explored this part of Spotify yet and haven't even made a single playlist of my own yet. I am sure I'll figure out the value once I play around more. Also, from my PC at work I've clicked on the social share feature a few times, which is supposed to post what I'm listening to on Facebook or Twitter, but each time I've tried that it hasn't worked. Might be a work firewall issue though so I'll have to try it at home or on the mobile app.
The home page sucks. It profiles only a handful of new releases and does not offer a "since you like X you might like X" feature. Amazon does this well, but Spotify is seriously missing the boat on promoting artists and helping users find new music they might like.

Overall I have to say I love Spotify and I'm sure they will address some of my minor complaints in the future. But truthfully, for $10 per month it's the musical steal of the century. I'm hooked.

Filed under: Music

AFI #84: Easy Rider

I think I know why Baby Boomers voted this film into the top 100 — they were clearly stoned when they watched it and everything seems more interesting when you are high (or so I've been told). Easy Rider is so typical of the 60s in that it was friggin overrated! I couldn't believe how awful this film was after believing the hype that it was some kind of mystical representation of the 60s counterculture. I call bullshit.

This is how the film is billed: Two counterculture bikers travel from Los Angeles to New Orleans in search of America. I don't think they were searching for America at all. No, they weren't searching for anything, rather they were just riding their choppers to New Orleans. Along the way they meet some other hippies, they pick up a confused lawyer, then — spoiler alert — everyone gets killed. The most unbelievable part is that even though the characters barely spoke in the film (and when they did they said "dude" and "groovy" a lot) the film was nominated for an Oscar in 1969 for best screenplay. Clearly the Academy voters were stoned as well. Seriously, I understand the 60s were a time for dropping out and experimenting with drugs and all that counterculture crap — but this flick was anything but groovy dude. If you remember liking it, try seeing it again without the influence of drugs and I'm sure you'll agree with me that it's much ado about nothing.

Next Up: Titanic

Filed under: AFI Top 100

AFI #85: A Night at the Opera

There's a moment in Woody Allen's Hannah and Her Sisters in which Woody's character is having an existential crisis and contemplates killing himself. As he wanders around New York, he stumbles into a random movie theater and it turns out the film playing is a Marx Brothers film. After a few minutes, Woody starts laughing and realizes that it's the little moments — like enjoying a Marx Brothers film — that makes life worth living. He is so right.

I'm going to just go ahead and say it: if you don't think the Marx Brothers are funny you are not a member of the human race. The Marx Brothers pretty much invented comedy, and not just slapstick humor but really clever comedy that keeps you on your toes. From Groucho's word play to Harpo's physical humor to Chico's dim-witted "everyman" it's all amazing and it leaves you in stitches. I had seen A Night at the Opera in the past, but that didn't stop me from laughing out loud several times as I watched it again on my flight to Pittsburgh on Monday. The woman sitting next to me smiled each time I let loose a guffaw and it was probably louder than I thought because I was wearing a headset. I have to provide a clip for you because if you haven't seen this you'll crack up and even if you have you'll be reminded how great these films are. Here's a classic scene from A Night at the Opera:

A Night at the Opera was made in 1935 and it's as funny today as it was back then. You know that saying that sometimes you have to stop and smell the roses? The Marx Brothers are the roses! Do yourself a favor and make some time in your life for A Night at the Opera or another classic Marx Brothers film.

Next up: Easy Rider

Filed under: AFI Top 100

AFI #86: Platoon

It's funny, but 25 years after seeing Platoon the first time I had the same reaction to it watching it today — why did so many people like this film? You can't "like" it as much as you can simply experience it. It's 120 minutes of blood, guts and confusing combat scenes with very little plot. Yes, there is the subplot of Charlie Sheen's character Chris Taylor trying to deal with the injustice of war and the sheer lawlessness it brings. There is a little "right vs wrong" subtext during scenes like when Kevin Dillon's character smashes in a villagers head for no reason and when members of the platoon start to rape a woman until Sheen stops them. And there is the whole bit with Tom Berenger's character killing Willem DaFoe's character and Charlie getting even later on. But all that was small potatoes to what I think Oliver Stone was trying to express with Platoon — war is no way to resolve a dispute.

