A Baseline of Weird

Since Lola came into our lives, I’ve gone out of my way to play weird music for her. ‘Becca’lise has begun showing her dance videos on YouTube. As a result, Lola will now make beautiful, balletic movements to some of the weirdest jazz you’ve ever heard.

Recently, a bunch of Jim Henson shorts were added to FilmStruck. We haven’t really dove into the longer-form stuff yet, but the experimental live-action and animated shorts like Ripples and Drums West have been invaluable towards developing Lola’s comprehension of what motion pictures can be. A lifetime of four-chord songs and three-act structure is just around the corner, why not use these precious, early years to focus on the weird stuff?

The fact that right now Lola doesn’t even know the word, “art” is a beautiful thing. She can express herself in infinite ways and can find enjoyment in things that would put off most adults. Right now my daughter’s horizons are endless and I want to do everything in my power to keep it that way.

If you don't have FilmStruck to check out the Jim Henson films, here's a few shorts to check out on YouTube from Stan Brakhage, Manoel de Oliveira, and Kenneth Anger! Do you have any other experimental shorts that you would recommend for kids?

33 Years, 33 Movies

Another year, another list of Craig's favorite movies. As with any list I put together, I'm sort of underwhelmed. I look at it and see a bunch of "obvious" choices. But what am I expecting? It's my list. I made it. And the films on it are the ones that best represent me. I'm never going to be able to look at it and think, "Wow, he really surprised me there!" And if you've been reading this site for any significant amount of time, I'm sure they won't surprise you either. Oh well. I can't lie. Cinematically, this is who I am. Here are my 31 and 32 lists.

1. State of Siege
2. McCabe & Mrs. Miller
3. North by Northwest
4. Lady Snowblood
5. Black Swan
6. Beginners
7. Gilda
8. Possession (1981)
9. Little Shop of Horrors (1986)
10. Los Angeles Plays Itself
11. Shaun of the Dead
12. Inherent Vice
13. Frances Ha
14. The Royal Tenenbaums
15. The Rules of the Game
16. On the Waterfront
17. Jackie Brown
18. Persepolis
19. Aguirre: The Wrath of God
20. Goodfellas
21. 2001: A Space Odyssey
22. Journey to Italy
23. Arabian Nights (1974)
24. The Umbrellas of Cherbourg
25. Citizen Kane
26. Sleeping Beauty
27. Fargo
28. Fox and His Friends
29. La Dolce Vita
30. Charade
31. Morvern Callar
32. The Last Days of Disco
33. Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

Oscar Noms: What A Lovely Day!

I'm not sure about you guys, but I'm already burned out by this Awards Season. I don't remember being this over it this early last year. But then again I was a much bigger fan of last year's cinematic output. Not that this year was a total wash. There have been some legit great movies this year. It's just that right now, I'm pretty confident that the truly great stuff is not going to win. Am I just being pessimist? Am I putting too much faith in Oscar bloggers? Am I still burned over Birdman's win last year? We will see when the little good guys get handed out next month. Until then, here are my annual bullet point thoughts on the nominees...

-First and foremost I say: Screw Shortlisting! More than a month before these nominees were announced it was decided that Phoenix was not going to make the cut for Best Foreign and Call Me Lucky was not going to make the cut for Best Documentary. As those were two of the year's best films, the decisions to exclude them are dumb decisions.

-White people! I thought this was supposed to be a paradigm shifting year thanks to all the young and ethnically diverse voters? Perhaps they all threw in behind Mad Max and stuff like Creed and Tangerine got left in the lurch?

-WTF with the overall lack of Carol in most major categories? That's some serious BS.

-In happier news... 10 NOMINATIONS FOR FURY ROAD! ... let's just hope it can win a few. Don't know if The Academy would deign to give it Best Picture, but I will totally settle for Best Director!

What Do Your Favorite Films Say About You?

