3 thoughts on “Great American Movies List”

1. American Graffiti was the first title that came to mind, so I was glad to see you included it.

   I would add something like Boyz n’ the Hood or Do the Right Thing (which I have not seen), plus something exploring the history and culture — or at least the culture — of indigenous populations.

   Woodstock is a great idea. I wonder if we can pair it with something a little more recent. That was 54 years ago, and there must be a relevant, non-ancient music-youth-culture film of some magnitude that we can include.

   Reply

   1. I would add something like Boyz n’ the Hood or Do the Right Thing (which I have not seen),…

      I feel like Killer of Sheep is better than those two films.

      …plus something exploring the history and culture — or at least the culture — of indigenous populations.

      I definitely wanted to choose a film featuring indigenous characters/stories–especially Native Americans–but I also wanted to choose a good film that went beyond stereotypes.

      None really came to my mind so far. Maybe Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner (2001) by Zacharias Kunuk, although I don’t know if that would count. There’s another film called The Exiles (1961) directed by Kent McKenzie that would fit, but I don’t really think it’s a great film.

      Woodstock is a great idea. I wonder if we can pair it with something a little more recent. That was 54 years ago, and there must be a relevant, non-ancient music-youth-culture film of some magnitude that we can include.

      The first thing that came to mind is Edgar Wright’s Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010), but I’m not sure that’s what you had in mind.

      Maybe Woodstock isn’t a great pick because it mostly represents the 60s. If I include this film, I probably should choose films that represent other time periods in America as well, which is not necessarily a bad idea.

      On another note, here are some alternates to some of my choices:

      Justin Lin’s Better Luck Tomorrow (2002) instead of Chan is Missing
      Amy Heckerling’s Fast Times at Ridgemount High (1982) instead of The Breakfast Club

      Reply

2. I recently re-watched Bonnie and Clyde, and I would add that to this list. The film is known for its violence and the tabloid nature of the story, but I see this more as a character-driven movie. Beatty is good, and I liked his interactions with Dunaway, but Dunaway’s Bonnie really stood out for me, giving a great performance she may never have equaled. (Credit should also go to the screenwriters, Robert Benton and David Newman for the characters and dialogue, and Arthur Penn for also helping them bring the two characters to life.)

   Whether the depictions are accurate or not, the film presents them as people the audience can relate to, in spite of bank robberies and shootouts with the law that most people can’t. In the film Bonnie is the outsider looking in–reminiscent of Jay Gatsby, Willie Loman, and Travis Bickle. But she’s also that small town girl with talent and ambition to do something more with her life, maybe not unlike George Bailey. Interestingly, in this film, Clyde Barrow, the criminal and killer, understands this about her and that draws him to her, as it draws her to him. Tragically, she decides to hitch her fate with his. Many Americans are like Bonnie, having big dreams in spite of having a modest upbringing. Many of these people never really try to realize their dreams. A few really go for it, but unfortunately fail. To me, this is big part of Bonnie and Clyde. All of this, and the fact that the fact the characters driving around the country in a car, make it quintessentially American film.

   By the way, I also recently re-watched The Godfather and The Godfather II. The films would probably still make the list, but they didn’t hold up as well this time around.

   Two things come to mind with regard to this. First, both films feel very, very compressed. There’s a lot we don’t see, the film skips through time. For the most part, the film does this skillfully, and it doesn’t hurt the film, but it almost feels too tightly edited and reduced. I suspect that my reaction stems from watching TV mini-series in the last decade or so–series that are essentially extremely long movies. These films have a much bigger canvas than these Godfather movies, and they would be very different if Coppola made both as a 12 hour series. Ultimately, this isn’t a strong criticism of the film, but it’s something that diminished the film a little on this viewing.

   The second thing that impressed me a little less was the acting–especially Al Pacino. Pacino screen presence was still excellent, but his acting didn’t seem as good. (Diane Keaton still seemed very good, if not better than I remember.) It’s strange but my judgment and perception of acting has changed over time, quite significantly. I almost feel like my perception has become keener and more sensitive. It’s like when I was younger I really wasn’t sensitive to my own singing. As I grew older, for some reason, I could now hear how bad I sounded! (Haha). It’s almost as if I could never hear my singing in the past. Something similar seems to have occurred with regard to acting.

   On the other hand, maybe my perception hasn’t improved so much as my tastes have changed. Perhaps, I enjoy a specific type of acting and no longer enjoy another type? I don’t think this accurately explains what’s going on, but it’s another possibility.

   The visuals, editing, and score were still solid.

   Overall, though, I’m not sure I’d describe the films as masterpieces.

   Reply