[rating: 5] Humphrey Bogart did the same thing in every movie, to different degrees, from thoroughly grizzled in The African Queen to—for Bogart—downright sentimental in Casablanca. The question, then, is when he did it best. Was Sam Spade the peak Bogart character? Or Philip Marlowe? It's nearly impossible to choose, but an argument can be mounted that Fred C. Dobbs in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is Bogart's greatest achievement. We first meet up with Dobbs in desperation and penury, homeless and begging on the streets of Tampico. All he wants is to get his head above water, to live comfortably without having to depend on handouts from rich American vacationers. Nothin' fancy, just freedom from poverty. Even when he first hits on the idea of prospecting for gold, his ambitions remain modest. Howard (Walter Huston, in one of the best-deserved Academy Award winning performances of all time), another drifter with some experience as a prospector, tells him what gold does to a man, the way getting a little only makes you hungry for a whole lot more. Dobbs insists that won't happen to a simple, reasonable man like him, that he'll just collect his little piece and go home. We know better, ...

[rating: 5] I’m not gonna lie to you: Raiders of the Lost Ark might be my favorite movie. It’s definitely the movie I’ve seen the most times. In fact, I’ve probably seen it more times than Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi put together. Crammed into its two hours is each and every one of the elements I look for in a movie, and once they start coming they never stop. What makes it kick so much ass? God, where to begin. It’s got people climbing on speeding trucks; it’s got swordfights; it’s got gunplay; it’s got drinking games; it’s got boulders a-chasin’ people; it’s got creepy ghosts. It’s even got John Rhys-Davies! Could you ask for anything more? If you could, you would reveal yourself to be a greedy asshole who is impossible to satisfy. The movie also has Karen Allen in it as Marion Ravenwood. In case your mind flashes back to Animal House, I will tell you this much: unlike in that raunch-comedy, in Raiders of the Lost Ark you do not see her buttcheeks. You can take that as a boon or a detriment depending on your tastes. Okay, this review’s getting all over the ...

[rating: 1.5] The folks at the American Film Institute would have you believe they know best, but if I made a list of the 100 greatest movies, Easy Rider wouldn’t be anywhere near it. It defines an era and an attitude, they say. It encapsulates the disenfranchised soul-searching of an entire generation, they say. Twaddle! The truth is that this movie, as Oscar Madison might say, is garbage. Praise it all you like, but you’ll never convince me that it’s anything more than what it appears to be on the surface—a rambling mish-mash of a low budget biker film, where everyone involved was high all the time and it shows. Despite having Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper and Jack Nicholson in its cast, Easy Rider never stands out as any better than the grainy, pointless motorcycle flicks Joel and his robots would sometimes watch on Mystery Science Theater 3000. Fonda and Hopper smuggle some narcotics in from Mexico to fun their retirement, with a spiritual journey to Mardi Gras planned along the way. In the course of their travels encounter a couple of groups of people who do nothing and don’t matter before finally meeting up with a lawyer for the ACLU (Nicholson) and ...

[rating: 4] My preference in movies watched for entertainment runs to things like Die Hard, Army of Darkness, Airplane!, and Star Wars. I appreciate great dramas, but most of them require that I get in the proper mindset—that I prepare myself—and that just doesn't happen very often. Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, on the other hand, is a movie I could watch every single day. The movie takes place on the day Joey Drayton (Katharine Houghton) brings home John Prentiss (Sidney Poitier), the man she intends to marry. The meat of the film centers around the reaction of her parents (Tracy and Hepburn, who appeared together in every movie released over a stretch of some twenty years) to this situation. John is handsome, impeccably mannered and polite, and a doctor famous in his field—not to put too fine a point on it, he's a helluva catch for Joey. But since he's black and it's 1967, Mr. and Mrs. Drayton are still shocked, no matter how forward-thinking and liberal minded they've professed to be in the past. The script is a masterfully realistic exploration of personal feelings on race—not just the feelings of Joey's parents, but John's family too—as well as whether a ...

[rating: 5] I've reviewed It's a Wonderful Life once before, during the Christmas season of 2004. Though that was but three short years ago, much has changed. In 2004 I was either retarded, an asshole, or both, because my assessment of this movie was completely wrong. Then I decried it as an overlong, boring, sappy piece of crap with a mushmouthed jackass in the lead role. Now I realize that this movie is wonderful and the me of three years ago should shut the fuck up. The movie, as most of us know, tells the story of the life of George Bailey (James Stewart), from his childhood through his adult years. One at a time, the plans he's laid for his life are altered, reversed or cancelled and he ultimately decides that his life basically sucks ass, that he should kill himself, and that everyone around him would be far, far better off had he never even been born. With the help of some angelic intervention, he learns, of course, that that simply isn't true at all and that his life is great because he has people who love him and whatnot. It's exceedingly maudlin and sugary-sweet, enough so to send you ...

