Movie news on your iPhone today!
Advertisement
Sign in
Username   Password         Forgot password?
Wanna join? Sign up
Find movies you'll love

ShaunHuston filmblog

  • AFI's 10 Top 10: Introduction

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Ahh, what would summer be without an AFI list to dish about? Based on last night in our household, these lists continue to be successful as conversation starters, and, secondarily, as pointers or reminders about films that Anne-Marie and I may have yet to see or haven't seen in awhile.

    Central to their function as points for discussion is their flaws, and so, in some respects, taking issue with this or that selection is somewhat pointless, at least in the sense that lists of these sort, whether generated via the AFI or not, cannot be “fixed” so as to be indisputable. However, discussing the merits of different films, and whether the selections are biased towards or against certain kinds of films, or what is it, exactly, that makes a film “American” in the first place, is still fun and, I think, productive in terms of refining viewers' own evaluations of and exposure to different films. More than previous shows, last night's “10 Top 10” raises questions not only about film selection, but also list construction.

    What follows is a series of commentaries on each of the AFI's Top 10s.

    Jump to animation.
    Jump to romantic comedy.
    Jump to western.
    Jump to sports.
    Jump to mystery.
    Jump to fantasy.
    Jump to science fiction.
    Jump to gangster (forthcoming).
    Jump to courtroom drama (forthcoming).
    Jump to epic (forthcoming).


    Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs


  • AFI's 10 Top 10: Animation

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Wizards  (1987)

    American Pop  (1981)

    The Iron Giant  (1999)

    Waking Life  (2001)

    The Incredibles  (2004)

    A Scanner Darkly  (2006)

    The animation top ten was the first list and it got the evening off to a shaky start. The problems with this list run much deeper than its rather uninspired roster of, almost exclusively, Disney “classics”.

    Most fundamentally, animation is not a genre; it's a medium. However, it is also the case that in Hollywood, animation verges on being a genre, but the American animation genre of the 20th century is not the same as the genre in the 21st century except insofar as animation is treated as a medium for children's, or “family”, films. In the 20th century, as ably shown by the list, animation was more or less the new medium for musicals. In this millenium, music remains an important part of animated films, but they are less often actual musicals. They are, however, characterized by hyperreal computer animation and dialogue rich with “clever” asides and pop culture references. Does that make a genre? Maybe, but not one that has much in common with the prior century.

    The larger point is that in other parts of the world, and outside of the American corporate mainstream, animation is used to tell all kinds of stories, including those directed at adults. Even if one were to be biased towards older films in this “genre”, shouldn't there have been room for at least one film by someone like Ralph Bakshi? I don't know about anyone else, but seeing Wizards (1977) was, politically and aesthetically, an earth shattering experience for my eight or nine or ten year-old self, more profound, I would say than the original Star Wars. And certainly American Pop (1981) is enough of a cultural document, and marker for the form, to have been seriously considered for inclusion on the AFI's Top 10. I would also have looked to include one of Richard Linklater's forays into animation on the list (indeed, either Waking Life, 2001, or A Scanner Darkly, 2006, would have been nice companions to American Pop).

    But, staying within the scope of children's or family films, the lack of either of Brad Bird's eligible films, The Iron Giant (1999) and The Incredibles (2004), seems like a critical oversight, and perhaps reflective of the fact that many of the voters were, undoubtedly, simply mining their own childhoods when making their selections.

    (I'm not going to suggest specific alternate selections here because, as indicated above, I think that this list is inherently misconceived, and because I think most of the selections on the AFI list are more or less interchangeable in any event).

    Link to introduction.


    Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs


  • AFI's 10 Top 10: Western

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Cat Ballou  (1965)

    High Noon  (1952)

    Red River  (1948)

    The Searchers  (1956)

    Shane  (1953)

    Stagecoach  (1939)

    The Wild Bunch  (1969)

    Lone Star  (1996)

    The Claim  (2000)

    Open Range  (2003)

    Serenity  (2005)

    The Western Top 10 is the toughest for me. As some of you may know, while I'm hardly Richard Slotkin or Jane Tompkins, I write, teach, and think about this genre on a regular basis, and, as a result, my views are not only fairly strong, but well-informed. And, where certain well regarded classics are concerned, they are also iconoclastic. This is probably nowhere more obvious than with The Searchers (1956), the film that tops the AFI list.

    This film does not resonate with me on any level. I have never found the ending credible. John Wayne does not portray Ethan Edwards with any of the complexity needed for his embrace of Debbie (Natalie Wood) to ring true after his 118 (or so) minutes of hard, racist ranting about Native Americans and his intent to kill her. I also find the photography and production design to be garish without purpose, and for all of its superficial sophistication about Native peoples, the talk of ritual, the use of indigenous language, it only serves to perpetuate the myth of white mastery. After all, it is white men who “know” and understand Native peoples, not the other way around. Native Americans are no less the brutish savages in this film than they are in Stagecoach (1939), but at least that film doesn't pretend to be anything but pulpy fantasy (indeed, it remains my favorite John Ford/John Wayne Western). And the landscape changes in The Searchers drive me crazy. Even though no one seems to actually leave Texas, the weather and land change in absurd ways during the course of the quest. Where are these people supposed to be?

