My Favorite Movies

If I were forced to pick a favorite film, it would be 'The Empire Strikes Back'. What other film supplies you with deeply rich lighting and camera work, along with an engaging story, flawless special effects, beautiful sets, and long lasting, almost God-like characters. I say God-like because they've become completely embedded into the psychological structure of pop culture. Several years from now, I predict that the story of Luke Skywalker's battle against the ruthless Empire will turn into deep mythology, the same way Robin Hood, or King Arthur have. The film is the most perfect mixture of visuals, sound effects, and music that has ever been captured.

George Lucas' first chapter in the series(or fourth, depending on how you look at it) was a modern reimagining of the serial adventure films from the 1930s. Specifically regarding 'Buck Rogers'. The story had been taken directly from Kurosawa's 'The Hidden Fortress', making the film a mixture of high stakes adventure, western, space opera, and a Samurai movie. This second chapter in the saga(or fifth, if you will), deeps into more mythological routes, almost abandoning the high stakes adventure, and diverting more into Space Opera. Things are far more serious and brooding. They are also more developed and better characterized.

The film was directed by Irvin Kerschner who focused more on character study. This is obviously the best of the series. The character are more compound and rich, and the dialogue, though still dry and withered, has more life. For instance, can you imagine if Han Solo had said, "I love you too." in response to Princess Leia? It took Kerschner to say, "Say something else, Harrison." Of course, what Harrison ended up saying was, "I know." It is the most perfect exchange of lines that has ever been filmed. Kerschner understands something that Lucas doesn't, and that is subtext. This is the one and only 'Star Wars' film that has any subtext, and the characters are more life-like and more profound because of it.

There are moments in the film of pure genius. Darth Vader's revelation sequence is the first to come to mind. Let it be known that the intricate choreography of the saber fights in Episodes I-III can not ever replace the tense, emotional saber battle from 'The Empire Strikes Back'. It is, possibly, the greatest sword fight of all time. Something interesting is that the rule for the first two films(four and five) was that there would be no music during the saber fighting. This is what set the lightsaber battles out and made them unique. However, in 'Return of the Jedi' they used music in the sword fight(very wisely) but it broke the tradition, and the soundtracks for the newer films are so cluttered. I'm breathless every time I see the battle between Luke and Vader, because the sound effects of the Sabers(Ben Burtt is a genius!) IS the music for the scene, and is accompanies the action far better than any actual scoring could.

That is not to undermine the music of the film. Quite the opposite: They knew where to place the music, and where to keep it silent. Something that nobody in the business knows how to do in today's world. John Williams timeless score is the perfect embodiment of the action. When most composers would fill the moments of action with a thunderously ominous underscore, Williams uses a deeply romantic one, counter-acting the action.

Yoda is so life like. You'd never know he was a puppet. Frank Oz(the voice of Yoda and . . . Miss Piggy) was a God given gift to Lucas and Kerschner. The film is elevated to the skies because of his portrayl. When the movie had been released, Lucas tried his heart out to campaign for Oz to be nominated for Best Actor at the Academy Awards, and the brainless Academy replied, "Puppetry is not acting." This shows the utter knowledge-less-ness of the Academy. Puppetry is so acting, and Frank Oz not only deserved the award, but as far as I'm concerned, it's one of the greatest acting performances in history.

People often times ask me what separates this film from mindless action/adventure flicks. The answer is this: Through out the whole film, Darth Vader is killing people left and right for making stupid mistakes. At the end, the one time some one makes the greatest mistake out of all, Darth Vader stands alone, looking out the window. He looks down, back out the window, and then saunters right past the person whose fault it was, not looking at him, and doesn't do a thing. He doesn't kill him. This is the greatest moment in the film, and it answers the question that Luke has to ask himself: "Is Darth Vader my father?" Obviously so. If I may add one more thought: When Luke jumps into the bottomless pit, he curiously falls into a hole in the hall that guides him through a tunnel which reveals a trap door at which Luke falls through, finding himself hanging underneath Cloud City. Several people have had many arguments regarding this scene. To me, the answer is simple: Darth Vader. He saved Luke using the force. It's never explained to us though, as nothing else is. And that's why 'The Empire Strikes Back' is a work of genuine art.

Nothing compares with the final scenes of this dark drama, where Norma Desmond, famed star of yesteryear, finally gets her long awaited close up. The irony of this film is that Gloria Swanson was a washed movie star at the time of filming. It is the greatest film of her career because it is real. I find that the level of "realness" no matter what type of movie it is, greater determines the success of that movie.

Ingrid Bergman never understood why people loved her performance in this film above all others. Maybe it's because the reactions are real, the questioning is real, the confusion, the puzzlement, and the passion of her performance were all real. The script was unfinished and the ending undecided. Should she stay with Rick and give us the romantic ending we crave? Or is there something more important that needs to be done. A sense of duty that is greater than two people's love for eachother. These are the questions Bogart and Bergman are constantly asking, and they are real.