When that recent Tarantino interview came out, so much of the film loving Internet was aflutter (a Twitter?) with opinions about the valid, constructive criticism Quentin had regarding the film It Follows. Yet among my friends, more dispiriting was the fact that Tarantino himself loves to badmouth a different film which many of us hold in high regard - his own carchase/slasher masterpiece. Yes, I'm talking about Death Proof!

Personally, I hold that film above Reservoir Dogs, Django Unchained and Inglourious Basterds. Of course a few took exception with my opinion on this, but many people on my Facebook wall chimed in and declared Death Proof to be their favorite Quentin Tarantino film altogether. Which I guess goes to show you how subjective taste can be. Sure we can back up our opinions with this or that "fact", but in the end, it's all very personal.

If you press someone to give you a list of their Top-10 or more films, what you'll get is a pretty good glimpse into who that person is. You will not only be able to know what they respond to visually, but emotionally as well. In a way, a list of someone's favorite films can be even more insightful than the much lauded Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator.

Pretty much every time I look at my own personal favorites list, I find myself thinking, "Perhaps it's time to  shake this list up Craig?" Yet when I try to think of what I'd eliminate, I'm at a total loss. Even though I now prefer Kill Bill (as a whole) to Pulp Fiction, I cannot bring myself to remove Pulp Fiction from the top of that list. That's the movie that made me who I cinematically am and introduced me to things like the French New Wave and Hong Kong Cinema. I'm so resistant to removing films from my list that my Top-10 is actually a Top-11 because I couldn't bring myself to remove anything to make room for Y Tu Mamá También.

Looking at my Top-11 I see so many recurrent themes and visual tropes. Lots of bittersweet endings and films about eras ending. There's also lots of brown in the color pallets and an overall mid-century flavor to much of the design. Of course most of the films use source music to underscore scenes and feature hyperbolic camera moves...except for the ones that don't. Some of the films on the list are even from the same year. Does that mean something?

When I saw the 1962 commedia all'italiana classic Il Sorpasso for the first time last year, I fell instantly in love. Upon trying to figure out why I responded to it so strongly, I came to the realization that though this movie pre-dated me by twenty-one years, it was made specifically for me. It checks off pretty much every element on the list of things that I respond to in cinema. To quote my own review: "It’s a road movie that luxuriates in the settings and side characters, it expertly balances comedy and drama, it features a passive main character who is propelled along by a charismatic rascal, the pop songs are expertly placed and the photography is beautiful." Of course I loved it, it was pretty much predestined.

So is it now time for my Top-11 to become a Top-12? I've come to accept the fact that none of those core movies are going anywhere anytime soon. They are part of who I am. They're like those islands in Inside Out. My relationship with them can change, but they will always be there underscoring everything else that I watch. I will love or hate something for the ways it is either similar to, or different from those core films. The only choice is to add, right?

But then again, Il Sorpasso doesn't bring anything new to my personal canon. It's merely a variation on several extremely well known themes in the pre-existing, "Craig Canon". Perhaps I should only incorporate a new film  to the list if it adds something new to my understanding and appreciation of cinema. Or perhaps I should just accept who I am. Like they say, you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

For the curious, here are my Top-11 films. What are yours? What do they say about you?

1. Pulp Fiction
2. Ed Wood
3. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
4. Taxi Driver
5. L.A. Confidential
6. Buffalo '66
7. Annie Hall
8. The Godfather Part II
9. Boogie Nights
10. Chasing Amy
11. Y Tu Mamá También

Enemy Mine: Leonardo DiCaprio's Flawed Quest For Oscar Gold

If you've been on the Internet at all in the past couple years I'm pretty sure you're familiar with the various memes about Leonardo DiCaprio's desire to win an Oscar. A particular favorite of mine is Leo as Jordan Belfort crawling towards an Oscar while nearly paralyzed by Lemon 'ludes. He has become the Susan Lucci of the Oscars aka the perpetual "also ran". But it's not like he doesn't deserve one.

