_The 100 Best Films of All Time (59-55)
Director: Robert Wise
Cast: Christopher Plummer, Julie Andrews, Anna Lee
Genre: Musical
Academy Awards: 5
Year: 1965
Imdb-Rating: 7.8
Critic's opinion (Steve Rhodes):
THE SOUND OF MUSIC (1965) was one of the most popular films of the 1960s. Although a bit corny, it is a joyous musical odyssey suitable for the entire family. Today, too often what goes for musicals, see for example EVITA, is little more that a show with a single decent song. In THE SOUND OF MUSIC every song is tuneful and most are memorable and moving.
Director: Curtis Hanson
Cast: Russell Crowe, Kim Basinger, Kevin Spacey
Genre: Thriller
Academy Awards: 2
Year: 1997
Imdb-Rating: 8.3
Critic's opinion (Homer Yen): Absorbing and affecting, this movie has all the necessary ingredients to create a terrific gourmet serving of film noir. It boasts mysterious figures in control, double-crosses, hard information from sleazy sources, dirty politicians, corrupt cops, haunting women, and hard-nosed cops experiencing moral ambiguity. The underlying mystery is compelling. The look and feel of the movie is gorgeous. The entire cast is crisp and wonderful to watch (I wouldn't be surprised if Cromwell received an Oscar nomination for his performance). And, the dialogue is rich and memorable. The best line of the movie is spoken when a key player dispenses advice to one of the detectives unsure of what to do. "Don't start trying to do the right thing, boy-o," says he. "You haven't had the practice." "L.A. Confidential'' triumphantly achieves the rare gift of complexity and coherence while satisfying our desire for a good old-fashioned movie.
57. King Kong
Director: Merian C. Cooper, Ernest B. Schoedsack
Cast: Robert Armstrong, Fay Wray, Bruce Cabot
Genre: Fantasy
Academy Awards: 0
Year: 1933
Imdb-Rating: 8.0
Critic's opinion (James Berardinelli): Sometimes, it's not always the best thing to re-watch an older, well-beloved movie. Rarely does the real thing equal the images preserved and enhanced in our memories. Despite its various deficiencies and antiquated style, I still retain a fondness for KING KONG. My overall opinion of this film, however, has been formed more by childhood impressions than those garnered through any later, critical viewing. Ultimately, the mystique of KING KONG lies not so much in what it offers today, but what it has contributed during the course of the last six decades.
Director: George Cukor
Cast: Cary Grant, Katharine Hepburn, James Stewart
Genre: Comedy
Academy Awards: 2
Year: 1940
Imdb-Rating: 8.2
Critic's opinion (Brian Koller): With famous names like Stewart, Grant, and Hepburn, and with well-regarded director George Cukor in control, how could the film go wrong? The problem isn't so much the familiar storyline, which is complicated by the addition of humble secondary love interest Ruth Hussey, and numerous extraneous and stereotypical family members. The problem is with the script, which isn't nearly as funny as the writers believe it to be. The effect is one comic scene after another that falls short, like the routine of a mediocre comic that messes up all his jokes.
55. L'Atalante
Director: Jean Vigo
Cast: Michel Simon, Dita Parlo, Jean Dasté
Genre: Comedy
Academy Awards: 0
Year: 1934
Imdb-Rating: 7.6
Critic's opinion (Harvey S. Karten): Vigo has created a dreamworld which may well have been innovative--but only for its time. He has encouraged us in the audience to look inside our hearts to determine what really matters. Surely "L'Atalante" does not perform these praiseworthy designs in a unique manner, so that one wonders exactly why this meritorious enough film is lauded by so many critics above virtually all others of the genre.
I've had the same questions about L'Atalante as Harvey S. Karten. Does anyone have an answer?
I can't help feeling like that question was at least partially directed towards me, since I saw it and loved it recently. Perhaps that's just the narcissism talking, but anyway.
Unfortunately, I don't have any sort of definitive answer. I think it's perfectly legitimate to question how the film has gotten so much acclaim when it's such a simple, down-to-earth story. One thing I will say is that I think the film is a sort of bridge from the surreal to the real. Pere Jules, his cats, his tattoos, his knickknacks, and his over-the-top performance represent the weird, subversive sort of humor in Vigo's earlier works, whereas the center story is realistic and seems like a film from the French new wave, though 25 years earlier than the movement actually started. Like Breathless or The 400 Blows, the film doesn't form a straight narrative, but it meanders through the characters' lives and gives a wonderful snapshot - real people's lives aren't sensible narratives, after all, but drifting, like on a barge. This juxtaposition of real and surreal is very interesting in my opinion, and the framing and cinematography is pretty great as well.
Maybe all this doesn't add up to its acclaim. But watch L'Atalante as the film it is rather than as the 13th-most-acclaimed film of all-time, and you won't be let down.
Good points. I need to rewatch it. And, I'd momentarily forgotten about your review of the film when I made this post, but if your inferred responsibility caused you to respond... yay.