I thought this would be a cool idea. I'm not super into movies a lot of the time though, or at least not as much as the general populace, so please forgive me for forgetting your favorite movie. Also, that's your favorite movie so maybe just don't be butt-hurt about stupid stuff that doesn't matter. Like my blog. Here we go!
1920's: Metropolis (1927)
I'm not going to pretend like I love movies from the 20's. As interesting as the era is from a film studies standpoint, I don't really study film any more than any average Joe. But something about Metropolis in a high school film class made me watch it again on my own. I enjoyed its general concept at the very least. I lean more towards sci-fi more than most things and for its time it is very well done. Since this was the 20's, there was a very small amount they could do in terms of story-telling and yet they kind of pulled it off. Like Nosferatu from the same decade, something about it is just more ominous than most modern horror. With Nosferatu (yes, that's another 20's movie I have actually seen and one of the only ones I have seen) there is just this horror element that I don't like of "when is this person going to die?" or "is the scary monster going to die?". Metropolis is scary because its concept is timeless. Just like the Matrix did a damn 72 years later, it brings something you have probably thought about before and cast the thought aside and slams it up in your face in ways that make you uncomfortable but also unblinking. Is this movie loads of fun by today's standards? Am I going to recommend you all watch it or you know nothing about culture in general? Hell no. It's dated as fuck. However, in this early of an era of film, I just so happened to notice a few movies on the lists I found online that I had actually seen. If you are really into film or are thinking about working in film one day, I would say Metropolis is interesting and won't feel like a waste of time. Otherwise, skip it. Sad, right? It's my favorite 1920's movie but even I'm like "dude, don't worry about it, Y'all watch some 90's Disney with me".
1930's: Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)
The 30's didn't have much I cared about or have seen, but I have always had a soft spot for Snow White even when I was a kid. It's animation at the very least still holds up and that in itself is impressive. I always say something along the lines of "if you have to tell yourself that certain things in media are okay because of their time period, then they really aren't that great". Snow White however just looks really nice. Something about it is still pleasing for me to watch, probably more now than when I was a child. Maybe its the sweet ass on Snow White! Eh? Ehhh?
...kidding.
Its settings, all hand-drawn, are thematic and breathing. Everything in the movie feels alive, even if its an inanimate object. The fight scene with the queen in witch form near the end is still daunting because of the way the cliff merges with the water and lightning. Something about it is just visually striking to me and I think the simplistic plot centered around greed and jealousy is just solid enough without being overbearing to make the real focus the visuals. I'm okay with this.
Okay but before I move on, the first big musical number where Snow White is making a wish into the wishing well, Prince Charming interrupts her song and scares the ever-loving shit out of her and it makes me laugh out loud every time. Alright moving on.
1940's: It's a Wonderful Life (1946)
So when you saw 20's and 30's on this list, you probably thought I was a hipster fuck, right? Well eat your own words mister miss mister and just have a damn seat. Let me tell you a thing or two about It's a Wonderful Life. Are you ready? It's a Wonderful Life is not only my favorite movie from the 40's (an era where I think I have only seen 2-4 movies), it is one of my favorite movies of all time. I'm not kidding. This isn't the thing I do where I reveal in a few sentences that I'm joking or actively being facetious. Me saying "I'm not kidding" is not a mislead. Everyone should see this movie, it is quite the bomb, and in my opinion, it might as well be storytelling perfection.
I know it's old as fuck and it's a Christmas movie to boot, which is why most people ignore me when I jizz all over my own face in public about how fucking awesome It's a Wonderful Life is, but just hear me out. The whole first act seems like it is setting up an angel character by showing him his target, George Bailey, who is really the main character, hands down. George Bailey's life isn't necessarily a life that all viewers will relate to: not everyone lives in a small town with a brother who almost died but they saved his life and girls that they grow up with that end up being potential love interests like some kind of pervy dating sim. It doesn't have to be. The point of the first act is that you see the synopsis of a man's entire life unfold. It takes for-fucking-ever, and in a modern movie or hell, even most books, this would be a sluggish chore on a burning, crashing train to sit through. But every little segment that the angels show the audience is fun on its own in its own special way. You feel like you know George Bailey. You don't have to relate to George Bailey and they didn't have to make him a superhero to make him interesting. At the same time, they didn't make him a boring, wash-up comedian to try and make him relatable while boring the audience half to death. George Bailey is a guy you know because you had fun watching a synopsis of his life, so you associate this character with good times and bad times but all the while still entertaining, which thematically sets up the whole fucking movie. And that's just the beauty of act I, and I'm majorly paraphrasing.