Leo has been great in so many films ranging from his first nomination for Arnie in What's Eating Gilbert Grape all the way to Belfort in Wolf of Wall Street. With the release of the first trailer for Alejandro González Iñárritu's upcoming wilderness survival story The Revenant, awards speculation has begun anew. Will this be Leo's year? Personally I don't think so.

Judging by the trailer and source material, The Revenant has all the sign posts of an award worthy performance: he's playing an historical figure, he's required to get dirty and there doesn't seem to be a more showboaty character in the film to draw attention away from him...unless you count director Iñárritu and superstar cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki. Once again DiCaprio's good taste has turned out to be his worst enemy.

No matter how good Leo's performance in The Revenant turns out, he is destined to be overshadowed by the long takes that the film appears to be shot in. Don't believe me? Just ask Sandra Bullock (Gravity) and Michael Keaton (Birdman). Add to this the decision to shoot the film entirely in natural light and it's a done deal. By continually choosing to work with "name directors" like Martin Scorsese, Christopher Nolan and especially Baz Luhrmann, DiCaprio is continually allowing himself to become just another stitch in a large, enveloping tapestry.

No matter how great Leo was as Howard Hughes in The Aviator, there was no chance he was ever going to beat Jaimie Foxx in Ray. As capable as Taylor Hackford is as a director, he's not one to try out stylistic techniques that would draw attention away from his characters. DiCaprio, on the other hand, had to compete with epic flight scenes and a color pallet so distinct that even the film illiterate had to take notice. The best you can hope for in a film that big is Best Supporting because you are literally supporting the film. Cate Blanchett had to crank it all the way to 11 just to get noticed and win her Oscar.

Let's remember that Denzel didn't win Best Actor for channeling Malcolm X in Spike Lee's ambitious and sweeping epic, he won it for overwhelming everything in his path in the relatively minor Training Day. Judging by the Southpaw trailer, Jake Gyllenhaal seems to have gotten that message loud and clear. It's even directed by Training Day's Antoine Fuqua!

If Leo seriously wants to take home a golden statue in the near future, he needs to first take a look at Johnny Depp's recent playbook. Rather than resigning himself to being yet another swirly-whirly in yet another Tim Burton film, Depp has opted instead to be the showboat at the center of what looks to be a fairly by the books, true crime tale - Black Mass. No way his newly blue eyes and receding hairline will go unnoticed in that picture! DiCaprio just needs to find a capable second stringer to hitch his horse to. Or perhaps he can just hold out for a lifetime achievement award like Peter O'Toole! 

The Craig Duffy Classic Film Festival

As it often does, attending the Turner Classic Movies Film Festival this past weekend got my brain spinning. If I were programming a film festival, what would I show? The easy answer is to just say "All of the best movies!" But what is your definition of "best"? Do you stick exclusively to epic, foreign dramas? Or maybe you go the commercial route and stick to the spectacular and crowd pleasing? Lots to consider.

In planning out this hypothetical schedule, I called upon my love of making mix-discs for friends. Variety is key. You want to have an overall experience. Showing too much of the same becomes mind-numbing, but you also don't want to be arbitrary. There has to be some sort of logical flow  to the day. You have to really Rob Gordon this shit. Peaks and valleys, man. Peaks and valleys.

Having sweated out every decision here, I can now say with absolute certainty that if you were to dedicate a full two days to following the precise screening regimen I am about to lay out for you here, you will have one of the most cinematically fulfilling weekends ever!

So without further ado...

Day One

• 12:00pm - Singin' in the Rain
• 2:00pm - Nashville
• 5:00pm - A Night at the Opera
• 6:45pm - Alphaville
• 8:45pm - Sleeping Beauty (1959)
• 10:15pm - Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn
• 12:00am - The Blues Brothers

Day Two

• 12:00pm - The Red Shoes
• 2:30pm - The Lady Vanishes
• 4:15pm - The Rules of the Game
• 6:30pm - Hard Boiled
• 8:45pm - Blow Out
• 10:30pm - The Freshman (1925)
• 12:00am - Beyond the Valley of the Dolls

Which films would make the cut at your personal film festival? Should I program a third day? Let me know in the comments!

