I bet you watch that movie every year...

This year, I'm doing something I've never done before. I'm keeping track of every movie I watch.

I've always saved my ticket stubs when I've gone to the theater, but I've never actually written down every movie I've seen in a year. But at the end of 2008 when everyone was blogging about what movies they had seen over the course of the year, I found myself trying to remember, and guessing, and wondering about my movie log. This year, I'll know for sure.

And as I've been keeping track, I've confirmed what I thought last year anyway: while I like to watch new and new-to-me movies, most of my film time is spent revisiting my favorites. Yep. I'm a Rewatcher.

I've started wondering if others fit this pattern as well. Do you find yourself returning to familiar favorites often? Introducing them to friends, or thinking of some quote and then feeling compelled to watch the whole thing? Does some event or circumstance go along with a certain movie for you?

For me, some favorites that get a lot of play include the movie from which I've taken (and modified) my post title. In You've Got Mail, which I tend to watch when autumn comes around (Don't you love New York in the fall?) or anytime it's replayed on TV, Tom Hanks says "I bet you read that book every year" about Pride and Prejudice. (The BBC film version of which I happen to turn to whenever I am really sick, along with Laura.) I also seem to go on a Civil War kick maybe once a year, which leads to reviewing the whole Ken Burns' documentary, often followed by Gone With the Wind, which occasionally leads to the excellent The Making of a Legend. Add to all that the frequent plays of other favorites. And somehow I'm never bored with them.

I know there must be people out there like me, but I'm sure there are other movie watching types as well. Here's a few profiles I've sketched out:

The Rewatcher:
This type is content to watch the same movies over and over again. If the film was great the first time, why wouldn't it be great to watch again? Perhaps this person is comforted by the familiar, viewing favorite movies as old friends. Maybe he or she is delighted to discover new insights or nuances in the films that got worn out in the VCR. (And yes, this person still has a VCR. And doesn't want to re-buy everything on Blu-ray.) Maybe in an unsure world, the Rewatcher is pleased to know that some things always remain the same. This doesn't mean you will never get a Rewatcher to sit through a previously unseen film, but you'll probably have the most success if the new movie features actors he or she already loves. And if the Rewatcher likes the movie, it will quickly be added to the replay queue.

The Explorer:
Polar opposite of the Rewatcher, this type thrives on always finding something new to watch. They have no trouble at all picking up a random rental, borrowing from friends, or trusting that anything on TCM is worth adding to the DVR. This type is found waiting in line on opening night, wanting to be the first to see and review anything new. While this doesn't mean that the Explorer has no standards, he or she is probably pretty open-minded, finding something to like in almost any film. This type has a never-ending, out of control Netflix queue, and would usually prefer seeing something fresh, or something not watched in a while, instead of viewing the same favorites month after month.

The Picky Viewer:
Here's someone who doesn't mind waiting to see what the consensus is about a film before watching it. This person doesn't want to waste time on junk. He or she may take a chance on the recommendations of friends, if they haven't been burned by being disappointed in their taste before. Perhaps they rely on Netflix Movies You'll <3, or a critic they tend to agree with, or perhaps they only rely on their own judgment, being able to tell from the previews if a movie is worth their time. And if they don't like a movie? Look out. This type is critical. But that just may be the only pleasure the Picky Viewer can derive from watching a sub-standard film.

The Movie Date:
This is the most passive of movie watchers, content to go along with more opinionated friends and family when choosing movies. This doesn't mean that Movie Dates always like everything, or that they don't have their favorites, but in general they are the quiet ones more easily entertained, happy watching whatever as long as everyone else is happy.

What do you think, do you fit into one of these categories? Or are you a hybrid of the above, or perhaps in a category I didn't come up with yet?

Happy Anniversary to me!

Today marks the one year anniversary of the start of moviewings. This blog came out of a combination of events: Paul Newman had just died, and I found myself saddened and thinking about what the star and old movies meant to me. A good friend of mine had recently begun blogging, and while I knew I didn't want to create an online diary of my personal life (who'd want to read that, anyway?) I began to think about what I would enjoy writing about. If I wrote about movies, I thought, I would have plenty of things to say. So my first post came out of a desire to express my feelings on Paul Newman's death while opening up a creative outlet for me to talk about my love of movies.