'Psycho' is Alfred Hitchcock's strangest, most disturbing, and best film he has ever made. The movie starts off in Phoenix, Arizona where lovers Sam Loomis and Marion Crane are sharing a secret, passionate afternoon in a cheap hotel. Marion is worried that their relationship won't work because they live so far apart and have to keep their love a secret. In the next scene, Marion is at work, her boss asks her to deliver 40, 000 dollars into the bank. In desperation, she steals the money and pursues California to find her lover and run away with him with their new fortune. On the way, however, Marion goes through several obstacles. A policemen finds her suspicious, as does a car salesman. Marion is a clumsy theif. Finding it hard to see the road through a rainstorm, Marion pulls off into an old inn, The Bates Motel. There she meets Norman Bates, a flirtatious, sad, likable guy who's aggressive mother worries Marion. Here are two people, Marion and Norman, who are both trapped. However, Marion has a chance to redeem herself, and she hopes Norman does too. The choice to film in black and white was an inspiration. Instead of grossing out the audience, Hitchcock disturbs the audience with violent and tragic scenes. Joseph Stefano hands over a brilliant script, making this story extremely interesting from a source material that was rather quite dull. We never know exactly where the storie's going and the melding powers of Hitchcock and Stefano are to thank. The music by Bernard Hermann is pure genius. From the second the film opens, our attention is on the screen. The score is all strings, and it brings out the beauty of the black and white picture. Janet Leigh gives a terrific performance as Marion Crane, as do Gavin Lee, Martan Balsam and Vera Miles as the supporting characters. But the best performances come from a voice over work by Virginia Gregg as 'Mother' and Anthony Perkins' defining role as Norman Bates, not only the best performance in his career, but the best performance given by any actor ever. He captures all the subtleties and tragic struggle of the character so well, that he is one of the most memorable characters of all time. Psycho has a terrific surprise ending and a everything ties up nicely in a psychiatric scene most critics seem to hate, but I find resonate. The film has two reaccuring themes: Dependence and hatred of our own mothers. And describing a word by using the same word: "Eating in an office is too officious." "You make respectability sound disrespectful." "I will not speak of such disgusting things because they disgust me." All in all, Psycho is a near perfect film, and a film that hopefully will live forever.

Director Bob Fosse won an Academy Award, as did Liza Minelli, for this incredible film. Michael York gives a brilliant performance as Brian, an english writer who comes to Germany during the rise of the Nazi regime. It's interesting that I chose this as my favorite musical as the music becomes more of a narration rather than forwarding the story. Joel Grey provides the singing, representing the dark rise of Nazi Germany.

Not only the greatest animated film of all time, but the greatest romance film of all time. The animation is flawless, the story improved upon from the original, and the music is pure magic. An instant classic.

"The horror! The horror!" are the final lines of this bizarre and disturbing tale of a boating expedition in Vietnam during the war. Never before has a director been so daring and so honest in a work of film. Martin Sheen and the other expeditioners give great performances of course, but the more interesting performers are Robert Duvall and Marlon Brando, both having about 15 minutes of screen time, but giving the film its true heart beat. Apocalypse Now is Francis Ford Coppola's greatest film.

Remarkable. Sensational. An epic the likes of which we'll never see again. Since I added 'The Godfather' to my Great Movies list, it's only fair that I add 'The Godfather: Part II', because - after all - it is a better movie. And that's saying a lot.

'The Godfather: Part II' is everything the first film is not. The first film is a Hollywood motion picture to the umph degree. The story structure is the basic three act structure. The second film is contemporary and sporadic. The story chaotically swings one way, and then another. It is suspenseful and imaginative, and damn good filmmaking.

Michael is now the Don, with Fredo and Tom as his only brothers left. Trying to rack up more political power in Nevada, they're new location, Michael makes enemies fast. The only question: Who is the enemy? It could be a number of people: Hymon Roth - Vito's old business buddy, who may be trying to cut Michael out of the business deal in Cuba. Frankie - The head of the Clamenza family. Frankie is angry at Michael for doing business with his enemies, the Rosatta Brothers. Along the way, more and more suspects, yet the actual link is a surprise to both us and Michael.

It is interesting that we discover the foe at the midpoint of the film. Through the second of the movie, we see Michael's world falling apart in front of his eyes. All this playing against a second story: The past life of Vito Corleone. It is interesting that Michael makes many of the same choices that his father makes. But, as Michael says, "Times are changing." Indeed, they are. Vito lives in prosperity with his wife and children for the rest of his life, while Michael loses everything he loves.

Of course, the other obvious difference is the production value, which is much more gratuitous. Every inch of the frame in every shot is filled with beautiful images. Extras by the thousands, massive sets, incredible costumes. But, the movie wisely doesn't over produce. The streets are still dirty, and the windows have fingerprints. The camera operation is widely enhanced, and again, more contemporary than its predecessor. Copolla focuses more on abstract shots, while maintaining the epic spirit of the first film.