House Styles

Back when I started reading comics in 2nd grade, the art contained within was all pretty similar. Even though the gap between Dan Jurgens and Neil Adams is admittedly gigantic, you would be hard-pressed to deny that there isn't at least a little commonality there. From the golden age onward, that was just how you drew superheroes. A “house style” one might call it. If you wanted a unique visual take on things, you had to turn to the independent books like Madman, Love & Rockets and Mage. And then there was the Image Comics revolution.

Though founded by mainstream artists working in the conventional style, Image’s emphasis on “creator owned” books lead to them embracing a lot of the more unconventional voices out there in comics. Thanks to their open submission policy, you suddenly had manga and indie inflected art turning up in books that got shelf space right next to “the big two” of Marvel and DC. Of course it was only a matter of time before these unorthodox voices found their way into the mainstream as well. Now when I walk around my local comic shop, I see all sorts of styles ranging from the deliberately paced David Aja on Hawkeye, to the pop art inflected Mike Allred on Silver Surfer, to the street-art stylings of Ron Wimberly in the pages of She-Hulk. Today a superhero book can look like ANYTHING! Yet sadly, the same cannot be said for superhero movies.

Rather than embracing the visual diversity inherent in their comics, Marvel and DC have both opted to hold true to that old-fashioned “house style” mentality for their cinematic universes. DC is dark and brooding, Marvel is bright and playful. I assure you that if Jeremy Renner ever gets to star in a Hawkeye movie, you will not find any of the ground-level, every-day simplicity that made the Hawkeye comic a hit. And even though the “New 52” incarnation of Batman has embraced a bright color pallet (complete with healthy doses of pink and purple) you will find those colors sadly absent from the monochrome Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice.

I get that both companies are spending billions on large interconnected universes where characters from one film can pop up in another, but do they think we just won’t “get it” unless all the films look the same? I don’t know about you, but I’m perfectly capable of accepting the fact that Captain America looks one way in his own book, and slightly different when he pops up in someone else’s book. No cognitive dissonance here. Give your fans a little bit more credit. If a firmly entrenched institution like super hero comics can change its aesthetics to more accurately reflect the full range of the human experience, why can't our super hero movies do the same?

Build Your Film Library

If you're ever in Paris, do yourself a favor and visit Librairie du Cinéma du Panthéon Ciné Reflet

After recently re-organizing our shelves to incorporate all the new books we received for the holidays, I was reminded of just how many film books we own. Books on filmmakers, books on film movements, screenplays, criticism, history, etc. And though I would never sell off a single one of them, I started to wonder: Which ones are the most essential? Which ones would I recommend to a budding cinephile just starting out. Well here you have it! 

Disclaimer: Some of these books are no longer in print. Click any of the titles and be taken to an Amazon page where you can buy either a new or used copy of the book in question. Some might be available digitally but I honestly didn't look into that.

The Story of Film by Mark Cousins

There are plenty of Film History text books out there to buy, but of course then you end up paying text book prices. Forget all of that and just buy this one. Cousins writes in a simple, personal and easy to read style that goes down smooth. He also makes a point to hit on cinemas of the developing world which might have been excluded in more Western oriented texts.

The American Cinema by Andrew Sarris

The New Biographical Dictionary of Film by David Thomson

Though I don't agree with several of the opinions voiced in both of these volumes, they're absolutely essential. These are works you have to reckon with. If you are going to write a piece that runs contrary to either of these texts, you best bring your A-game. The arguments in both are extremely well thought out, well reasoned and impeccably written. Read these as an exercise to challenge your thinking. Butt heads with them. Wrestle with them. Like sparring with Bruce Lee, you will certainly come out bruised on the other end, but you will also have learned something.

