The Sixth Sense (1999)

#89, replaced Patton (1970) in 2007


Hey, remember The Sixth Sense? I forgot how great this movie is. I saw it not long after it came out (the end was ruined for me- rude!) and as I just watched it again now I realized that I don't think I've seen it since. Well ten years later it's just as good, let me tell you. I remember thinking it was terrifying (I was a wuss at 13 and I'm not much better now), but it's not nearly as scary as I remember. On the off chance that anyone still hasn't seen the movie I won't spoil what might be the greatest twist ending of all time, but I'll mention a few other thoughts.

First of all, Toni Collette is one of the greatest actresses I've ever watched. I just finished the first season of "United States of Tara" where she plays four distinctly different character- sometimes in the same scene. I always forget that she was in this movie and that it got her a (very well-deserved) Oscar nomination. She's incredible and you'd never know it was her. Her Amercian accent alone is perfect, but she does Philadelphia just as well (and on USoT, Southern woman, Southern man and teenage girl, all equally brilliantly). Haley Joel Osment is truly amazing considering he was 10 when the movie was filmed. I think his Oscar nomination was also highly-deserved. Bruce Willis is good, though he's never been a favorite of mine and he doesn't display any remarkable range of character in this. And, although I hate this in principle (don't ever ruin the end of anything for anybody!), it's almost better knowing the secret. I'm a big M. Night fan (the only one in the world who's still a fan, actually) and one of my favorite aspects of his movies is how much better they get upon repeat viewing. Once you know, everything becomes an "oh my god!" moment. (It's also way less scary for chickens like me.) I'll stop gushing before I say anything that will give away the MONSTROUSLY INCREDIBLE LIFE-CHANGING ENDING (I'm not overselling it at all, am I?), but if there's any way you've missed seeing this one- GO! GO NOW!

Extra- I read about the movie on Wikipedia and learned two things I didn't notice either time. I don't want to say it since it might give away the aforementioned surprise ending, but look for the section called "Production". So smart! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sixth_Sense

Psycho (1960)

#18, replaced in 2007 by The General (1927)


Who doesn't love Psycho? No one, that's who. It's a masterpiece and a classic and I'll kick your ass if you say otherwise. I've seen Pyscho several times (though admittedly I was far too young the first time I saw it) but it had been many years since the last time. We have a movie theatre in Palo Alto that only shows old movies and it's been restored to its original decor: an actual ticket booth out front, old-time movie seats, a balcony, an organ that raises and lowers before and after each movie, curtains that open and close over the screen, etc. The whole experience is fun and the atmosphere definitely adds to the movie-going experience (plus they have double features for $7!). I saw a double feature: "The Birds" and "Psycho" and we'll just skip right over the first (where is the ending?? where is the explanation?? why is Suzanne Pleshette only in 0.2375 minutes of it??) and go right to the second.

This movie is the definition of genius! It starts out in the big city and ends up in a creepy deserted motel, it tricks you into thinking the killer isn't the killer, the main character (famously) dies not terribly far into the movie and the twist at the end is impossible to predict. It's a fascinating study of film-making in the 60s, a brilliant representation of what Hitchcock does best and a really scary movie! It was nominated for 4 Oscars (including Best Actress- Janet Leigh and Best Director- Alfred Hitchcock) but didn't win any. If you've never seen "Psycho", and I pity you if that's the case, get thee to a Blockbuster immediately!

Extra: Several years ago I saw the exhibit at Universal Studios which explains some classic movie magic. They have an in-depth demonstration of many of the elements that make up the classic "shower scene". It was the first place I learned that the blood was actually chocolate syrup which looked more realistic in black and white than fake blood. Also, there's a clip of Janet Leigh explaining that the scene took almost a week to shoot and Hitchcock, being such a perfectionist, was obsessive about getting each shot right. Although she appears naked in the scene, she was fully clothed for most of the shooting and it took so long and was so boring that the filming experience was nothing at all like the experience of seeing it on film. She said that she was so scared when she saw the movie that she refused to take showers alone at home ever again. Fascinating! For more interesting tidbits, Wikipedia has a great write-up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psycho_%281960_film%29

(Note: that scene scared me so much as a child that I may or may not still to this day dislike shower curtains. Just sayin'...)

North By Northwest (1959)

#40, undisputed


Who knew Hitchcock had a sense of humor?! Okay, maybe a lot of people did. I didn't. I'm a big Hitchcock fan and I've seen surprisingly few of his movies. For the most part (thank goodness "The Birds" isn't on this list...) I love everything I've seen. And I will admit to thinking all his movies were horror films. Apparently I was wrong and the "Master of Suspense" has some really fun not-at-all-scary movies. Don't get me wrong, "North by Northwest" is neither a comedy nor void of suspense. But it's just pure fun. Cary Grant is in all his Grant-ness in this one and it works well. The story is a little flimsy but enjoyable, nonetheless. The classic crop-duster plane scene is fun (although I admit I was waiting for it the whole movie) and the chemistry between Eva Marie Saint and Cary Grant is perfect. I most enjoyed seeing the big cities as they were in the '50s (much of the action takes place in New York and Chicago and on a train in between) although the scenes in the country home at the end were a lot of fun too. This one isn't by any means Hitchcock's best but it's definitely enjoyable.