On the whole, the story is simply more engulfing. The relationship between Kay and Michael is the greatest screen relationship of all time. It's the only thing that saved 'The Godfather: Part III". I wish there were more scenes between them in this film. The sequence where Kay reveals the truth about a certain accident is both shocking and intriguing. Diane Keaton; what happened to her? She used to do movies like this! Now she does films like, "Because I Said So". How did this happen? Please, Diane Keaton, do more films like this! Same goes for Al Pacino and Robert DeNiro, both of whom do great in this movie. You do a film like 'The Godfather: Part II' and then start taking roles in trite like 'Righteous Kill'?

I can't recommend the film enough. It's beautiful, and the score is breathtaking. What an influencial movie. Probably, I'd say, one of the most important movies ever made, not just for what it did for the film industry, but for what it accomplished in popular culture and political influence. How truly wonderful to witness a part of history. 'The Godfather: Part II' is a relic, a holy artifact that will live on in the same light as The Mona Lisa.

"Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn." You just can't buy moments like that. Gone With the Wind is so full of romance and suspense, that it is hard not to love it. The cinematography is astounding and the color palet is perfect. With great performances from Leigh and Gable, Gone With the Wind is one of those movies that was bound to become a classic.

A fun, lively, and hilarious musical that you'll want to get up and dance to.

A wild fantasy that keeps your eyes glued to the screen.

My mother recalls when she was a child, and the Wizard of Oz would be shown on television once a year during the Thanksgiving season. It was such a big event that schools would let out, and people would take off work just to go home, make a big dinner, and watch The Wonderful Wizard of Oz with their family. The impact that this one film truly shows how movies touch lives, change hearts, and reach out to create emotions. In our modern society, seeing such crap being produced all the time, it is a comfort to know that kids are still being touched by one film that will never grow old.

Nothing can compare to the uplifting story of Oscar Schindler, proving that one man can make a difference.

Most movies that try to be touching only allow us to feel one emotion. This film takes us on a roller coaster ride of emotion that never ceases to leave a smile on your face. Top notch performances from Whoopi Goldberg and Oprah Winfrey, and a great cinematic approach, Steven Spielberg shows us that he is one of the best directors in the business.

A truly groundbreaking film that changed the way movies are made. But the great thing this film has to offer is a heart.

A return to the classic movie musical that you'll want to watch again and again.

This week, 'The Godfather' trilogy was released on DVD, newly and meticulously restored. Having had the chance to re-watch the classic films, I've decided to add them to my Great Movies list.

It's impossible to describe the impact that 'The Godfather' has had. Nearly everyone knows the famous quotes: "I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse." "Leave the gun, take the cannoli." And the pop culture references in movies and television are a record high. If I could name the most quoted, referenced, or parodied films it would be 'Star Wars', 'The Godfather', and '2001: A Space Odyssey'. I knew a group of teenagers in New York City who constantly did impressions of Marlon Brando or Al Pacino from 'The Godfather'. Everyone who sees the film loves it, in my experience anyway. I watched it with a good friend once who was shocked afterward to find out that the film is nearly three hours long: "It didn't seem that long!" It doesn't. The film has a spectacular pace, and is engrossing every minute of the way.

The story of 'The Godfather' is universal. People so often categorize the film as a gangster movie. That is a horrible generalization. The film is about family. It is about protecting your family and fighting with your family. It's about the internal struggle to discover what is morally acceptable. It is a tragedy of ethics and standards. It is about a period of change.

Change: A theme of the film. Michael Corleone(Al Pacino) swears he will never have anything to do with the family business. Kay(Diane Keaton) is devoted to Michael. Through the course of the film, their relationship and ethical behavior is shifted. Michael does become involved with the family business; more so, infact, than his brothers, Santino and Fredo. When it comes time to choose a new Don, Michael is chosen. Kay, who was devoted to Michael, starts to question their relationship. She becomes more independent than traditional marriages allow.

Marriage: Another theme. There's the marriage between Vito(Marlon Brando) and his wife. A perfect, traditional marriage. The wife doesn't interfere with her husband's business. It is his and his alone. There's also Santino's(James Caan) marriage, in which he's having an affair. He's disloyal to his wife, yet his wife is not allowed to have a mind of her own, he tells her what she can and can not do. Michael has two marriages: one is in Sicilly to a young, beautiful girl. The marriage is young and passionate. Later, he marries Kay. He asks her as if he's proposing a business strategy. Their marriage is straight forward and passionless, mandatory. Alas, the movie starts with a marriage: The marriage of Connie(Talia Shire) and Carlo(Gianni Ruso). Carlo really does love Connie, but out of a moment of weakness, abuses her through a plot set up by a competitor of the family.

The Family: Organized crime. The very thing that moves the plot along. Many people are killed. We are asked to what extent this is acceptable. Vito Corleone refuses to get involved in the drug business out of moral objections, yet it is told to us that earlier he forced a man to sign a contract by threatening to kill him. When his son, Santino, is killed, Vito calls for no acts of vengeance. Micheal, however, begins is career as the don by killing all threats and competition to the family. When asked by Kay whether or not he killed Carlo, Michael says "No." Kay smiles briefly with relief. However, her fears are revealed soon after as she fixes her husband a drink and has the door to his office closed on her.