An Army of Phantoms and The Dream Life by J. Hoberman

These books comprise volumes one and two of what will eventually become a trilogy of books dedicated to exploring the Cold War through cinema. Drawing from films both great and small, Hoberman explores the fascinating ways in which film culture and political culture were inextricably intertwined during this tense time  in world history. If you like these, keep an eye out for the third volume (tentatively titled Found Illusions) which is certain to be just as essential.

Pictures at a Revolution and Five Came Back by Mark Harris

Having cut his teeth at Entertainment Weekly, Harris is in full command of a compulsively readable style. But don't let the magazine pedigree fool you into thinking that either of these tomes is mere toilet reading. Read back to back these books form an epic saga of two distinctly different generations coming into their own. Some "characters" from one even pop up in the other. Absolutely riveting stuff and it's all extremely well researched and true.

Who the Devil Made It? and Who the Hell's in It? by Peter Bogdanovich
As an actor, programmer, screenwriter, director and cinephile, Peter Bogdanovich was in the entertainment industry long before he became an "overnight sensation" with his second film The Last Picture Show. During those early years he made a point to seek out several of the actors and filmmakers of Hollywood's Golden Age and got them to sit down for interviews of varying lengths. Though many of these personalities are now considered icons, at the time many of them were either forgotten or dismissed as old fashioned. God bless Peter Bogdanovich for getting them on the record before it was too late.

Hitchcock/Truffaut by Francois Truffaut

Conversations with Wilder by Cameron Crowe
In keeping with the Bogdanovich books, these two are also interview based. But instead of a litany of subjects, each of these books picks a single target and really zeroes in on them. Oh and the interviewers aren't slouches either! You can really feel the admiration Crowe and Truffaut have for their subjects. It's also nice to see the old masters sporadically return the compliment and send back a little love as well.

Everything is Cinema by Richard Brody

The Films of Akira Kurosawa by Donald Richie
We all have certain filmmakers we feel strong connections towards. Something about them just speaks to us. We GET them. Richard Brody and Donald Richie really GET Godard and Kurosawa. These books are without a doubt the definitive takes on these two filmmakers. The insights go extremely deep and help to illuminate things that you would never notice on a first or even thirtieth viewing.

The Great Movies I, II & III by Roger Ebert
The problem inherent to weekly reviewing of new movies is a lack of perspective. You have to make your judgement on the spot and stick to it. What if a great new angle on the film comes to you after discussing it with a friend? Or what if you go through some sort of experience that changes your perspective on an aspect of the story? What if that film goes on to start a revolution? I think this is what inspired Roger Ebert to start The Great Movie series. These collections of essays allowed him to go back, dive deep and really get at what makes a movie particularly "great". Guaranteed to drastically expand your Netflix queue.

The Celluloid Closet by Vito Russo

New Queer Cinema by B. Ruby Rich
I actually did a whole post several years ago where I highlighted some of the more commercial resources available to anyone interested in learning about Queer Filmmakers and the various ways LGBT characters are/have-been portrayed in cinema. Obviously both of these important texts are mentioned there. Rather than plagiarize myself, I'm just going to link to that post HERE.

A Third Face by Samuel Fuller

Shock Value by John Waters
As you've likely heard, "directors are storytellers". Perhaps that is why autobiographies by filmmakers make for such riveting reading. I picked these two filmmakers in particular because in addition to having fun stories about the makings of their various films, they also have stories that are just fascinating in general. I also suggest listening to clips of these men speaking beforehand so that as you can hear their wonderfully unique voices in your head as you read.

Rebel Without a Crew by Robert Rodriguez 

Make Your Own Damn Movie by Lloyd Kaufman
As someone who went to film school, I can assure you that the only real way to learn how to make a film is to actually do it. What a book CAN do is provide you with encouragement. Both of these books have that in spades. They're also funny and filled with all sorts of little tips and tricks on how to creatively solve problems and keep costs down. The rest is up to you.

