A Movie You Love But Everyone Else Seems To Hate – 30 Day Movie Challenge
I’m not sure why most critics didn’t enjoy this film. I wonder if it had anything to do with the dark tone or the fact that there is a giant blue penis on display for half the film. But I love the alternate reality and the bleak landscape. Imagine an America where ordinary people have donned masks and alter-egos to take the law into their own hands. That sounds like the opening exposition of every superhero story. Now imagine that in this world, because of the threat of Communism, Richard Nixon has not been impeached. Rather, he is serving his fifth consecutive term in the White House. That could be the most implausible thing about the whole film. Caped superheroes, sure. A flame throwing owl aircraft, no problem. A glowing blue demi-god, why not. But the idea that Nixon won that many elections, that takes a suspension of reality. But in a world where America won the Vietnam war (albeit with the help of a superhuman) a lot of things could be different.
Nixon has outlawed vigilante justice telling the heroes to put away their masks and rejoin society. What use is a caped crusader when you wield the power of a god. At one point, a newscaster says, “the superman does exist, and he is American.” So all the watchmen are either in hiding, trying to live a normal life, or have resorted to criminal actions to continue their masked marauding. Dr. Manhattan is the only one with superpowers in the literal sense, and he lives outside ordinary time and space and has control over the forces of the universe. It is dark and philosophical and I just really enjoyed it.
In most superhero movies, you’d just be waiting for everyone to snap out of it, climb into the spandex, and save the day almost guaranteeing a sequel. But there’s so much dread and baggage surrounding this group of justice seekers that it isn’t clear who the hero is, if there even is one. So what do you think? Did you like Watchmen? Am I way off? Please leave me a comment in the section below or on Twitter or Facebook.
I’m a little wary of this question. It seems like the person that started this challenge may be sitting in an office in Hollywood waiting for all of us film geeks to get to day 24. Then when we post our great ideas he steals the ideas for his own and presents them to his boss. Perhaps I’m just paranoid, but I’m not sure if I want to put my great idea on the internet for everyone to see. Perhaps if I post it here with a time-stamp and a copyright at the bottom of the page that will be sufficient to prove that it was my idea before any one else. Well, I’ll live on the edge and throw caution to the wind and tell you all, but you have to promise to at least give me free screenings to your movies that will make millions after you steal my idea. It really is a simple concept and all the technology to make it happen already exists. In a sentence, I’m talking about audience interactive plot control or Choose Your Own Adventure.
No, I didn’t mis-count, it is still day 20. Yesterday I stretched this question into two questions by naming 
My favorite modern actress is another tough decision. The leading lady I picked has been very selective in her roles. She started her career at 12 years old by getting herself kidnapped by a hitman named Leon. She would go on to get her Bachelor’s degree in Psychology from Harvard University, and become the Queen of Naboo and a representative in the Galactic Senate. But Natalie Portman really caught my eye when she shaved her head and learned an English accent to play Evey in the futuristic V for Vendetta. She is the accomplice to V, a masked and mysterious anti-hero who’s either a terrorist or a freedom fighter, depending upon which side of the explosion you’re on.
You would think that with 20 years to work on a worthy follow-up to the Indiana Jones Trilogy that Steven Spielberg and his collaborator George Lucas could create an entertaining and exciting film. However, it seems that instead of becoming sweeter with time, this one just became rotten. In Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, we see an elderly Indy (or should I say Henry because he is rarely called “Indiana” or “Indy” in this film) in his baggy grandpa pants with locks of grey-white hair peeking out under a crisp and rarely-dirty brown fedora you really don’t get the feeling that you’re watching anything historic. This is a movie that obviously misunderstood its audience, it’s exactly the type of summer blockbuster developed to make money at all costs: things blow up; there are aliens; and an unnecessary youthful sidekick.
The other aspect of the film that disappointed me was the role that extra-terrestrials play. The original trilogy uses religious artifacts as the treasure the Indy is hunting. But as with the abominable Star Trek prequels that George Lucas thrust upon audiences, all of the religion and mysticism was replaced by science-fiction. Why don’t film-makers understand that audiences want to encounter something inexplicable in the theater. We don’t want midichlorians to give a scientific explanation of the force or science to replace our religion. The presence of the aliens is strong, but there is no dialogue between the two parties, much like Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
Ultimately, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a film that, while not entirely bad, is nowhere near worthy of its lofty pedigree. As generic action films go, it may have provided some level of entertainment in the vein of National Treasure..But with the attachment of “Indiana Jones” to the title and the involvement of Harrison Ford, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg my expectations were raised and my standards were set to a level that these individuals can sadly no longer meet.
Yikes! I only have an hour to give you this day’s challenge before my carriage turns into a pumpkin. There is that word “hate” again. As I said a few days ago, hate takes too much energy. These are movies that I used to like but have put out of my mind or forgotten about. When looking back at some movies that I enjoyed in my childhood and youth, I was amazed at how many I still enjoy. I didn’t watch most of the crap that passed for film in the late 80s and early 90s. But one of the films that I kept coming back to was Batman and Robin. I mean, George Clooney with bat-nipples and two inept sidekicks. I probably watched it originally because I loved Alicia Silverstone. But I could really just say any Batman film made in the 90s. That’s right, even Batman Returns. The first Tim Burton Batman was tolerable, but having seen Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, even it has lost a great deal of its original appeal.