What has made 'The Godfather' last as long as it has is the fact that the characters are us. They reveal our own inner emotions and dilemmas. We connect with them and sympathize with them. We love and enjoy them. We loath them. Their emotions call out to us and become our own emotions. Has there ever been a more perfect film? 'The Godfather: Part II' perhaps?

The most adorable and innovative film that Walt himself has ever produced. Truly a masterpiece.

Nothing else can put shivers down your spine like those two notes played vigourously on the cello.

Julie Andrews has never been better than her performance in this breathtaking musical.

Perhaps what makes A Star is Born such a good film is the story behind it. First of all, it was Judy Garland's first film in five years. She was addicted to several drugs and alcohol and had become quite a hassal to work with. This was probably the biggest return for an actress through out all film history. In a way, this film reflects Judy's own career, her own life, accept for she plays the other end of it. When the film opened, it was critically acclaimed, however, Warner Bros. decided to do something stupid: they chopped out about 45 minutes of the movie. This not only made critics and audiences furious, but it has caused all the cut footage to be lost, therefore, the Academy of Motion Arts and Sciences has been trying desperately to piece this film back together. Sadly, we only of the remains of one of the greatest films every made.

This film fills me with childhood memories that I'll never forget. Truly a magnificent piece of art.

One of the greatest love stories ever told. It is not a "gay cowboy movie" as it has been deamed, but a true sweeping, tragic, romance just like any other.

'The Talented Mr. Ripley' is a film that has been forgotten by most people it seems, which is a shame, as it is so emotionally driven that the audience still doesn't know whose side they're one by the end. Matt Damon gives a superb performance as Thomas Ripley, a nerdy young man in search of a new life. When he gets the oppurtunity to go to Italy, he meets another young man who he admires so much, he decides to kill him and steal his identity. But, how far is too far? When have the people in the film know him as Tom and the other half know him as Richard, what happens when, by chance, they meet. The film does so well at capturing the emotion behind Tom's eyes, and Matt Damon knows exactly how to act as one character who is actually two characters, and he believe him all along. Some one who doesn't believe him is Gweneth Paltrow's character, performed beautifully as a smart, investigative young woman. Other great performances come from Jude Law, Cate Blanchett, and Phillip Seymor Hoffman.

With so much controversy surrounding the release of this film, Mel Gibson suceeds in giving us an instant classic and marvelous film. Cinematography, Color Palet, Costumes, make up, and a well written screenplay make this one of the most emotionally well done films ever made.

Orsen Welles only recieved one oscar for this film and he had to share it with fellow screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz. Everytime the film was announced with a nomination, it recieved a round of boos and jeers as a skeptical crowd passed up one of the greatest films ever made because of politics and social agenda.

Lots of flaws keep this wonderful adventure film from a five star rating.

"I think that movies or other media may be able to provide the spark for anxiety and consequent violent acting out by teens, although I'm quite skeptical about movies doing this in the absence of other triggers." - Jay Reeve, a senior psychologist at Bradley Hospital in Providence, R.I., on how movies can contribute to (but not solely cause) violent behavior.

You'd be hard pressed to find a person in the industry who doesn't recognize, admire, respect, despise, or purely hate the words, 'A Clockwork Orange'. The film, by Stanley Kubrick, was released to an appalled public in 1971. Roger Ebert slandered the film for endorsing violence. It was banned in England, and Kubrick himself had to pull the film from distribution because of hate letters and death threats. However, it did win the love of The New York Critics Film Circle which awarded it with Best Picture of the Year and Best Director. Indeed, it was also nominated for Best Picture at the coveted Academy Awards, despite it's bad reputation, which begs the question: Is the film loved purely for taboo reasons?

In fact, today - now that the ban has been lifted and the movie has been transferred to DVD - the film is praised almost entirely from all possible perspectives. AFI listed it as #46 on their 100 Greatest Films of All Time list. It has a fresh tomatoe-meter on rottentomatoes, and many modern day filmmakers (Mary Harron of 'American Psycho' and Tony Kaye of 'American History X' for example) repeatedly mimic Kubrick's work.

But the praise doesn't exist solely within the industry. The public has seemingly become quite keen to the film as well. It is rated at #48 on IMDB's top 250 by the public, it is in almost every 'must see movies' book ever published, and the public's liking to it even led to the film being included in the Best of Stanley Kubrick DVD Box set.

So, why the change from disdain to praise? Has the public eye really changed so much since 1971? Does the movie, in today's exploitive world, seem more conservative? The answer, and to Kubrick's credit, is no. The film is just as dark, violent, and disturbing today, if not more so, than ever before. So, again, why the praise? Is it just because taste in Hollywood has gone bad? Is it just because the liking of a taboo movie is now the cool thing. No again. Kubrick doesn't take kindly to Hollywood, and in their hands his movie would have been watered down even in today's world of the film business.