One year and almost 70 posts later, I pause to look back. Finding the LAMB helped me not to feel like I was alone and talking to myself. A major makeover changed the look (but not the spirit) of the blog. In this year, I've learned a lot, like the fact that I'm not the only person who loves classic movies. (It turns out that many people are even more obsessed than I am, although classic film bloggers still seem to be in the minority.) I've had a lot of fun, especially highlighting some of my favorite Overlooked Oldies, doing some silly lists and memes, participating in the Lit Flicks challenge, and declaring January to be a Month O' Musicals. One thing I haven't liked is feeling sometimes that watching movies has become homework instead of entertainment (I don't always want to take notes and think of criticism as I watch a film.) But the blog has also moved me to widen out in the movies I've seen, and I've found some great new-to-me movies that way that I might not have gotten to otherwise.

So where do we go from here? The blog doesn't have an expiration date, but it also is not the only or most important thing in my life. It's very safe to say that I will continue watching films. And whenever I am so inspired to share my thoughts about what I've viewed, especially on the movies that give me wings, this is where I'll do it. Thanks for reading.

The Women -- Movie Chain Review #1

Chain chain chain... chain of reviews...

I've had this idea in my head to start a Chain O' Movie Reviews. What does that mean, you ask? Well. Often for home film festivals I'll create my own movie marathon by chaining together films with a common link. It's kinda like TCM does with a day or month dedicated to one star, but instead of sticking to just one actor I'll chain together film after film with different links in between. Say I start with The Philadelphia Story, then I might move on to Notorious (Cary Grant is the Link) and then I might move on to Casablanca (Ingrid Bergman as the Link). It doesn't just have to be actors as links, either; you can chain directors or even themes back to back (ex: movies with a lot of rain, or perhaps a movie and then the remake). Anyway, I thought it would be fun to carry this habit of linking movies to the blog world. How will it work?

I'll kick things off here with a movie review, the first link in the chain. If you want to join in, after that you'll have to:

1. Call dibs on doing the next review in the comments. First one to speak up gets it, others will have to wait to join up to the next link in the chain! (Chains usually only link one at a time, after all. It's not a movie review tree.)

2. Write your own review of another movie (it should be one not yet used in the chain) and post it on your blog. Make sure the link to the previous review is made clear and that you link back to the original post where the chain began (so we can keep track of how the chain grows). The link can be an actor or actress, director, or something more creative (like a theme).

3. Include the rules of how to continue the chain, and let someone else continue it!

Simple enough, right? Let's get it started!

Movie Chain Review #1: The Women (1939)

Link: First link in the chain, not connected to any reviews (yet).

Review: I found the opening credits of this movie so helpful. As the actresses are introduced, each is paired with an animal that represents her character. So right away you know who's the deer, who's the fox, and who's the old cow. I think more movies should do this.

The word at the beauty parlor, where "Jungle Red" nail polish is all the rage, is that Mary Haines (Norma Shearer) has a husband who's stepping out on her. When Mary's friend (I use the term loosely here) Sylvia (Rosalind Russell) hears about this, she relishes the gossip and eventually sets things up so Mary will hear the rumor.


Mary has been blissfully happy in her marriage to Stephen and as mother to Little Mary (Virginia Weidler). Can she just pretend that nothing is going on and continue her life? Not once she has met the other woman, Crystal Allen (Joan Crawford). The two have a showdown and Mary, choosing pride over love, ends up on a train to Reno. Mary's sweet friend Peggy (Joan Fontaine) is surprisingly also along for the ride, as well as two other women getting divorces: Miriam (Paulette Goddard) and the often-married but still-romantic Countess Flora. The women bide their time at a dude ranch (!) while waiting for their divorces to become final. (Is it wrong to say I was a little happy when Sylvia showed up there as well?) Who will reconcile, who will move on, who will fall in love again? I'll leave the final twists for you to discover.


The joy of the movie for me was not so much in the plot as in the performances. Director George Cukor is completely in his element here with a dialogue-heavy, all female (even the dogs and horses?!?) production. (Interestingly, Cukor was only available for this movie because he was replaced as director of Gone With the Wind. Paulette Goddard too would have only been available here since the one-time frontrunner for the role of Scarlett O'Hara lost out to Vivien Leigh.)

While the actresses are all great in their roles, I was particularly taken with Norma Shearer. How could anyone leave her for Joan Crawford? Impossible.