As you might have noticed, there are no books here that pertain to women in film and/or feminist film theory. Believe me I am well aware of this. Unfortunately, there is presently only one such book in our collection that isn't a biography (Karen Ward Mahar's Women Filmmakers in Early Hollywood) and alas I have not read it yet. I've of course heard wonderful things about Molly Haskell's From Reverence to Rape and really have really dug the large portions of Carol J. Clover's Men, Women and Chainsaws that I have read. As you can see, a great film library is a constant work in progress.

What essentials did I leave out? What are some of your favorites? Let us know in the comments!

Aging Auteurs

The recent discovery of a nearly pristine print of Orson Welles’ Chimes at Midnight has me thinking a lot lately about later works of great filmmakers and how we perceive them. Is film truly a young man’s game? Or is there room out there for an old master to still make an impression on the world?

Though Welles went on to direct the wonderful essay film F for Fake and the still unreleased The Other Side of the Wind, his Falstaff picture is considered by many to be his final masterpiece. Yet at the time of its release, opinions were decidedly more mixed in nature.

After Midnight and Charlie Chaplin’s final film A Countess from Hong Kong were both brutally panned by Bosley Crowther in the New York Times, Andrew Sarris seized the moment as a chance to defend the honor of older directors whom he felt were being unjustly maligned for staying true to who they are. As Sarris succinctly put it, “The great sin of Welles and Chaplin is their failure to abandon their own personal visions of the world to current fashions.” And just imagine if these great filmmakers had in fact tried to chase the trends! They would have been just as ridiculed for falseness. Remember how bad it was when George Romero went digital and tried to hop on the found footage train with Diary of the Dead?

Apparently the best a filmmaker can hope for is an audience that ages with you. When the audience is young and brash, you are there to egg them on. As they begin to settle into the rituals of family life, you are there to point out the little foibles and nuances that only they can appreciate. And as they begin to reflect upon their own mortality, you are there to either comfort them or to at least let them know that they are not alone in having such thoughts. Of course your audience won’t be as big at the end as it was at the beginning, but so what? They've been loyal and stood by you through thick and thin. Unless of course you've outlived everyone in your original audience like the still active 106 year-old Portuguese director Manoel de Oliveira. In that case, everyone should want to watch your movies BECAUSE YOU ARE 106 AND STILL MAKING MOVIES!

And what about the older directors like Kinji Fukasaku and Martin Scorsese who unleash big, swinging-dick movies like Battle Royale and The Wolf of Wall Street at the ages of 70 and 71? Who am I to write someone off just because they're old enough to collect Social Security? I'm still the guy who has all but given up on filmmakers like Brian De Palma, and who holds theories about how certain filmmaking styles only work with certain no-longer-in-production film stocks. Mea culpa! I'm very far from perfect. But I do try to expose myself to as much as possible and give it as fair of a shake as I can.

Let’s close this piece by taking solace in the fact that even Quentin Tarantino who plans to retire at 60 and has made insanely brash statements like, “I don’t want to be an old-man filmmaker, making old-man movies who doesn't know when to leave the party. And I don’t want to fuck up my filmography with a bunch of old-man stuff.” listed Midnight in Paris (directed by the then 76 year old Woody Allen) as his favorite film of 2011. There's hope!

Lazy Day Links

I'm feeling a little under the weather, and can't form complete sentences very well. So here's a link to a bunch of MOVIE TRIVIA QUIZZES, just for the hell of it. Thanks, Sporcle.com!

And here's a really awesome article on how to make any movie the perfect Valentine's Day movie...it's mostly a set of rules for any movie-loving couple to peacefully co-watch a film (definitely applies in our house!)

Finally, check out how your favorite movies should have ended...

I'll have more another day, I promise!

"Living In" on Design*Sponge

Design and lifestyle blog Design*Sponge has a regular series called "Living In..." that takes beloved films and finds clothes and products that you can buy for a taste of that film's style in your own life. Check some of them out in the links below! I absolutely adore this series!