The reason this movie is fully praised today is because Kubrick's effect on us is real, unmerciful, and frightening. Instead of Alex DeLarge being a run of the mill 'villian'(Darth Vader), or even for that fact, a ruthless monster(Heath Ledger's Joker), he's likeable. The audience connects with him. We see tendencies in Alex that exist in us. He's sexy, even. Charming. Kubrick knows, and executes the fact, that there are people out there that seem to be just like us. People we like, even, who can be the most depraved of human beings. Alex DeLarge frightens us, because unlike other villians, his emotions are real and they call out to us.

We, as the audience, genuinely feel hurt for Alex when he's being forced to listen to Beethoven, his favorite composer, while having electro-shock therapy which causes him incredible pain whenever he listens to the music ever again. We feel such sympathy that we forget about the incredibly inhumane rape scene earlier in the film where Alex beats and rapes a woman while singing the song, 'Singin' in the Rain'. This kind of filmmaking is ingeniously manipulative. Kubrick knows how to monitor our emotions, and with the help of an incredible performance by Malcom MacDowell, the audience is sent through a whirlwind of never ending suspense, thrill, excitement, horror, disturbia, and gratification that only this film has ever been able to supply.

Ironically, through the controversy and undeniable violence that exists in the film, there is not a single drop of blood to be seen. People may ask me the difference between this film and a film like 'Mirrors' which I panned for being heartless. Well, in the iconic scene from 'Mirrors', a young, beautiful girl gets in the bath (nudity gratified) and forcefully, against her will, pulls off her own jaw bone. The scene is approximately five minutes long. It shows every detail of her face, her veins, or jaw as it is being pulled from her skull. The blood sprays from every which corner, and the bath water quickly becomes a deep red. This glorified violence, mixed with the nudity of the scene, is meant to look attractive. By the end of the scene, we are shown a close up shot of the girl's, now deformed, face with the jaw hanging off, still connected by the littlest of skin tissue. Now, compare that scene, full of gimmicks, glorified violence, up close brutality, and nudity made to look attractive, to the scene in 'A Clockwork Orange' where Alex breaks into the home of an old couple and beats them near unconsious, leading to the rape of the woman. Most of Alex's rapid behavior mostly includes shots of him knocking over bookshelves, and throwing furniture, the shots that actually do show Alex beating the couple are either in the background of the shot, or in shadow, and the lens which Kubrick chose to film with is a wide angle lens, distorting the action. When the rape scene does come to fruition, the nudity is minimal and disturbing, and the scene cuts away before any actual intercourse is presented.

Having violence exist in shadow is not chickening out on the violence. Kubrick knows, as do most good filmmakers, that when the violence exists in the audiences head, the effect is more suspenseful, more frightening, and much more gratifying. The human emotions, the sounds, the imagination from the audience is what causes fright. The gratuitious violence in countless films weakens the effect and makes the audience want to turn away from the screen.

'A Clockwork Orange' leaves the audience's eyes glued to the screen. It is a remarkable film, one that has stood the test of time despite countless rejection and controversy, and a movie that will forever live in the minds of movie goers and inspire future filmmakers to create motion pictures that challenge us, frighten us, disturb us, and make us ponder, "What causes people to do unspeakable things?"

Rarely are films this original, true, and incredibly funny. Harrison Ford singing "Some Enchanted Evening" is worth the purchase alone!

Steven Spielberg's film was not an immediate success or blockbuster hit like his last film, 'Jaws' had been. Being released the same year as such films like 'Star Wars' and 'Annie Hall,' it was hard to recieve recognition. But 'Close Encounters' shines through today as an extraordinary experiment in film making, recreating special effects and story telling methods, this film is one of those movies that everyone should see.

It's amazing to see how Disney recovered itself after releasing such horrendous atrocities such as Aristocats and Black Cauldron with this truly groundbreaking animated masterpiece!

A journey into the life of a man who was just a little different. That's what makes it great.

Bette Davis and Joan Crawford in a movie about one-up-manship, murder, and deciet. What more reason do you need to see it?

A breakthrough in filmmaking and a truly magnificent performance by Gregory Peck.

It's impossible for me to fathom somebody not liking Sweeney Todd, although I know there will be plenty who can't appreciate pure genius. Listen to this idea for a movie: Sweeney Todd is a man set on avenging his wife and daughter by killing Judge Turpin. Along the way, he slits people's throats and his neighbor, Mrs. Lovett, grinds the bodies up and bakes them in her popular meat pies. It's a horror movie, but it also has a dark comedic edge to it with a fair bit of romance, drama, suspense, and with about it. Oh, and it's a musical. Sweeney Todd is done in the style of old 1930s monster movies. The color is mostly drained from the film, leaving it looking like a black and white, which is perfect! The only color that does pop up is bright red. The movie feels like a classic, with bits of 'The Count of Monte Cristo' and 'The Avengers' added in, the story truly becomes gripping and the characters more complex. I've often critisized Tim Burton for lack of character development. With this film, Burton shows that he truly can dive into a character. I haven't seen characters this intrigueing in a long time. The plotting and pacing is ingenius, the acting is superb. Johnny Depp gives a brilliant performance as always, but Helena Bonham Carter truely outdoes herself. She plays a woman desperately in love with a psychopath. She knows that he could endanger her life, yet she follows him blindly. Tragically, she chooses him, who doesn't love her, over somebody with true genuine love and protectiveness over her. Alan Rickman is remarkably cunning as Judge Turpin, Timothy Spall, engaging as always as The Beadle. Sacha Baron Cohen makes a great turn as Pirelli, a rival barber, and the two newcomers, Jamie Cambell Bower as Anthony, and Jayne Weisner as Johanna are romantic and thrilling. Laura Michelle Kelly also give a terrific performance. Sweeney Todd is Tim Burton's best film. There's not one loose screw here. The ending is tragic, and rightly so. Sweeney will not be what some people expected, but for many it will be a thrillingly new experience that will forever touch them emotionally. Sweeney Todd is the best film of 2007.