If you want a war movie about right and wrong check out 1989′s Casualties of War with Sean Penn and Michael J. Fox. But if you want 120 minutes of feeling depressed and questioning the value of war then Platoon is for you. With Platoon Stone gives us a taste of war that the American film-going public hadn't really seen before. Previous war films were stories of heroism and bravery, with great battles and selfless acts. No, Platoon is not that kind of war film. I believe Stone made Platoon to rub our faces in war, to show us the ugliness and to in some way make us question war as a political weapon. It was his first big movie and he deals with the issue at the top of his mind in the Vietnam War, but it was just the first of many films for Stone in which he questions the moral authority of government, corporations and politicians (Wall Street, Born on the Fourth of July, JFK, W., and others followed). Stone makes us think, and that's what I did after watching Platoon again.

I don't believe in the concept of a just war. I definitely don't believe in the Bush Doctrine of preventative war. As I was watching Platoon I began thinking about the Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan and how Americans have learned nothing from our past failures in war. We didn't accomplish anything in Iraq and we certainly haven't accomplished anything in Afghanistan. War should be used only as a last resort and then only when we are attacked. I think Oliver Stone made Platoon to say just that. I suppose that in and of itself makes Platoon an important movie, though certainly not entertaining. It was tough to watch…like real life.

Next Up, something a little lighter! A Night at the Opera.

Filed under: AFI Top 100

AFI #87: 12 Angry Men

There is no denying America is obsessed with crime and punishment these days. There are tons of TV dramas on the air like Law & Order and CSI to help prove the point, but even more so we become transfixed as a nation when we get a particularly engaging event like the recent Casey Anthony trial. We've always been interested in law and order…crime shows have been a staple on TV since the beginning and everyone loves a good crime film.

How sure are you that Casey Anthony killed her little girl? I don't know anyone who thought she was innocent, but the defense provided enough reasonable doubt to make the case she may not have murdered little Cailee. It seemed like a travesty of justice, but we weren't in the room. If only…

12 Angry Men puts us in the jury room. It was made in 1957 and it serves as a great reminder today that not everything is as it seems when it comes to crime and punishment. So there is an important moral lesson in the film, but it's also a damn fine courtroom drama with great acting and a compelling story. When the film opens, 12 jurors are walked into the jury room after the trial of a young man accused of killing his father. The jurors settle in and quickly vote to see where they stand…it is 11-1 in favor of conviction with Henry Fonda's character as the lone holdout. Fonda's character doesn't make any assumptions about the case, he simply wants the jury to talk about it before sending a man to the electric chair. Then, little by little, the prosecution's case falls apart. It's quite enthralling really. Each juror is like someone you know. One is a hot head, another is a racist, another seems preoccupied with where he has to be rather than the fact that a life hangs on his decision. Aside from the fact it was all men, this is probably exactly how juries are today.

The drama in the room is palpable. It is a hot day and the men are sweating and tired. You can feel the heat through the screen. The whole film takes place in the jury room and you sort of feel like you're stuck in there with them. Director Sidney Lumet did a great job of creating a mood. I really loved the first long scene in the jury room which was all done in one take with the camera panning around to each juror. Cool stuff.

I wonder if juries take their job as serious today as they did back in the day. The men on this jury worked hard to come to a verdict, and they listened to each other. Sure, there was fighting, but ultimately they all did the right thing. I like to think the Casey Anthony jury, for example, thought through all the details and evidence before coming to a verdict. I'm sure it was hard to let this women walk, but they did what they thought was right based on the evidence and rule of law. We can bicker all we want about the result, but we weren't in the room. That's why 12 Angry Men is such a compelling drama.

Next Up: Platoon

Filed under: AFI Top 100

Why I Watch True Blood

Last night I watched back-to-back episodes of True Blood after being on vacation for a week, and as I was sitting there watching this ridiculous HBO "drama" it occurred to me I wouldn't have any interest whatsoever were it not for the sex. I'm not sure what that says about me other than perhaps I am willing to lower my standards for a little soft-core porn. Hey, I've been married nearly 20 years — I'm willing to take what I can get!

My wife is going through a vampire stage so I got stuck watching this show early on in the first season. I didn't want to watch it at first, but as soon as I saw Anna Paquin strutting around in her Daisy Dukes and mounting vampire Bill Compton I was hooked. I could care less about the storyline…I just enjoy the constant sexual innuendo, sexy women and, well, the hot and steamy vampire sex! All the women on this show are hot, from sultry red-headed teen vampire Jessica to bi-curious waitress Tara to the former queen of Louisiana Sophie-Anne (played by the very sexy Evan Rachel Wood). But all the hot babes take a backseat to Paquin's Sookie Stackhouse.

