AFI Top 100 Movies: 68 to 65

68. An American in Paris - Oh boy! Sarcasm? Maybe. This film is just a big ball of joy. Nothing shows that more than the climax of the film: an 18 minute ballet style dance number through stylized sets of Paris. Oh boy!
That's pretty much the whole film. The plot is just kind of in the background, the songs don't really have to do with a whole lot and they dance around. Like a lot of musicals? Not entirely. The best musicals actually have a story. An American in Paris is about an American painter in Paris who starts stalking his friend's fiance. Somehow she ends up with him in the end. The end being the 20 seconds after the 18 minute dance number.
What's interesting to note about this musical is that the people in the world of the film not singing stop and smile and notice the people singing as if it were a show. Shouldn't they be going about their normal business, while the singing people emote how they feel? (Just like in other musicals.) Isn't that what the song in the musical is for, just a way to emote how you feel in an artistic way? So this film doesn't make much sense, it's just a chance for Gene Kelley to dance and sing and 1951 America to feel good about itself.

 67. The Manchurian Candidate - This is a near perfect film. Every shot is planned perfectly and artistic. Some of the cinematography is years ahead of its time, but watching it now you don't notice it because it's been copied so much since. There is a documentary look at times, then it gets closer and it's intimate. And all that flows together so well that you never notice, you're just swept into the story and characters.
The film is so interesting because it's almost satire, but it's not a comedy. They take it all so serious, with the political implications, Iselin is definitely patterned after McCarthy, but he never plays it overboard. The film plays with the notion of communist infiltration, and the joke is that the people supposedly blowing the whistle on secret commies in the government, are the actual communists. Pretty scary, and pretty close to things that have happened. Looking at the details of the Kennedy assassination, there is a haunting prophetic tone in the film. People in this film are patriotic, but yet they are doing things that are harming the country, whether they are forced to or not. (Several theories propose that Oswald was a loyal CIA operative, who spent time in Russia as part of one of their secret operations. If that's true, that's scary to think that a loyal CIA op would be told to kill the President.) It's unclear how much of a true communist the mother is, if she believes it or is just using it as a chance to get into the highest position of power. It hints at that at the end when she talks about when Iselin will be swept into power making Marshall Law seem like anarchy. There is so much depth to the film, from the technical aspects to the metaphors and social commentary, honestly, it's one the greatest American films. A+. Good Job.

66. Network - Ding dong, this movie was exhausting. I'm exhausted as hell and I'm glad this movie is over! Everyone was yelling in this movie. The 70's were the worst decade of all time, and people were awfully pissed about it. I would be too. Sky high oil prices, terrorists, commie black nigga's robbing banks, (Betsy was super pissed that I repeated the N-word. I think it's in the public domain by now.), and tons of other crap going on. The world was going to crap, and the only people that could possibly help people out and get through it are the people running TV. The problem is that people running TV networks are the worst people on the planet. Faye Dunaway, as usual, plays a crazy chick, who runs the programming on the network, and looking at her face in the movie poster, she's got a little bit of the Crazy Eyes.
The social commentary is pretty thick, and poignant even today. But still we've seen so much of this kind of satire that it wasn't shocking. What I took away from the film was this trend in America toward catching and cashing in on fads. Fads are like lightning and can only rarely be caught in a bottle. This is so true for TV, where one show gets high ratings and works, then is copied repeatedly. But what worked with the original doesn't carry over to the copies and they fail. In the movie they try to capitalize on Beale's live breakdown, re-tooling the news around his craziness. Then, Dunaway is trying to capitalize on the public fascination with revolutionary groups, despite the fact that they're collaborating with terrorists. Also, in the side plot, Harry leaves his wife of 40 years to have an extended affair with Dunaway. He gives up a lifetime of love and commitment for a fling with the craziest chick on the planet. A super fun idea at first, but not something you should ruin your life for.
That's what I get from the film, that destroying consistency for trends, ends up destroying everything; from decent television to our morals and values. Basically, that's the history of television. Thankfully, though, full-time news organizations and shows have maintained an acceptable level of standards. Reality TV today has provided that vent for the public's need for trashy, trendy and low brow entertainment. But this film definitely foresees some troubling times ahead, as we as a nation struggle between getting our fix of disaster and trends and maintaining a level of consistency in our actions, passions and morals.

65. The Silence of the Lambs - Ne'er was there a better example of a perfect script than this film. It's basically the Screenwriting book, with what to do, what not to do, and how to side step cliches while still using the best story format man has ever come up with. As the credits roll there is hardly any dialogue, but yet through the first few scenes you learn so much, not only about setting and the tone, but about Starling. Even the name is great, she's a lil star about to explode.
The film isn't stuck in film structure, it uses it as a tool. The twists and revelations are needed to build the story and drive, but they're never expected or contrived. I think that's the case because the script has just enough differences from usual stories to make it completely new and unique. For instance, Starling never meets the villain until the end. He isn't a classic nemesis that she knows and either was friends with. In fact, he isn't even trying to attack or elude her directly until the final battle. He has no clue about her, and she barely even knows who he is, only his persona.
The other obvious twist is the character of Hannibal Lecter. It's a rare treat to see such a unique and deep supporting character as him, especially since he's so bad. Lecter really provides the heart of this film, because Starling has to face him first before she ever gets close to Buffalo Bill. Lecter is THE twist of the film, it's what distances this film from any other average cop drama that preceded it. Story format and structure can be learned, but writing and using a character like Lecter is what makes screenplays into movies that excel above everything else.
As well, his character is used so perfectly, because he draws out Starling's past. She could have had flashbacks or dreams that she wakes up in a sweat, but instead we have the world's greatest psychologist pulling it out. It just so happens that he's a cannibal. Again, without him, and without him being written so perfectly, we have a B movie cop drama. Or worse yet, a Law and Order episode. It seems apt to point out as well that police procedurials probably wouldn't be the same without The Silence of the Lambs. Every L&O or CSI or even Dexter, pulls a little from this landmark film. In every Law and Order, the killer is interesting and deep, and even many of the side characters are. This film took a seriel killer and brought him out and made him intelligent, witty and sometimes human. Every show now wants to paint the same picture of their villains. The painting of Hannibal Lecter may be gruesome, but it takes a looking at every now and again to remember how well made it is, even if it's hard to look at.