I always love seeing movies like this. Movies that force people to think about what it's trying to say. Movies that create new ways of filmmaking, they force themselves to think outside the box giving us a truly original film that will be remembered for a long long time.

From the moment Aunt Marge blows up like a balloon, to the moment when Harry takes a soaring ride on the latest racing broom (The Firebolt), I was completely enthralled by this visually abstract masterpiece. Most decidedly the best of the Potter films, 'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban' helms a new director: Alfonso Cauron, taking over from Chris Colombus from the enchanting first two films. Cauron makes the film fast paced, emotionally satisfying, humerous, and truly magical. The attention to detail here must be noted! Cauron puts tiny bits of color, if you will, by making this world real. We see a bartender who simply waves his hand and the tables clean themselves, or quills that write on their own. Cauron wisely introduces us to certain themes or places early on in the film. The whomping willow, a moving tree that will kill you before allowing you to move close to it, becomes in and of itself: a character. It's used as a guide for the season, but also allows us to get to know the tree so that by the time we get to a scene where the triplet must find a way passed it, We know exactly what it is and what danger they're in. Elements from the novel by J.K. Rowling are played with such creativity and believability. The Maurader's Map could have easily become a joke, but Cauron designs it with precision, making it a uniquely magical and dangereous object. Performances are also topnotch: Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson especially, and the three kids make the film a fun and exhuberant rollar coaster. 'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban' is an instant classic that can be enjoyed time and time again.

Robert Zemeckis should be awarded a gold star for never making a terrible film. He is one of the only directors to accomplish that level of greatness(along with Martin Scorsese).

If there was a musical that had it all, this would be it. Romance, dancing, danger, and human drama. A must see.

Funny, Romantic, Creative, High Spirited, Suspensful, and Mysterious. Everything a good film needs.

Innovative and groundbreaking in scope, style, and presentation.

James Cameron's labor of love film is true art work. Even more quotable than 'Casablanca,' Titanic sweeps us away on an incredibly emotional ride that combines the classic romances with the blockbusters of today. Unique and with incredible production value, Titanic is an incredible movie going experience.

Definately the best of the prequels, bringing us back to the spirit of the original trilogy while at the same time, giving us a darker, more menacing tone.

Inventive, Creative, fantastic cinematography, the color scheme is magnificent!

What a fantastic musical! Julie Andrews shines in her film debut, and Dick Van Dyke, even with the phony accent, does exceptional.

Holy freaky, Batman! Fabulous performances and direction lead to one of the best films of the 90s.

What's immersive about this musical version of the Charles Dickins novel is the use of color and camera work. In one scene, 'As Long As he Needs Me,' Director Carol Reed shows his amazing capability at showing emotion through movement and setting. As Nancy sings this beautiful song about how much her abusive lover Bill Sykes needs her, she starts at the top of a bridge, wearing a deep passion red dress and walking along the railing. As the song progresses, she slowly starts working her way down the stairs as the camera pans down with her. She makes her way into a building where we see her through a series of moldy, broken windows, and finally, when she emerges from the building, the rest of the song is sung with her back to us, and the camera hiding behind the stair railing. In this one scene, we are shown the enormous effect that motion pictures have on us as people and how they can stir our emotions. It is probably the greatest scene ever filmed for any movie.

Rex Harrison gives the best performance of his career, however, the movie's ending is remarkably horrendous!

What can I say? It's Alfred Hitchcock!

The best of the Disny/Pixar films.

The scariest and most exhilerating Disney film. True Magic.

A great holiday classic, that will put a smile on your face when you think of how wonderful life is.

Julie Andrews is absolutely fantastic to watch. She lights up the screen in one of her best performances as a woman pretending to be a man pretending to be a woman. Robert Preston also does an incredible job, proving that he is one of the greatest actors who didn't get enough credit for his work. The musical numbers in this film exceed most movie musicals, smartly making it less of a musical and more of a film, being made when it was, a musical would not have been a good idea. Blake Edwards does a great job of handling this piece with great care, giving us one of the first pro-gay films to be made, this really is ahead of its time.

