A Few Lists and You Get the Gists

Three months since last post? Damn, sorry, y'all. I actually had a pretty good run of movie watching after the Oscars, but it was all watching and no writing, for some reason. I took a step away from current releases and, like Inigo Montoya after the job went wrong, I went back to the beginning.

I assume that most cinephiles have some sort of personal checklist of movies they want to see, even if it is just a mental list. Mine is slightly more organized. Sorry, that's a lie. It's obsessively organized, and spreads across dozens of individual lists culled from various books, news sources, and websites. (filmsite.org has a great compilation of such lists). I keep things broad enough to cover everything from major directors to Maxim Magazine's favorite "Guy Movies," from everything ever released by Criterion to silent classics and cult favorites, and any film that's been awarded a major Oscar.

My personal baby, my "master" list, is one that I started around 1999, my freshman year in college, and is a compilation from major lists of films that are considered must see. It was the impetus of the list-craziness. I always add some of the best films from each year, new stuff that slips into (and sometimes right out of, the Top 250 on IMDb (my internet Dead Sea Scrolls, fanboys be damned) along with every film nominated by the Academy for Best Picture, some of which I loudly grumble when I am forced to add...I'm looking at you, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Ugh. But rules are rules, even if they are self-issued, arbitrary and often ridiculous. The list hit 1000 around 2007, and has since ballooned to the tune of 1154. If you want, you can check out my original 1K, warts and all. Yellow = I've seen it.

Still a little way to go, but it feels like I'm in the homestretch on this thing. I typically come back to this master list to find something when I need a reboot of viewing inspiration, but this time instead of being picky-choosy, I basically started from the top and ticked off things I hadn't yet seen by working alphabetically, managing to close out everything through the C's, with the exception of a couple of hard-to-find pieces.

Kanal

Some quick highlights from the last few months, which had a mostly international flavor: 
Having seen A Generation (1954) a few years ago, I finished Polish director Andrzej Wajda's "War Trilogy." First, the claustrophobic masterpiece Kanal (1956) follows an isolated squadron through one final battle and their subsequent attempt to evade capture (or worse) by slogging through the city sewers, led by a ragtag group of underground fighters, notably Daisy, one of the most badass women ever depicted on screen. Their physical and emotional descent takes an exhausting toll, and the result is harrowing and fatalistic. 93/100

The final piece of the trilogy, Ashes and Diamonds (1958), is a free-flowing, existential examination of the post-war experience, depicting a cross-section of characters reacting to the cease-fire with various states of mourning, celebration, and continued defiance. A poetic reflection from a nation still rebuilding and attempting to reclaim its identity, with an explosive, James Dean-like lead performance by Zbigniew Cybulski as a resistance fighter tormented by his final mission. 80/100

Closely Watched Trains

Closely Watched Trains (1966) - An essential piece of the 1960's Czech/Slovak New Wave by Jiří Menzel, this bawdy, coming of age story provided a nice palate-cleanser to Ashes and Diamonds. It manages similar themes of political unrest and occupation, national identity, and existential malaise with colorful characters and black humor, but is tinged with moments that pack an emotional punch. 82/100

Come and See (1985) - Elem Klimov's controversial depiction of the WWII Belarussian genocide is one of the most brutal depictions of war I've come across. If you thought Atreyu had it bad in the Swamps of Sadness, you ain't seen nothing yet. 90/100





Away from the list there was some new blood, too, both good and bad:

I mean, right?

Evil Dead  (2013)- The new reboot of Sam Raimi's unimpeachable cult trilogy is loads of gory fun but lacks the cheekiness that elevated Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness. Bruce Campbell is irreplaceable. Still worth a look for horror fans, but I preferred The Cabin in the Woods (2012), a cutting genre deconstruction that tosses the humor and horror into a blender, pumps it through a hose, and sprays it all over audience expectations.
Evil Dead: 72/100
Cabin in the Woods: 81/100












Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)/Man of Steel (2013) - I'll go ahead and lump these together because I felt approximately the same about both of them: incredible visual spectacle, good popcorn-munching summer diversion, but wanting for some originality in the story department. Trek sufferes from relying on all sorts of all-too-familiar constructs -- The baddie behind bars who is really in complete control; the not-so subtle flipping and subsequent copping-out of the Wrath of Khan heartstring-tugger; the "good" superior officer with hidden hawkish motives a la General Jack Ripper (I'm telling ya, just have Peter Weller replace "communist" with "Klingon"). Man of Steel, on the other hand, lacks the snappy dialogue and character interplay and doles out Kal-El's internal and external struggles with a heavy hand, repeatedly relying on short, distracting flashbacks to shoehorn in character motives whenever necessary. The singleminded villainy of General Zod (Michael Shannon) makes for a few fun, overly ridiculous set pieces, but it becomes a little tiresome watching indestructible people batter one another over and over and over...and over and over again without anyone getting tired or hurt. In the end, these are movies designed to put buts in seats and dollars in pockets, but they aren't going to change the way we think about Sci-Fi and Superheroes.
Star Trek: 65/100
Man of Steel: 61/100