Here we go again: a list of the 50 best films, this time from The Spectator magazine. Some time ago Orson Welles's "Citizen Kane" always took pride of place at the top of these lists; now it hardly ever does. Here it is at No. 14; and here too is "The Magnificent Ambersons" which most people would, I think, have put at a lower level (if appearing at all) - here it is at No. 7! There is a lot of doubt about whether Welles was completely in charge of the filming of "Ambersons"; certainly the editing of it was not done solely by Welles who, I believe, "washed his hands" of the project since the producers wanted so many changes, believing it to be a money-loser. They were right. It's a hard film to like. There is one outstanding performance in it though; not only outstanding but altogether surprising. Tim Holt, a B picture actor, gave a great performance as a rather "spoilt child" of a young man (his other great performance in film was in "Treasure of Sierra Madre").
There is one serious omission from the list I believe: "Shane". It's never in any list now that I know of. A superb masterpiece of a Western, better than any.... OK, maybe "The Searchers" is as good - that is on the list at No. 6. And where is "High Noon"?
Film critics of newspapers used to offer their lists of best films to a certain newspaper or magazine (was it "Sight and Sound"?) and someone would compile a "critics list" from them. I recall Dilys Powell, well known film critic then, writing that she would have liked to have included a couple of Laurel and Hardy "shorts" in her list - probably not allowed or maybe they would have been deemed "fascetiously chosen". She was quite serious. Why not? Those L and H "shorts" are wonderful. Well, some are.
The No 1 in this list is a surprising choice, directed by an actor, his one and only film as director; not a popular film, one that produced heaps of problems in its making, and one that is not just frightening but alarming in a way that makes me sometimes feel that I shouldn't be watching it as if I am watching porn. The film is "The Night of the Hunter" directed by Charles Laughton with an astonishingly unsentimental and real personification of a religious basket case by Robert Mitchum.
Here are a few films on the Speccie list that I think should not have been included: "The Red Shoes" (No. 20); "Blade Runner" (No. 17); "Le Grande Illusion" (no. 13); "Rio Bravo"(no. 10); "The Magnificent Ambersons" (No. 7).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'll argue that "Night of the Hunter" was a film "that produced heaps of problems in its making", that is more like a legend bred by Laughton's widow (never present an the NotH filming, BTW) and her collaborators in a couple of biographies: you see, the "mommie dearest" type of film biographies sell like hotcakes.
I'd recommend to read Preston Neal Jones' "Heaven and Hell to play with" or Jeffrey Couchman' "The Night of the Hunter, biography of a film", both quite well researched, you'll see that the "shooting from hell" reputation is quite untrue.
Incidentally, if you can also read this article from The Guardian:
The Hidden Hunter
I hope it helps getting a bigger picture.
Post a Comment