One thing I didn't really like about the movie was the idea of giving up your pride for love. Maybe occasionally one has to choose, but then, that wouldn't be the case if people just behaved better. Which brings me to what I really didn't like about the movie: the way it portrays female relationships. Maybe it's true that women can be a bit catty, even toward their friends. This movie certainly highlighted that! We've got "friends" gossiping about each other, men-stealing, gold-digging, and dubious advice getting passed along (even from mother to daughter). While all of this does make for an interesting story, I found myself wishing more positive aspects of female friendships could have been included as well. Maybe the estrogen overload just started getting to me after a while. I missed the men.

Final analysis: see it for the great actresses/performances, but don't model your life/love/friendships after it.

Rating: (Although I'm kinda wishing I had made half wing ratings, because this feels more like 3.5 to me.)


Now, what movie will be the next review in the chain? There's plenty of links here to pick from!

Nothing Magnificent about it.

Although I'm a big classic movie fan, I'm not such a purist that I object to any attempt to redo an old film. I try to give remakes a fair shot. Sometimes I'll even find things I like better about the newer version of a movie, perhaps enjoying how things have been updated. But sometimes, as in the case of The Magnificent Ambersons, I just really hate remakes.

Perhaps my love for the 1942 The Magnificent Ambersons predisposed me to being biased against the 2002 made-for-TV movie. But it claimed to be based on the Orson Welles screenplay, and since his film was edited (some say butchered) without him, I hoped at least that the new movie could provide some insight into what got lost. Now, I'm not sure, but I seriously doubt that Orson Welles' grand vision included a weird birth scene filmed from an inside perspective. Nor do I think he intended to show a death scene including some inappropriate tango dancing, or an overly-dramatic car accident scene with a person flying through the air in slow motion.

The scenes in the remake that probably did get cut from the original version include a bit with George as a boy bullying his friends to make him president of their club. There's also more hints about the changing town and the family's changing fortunes, like in a scene where George objects to rental homes being built on the Amberson grounds (when Grandfather's just trying to make some much needed money). There's also some extended information about the trip George makes his mother take, and a scene where George looks through a book of the town's history and can't even find the Amberson name. It's also made clearer in the remake how the Morgans with their new money are becoming the next magnificent family in town.


What's strange is what got cut from the Welles script. For example, there's no beginning narration and setup for the times and family. Instead, the newer movie begins with the ball at the Amberson mansion and later backtracks, using flashbacks to show the history with Eugene and Isabel as well as Georgie as a wild kid. In the original, the town "prophetess" clearly, quickly, and amusingly explains how Isabel ended up with Wilbur instead of Eugene (a man any woman would like a thousand times better) and how this lack of feeling for her husband will lead to Isabel having the most spoiled children. In the remake, it is hinted that the unnaturally close bond with George and his mother comes from him being an only child, but it's not made satisfyingly clear why George is such a terror or why Isabel caves into him. The new version also shows some full mouth kisses between the two, which is just unnecessarily creepy.

Even the things that made it from the original screenplay, like a lot of the dialogue, are mangled in the remake. For example, there's a sweet scene in the original with Eugene getting teased for how things ended with Isabel, and he says there's one thing that makes him forgive how things turned out. At that moment his daughter happens to be walking by, and he says her name. In the remake, while the words remain the same, it's all delivered with everyone sitting around a piano, and everyone oohs and ahhs about how charming this sentiment is. But all the nice subtlety of the original is lost.


As far as the acting in the remake goes, for the most part it is adequate but not extraordinary. James Cromwell does a good job as Major Amberson. But Jonathan Rhys Meyers as George and Jennifer Tilly as Aunt Fanny are both pretty terrible. Yes, George is supposed to be a spoiled brat and not very likable, but Meyers plays him as a tantrum-throwing, foot stomping, growling man-child that it's pretty impossible to care about. (Tim Holt at least had a bit of innocence, humor, and idealism thrown in to temper the obnoxiousness of his character.) Tilly seems to be doing her best impression of Agnes Moorehead, but she lacks the talent to make crying and self-pity sympathetic, and when she's not being shrill and/or weepy she's pretty amazingly dull. The worst is when the two act together; the scenes are painfully long and even ridiculous, like when George is trying to calm his hysterical aunt and ends up crawling full on top of her while someone watches, crying, through the window. (What is up with the incestuous undertones in this movie?)

Also inferior in the newer movie: the music. And instead of the gorgeous deep focus photography? Extreme close-ups, and to-the-camera delivery of the contents of correspondence.