In the world of moviedom, there are really only a few noteworthy horror films. Among them, Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho in 1960, Whatever Happened to Baby Jane starring Betty Davis and Joan Crawford in 1962, Scream, which is really a spoof of horror movies, and this movie: John Carpenter's Halloween from 1978. What makes this movie work better than it really should, I think, is that there is no blood. That's something that surprises a lot of people as 'Halloween' is seen as the pivitol slasher movie. But the fact that there is no blood allows us to concentrate, not on the gore factor but, on the central character (if you can even call him that), this evil incarnate: Michael Meyers. The fact that there could be a person who, at the age of six, could be completely filled with evil is a really scary idea, and one that haunts people. The story does revolve around Michael Meyers, the spawn of Satan, who kills is older sister when he is a child and sent to a mental institution to be transferred to prison when he reaches adulthood. His doctor, Sam Loomis (named for a small tribute to 'Psycho') fears Michael who doesn't speak or move for 15 years. FREAKY! Well, finally, at the age of 21, Michael escapes and his hometown is about to be terrorized by him on the fateful night of Halloween (Michael's birthday). In another tribute to 'Psycho', Carpenter casts Jamie Lee Curtis, daugher of Janet Leigh. She is Michael's obsession. The idea behind this is that her character, Laurie, is Michael's younger sister, and Michael has set off to finish what he started. No family = less human, which is essentially what Michael wants. Michael tries desperately to ensure himself of his loneliness, that way he has something to kill for, and if he is smart, he can overcome even Satan to become the pure Idol of Evil. The fact that Michael seems to be impervious to injury is, I think, a metaphorical choice: The lonelier and less human you are, the harder it is to hurt you, to wound you. He has trained himself to let go of his emotion and in so doing, has defended himself against pain. The fact that Michael was evil to begin with is essential. He was born with evil spirits possessing his body. With that said, this movie could've been the darkest, broodiest film ever made. But, Carpenter wisely gives us a break from all that by supplying us with main characters you are, in fact horny teenagers with strong personalities. This was the first horror film to use that idea, and remains the only one to use it wisely(except perhaps Scream). Therefore he have a new kind of horror film, one that frightens us out of our wits, but one that is often humorous and laughable. That is the genuis of this movie. Often copied, never equalled. I think Halloween is immortal because it is about evil incarnate, about one person who has devoted his life to become progressively more and more evil, and that is the most frightening idea that I think any of us can think of, or worse, witness.

Just as good as the original. King Kong provides us with a true reason to watch a three hour plus movie.

A big brassy musical that offers us with a lot of sex, booze, and FUN!

This is the stupidest movie I've ever seen. That's what makes it work so well.

The Harry Potter series is turning out to be one of my very favorite film sagas since Star Wars and The Godfather. These are films that know who it's audience is and grows not only with them, but with the young actors as well. Book 5 is my least favorite of the Harry Potter novels, so naturally I was expecting to be a little disappointed with the movie, but David Yates takes something that was quite uninteresting from the source material and makes it interesting. Not an awful lot happens in 'Order' so it's important to keep the film fast paced and exciting, which is crafted well by Michael Goldenberg, the new screenwriter. Any and all magic that is shown is done so to feed us into Harry's feelings and inner struggle: Instead of focusing on what's around Harry, this time around we're focusing on what's inside Harry. The performances are superb, the special effects are fine, the music's above average, and the editing is uniquely impressive. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is potentially the most lively Potter film, yet I'm still sticking with the abstract "Prisoner of Azkaban" as the greatest Potter flick.

Although undeserving of it's golden trophy for best picture, a tremendously fascinating film.

A great addition to the Potter films, 'Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire' is darker and yet, still fanciful. Harry returns to Hogwarts yet again, this time to compete in the Triwizard Tournament, a cometition where battling Dragons, defeating mermaids, and maneuvering through a giant evil, and bewitched maze are just as gamely as anything else. Something different and well done about this chapter is the way the growing pains and awkardness of the kids comes out. Of course, Voldemort returns here, and he is played menacingly and intriguingly by Ray Fiennes. Other great performances include Maggie Smith's McGonnagall, Alan Rickman's Snape, Michael Gambon's Dumbledore, and Brendon Gleeson's Mad Eye Moody, the new and strange Defense Against the Dark Arts theacher. However, it's the kids once again who steal the show. Daniel Radcliffe is really coming into his own as an actor, as is Rupert Grint, but I wished Steve Kloves would've written in the resourcefullness and cleverness of Hermione Granger as he did in the previous films as that made her my favorite character. As much fun as 'Goblet of Fire' is, there are a few problems: 1 - The music, written by Patrick Doyle, is rusty and tired, sticking to unexciting adventure cliches and not adding a single touch of inventiveness or originality. 2 - The screenplay by Steve Kloves is at times witty, and at other times flat and almost demeaning to the audience. There is a scene where Harry is trying to pluck up the courage to ask a girl on a date and he says, "Right now, I think I'd rather take on a Dragon." That line almost destroys the beauty of these scenes of growing hormones and awkard feelings. The fact that Harry is more frightened by asking a girl to the ball than battling a dragon provides the biggest piece of poignancy to the film and to have it force fed to us is most insulting to the intelligence of the audience. These are just minor quibbles however, for 'Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire' remains a worthy and strong chapter in the series. However, after four films, 'Goblet' would have to rank in at the bottom.

