005 Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

In 1998, the American Film Institute celebrated the first 100 years of cinema (1896-1996) by listing the 100 best American films of the century. Lawrence of Arabia (1962) was Number 5 on the list. It is based on the true story of T. E. Lawrence, a British army officer who served as liaison during the Arab Revolt of 1916 in which the Arabs revolted against the Turks and won their independence (more or less).

Lawrence of Arabia has been widely popular among fans and critics ever since its release. It was nominated for ten Oscars and won seven: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Music Score, Best Film Editing and Best Sound. I thought this was a beautiful picture. I loved the images of the horses and the desert and the costumes.

Lawrence (Peter O'Toole) is sent from Cairo to assess the prospects of Prince Faisal (Alec Guinness) in his revolt against the Turks. Instead of making his assessment and leaving, Lawrence advises Faisal to attack Aqaba, so that the British would have a port through which to deliver supplies to Faisal. Lawrence accompanies a contingent of 50 men across the impassible Nefud Desert and risks his life to save a man who falls behind.

Near Aqaba, Lawrence forms an alliance with a Bedoin leader who agrees to help attack Aqaba. The alliance is threatened when one of Lawrence's men kills one of the Bedoin's men because of a blood feud. In order to preserve the alliance, Lawrence offers to execute the murderer himself. It turns out to be the same man he saved in the desert. The attack on Aqaba is a success. Lawrence returns to Cairo to give his report, and he is promoted.

Lawrence launches a guerilla war with a jouranlist following him around making him famous all over the world. He recruits an army of mercenaries and massacres a column of Turks who slaughtered an Arab village.

The Arabs enter Damascus before the British. They form up a council to run the city, but they can't stop squabbling. They can't keep the electricity, telephones or water working, so they abandon the city to the British. This was my favorite part. Today, the leaders in the Middle East have all been well-educated at the best schools in Europe and the United States, but in spite of having more oil money than they know what to do with, they have failed to bring prosperity to their people.

It turns out that the bit about the Arabs abandoning Damascus to the British is one of the least accurate bits in the film. The council that the Arabs created to govern Damascus remained in power until the French drove out the British in 1920. More generally, this film portrayed the Bedouins as talented, powerful and noble. I appreciate that. What do you think a remake of this film might be like? Have American attitudes towards Arabs changed so much since 1962?

004 Gone With the Wind (1939)

In 1998, the American Film Institute celebrated the first 100 years of cinema (1896-1996) by listing the 100 best American films of the century. Gone With the Wind was Number 4 on the list. It is an adaptation of the Pulitzer-prize winning novel by Margaret Mitchell of the same name which was published three years before the film was released. It is considered an epic film because the events of the film span many years (1861-1870). It was very popular at the time of its release and has maintained its popularity for many years. It has sold more tickets in the U.S. than any other film in history. In the united States, it has sold almost twice as many tickes as Titanic. It was nominated for thirteen Oscars winning: Best Actress, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Director, Best Film Editing, Best Picture, Best Screenplay and Best Supporting Actress.

It is the story of Scarlett O'Hara (Vivien Leigh) a debutant of a Georgia plantation at the eve of the Civil War. At the start fo the film, she spends all her time and energy flirting with her several potential suitors. The boy she is most interested in marries someone else. By intermission, so many terrible things have happened that her only interest is to fight for the survival of her family.

Scarlett marries twice for money and security, the whole time preferring the same man from her youth who is married to someone else. When that someone else dies tragically, she suddenly comes to realize that she actually in love with her husband. Tragically, she is too late, her husband leaves her. He is too heart broken to be reconciled.

I thought this movies was boring, boring, boring. I couldn't bring myself to care about Scarlet. She was petty and childish, and I just couldn’t root for her. I cared more for her second husband. I really felt for his heartbreak when their daughter was killed, and I didn't blame him one bit when he left his wife. What do you think? Did you like this film? Why?

003 The Godfather (1972)

In 1998, the American Film Institute celebrated the first 100 years of cinema (1896-1996) by listing the 100 best American films of the century. The Godfather was Number 3 on the list. It was the first gangster film to portray a family of gangsters in a sympathetic manner. The Godfather was nominated for ten Oscars, winning Best Actor, Best Picture and Best Screenplay.

The Godfather is set in New York City from 1945 to 1955. It is the story of how Michael Corleon (Al Pacino) replaces his father (Marlon Brando) as the head of a crime family. The opening scene shows the father receiving visitors like an emperor at court. This portrayal of the gangster as a feudal lord was unique in this film, but it has been copied many times since.

Michael is home from college for his sister's wedding. He explains to his girlfriend (Diane Keaton) that the family business is not for him. The family business is never made clear. There are no scenes portraying prostitution, gambling or loan sharking.

The action of the film centers around the conflict between Michael's father and the other crime bosses who want his help to expand their businesses to include the trafficking of heroin. Michael's father refuses and the other families declare war. It gets very confusing trying to keep all the characters straight. There are lots of double crosses and infiltrations. It's hard to tell when the characters on screen are lying to each other, and when they are telling the truth.