Act 2 turns into a dark comedy that makes The Life of Brian look like fucking My Little Pony and then transcends into full madness that makes Alfred Hitchcock fully erect in his grave every time someone buys the movie on DVD. James Stewart does such a fantastic job of transforming the eccentric and jovial nature of George into earnest servitude when necessary, and this just makes his insane moments even more gripping. The writing alone could make a lesser actor in this role pull it off okay, but James Stewart, in assistance by the cinematography, makes you feel uneasy.
"But this is just a Christmas movie, it can't be that scary, or at least not as unnerving as A Christmas Carol!"
We all know Christmas Carol and we all know its scary because ghost people holding a mirror to our face is a terrifying concept in its own right. Showing us our own greed and what it can do to hurt others is something that anyone with a general conscience has probably thought about at least once in their lives. The reason It's a Wonder Life does this so much better is because it actually does the opposite, and it's much more terrifying. It brings your own selfishness of leaving your life or just leaving people behind in general and shoves that in your face. It tells you to buck up because the pain you cause in your current life is nothing compared to what may have happened without you on the planet. This probably hits home for me more than most people because of my own mental health issues, which might just speak to why I think It's a Wonderful Life is such an important movie for people to watch in general. It shows you that you or anyone you know has value. You have known George Bailey for about an hour and a half, and already the thought of him being gone is not great. To further accentuate this is the terror of a world without him; a fantasy element to the movie so based in reality that it hits close to home for anyone, and hits three times as hard for those who actually paid attention in the first act.
Going into any more detail might spoil the movie and/or bore the shit out of you so uh.... Next!
1950's: Alice in Wonderland (1951)
The 50's was a real stretch. I wanted to say Sleeping Beauty but I haven't seen that since I was really little. Equally impressive on a visual scale was Alice in Wonderland. I thought about Vertigo too but I don't think I made it to the end of that one, so again, I defaulted to Alice in Wonderland because I have no idea what happened in the 50's at all. In any case, Alice in Wonderland still earns the slot it has in many people's hearts as a timeless fantasy adventure. It shows why I love animation so much because when it is done right, it is timeless by default. Alice in Wonderland isn't one of my favorite Disney films or even one of my favorite animated films, but again, the 50's eluded me on this one. I'm just a sucker for animation and a well-balanced mix of trippy shit, and I think this iteration of the Alice story fulfills that.
1960's: The Producers (1967)
Mel Brooks is a big name in comedy, with good reason, and while most people almost strictly think of Blazing Saddles and Spaceballs when his name is brought up... well I also think of those two things but I also think of The Producers. Something about The Producers is just thoroughly entertaining to me from beginning to end. It feels varied, which can be hard to pull off in a film while still keeping a concise story that goes from A to B. Each scene in The Producers could be its own sketch. The scenery changes up a lot and the characters met along the way are all silly and memorable in their own ways. The finished musical that the characters make is so bombastic, and since the production is part of the story, you feel like you were in on it the whole time... well kind of. Obviously, that sounds stupid, you know you aren't in the movie. The Producers isn't set up like Blues Clues or something dumb. Gene Wilder is incredibly cartoonish but still believable and attention-demanding with his performance in every scene he's in and Zero Mostel's character has a great dynamic with his. It's been about 5 years since I've seen this all the way through but its a comedy classic for a reason.
I'm not going to say "it's dated but you have to think about for its time" because I don't know jack about the 60's, especially in regards to film and as I stated above that argument is bullshit. What I will say is that it has a kind of older sense of humor and its delivery is affected as such. This is something that I personally find charming and part of what brings it to the top of the 60's for me, but I can see it being a turn off for a lot of modern audiences. Something to think about for anyone who hasn't seen it or might be debating on checking it out.