A truly fascinating cultural learning of the native americans.

The best of the Batman films. This is a movie that can be taken seriously as well as being a fun action flick.

When it was over, I felt my self wanting to start it up and watch it again. Which I did.

The best imagining of the Pan legacy. For the first time, the themes from the book are taken seriously and handled with great care and sincerity.

Once again, as with movies like Donnie Darko and The Matrix, we are given a truly original film that thrives on showing us things we have never even imagined.

A better film than Million Dollar Baby, which took home the gold. Johnny Depp and Kate Winslet are breathtaking.

Tim Burton is a genius!

I've never laughed harder in my life. The musical numbers are also very well conceived and put together. However, in terms of filmmaking, it is much too stage-like, which isn't surprising, since it's directed by stage choreographer Susan Stroman. There is far too much of the actors actually talking to the audience, which is great in a stage setting, NOT in a movie. The cinematography is not particularly memorable, it just does what's required of it, and the set is just there. There's no sense of new discovery, they pretty much just filmed the stage play. Still, funnier than the original, not quite as put together.

The gang is back, yet somehow halfheartedly. It's almost as if we should have a voice over at the beginning of the film saying, "Previously on Star Wars . . . " After the enormous success and cinematic pleasure of 'Empire Strikes Back,' 'Return of the Jedi' is a bit of a let down.
The film opens with Darth Vader visiting the new Death Star. The villians seem to have no originality. You'd think that after their mistakes in the first film had shown that they'd learn from them. But no, once again the battlestation has been so poorly designed that one small fighter can destroy the entire thing. Once again, Darth Vader has yet another design for his helmet. I wonder if he shops for his clothes or if he has a personal designer.
The problem with Jedi is how unbelievable the whole thing is. The people in the film have somehow become icons rather than characters. Luke has somehow become ten times more powerful in the force without any new training. Leia has become a sex symbol, and Han has become more cynical than ever (You'd think that being frozen in carbonyte and almost dying might change a man somewhat). C-3PO doesn't make any sense in the movie. At one point in Jabba's Palace, there are three creatures who all speak different languages that C-3PO is supposed to translate for, but he translates for all of them in English. If they all understand English, why don't they speak it and save the trouble of having an interpretor? 3PO spends the whole movie complaining about how scary every little thing is. This was never 3PO's character. The joke was that 3PO was programmed for protocol, but is constantly having to put himself in nonprotocol situations, not that he's a crybaby. Chewbacca has been dumned down as well. The big furry companion has always been slightly annoying, but never a complete idiot. The chewbacca from the first two would never have seen a random dead animal in a tree and tried picking it up, he's smarter than that, he's a pilot for crying out loud.
The movie has three great scenes: One where Yoda steals the whole movie within five minutes, telling Luke that he must confront Vader. Another where Luke tells Leia about their family relationship. And another where Luke tries to convince Vader to leave the Empire and turn back to the good side. These scenes are the only source of substance that this film actually has.
There are three battle scenes going on simultaneously which I wanna talk about seperately:
First is the Forest battle. There is nothing on Heaven or Earth that could convince me that the little Ewoks (of which you can almost see the zippers on the back of their costumes) could destroy the enitre Empire with sticks and stones. Somehow the Empire became stupid and they practically let the Ewoks win.
Second is the Space Battle. Billy Dee Williams is leading the battle. Why would the Rebellion do this? He just barely joined their squadron and has no fighting experience. If anything Wedge Antilles should be leading the battle as he has been with the Rebellion for several years and most certainly proved himself as the best fighter. Maybe that's why Wedge has lost his spark that he had in the first two when he had such great lines as: "Look at the size of that thing!' and "That got him!" Now he just sits there looking solemn, delivering orders in the worst monotone. Also, the Death Star from the first film could destroy an entire planet. This Death Star, which we are informed is even more powerful, hits the same ship twice and it is still there. The Super Star Destoyer goes down because a small fighter ran into it, so shouldn't the Death Star go down when the Star Destroyer runs into it? No sense at all.
Last is the battle between Luke and Vader, where we discover that mind reading and lightning are on the list of Force powers. Why is Darth Vader dying? The only thing that happened was his hand getting cut off and being zapped for a couple seconds. Luke was zapped for at least 2 minutes and he seems perfectly fine. Anyways, we find out that Darth Vader is some fat, bald guy with purple eye shadow, who just sort of blinks his eyes and dies, after which Luke cremates him WITH THE SUIT ON! Why would he do that? Wouldn't he want to cremate is father as he had been before he turned to Darth Vader? Plus it's bad for the environment. Yes, I blame Luke for global warming.
Anyways, Return of the Jedi is a fun and exciting adventure, but with one big downside: The characters are all complete idiots.