Following the attempted assassination of his father, Michael dedicates himself to protecting him. When his father returns home unable to resume his duties as head of the family, his oldest son Sonny (James Caan) runs the business for awhile. He is a hot head, and under his leadership the war escalates. After he is killed, Michael becomes responsible. His father is a bit heartbroken, but Michael finds himself quite naturally well suited for the role. The final scene is of Michael receiving visitors like an emperor at court, and his wife realizes too late that her husband has been sucked into the family business.

This film is a contradiction for me. On the one hand, the themes of family responsibility, a father's legacy and the need to earn respect are all things that I can understand. In fact, there are more family scenes such as weddings, dinners and christenings than there are crime scenes such as stabbing, shooting and strangling. On the other hand, all that violence and murder destroys families, legacies and respect.

002 Casablanca (1942)

In 1998, the American Film Institute celebrated the first 100 years of cinema (1896-1996) by listing the 100 best American films of the century. Casablanca was Number 2 on the list. When it was first released it was a solid hit. It was nominated for eight Oscars, winning Best Screenplay, Best Director and Best Picture, but it remained popular while other films from the 1940s faded from memory.

Casablanca is an important port-city in Morocco (North Africa). In 1942, it was controlled by the Nazis who also controlled France. Rick (Humphrey Bogart) owned a night club which was popular among French, Italians and Nazis living in Casablanca. Rick is a cynical American who can't bring himself to care enough about the political situation to do the right thing. Someone arrives at the club smuggling letters of transit. They will allow the bearers to travel freely through Nazi controlled territories. They are priceless. Through a series of adventures and misfortunes, Rick comes to possess the letters.

We suddenly understand Rick's cynicism when the love of his life walks through his door. Ilsa (Ingrid Bergman) and her husband are in trouble. They came to meet the man who had the letters of transit. Rick could help them, but years ago, Ilsa left Rick without explanation. When she finally explains that she believed her husband was dead back when they fell in love in Paris, and when she learned that he was alive, she went to him, Rick forgives her and helps her and her husband escape the Nazis. In the process, Rick looses his club and has to flee the country himself. Through his sacrifice, Rick is completely transformed from an amoral war profiteer to one of the good guys.

The theme of sacrifice reassured the war-time audience that painful sacrifice could be a romantic gesture for the greater good. I love stories in which love conquers all. I only wish I had seen this movie when I was younger, twelve or thirteen, before I had heard all the best lines quoted and misquoted out of context. I would like to buy a copy of this film and watch it every year. A local theatre near Harvard University screens it every year during exam week. What do you think? Have you seen this movie? Do you love it? Or do you think it is hopelessly out of date?

001 Citizen Kane (1941)

In 1998, the American Film Institute celebrated the first 100 years of cinema (1896-1996) by listing the 100 best American films of the century. Citizen Kane was the Number 1 film on the list. Citizen Kane is at the top of many such lists. It was nominated for nine academy awards and won the Oscar for best screenplay. Personally, I don't see what all the excitement is about. I knew before I watched the film that Rosebud was going to be his sled, but that just means that I didn't have to watch it twice.

In short, the story is the biography of a newspaper man. He had a sad childhood. His parents were very poor, and he was sent away to live with an uncle. It broke his heart to leave his mother. He felt unwanted. He went to the best schools and made his fortune. Then he bought a newspaper, fancied himself a defender of the people and made a lot of powerful men very angry. He tried to run for office, but he was stopped cold. It really took the wind out of his sails, and he retired sadly. His first marriage failed at the height of his success. When his career was at its lowest, his child was killed in an accident. His second wife was merely a distraction. When he died, another newspaper man went to his home to research his life for a story. The house was stuffed with valuable objects, but there were no friends or family to mourn him. The newspaper man learned from the staff that Mr. Kane's last word was "Rosebud." He interviewed many people to discover what that meant. He never did find out, but the final scene of the film showed someone throwing an old wooden sled into a fire. The sled had a rosebud painted on it.

So it seems the moral of the story is that a man cannot overcome a sad childhood. Mr. Kane had everything money could buy. He had an exciting and interesting career, but he let his marriage fail, and he died longing for his childhood. I guess that sort of story appeals to Hollywood types, but I just found it completely unsatisfying. In my experience, you can overcome an unhappy childhood by creating a happy childhood for your own children, but Mr. Kane took very little interest in his own child. His dying regret is not for his child. It was for his own childhood, so at the very end he doesn't regret his own mistakes. He regrets his own misfortune. He sees himself as victim, one of the most powerful men in the world, feeling sorry for himself, on his deathbed - disgusting.

All the other things this movie is praised for are true. It is a beautiful picture. It's well-acted, well-directed, the production value is very high, the characters are believable, but in the end, it didn't seem like a story worth telling. What do you think?