1970's: Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
Monty Python and the Holy Grail is a comedy that I watched way too many times as a young teen. I thought in adulthood it would get old and all the quirkiness that made this movie such a mainstay in my life would lose their luster. I was wrong. There are still multiple scenes in the movie that make me smile uncontrollably and remind me of why I love the movie so much in the first place. It tells a very simple tale but one that splits the knights in the story onto different routes that give way to completely different scenarios in the tale. These bring the protagonists together in the final act of the movie in a way that would be a dramatic odyssey of conquest and valor in a fantasy adventure film, but in Holy Grail, it kind of does that but its ultimately just silly. It does so many goofy things and mixes in cartoon elements where they shouldn't work but they do. Even the fourth-wall breaking humor works here because it completely diffuses situations of tension where you as the viewer are actually curious how the main characters will survive, and then they end up surviving in the stupidest ways possible because the main characters have also proven to be too dim-witted to actually solve most of anything on their own. Beyond that just go watch it, because otherwise, I would be explaining jokes, and that is never funny. I know you think it is. It's not. Don't explain jokes to people from a movie that they haven't seen. Your half-assed, unorganized depiction of one scene in a movie with no build up doesn't even do as much justice as a shitty movie trailer would. That was irrelevant to the movie, I just thought I would get that off my chest. Phew! Onward!
1980's: Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind (1984)
Anyone who has heard of Studio Ghibli knows that even the worst films this studio crafts are masterful. My Neighbor Totoro (one of their most esteemed and arguably most popular movies) knows what you came for and makes the story take a backseat to glorious animation that is entertaining enough on its own. Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind came out before Totoro and I can't believe more anime weabs don't talk about Nausicaa because its the only Ghibli production I've seen so far that has a plot that actually kept me glued, and in my opinion, its character design and backgrounds are some of the best I have seen in any anime production, especially one the length of an average feature film. Actually shit, this one's two hours I think too. But a lot of you nerdos, like myself, think of one movie in particular when you think of one of the best movies ever and one of the best movies from the 80's as a whole.
Get ready to get mad...
Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.
This is probably my favorite Star Wars movie out of the 7, if we are to ignore Rogue One, which in my opinion should be called Chode One because honestly, that would make the movie exponentially more fun for me. So don't get me wrong, I like Empire a lot, but I like Nausicaa more. You already know Ghibli is awesome and you know that Star Wars is one of the most well respected and successful franchises on the planet. So I'm going to try to argue why it isn't blasphemy to rank Nausicaa over what is considered one of the greatest films ever created and one of the greatest films that will ever be created... you know, other than the fact that this whole thing is just a giant opinionated soapbox and nothing I say should sway the way you feel about Star Wars but eh ya know whatever time to piss off some internet kids.
Since I was young, I always loved the Star Wars movies. Looking back on the main seven as an adult now, The Empire Strikes Back, in my opinion, is the one with the best overall production value, best script, best plot depiction, set design, character development, satisfaction from previous titles in the series: Empire just simply has "the works" as they say in "the biz". Calling Empire specifically one of the best movies of the 80's is like saying urinating is one of the best things to do in the bathroom. Even amongst the competition, it is a no-brainer, which is why I'm sure I look like when I say I like Nausicaa more, a complete psycho.
Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind is also sci-fi and has a "good vs. evil" mechanic just as easy to grasp as Empire, but Nausicaa does it on its own. Nausicaa introduces endearing and interesting characters, captivating scenery, believable yet fantastic geography, and delightfully designed creatures all in the beginning without the movie feeling like a total drag. Even its one-on-one talk shots suck you in because you want to know what's going on in this universe after the first scene, and the first scene is just gorgeous and barely relies on dialogue at all. You're already strapped in for the ride and its barely even begun.
