I've seen this film several times. It does look old after all these years. Yet it still is the greatest film ever. The DVD ad at Barnes and Nobles even ranks the film as the best ever. It their ranking system Citizen Kane is number one. It's ahead of The Godfather and many others. I was dismayed when I walked through Barnes and Nobles tonight. I go there often and look at the DVDs for sale. A few years ago Barnes and Nobles was in difficulties. Now I don't hear any of that. And their DVD section near where I live is much improved. They now have two sections of Criterion Collection films which are some of the best films ever made. They also, in addition to the greatest American films section which I take with some objections, have a Western's section. I've seen plenty of those. The Searchers, Dances with Wolves, the Spaghetti Westerns, and other Clint Eastwood pictures. I haven't seen too many Jimmy Stewart Westerns. Maybe I should watch one. Who Shot Liberty Valance? That's a good start.
Now back to the reasons why I have objections to the Greatest film rankings at Barnes and Noble. It doesn't include Warren Beatty's Reds. Reds is an incredible film that won nine academy awards, yet it's not in the top 100 films ever made? It sounds like McCarthyism to me. No film about the Russian revolution? An American's vision of the tumultuous times in Russia?
I was confounded and depressed when I realized that the film had been omitted. I felt like it was a set back for liberal America. The area where I live is semi-rural and not very big at all. I guess it's a reflection of Barnes and Noble politics. Or rather it's AFI, or American Film Institute. That's who did the rankings. Perhaps it they who are being McCarthyistic. Is that even a word, "McCarthyistic." Sounds like a religious term or rather some political slogan that encompasses what the Republican party means these days. With the forced resignation of John Boehner who knows where the Republicans in Congress are headed. Do they really want a firebrand to control the House? I don't think a firebrand can work with the Oval Office and do anything except shut down the government. Then where will we be?
I guess I could complain, but if it's that obvious of an omission and they planned such an extensive ranking without including Reds I should stop going to Barnes and Nobles. Perhaps they are in a conspiracy to control what we watch, and that doesn't include a film that is openly Socialist. That's too bad. The AFI should be ranking a film for it's merit, not it's political content. If they don't like the film because it's Communist or Socialst that shouldn't prohibit them from ranking a film of such beauty and poetry. The film is also a love story. Why don't they get that? Jack Reed was an American. He was a great writer. It's too bad the AFI doesn't recognize true art.
The film was great as ever. The story is epic and everything looks marvelous. Greg Toland was the best, Orson Welles was great. I couldn't tear my eyes away from the screen..
No comments:
Post a Comment