    I fully recognize that I am a freak when it comes to this film, and as a result, I'm not going to make a pitch for taking it off of the list, although I do think that it needs to be demoted. The other film worth arguing about is one that I would knock of the AFI list, and that is Shane (1953).

    My biggest block with this film is Joey (Brandon de Wilde). The whining, oh the whining. Gah. I can't get past it. At the same time, I don't think that Alan Ladd makes for a convincing hero; he has too much of a “contemporary” presence. Van Heflin's Joe Starrett is virtually the same guy as Dan Evans, Heflin's character in 3:10 to Yuma (1957), and much less interesting. As menacing as Jack Palance's black hatted gunfighter is, he's also more hollow than the norm. And, yes, I understand the subtext about the Frontiersman and his lack of place in civilization, but that theme is punctuated in many a film without Shane's weaknesses.

    The selection of Cat Ballou (1965) still seems like some kind of a joke, but it is perhaps typical of an industry that has wanted to bury this genre for the past five decades or so. Red River (1948) made no impression on me when I saw it. Is that a reason to take it off the list? I don't know, but I would have no shortage of replacements if it is.

    Part of the difficulty with these lists is how the boundary is drawn around “American” film. I can see where Sergio Leone's movies with Clint Eastwood might be precluded as “American”, but, given some of the other selections on other lists, Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) seems perfectly fair game to me (it was, after all, co-produced by Paramount, not to mention featuring a group of notable American actors in all of the lead male roles). Were it up to me, this film would certainly be on the list, and possibly even on top (I might just elevate High Noon, 1952, to the top spot depending on how much of a classisist I want to be).

    Undoubtedly, The Wild Bunch (1969) is Sam Peckinpah's magnum opus, but that's hardly a reason to make it his only film on the list. Ride the High Country (1962), for example, is an early elegiac Western that explores Western archetypes in more interesting ways than most of the films on the list from its same general period. The AFI's definition of the Western - “a genre of films set in the American West that embodies the spirit, the struggle and the demise of the new frontier” - also seems to leave room for a movie like Lone Star (1996), or, and I know I'm pushing it here, Serenity (2005) (and you can scoff at this if you want, but Joss Whedon's movie re-imagines the Frontier and the supposed line between savagery and civilization in interesting and vital ways; I think that it certainly makes a more original contribution to the genre than does Shane). Two other recent Westerns for which I have a great deal of affection are The Claim (2000) and Open Range (2003).

    I'm not sure I'd end up placing all of the films listed above on a reconstructed list, but I do think that there is a tendency to treat the Western as a “dead” genre, killed at some point in the 1960s, with an occasional raising from the dead, and it's not so. It's also a genre with a fairly well-rehearsed canon. Placing The Searchers at the top of a list like this is much like putting Citizen Kane (1941) at the top of the AFI's ur-list: it's almost reflexive.

    Link to introduction.


    Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs


  • AFI's 10 Top 10: Romantic Comedy

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    City Lights  (1931)

    The Lady Eve  (1941)

    Moonstruck  (1987)

    For me, the romantic comedy Top 10 is the most solid compilation of the group. Not only is the rom com a clearly established American film genre, but the individual selections are all eminently reasonable and defensible. This is not to suggest that I wouldn't make alternate suggestions, because I would, but I understand the reasoning behind each of the ten films on the AFI's list. And I don't have any strong contrarian or idiosyncratic preferences that would lead me to tilt at a windmill like arguing against the selection of, say, City Lights (1931) as number one, or its inclusion on the list altogether.

    The one film on this list that I do question is Sleepless in Seattle (1993). There isn't anything outstandingly wrong with the film, but it isn't especially remarkable, either. It doesn't represent a particularly clever or innovative take on the genre. It doesn't push any boundaries. It doesn't mark any point in the development of the form (indeed, I would argue that it is fairly typical of the post-Harry and Sally rom com, including being less enjoyable than its progenitor). And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan do not have any special chemistry together (maybe one reason why they spend most of the movie apart).

    Replacing Sleepless in Seattle is fairly easy; the one gaping hole in the AFI's list is the absence of anything by Preston Sturges. But what to pick? Just about any of his films would be a better choice than the more contemporary film, but, for me, it's a tough call between: Sullivan's Travels (1941), The Lady Eve (1941), and The Palm Beach Story (1942). I probably lean in the direction of Sullivan's, largely because of how sharply written the first meeting between Sullivan (Joel McCrea) and The Girl (Veronica Lake) is; all I'll say here is that Nora Ephron wishes she could write dialogue like the snappy back-and-forth in this scene. On the other hand, there are moments of clear genius in The Lady Eve, from both Barbara Stanwyck and Sturges. However, the film does have one central flaw, and it's an important one from a genre perspective: the lead characters are not evenly matched. At no point does Henry Fonda's Charles Pike have a chance against Stanwyck's Jean Harrington, and practically each time I watch the film I want her to take her revenge without taking him back; he's that much of a drip.

    While I would replace Sleepless in Seattle with Sullivan's Travels, I would not list it at the bottom. In deference to people who know silent film better than I, I'd put it at number two. I could make an argument for either of the other two Sturges movies, but, as I indicated in the opening, the existing selections are reasonable enough that I don't feel compelled to argue for taking off, even, a film like Moonstruck (1987), the appearance of which I found to be surprisingly charming.

    Link to introduction.


    Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs


 


Advertisement