Empire, especially if you were dumb enough to start the series from Episode I all the way to V, does have fun characters, but the only ones that are really enigmatic enough to consider interesting would probably be Boba, Luke, and Vader. If you started in the prequel movies, then Vader already loses a lot of the mystique that helps make him such an intimidating villain as well. Luke is the main character and he is getting progressively stronger so you kind of already suspect that he isn't going to die in these movies, or at least not in Empire. We all saw what happened to Boba Fett. Star Wars, and this isn't a pun but get ready, has no sense of space. The screen pans and the main cast is instantly on another planet. Maybe they break away to Luke on Dagobah to give some illusion of time, which is not necessarily a flaw by any means, but when comparing it to Nausicaa it loses something that Nausicaa has and I have to commend. When Nausicaa's lead character, Nausicaa, goes to different locations, there is a sense of urgency and a feeling of losing home in so many ways that this makes you want the main character to succeed, even if you don't fully grasp the politics of the movie as explained in the first act. In A New Hope, Luke begs to get away from home, which is why the audience feels a guilty sense of relief when Luke's aunt and uncle are attacked because it was obviously depicted by the movie that they were tying Luke down from the adventurous life he wanted to lead. In Nausicaa, the audience is propelled to feel appropriate remission of the comfort of The Valley of the Wind of the movie of the overuse of the "of" of the English language. To make further comparisons, the creatures of Empire are memorable and pretty alright but I think Nausicaa's are better for lack of a better term than better. Not only are Nausicaa's fauna and hell, even flora, more unique and identifiable, but they are a central part of the plot and an extension of one of Nausicaa's most recognizable character traits. The Tonton scene in Empire shows that Luke is more kind to all life forms and Han will only do what he sees as necessary for survival by cutting it open. Nausicaa, as a character, has a love for all life that is so beyond any other character in the movie that no matter how terrifying and dangerous the wildlife in this movie gets, the audience still feels something for them. This makes you root for your main character throughout the whole movie because every step and little victory she takes is coming full circle from every single fucking scene she has been in.
Empire has a lot of things that also make Nausicaa a fantastic film as well, but if you aren't convinced of my point yet, I'm going to make one more. No, I swear, only one more point. I promise. Nausicaa is one movie. Empire is an amalgamation of different ideas and themes cast about from other films. You either need to see all of IV, V, and VI or all of I through IV or maybe even all six of the original films to fully appreciate what the film is going for, which is the problem with a space opera as ambitious as Star Wars. Take Kill Bill, for example, Christ, I am referencing a lot of movies just to defend myself for liking some anime bullshit. Vol 1. and Vol 2. of Kill Bill almost feel like different movies despite having direct story connections. You remember what happened in each individual movie with no confusion. Yes, Vol 1. is necessary for Vol 2., but it doesn't feel like an elongation of the same ride. 2 feels like a different ride that cools down from 1 and then amplifies with pure tension to make 2 appropriate for what was intuitively set up in 1. Empire requires so much investment and time from the viewer not because it's a bad movie, but because it's a Star Wars movie, and there's so much to digest that could, in theory, be condensed. My evidence for this theory is Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, which made my jaw drop in more moments within a two-hour time span than the original trilogy of Star Wars ever has even when I was a child and thought that Darth Maul was scary.
You don't have to agree, most won't, and I understand. Star Wars redefined what science-fiction was capable of and made it something that any audience could latch onto and enjoy to some extent, and for that, I will be eternally grateful, especially for Empire. But if you asked me what my favorite movie that came out of the 80's was, to my own surprise upon writing this, I am much more taken aback by the animated masterpiece, Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind of the Repetition of the Joke of the Previous Paragraph of the Stupid Blog.