Apparently Sookie is a faerie and emits a scent that is intoxicating to vampires. I can't smell anything through my television screen, but my sense of sight is not lost on Paquin. When did the little girl from The Piano become so hot? She may have won an Oscar at 11, but she's steaming up my plasma screen at 29. And it doesn't hurt to know that she is apparently sexually liberated in real life as well, as she came out of the closet as bi-sexual recently even though she is married to co-star Stephen Moyer. Hot damn!

Everyone is having hot sex in this show and because it's on HBO we get to see just enough skin to whet the appetite. True Blood has man on woman, woman on woman, man on man, woman on vampire, man on vampire, male vampire on male vampire and female vampire on female vampire. Last night a bunch of female werepanthers gang-banged Sookie's brother Jason. It's a veritable orgy of fantasy sex.

The best thing about watching True Blood is that my wife introduced me to it and we watch it together, so it's officially sanctioned soft-core porn! Not sure why she let's me watch this with her but still turns the channel when a Victoria's Secret commercial comes on, but I'm not complaining. All I can say is thank god for Alan Ball and HBO!

Filed under: Television

Will Sweden-based Spotify be iTunes' Waterloo?

Lost in all the hype this week about Google Plus was perhaps the biggest news in the music industry since Dylan went electric — the Swedish are coming, the Swedish are coming! Online music service Spotify announced it is coming to the U.S. after several years of false alarms and rumors.

So what? Why all the hype? Well, several music services (Rhapsody, MOG, Pandora,  iTunes Cloud) have threatened to change the way we buy and listen to music, but none have the success rate of Spotify. In Europe, Spofity has more than 10 million users and a million paying subscribers. That's a huge user base and from what I've read its both comprehensive and easy to use. If the pricing structure rumors are true…and they probably are…for $10 per month American users will be able to listen to  "any track, any time, anywhere." As my 13-year-old son says: "nobody buys music anymore dad!" If he's right…and I believe he is…I won't be buying music anymore, but rather I'll be buying the right to listen to whatever I want wherever I want and at only $10 per month that's a hell of a deal.

The news media has been all over this story this week, and many of them are warning us not to assume Spotify will change everything. But it already has. Plenty of my friends have jumped into Rhapsody and I've stayed on the sidelines. Spotify comes with something Rhapsody doesn't have — customer loyalty and brand appeal. Spotify is cool. Wired compares the service to "a magical version of iTunes in which you've already bought every song in the world.

If you're like me you've always bought the music you want. I have hundreds of CDs gathering dust, and even some casette tapes in neat carrying cases tucked away in my closet. And with the switch to digital music I still buy music when I find something I like. It's natural for my generation to want to own the music. But with Spotify comes the tipping point for the subscription model. Why store CDs or even gigs of digital music on an external hard drive anymore? What's the point? The music is in the cloud and it will always be in the cloud…the question becomes not whether to buy the new Eddie Vedder album, but rather which service to listen to it on. With Spotify you can stream the album on your computer, on your iPhone, on your iPad…in your car, at the gym, at work. It's always there and you can listen on any platform. It is truly like having a Tower Records in your pocket.

Owning music is so last century.

Filed under: Music

AFI #88: Bringing Up Baby

I was looking forward to finally seeing Bringing Up Baby as I had never seen it and Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn also star in one of my all-time favorite movies, The Philadelphia Story. About the best I can say about Bringing Up Baby is that it was good practice for The Philadelphia Story which came out just two years later. They weren't kidding when they classified Bringing Up Baby as a screwball comedy.

Bringing Up Baby is the story of a mild-mannered museum scientist who accidentally gets mixed up with a nut job who of course he eventually falls in love with. This is, after all, 1938 Hollywood. I suppose some of the dialogue was witty, but for the most part the film was just dumb. There is a pet leopard and batty constable and a psychologist who thinks everyone is wacky because he only hears part of the story. A dog steals a dinosaur bone and they accidentally let a vicious leopard escape and they fall in lakes and burn socks over a campfire and…well…utter silliness all around. It's sort of like a really bad Three Stooges film.

The film apparently did quite awful at the box office and thankfully didn't get nominated for an awards. Hepburn was quite off really, though Grant did play the dunce really well. I can't explain why this film made the AFI list any more than I can explain why anyone would want a pet leopard named baby.

Next Up: 12 Angry Men

Filed under: AFI Top 100