That Thing You Do!
Behind the Candelabra
Now and Then
Volver
Funny Face
Mary Poppins
The Perks of Being a Wallflower
Tuck Everlasting
Mona Lisa Smile
Monsoon Wedding
Best in Show
Leap Year
Bill Cunningham New York
2 Days in Paris
Coffee & Cigarettes
Harriet the Spy
Vertigo
Grease
The Talented Mr. Ripley

Such a creative idea...wish I'd thought of it first!
(Image credit to Design*Sponge)

Let The Good Blogs Roll!

Though unceremoniously let go by The Village Voice earlier this year, J. Hoberman continues to be one of the most insightful film critics out there. Where does he continue to be so insightful you might ask? Why on his wonderful Movie Journal blog for Artinfo of course! It's so wonderful in fact that we just added it to our blog roll! Wait, you guys have a blog roll? YES! It's right over there on the right (you might have to scroll up or down a little) under the title, "The Good Stuff" because that is precisely what awaits you there. Stuff from highfalutin' film critics, stuff from fancy-pants filmmakers and even stuff from average Janes and Joes like you or I! Oh and don't forget the Tumblr of movie barcodes! The one at the top of this post is from the, "These go to 11" sequence in This Is Spinal Tap. You can thank us later.

Cinema Love on the Interwebs!

I have a nasty head cold, and I'm not really feeling up to reviewing a movie. So! I thought I'd link to some of my favorite cinematic time-wasters.




The "How It Should Have Ended" series on Youtube


"The Golden Age of Video" by Ricardo Autobahn


I love a good re-edited trailer!


The famous Marx Bros mirror scene. So amazing!


My Man Godfrey outtakes!


100 Years at the Movies...I've posted this before, but it's still so good!

Sporcle Addiction! Craig and I love to do the movie quizzes on this site...here are a few to get you started.

AFI Top 100 Films (2007 list) - http://www.sporcle.com/games/g/afitop100
Disney Animated Films - http://www.sporcle.com/games/g/disneyanimatedmovies
Movie Posters - http://www.sporcle.com/games/g/movieposters
Lesser Known Movie Quotes - http://www.sporcle.com/games/burningriver/obscurequotes
Movies by Showdown - http://www.sporcle.com/games/JESUPO/movies-by-great-showdowns-pics

OK, my head's going to blow up now. Blahhh. I'll have something better on Friday, I promise!

MONTAGE!

I'm not sure if it's the economy or what but people seem to have a lot of free time to make video montages of film clips these days. Here are two recent awe-inspiring faves that span the entire history of cinema.

100 Years At The Movies

I woke up early to write today's review. It's too early. There's no way I'm going to be awake enough before I leave for work to write anything worth reading. It's Friday. You understand. So I share with you one of my favorite videos by TCM, celebrating 100 Years at the Movies. It makes me teary-eyed. I'm a sap.

It's amazing how far we've come...and yet there are still Madea movies. *sigh*

God Bless Independent Movie Theaters

Watching this really makes me wish that Cinema Nerds was based in Austin, TX. If only more theaters really gave a fuck. Le sigh....

Alternate Cinematic History

Film history is littered with roads not taken. What if Ronald Reagan had starred in Casablanca? What if Nick Nolte had played Han Solo or Tom Sellek had played Indiana Jones? Well until today few people had a clue that there was such a "what if?" regarding the role of Hyman Roth in The Godfarther Part II.

Though the part eventually went to legendary acting teacher Lee Strasberg, maverick filmmaker Samuel Fuller was apparently screen-tested for the role. Lucky for us Cinema Nerds, his widow Christa posted that test on her Facebook for all the world to see. Enjoy!

Junkies

"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream, it takes over as the number one hormone; it bosses the enzymes; directs the pineal gland; plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to film is more film."

 -Frank Capra

Art of the Title

A Brief History of Title Design from Ian Albinson on Vimeo.

You're welcome!