1990's: Reservoir Dogs (1992)
I'm a big sucker for Tarantino's movies, so this wasn't so much a question of "what is my favorite 90's movie" but rather "do you like Pulp Fiction or Reservoir Dogs more?" In the end, I don't have any concrete answers. As much of an overanalyzing goon as I am, I can't tell you why I like one more than the other. Maybe I think the gimp scene in Pulp Fiction is too long or something. Pulp Fiction I think is more fun for a general audience. Of the two I think Pulp Fiction is the most accessible and I can see why most people would say it is the best. Reservoir Dogs actually excites me every time I see it though. It speaks volumes about a movie if it revolves around a mystery that you already know the answers to and the story still floors you. Let's say there was a drama movie with a nearly identical plot to Reservoir Dogs but instead of people dying, people getting tortured, and instead of being in a shady warehouse all of the characters were in a family mansion and they were politely asked to leave because they lost a game. Their tension would have to be shown on each others' faces and would have to have killer acting to make this consistently entertaining for the audience. Going home to their families is not that daunting of a task without a lot of build-up. Tarantino is often criticized for an excessive use of violence in most of his movies and where most people may say its gratuitous bordering on adolescent, I see something else. I see the primitive trigger in the human mind when they see fictional murder, or rather murder that they don't have to feel bad about. It is a release, and it is instantaneous. The reason why this is usually seen as childish in film is that there are a lot of movies where a lot of people just die for no reason, and there's just this hardass character that likes to be overtly violent because the writers thought that would be cool. In Reservoir Dogs, every death is the result of some fault in someone's character and in Reservoir Dogs specifically, it does not take the world's best attention span to think about this while watching the movie. Everything is expertly put in place to set off a mental trigger for character development in characters that don't want the other characters to know about their personal traits. Every conversation metaphorically becomes a bullet that becomes someone's death by the end of the movie and even if it wasn't the outcome you thought would happen or what you wanted to happen, the tension is relieved in the most satisfying way possible. What I find even more impressive because I have seen it tried and failed in other forms of media is that the entire movie effectively takes place in one building, and it's better for it because of what Reservoir Dogs sets out to do with your brain. It still has enough charm and superb acting that it could be background noise or what they call a "popcorn movie" as well... I think that's the term anyways. Reservoir Dogs works best as a mind-rattling thriller though, because it doesn't need constant weapon fire to illicit turmoil to the audience. To explain further would spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen the movie.
2000's: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Every time I am too sick to move, I actually get a little excited because it gives me a lazy excuse to watch some Lord of the Rings! In my opinion, the Lord of the Rings trilogy is three of the best movies ever made. The adventure looks just as exciting for the cast and crew as it is for the viewers. I will admit that you have to keep your eyes and ears glued to what's happening in nearly every scene to fully understand what's happening but most of the time that is not super difficult. The incredible cast, impressive CG, and tasteful use of breaks and timing make every scene near perfection. Even if you don't pick up every single detail in a dialogue-heavy scene, the body language of the invested cast gives your brain enough context to be able to decipher enough to enjoy the films to their end. The most entertaining of the three for my brain is the third; the grand finale: The Return of the King. Now it's time to piss some more people off though, okay here we go:
Remember early when I was saying that The Empire Strikes Back requires a lot of effort and invested time from the audience because they have to pick up hours of information from other movies to even have a grasp on what's happening in this movie? So by this logic, I should hate The Lord of the Rings movies and especially despise The Return of the King right? Well, obviously I don't so I'm not sure why I wrote that shit in question form. The Fellowship of the Ring already sets up this precedent that there is going to be this long drawn out quest, so much so that a lot the main characters are originally opposed to it even though they were specifically gathered for the quest. It takes a little guy with basically no combat experience to say "yo pussies, let's do this shit! It's only going to take three movies that last like four hours a piece! What are you, babies?!?" Fellowship already sets up the use of magic, politics between whole cities, and not only does it set up this world in a constantly entertaining way but it sets up the characters that go on this journey. The characters by this point are endearing because the script shows that they can make you cry, make you laugh, and make you want them to succeed for whatever goals they are going towards all in one movie, again, something that took Star Wars... six... fucking... movies. Now I'm not saying that Lord of the Rings is better, more practical, and more immediately entertaining than the god that is Star Wars, but what I am saying is... well... upon further reflection that's exactly what I'm saying.
The Two Towers brings these characters along and twists them with the turmoils of their journey. Two Towers had every reason to be the Matrix Reloaded, the Dumb and Dumberer, the shitty Disney sequel cash-in to follow Fellowship, but from the beginning, everyone involved in these movies knew that they wanted a trilogy and they wanted them to blow every other fucking film of the time out of the water. Every impressive thing that Fellowship had in visuals, choreography, and in the script was topped in Two Towers to keep you invested because they knew that this had to serve as the bridge from the humble beginnings to the blood-soaked and exhausted end.