Bonnie and Clyde (1967)

#27, undisputed


I don't get it. At all. If someone can explain to me how this movie has any merit whatsoever, I'd greatly appreciate it. First off, if there's a movie that moves more slowly let me know. I was bored in the first ten minutes. Young Faye Dunaway (almost unrecognizable) is from a tiny farming town, hunky gangster Warren Beatty swoops in and takes her away to a life of violent crime. Along the way they meet annoying Gene Hackman and annoying Estelle Parsons. They rob a lot of banks but seem to still always be poor. They finally get caught by the police and shot. Yawn. Nothing about it kept my interest in the least. Somehow it was nominated for 10 Oscars for all four of the actors mentioned (how?), Best Screenplay (how??) and Best Picture (WTF???). Estelle Parons won (I generally think she's a brilliant actress, I don't get why she won for this) as did the cinematography (this makes more sense to me although, still, snooze-fest). I'll waste no more time on this bafflingly-adored "classic".

Recommendation: don't waste your time.

Goodfellas (1990)

#94, undisputed


Um, hey. How are ya? Remember this? I come crawling back to you, dear reader(s), on bended knee asking for your forgiveness. It's been almost a year since I last updated and I'm terribly embarrassed about it. Well, not "terribly". But a little. I made a commitment and I let you down. (Not unlike the commitment my "co-authors" made to this project. Have you seen anyone else posting a review? I haven't either.) I'd like to beg your forgiveness and renew my commitment. Can you ever love me again? In my defense, I have watched a few more in the time we've been apart. Although not technically "breaking" Rule #2, I'm bending it a little by posting some of these reviews several months after watching the films. Again, forgive me?

Goodfellas. I have to admit that I don't remember much of it. As stated above, I should follow Rule #2 more closely and rewatch it but who has that kind of time? I mean, I still have over 100 movies to watch. We need to get this show on the road! I'd like to saw that since I don't remember it well it didn't make much of an impression on me and therefore I didn't love it. But I seem to remember actually liking it. I will say that Joe Pesci is a brilliant actor, if always the same. I remember him specifically and thinking he was great in the role. This is because he is the role and he always plays the role. "My Cousin Vinny" is one of my all-time favorite movies but the only difference between his performance in this and his performance in that movie is that one is a comedy in the South (funny Italian New Yorker causes trouble in '80s Alabama) and the other is a drama in New York (funny Italian New York causes trouble in '70s New York). Surprisingly, he won an Oscar for this role which I think is well-deserved. I just happen to think he could easily have won for any number of other roles as they're not all that different. It's a Scorsese film so the film-making is brilliant. As I've seen more of his movies I've started noticing the Scorsese-isms and I do think he's incredible. Ray Liotta was pretty good, I'm not a huge fan and I think he, too, is pretty one-note. De Niro is, well, De Niro! He's brilliant in everything. All that being said, I thought it was more interesting as a "slice of life" movie, as I call them, (almost a period piece) than anything else. The story is mildly interesting but nothing Earth-shattering. I thought it was a bit too (needlessly) violent, which is also not uncommon for Scorsese. And, as I said, it didn't leave much of an impression on me. At some point I would like to see it again but for now, onward-ho!

Rear Window (1954)

#42, undisputed


I'm a big Hitchcock fan but not big on scary movies. Hence, this is one of my favorites since it's suspenseful but not scary like other horror movies (and others of his films). I read after watching it again that it was filmed on a massive set in Los Angeles and not in New York where it takes place, which is pretty incredible considering how much happens in the apartments across from Jeffries'. Several of them were actual working apartments decorated and sized according to their respective tenants. James Stewart is perfect, with a great balance of dry humor and inquisitive curiosity. Grace Kelly is classic Hollywood over the top which is outdated and unrelatable but a lot of fun to watch (I'm not sure I've seen her in anything else but she's certainly of an era). I remembered some of the storyline but forgot certain plot points so seeing it all unfold again was a lot of fun. I particularly like how much we see (and care for) the residents of the other apartments. Since the whole thing (with the exception of one moment) takes place inside Jeffries' apartment, you get a real sense of how isolated he feels and how closely he relates to these people he doesn't actually know. Because of this empathy we feel for him, we start to connect with these other characters as well and by the end of the movie we feel the same peace he does as we see their respective outcomes. I missed Hitchcock's cameo so if you know where it is, let me know! For a simple, fun, old-timey movie, definitely check this one out.

The Maltese Falcon (1941)

#23, undisputed




The Maltese Falcon is a movie. It is in black and white. A lot happens and it is hard to follow all the action. Peter Lorre is the best part. This concludes my report on the movie, The Maltese Falcon. Thank you.