[rating: 5] They really knew how to make movies back in the early 1930s. A taut and effective story told without any superfluous filler and it's all over in an hour and ten minutes. Yes, please! Plus, there's the whole thing about how this movie is still considered essential watching more than 75 years after its release, which is generally indicative of pretty awesome quality. Frankenstein is the greatest of the classic monster movies from Universal, and none of the other tellings of the tale that have been made since has ever come close to this one. The movie takes Mary Shelley's original novel and improves on it. Yes, folks, Frankenstein is one of that rare breed, the film that's better than the novel on which it is based. We all know the story. If anybody here doesn't know the story, you can just go home right now because what in the hell is wrong with you? A scientist digs up corpses and builds himself a manmonster! Manmonster terrorizes people, mob has torches, the monster meets his demise (OR DOES HE?!) and that's that. On the surface, that doesn't seem too wildly impressive; that, in the words of one Lita Ford, ain't ...

[rating: 3.5] I'm kind of torn about the inclusion of Psycho on the 100 Greatest list. Yeah, I like it. Yeah, everyone considers it a classic, and I guess that makes it one; there's no official definition of "classic" after all. That status is bestowed on a film by subjective group consensus rather than objective analysis. But the thing about Psycho is that, even though I do enjoy it, I recognize that it has a number of flaws. It's nothing hugely grievous, but there are a lot of little things that, taken together, add up to a movie that essentially succeeds in spite of itself. That's not to say I wouldn't recommend it. I've seen it many times and still derive enjoyment from it, and if you've never seen it and somehow have managed to go through life without ever hearing the details of its plot, then holy cow you should see it right away. I can still distinctly remember the first time I saw the flick as a small child. I went into it not knowing a thing about the movie. I was thrown for a loop when, a third of the way through, it suddenly turns from a story about ...

[rating: 5] The serious and objective part of my brain looks at AFI's rating for Star Wars and thinks that, although the movie is undeniably great and groundbreaking and influential, the number 15 slot is probably way too high. Another part of my brain, though, thinks the hell with all that, because holy nut do I love Star Wars. That part of me is gonna win out today, and you can take that to the bank. I've been a total, balls-to-the-wall Star Wars fan (of the original trilogy, that is) virtually my entire life. Any kind of sensible review, with legitimate analysis and appropriate discussion, is impossible. I can't talk about the whole Joseph Campbell, mythological and archetypal aspects of it, or about the numerous movies, especially Akira Kurosawa films, to which it owes tremendous debts. I know about these things, having seen and heard and read gazillions of interviews and essays and commentaries about the movies. But any attempt to actually discuss them is futile; I get talking about Star Wars and pretty soon I'm just gushing about all my favorite parts of the movie. I have so much goodwill for the picture, and so many happy memories associated with it, ...

[rating: 5] Look on this movie, ye mighty, and despair! This is the comedy of comedies, the absolute ne plus ultra of humor. Every other movie with laughs on the agenda—whether it’s a “comedy with a message” like this one or a straight-ahead comedy like Airplane!—wishes it could be this good. All others are mere pretenders to the throne; Dr. Strangelove will reign forever as the king of comedies. What makes it so good is that it has just about every type of joke there is. By the nature of the story, most of the comedy is satire, but that’s not all Dr. Strangelove has to offer. There’s slapstick, there’s non-sequitur humor, there’s funny accents, there’s poop humor, and there’s a subtle (or not-so-subtle) dick joke or sexual innuendo just about every time you turn around. Strictly in terms of the comedic content, the movie has absolutely everything you could want. The story centers on a B-52 that’s been given erroneous orders to nuke the Soviet Union by the insane General Jack D. Ripper (Sterling Hayden). While efforts are made to subdue the rogue officer and obtain the code necessary to recall the bomber, the best parts of the movie take place in ...

[rating: 5] Number twenty-five my fat, bepimpled ass! How can E.T. be at number twenty-five? Can you honestly think of twenty-four movies that are better than this? Of course not! Nobody can! E.T. is a top ten film for sure. What movie has touched more hearts and set more imaginations soaring? E.T. tops Steven Spielberg’s already impressive resume because it’s a movie that embraces you completely and draws you in, heart and mind. If you don’t cry when E.T. dies and have your hopes reborn when he comes back, only to cry all the more when he goes home with an “I’ll be right here,” then you are dead inside with a heart as black as coal and that’s all there is to it. The movie captures the spirit of both the child and the child inside, and it does it effortlessly, making it look as though getting an audience to invest emotionally in a rubber puppet is as easy as falling off a log. We all know what the movie’s about (and I just told you that E.T. dies, is resurrected and flies back into space in a giant Christmas tree ornament, so if you didn't know...oops!) and we all know ...