The Return of the King, in every way, is that blood-soaked and exhausted end. Every scene in this movie is so over the top and even one of the earliest scenes in this movie smashes your expectations of what this installment is going to do by unexpectantly killing off a major character before half an hour has passed. Every scuffle, battle, full-out war, and death thereof has some connection to every character in the main cast that you have grown to love for the ridiculous amount of time you have invested in this series of movies. A lot of people argue that Fellowship and Two Towers are more fun because of this, but without Return of the King, nothing that any of the beloved cast did has barely any meaning at all. Even the main quest of the series takes a backseat to some of the political conflicts that directly affected different individual characters, some already dead, making almost every scene satisfying.
I mean, other than this I'm just a big ol' dweebus and you have every right to think I'm an idiot for liking Return of the King and its dark, bloody, emo bullshit as much as I do.
2010's (so far): Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)
This is probably not a surprise, especially considering the movies I have picked up to this point. For me, it was a no-brainer. The 2010's haven't ended yet but already it has been an embarrassing decade for the world of cinema. There are so many shitty reboots and worn-out tropes that even titans like the Marvel universe and Star Wars have fallen victim to this sweep of mediocrity and general lack of imagination. I think Marvel answered this with Guardians of the Galaxy. On purpose? Eh. Who knows? What I do know is that, unlike a lot of the recent superhero movies or just movies in general, there was so much care and emotion put into every crevice of Guardians of the Galaxy as a production, that it is objectively okay at its worst. I hate to say it is the movie that has everything, but it basically does. Its comedy is persistently funny after seeing it however many fucking times I have seen it. Its tear-jerking moments still hit me just as hard. Its visuals are easily some of the best computer-generated 3D visuals in most movies, not only of its decade but ever. Even the motion-capture for a fucking raccoon makes most of these stupid modern shooter video games look laughable in comparison. Its romantic subplot is not just for the main man to get his dick wet but more importantly it focuses on pointing out flaws and insecurities in two very important characters in the story, arguably the two most important characters. Guardians of the Galaxy is a crazy ride because it doesn't follow a simple hero's journey. It abducts a child and raises him in a directionless world, and that lack of direction works in the best way possible. The main cast is constantly being jerked around by the faults in their past and threats of their future. The main cast members join together and become friends in a way that friends do, only on a way bigger scale that involves gunships and all that. Most of these action movies when characters end up becoming friends despite all of their differences usually just hinge on the simplicity of that sentence and force a fictional friendship with no consequence. The friendship of the main cast makes them stronger and admitting it makes them stronger, but their baggage directly affects all of them by almost killing them. If they hadn't teamed up, a lot of the villains would affect only the characters that brought them along, but together they had to combat all of them. Friendship does mean added strength, but if that strength isn't used for anything then it just falls flat. They all have to keep tabs on each others' dangerous personality faults and the demons they carry from their past, in the form of actual villains, some of which just happen to be carrying infinity stones and can blow up entire cities to build up into entire worlds.
The movie does beg for a sequel, but not in the way where it negatively effects the rest of the movie. Vol 2. could have never been made and Guardians of the Galaxy would still be a great movie where further adventures are just an idea that adds to the ending. But of course, with this stupid cinematic universe thing, they are going to have to reuse these characters in other movies where they are completely out of place just for the sake of crossing over for the cha-ching. Oh well.
I made this because I think to study storytelling, you have to go way back. Do you have to go to Egypt and translate ancient tablets? No. You just have to see more examples of the things you like and hate evolving from something else that you also might love and hate. Comparing the old to the new is important because you wouldn't be able to make the new so easily if we all just completely forgot about the old. We would make mistakes that older media would make again. Especially in film, which in comparison to literature, theater, visual art, and music is a pretty new art form. I feel we are still working out a lot of the kinks and a lot of it just comes down to being aware of origins and what's current and why that's important to you as a creative person, or maybe even just as a consumer. Also, I like to spout out my opinions on the internet to try to convince you that I'm smart and know shit about movie production.