I have to say that 1997’s Jerry Bruckheimer produced Con Air is an extremely fun ride, and it is one of my favorite action films. If I see this one on TV I will almost always watch it. The film is so over-the-top with its characters, dialogue, and situations that it can’t be truly believable and I don’t think it is meant to be. I know that this is not a high quality film, it doesn’t answer any metaphysical questions. But it is a good popcorn movie and it is endlessly re-watchable, even 15 years after it was released. True to most Bruckheimer productions Con Air is loud, crazy, and completely mindless fun during its 123-minute running time.
With a cast like that stuck on a plane together for at least half of the film, it has to be good.
Con Air is one boldly energetic and exciting action flick. I’ve seen the movie well over a dozen times since it first came out in 1997 and it’s never lost its luster or ability to be exciting, brain-dead entertainment. It’s one wild ride that I am a bit ashamed to say that I love to take.
This was another category that suffered from the use of vague language. What is a classic movie? What criteria would you use to define a classic? I think what determines a classic film is the same thing that determines a classic piece of literature: the test of time. No film or literature of substandard quality will survive that test. The key to passing this test of time is a work’s universal appeal. This asks for my favorite, not the most classic, so I am pleased to share my favorite classic movie, North By Northwest.
The 1950s were a great decade for Alfred Hitchcock. He had so many hits with Strangers on a Train, Dial M for Murder, Rear Window, To Catch a Thief, and The Man Who Knew Too Much. He also had a TV show, Alfred Hitchcock Presents. But in 1958, Vertigo was released and failed to impress critics or audiences. Hitchcock was undoubtedly disappointed by this and couldn’t know that Vertigo would eventually be considered one of his masterpieces. But he vowed that his next project would be a more tested and tried effort that would be more of a crowd-pleaser. The film was a box-office hit, second only to Ben-Hur for the year, and got positive reviews from critics.
It starred Cary Grant as Roger Thornhill a New York advertising executive who is mistakenly identified as a secret government agent, this put a target on his back. Then he’s framed for murder, this puts him on the run from the police as well as the bad guys. While on the run, he meets Eve Kendall (Eva Marie Saint), who apparently believes his story and wants to help. I’m not going to give you any more about the plot because I want everyone to see it. It has so many iconic scenes and it is still powerful today. It influenced a whole genre of action-suspense-espionage movies. Only three years after its release, the first James Bond film, Dr. No, appeared. Of course, James Bond is a spy, whereas Roger Thornhill was only mistaken for one. But both films have implausible action sequences in outrageous locations like Mount Rushmore. They both have beautiful but mysterious women who take an interest in the hero. And both have a well-dressed leading man who is suave, has a knack for one-liners, a fondness for liquor. You can probably think of dozens of movies since 1959 that have operated on those same principles.
With North by Northwest, Hitchcock tweaked the basic man-on-the-run story with witty dialogue, charismatic performances, and visually arresting action sequences. He demonstrated that these elements of basic popular entertainment, which are sadly looked down upon by some who call themselves critics, could be applied to big-budget studio films. He showed that a movie could be entertaining, thrilling, and funny, smart and well-produced. It didn’t have to choose to be either high-brow or low-brow. North By Northwest is an extremely entertaining thrill ride. There is not a lot of substance or meaning to it, it is just a tremendously fun roller coaster ride that Hitchcock takes us on. When I first saw it as a kid, I was hooked. And it set a precedent for hundreds of blockbusters that followed in its wake. 
Growing up, I remember getting to go to work with my dad from time to time. My dad has worked for several different companies, from pest control to shoe repair, but I will never forget the day that he took me to work with him at the radio station. He sold airtime to businesses that wanted to advertise on the station. I got to sit in the booth with the Djs, I even recorded a little radio spot when I was probably no older than 4 or 5 for the station that used to be GC-101.
If we’re going off of pure funniness, then the winner would be Blazing Saddles. I must admit that I saw this movie at much too young an age. I was a latch-key kid, spending several hours alone at home every night after school before my Mom and Dad got home from work. That gave me time to explore my parent’s collection of films. I probably saw this before I turned 12, but growing up in a town that is still to this day visibly divided by the railroad tracks, I understood the racial dynamic. I probably shouldn’t have been allowed to see it till High School, but I don’t think I was irreparably damaged. This is one of those films that has entered my vocabulary, one that my dad and I quote back and forth… “What’s a dashing urbanite like you doing in a rustic setting like this?”… “They darker than us!”… “Oh, lordy, lord, he’s desperate! Do what he sayyyy, do what he sayyyy!” Even though this film contains innumerable racial slurs, I think the point (if it has a point) is really about racial equality. The film is also quick to make references to other films and actors to make some of its gags. And since this was one of the few comedies in that home video library, I would watch it over and over again and was forced to do research on some of the jokes (Hedy Lamar, Randolph Scott, Cecil B. DeMille). Because of that, I owe a great deal of my love for film to this movie because it started me digging into the film industry.
Standing in stark distinction to Blazing Saddles, I didn’t see The Princess Bride until I was in college. It is a movie that my kids have already seen and is also tremendously quotable. It has everything; action, adventure, humor, pirates, torture, and of course, true love. Cary Elwes delivers the most outstanding performance of his career as Westley, the love-struck servant to Buttercup (Robin Wright), a beautiful woman living in a misty romantic fantasy world. She also gives one of the best performances of her career in her film debut here as Princess Buttercup. The thing that makes this movie so great is the quality of comedy relief of the entire supporting cast. Wallace Shawn is absolutely hilarious as Vizzini, the bonehead villain who is completely convinced that he has the whole world figured out, Andre the Giant delivers a lumbering but highly impressive performance as Vizzini’s enormous, idiot sidekick, and my personal favorite, Mandy Patinkin creates one of the most entertaining and likeable characters to ever see the screen. “My name is Inigo Montoya! You killed my father! Prepare to die!”