Needless to say, I don't recommend this remake. Unless of course you enjoy something so bad it's laughable at times. Or if you want to commiserate with me on how awful this was. In that case, go ahead and watch it. And hope it doesn't taint your viewing of the much superior original version of The Magnificent Ambersons.

Original: 5/5
5/5 wings
(Even edited, and especially in comparison to the remake, this is a great movie.)

Remake: 1/5
1/5 wings
(Although I seriously considered giving it 0 wings.)

If you want more on the original movie, here's some great links my father passed along to me:

Summary and analysis of The Magnificent Ambersons at filmsite.org
Information at Wellesnet.com, includes writing on the un-making of the movie
A site with lots of images, memorabilia, and information on Ambersons

Top 5 Classic Movies to Sleep to

In my family, it is not unusual to pair a nap with a good movie. Are we such multitaskers that we have to have something going even when we sleep? Are we so lost in the movies that we want to spend every possible moment (waking or sleeping) on good films? Are our favorite movies so familiar and comforting that they make it easy to drift right off to dreamland?

I'm not sure. But I do know that some movies are better to sleep to than others. Musicals and films with lots of explosions are (for obvious reasons) not the best choices. And while there are some good newer movies to put on when you want to sleep, as usual I tend to lean toward older films.

Here's my list of five great classics for sleepy-time:

5. Sabrina (1954) - Like most of the best bedtime stories, it begins "Once upon a time" and has a happily-ever-after ending. The fairy tale story in between features a charming Audrey Hepburn in some fantasy princess-like outfits. As a bonus, if you fall asleep to this one, you just might dream of Billy Wilder's first choice, Cary Grant, playing the Bogart role.


4. The Magnificent Ambersons - Even if you only catch the beginning of this one before nodding off, you'll get an idea for some of the themes. The lovely Orson Wells-narrated opening illustrates the changing times with Joseph Cotten trying on a variety of mens' fashions. You'll soon get introduced to the bratty Georgie and hopefully wake up in time to see his comeuppance at the end.


3. North by Northwest - The exception to the "no explosions" rule, as the loud bits of the movie (usually signaled by the stirring Bernard Herrman music) are thrilling and fun and worth waking up to see. If you have your eyes open before the gunfire in the scene where Eva Marie Saint does some shooting, check out the kid in the back who (eerily) seems to know what's coming.


2. The Third Man - Because zither music is so soothing.




And the number one classic movie to sleep to is....


1. The Big Sleep - It's not just the title that wins this one the top spot. Thanks to all the detectin' being done, there are plenty of quiet follow-the-guy and examine-the-evidence moments that are very conducive to napping. The rainy mood is also great for making those eyelids heavy. And the convoluted plot is not much more understandable even if you stay awake and alert through the whole thing. So just let the banter between Bogie and Bacall lull you right off to sleep.

*Please note, if there's any of these movies you haven't seen yet, I'd recommend staying awake through them at least one time first. Then, the next time you are dealing with insomnia, or when you just need a mid-day snooze, try one of these fabulous sleep-friendly classics.

Guest post on Ginger

If you haven't seen it yet, check out my guest post on Ginger Rogers over at Silents and Talkies. Kate has created a wonderful drawing of Ginger to go with my ramblings. Without wanting to take anything away from the genius of Fred Astaire and the amazing work the pair did together, I wanted to focus on Ginger and all her hard work and talent. Enjoy!

On love in Casablanca

Every time I see Casablanca I enjoy it. It's one of those great classics, rewarding to watch no matter how many times you've seen it before. After you've viewed it once and know the ending, you'd think the love triangle would get less interesting, but I find myself fascinated by it still. Of course I know who Ilsa will end up with. I don't even wish things would go differently -- Victor Laszlo is Ilsa's husband, after all, so it's only right for them to be together. Rick has to make the big sacrifice, being the sentimentalist that he is at heart. Besides, crossing Laszlo in any way would be akin to siding with the Nazis, and our hero can't do that.


So, while I don't question who Ilsa will be with, or even who she should be with, I find it quite interesting thinking about which of the two men she really loves more. On the surface it would seem to be Rick, right? In their scenes together in Paris, she obviously adores him. We never see her kiss Victor in the film, only Rick. And she also only speaks the words "I love you" to Rick. Her main emotion involving Laszlo seems to be fear: she tells him repeatedly to be careful and that she's afraid for him. And, while the guy is certainly admirable, courageous and fearless for his cause, there doesn't seem to be a lot of chemistry there. Ilsa basically admits as much to Rick, telling him the story of herself as a girl meeting this great man, looking up to him, worshiping him, with a feeling she supposed was love. Case closed, she doesn't, couldn't really love him, right? I am not so sure.


Let's look at the way the movie itself defines love. In the scene where the young Bulgarian girl comes to Rick about Captain Renault, to learn if he is a man of his word, she ends up asking him questions about love. "If someone loved you very much" she says, "so that your happiness was the only thing that she wanted in the world, but she did a bad thing to make certain of it, could you forgive her?" Rick's answer? "Nobody ever loved me that much." Really, Rick? Not even Ilsa in Paris?

I think he's right. Ilsa certainly loved him, but not that much, as Rick says. Otherwise she would have done the bad thing -- staying with him and forsaking Laszlo. Does she leave out of her love for Laszlo, or does she make the sacrifice for love of the cause, doing her duty? Either way, Rick loses out. She loves him enough to lie to him, making sure he will leave Paris safely, but not enough so that his happiness is all that matters.

Let's apply this same idea of love moving someone to do a bad thing to the relationship with Ilsa and Laszlo. When Ilsa comes to Rick for the letters of transit, she certainly seems ready to do a bad thing, pulling out a gun and threatening to shoot Rick. He makes it very clear what is at stake, telling her that if Laszlo and the cause mean so much to her, she won't stop at anything, taunting her to go ahead and shoot. He's really testing her love for Laszlo here: does she love him enough to do this bad thing? Apparently not, because she lowers the gun. Her love for Rick seems to have won out, as she tells him she couldn't stay away and can never leave him again. Should he believe her? Should we?

It is possible to interpret it that Ilsa really has given in to her love for Rick. But I think it is really a sign of her love for Laszlo. She is willing to do the bad thing, leaving him, being with Rick, so that she can make sure of Victor's safety and happiness. Also, when she left Victor earlier that night, he says he loves her, and while she doesn't say it back, she does begin to ask him "whatever I do will you believe that I..." he tells her she doesn't even have to say it. The implication is clear. She is off to do a bad thing, but she wants him to know she loves him.

Besides, at this point in the movie, I don't see how Ilsa can possibly still love Rick. There may have been some lingering feeling there when she first saw him again. But after she came to explain things to him and found him drunk, she has lost her respect for him. And respect and love go hand in hand for Ilsa, as she explains in her story about her first feelings for Laszlo, as we see when she looks at him admiringly as he stirs up the crowd in the cafe. In contrast, she looks at Rick with contempt and disgust at what he's become. And surely part of what she loved about him in Paris was the record hinted at throughout the film, the deeds which make him wanted by the Nazis, too. She's a sucker for an idealist.

Even after saying she can't leave Rick again, her concern for Laszlo is foremost. "You'll help him now, won't you?" she begs Rick. When they meet the next day, she remains agitated about Victor. The show of surrender to Rick has been just that, a show. So the story Rick spins at the end for Laszlo about Ilsa only pretending to still love him, that all that was over long ago (which Renault says is a lie, and which may have been a lie for Rick) really seems to be the truth about Ilsa. But what Rick says about Paris is also true, that they had lost it and had gotten it back, although I don't think it's exactly how he says it is. Maybe he got it back that night Ilsa came over, but she gets Paris back when Rick sends her off with Laszlo. Because now she has her respect back for Rick, she can look at him admiringly again and remember those days in Paris fondly. She leaves him with the same words she left him with in Paris: "God bless you."


You can also flip this idea of love in Casablanca to test the men's love for Ilsa. Rick is willing to do a bad thing for her, more than one actually. He ends up killing a man to make sure Ilsa gets away safely with Laszlo, making her happy at his own expense. Laszlo also is ready to do a bad thing, at least as bad as he gets, telling Rick to use the letters of transit to take his wife away. "Yes, I love her that much." he says.

Not to be overlooked is the love all three have for the cause. All have done bad/illegal things and/or made sacrifices for the cause. But I don't think the characters are motivated solely by their love for right. While the problems of three people may not amount to a hill of beans in a crazy world, they still amount to something, and of course impact the way each character acts. Rick loves Ilsa. Victor loves Ilsa. Ilsa loves them both, but in the end, she seems to love Victor more.

The balance of love and sacrifice, ideas of honor and duty verses selfishness, all these themes make Casablanca endlessly interesting, its finale wonderfully satisfying. These are just some of many things that make this movie great and keep me coming back for more.