39. The Maltese Falcon (John Huston, 1941)
So the blue print for detective noirs finally makes it's relatively high appearance at the 39th mark. Some of you lot may have been wondering if it was going to make the cut. But this is John Huston's masterpiece and The Prestige says my fellow Mofo's needent worry as I literally worship this film, especially considering what it's done for film noir. As with everything, you've got to start at the beginning and Maltese Falcon is noted as being the first film noir released in Hollywood.
I've made it no secret that I have a soft spot for noir, particulary the 40's era. I don't know what it is. Theres just something fascinating about the sleazy and amorality of the genre. And the way I see it, you don't have the right to call yourself a fan of noir if you don't rate Huston's landmark in cinema highly.
All the familiar tropes of film noir are on full display; from Bogart's cynical and world weary private dick to Mary Astor's alluring Tzetanian femme fatale and more twists and turns than a packet of quavers crisps.
What really stood out for me, though, was Huston's knack for exposing and satirising the nature of greed -'it's the stuff dreams are made of'. But really, it's that sort of social observation that makes this film one of the definitive noirs of that era as well as the first. And of course greed would become a strong theme in Huston's subsequent films.
Obviously, as with a lot of noirs, theres a slight air of misogyny, but it's to Bogart and Huston's credit that we are able to overlook this and enjoy the witty scathing remarks Sam Spade spits out of his mouth with flirtatious relish.
It's also a deceptively claustrophobic film, too. A majority of the plot takes place indoors, giving a recurring sense of paranoia and tension that would set the tone for other noirs after it.
38. Bullet Boy (Saul Dibb, 2004)
The rise of knife and gun crime in urban London and the ways in which it causes a disequilibrium society is the heart of this beautiful debut by Saul Dibb. Now it's not a commercially well known film, so i'll give a little synopsis:
Ashley Walters stars as Ricky, a former youth offender who's just got out of prison and obviously looking to go straight and make something of himself. However, less than a few hours after being released from prison, he's hooked up with his old mate and soon unwittingly finds himself in a spiral of violence that he never had any control over in the first place..
The reasoning for Ricky's escalation couldn't be anymore trivial if it tried. And that's one of the most disturbing aspects of the film - Dibb's depiction of a minor situation ends up being a major factor in the cause and effect relationship and the result of the film's tragedies.
Dibb's strong documentary background aids him in bringing a raw and realistic vibe to the film. It's photographed in a grainy naturalistic style with no trace of gloss whatsoever, giving an uncomfortable sense of authenticity to the film dodgy areas.
Now, i'm very well aware that the premise for this film may sound cliched and overly familiar, but it's the emotional punch that gives it it's weight. The naturalism of the performances and directorial choices in the film forces the spectator to observe just what happens when innocence is fractured and why, at times, it's almost impossible to avoid conflict of any nature.
I can't finish this without mentioning my boy Ashley Walters. Believe it or not, I have met him a few times and he seems like a lovely bloke. He adds a sense of realism to the film because of his notorious gun conviction several years ago, so he clearly used the role as a way to tell his side of the story. Mark my words, though, the man is a revelation in this film and you'll feel for him throughout. You find yourself really wanting him to get out of his predicaments.
It should also be noted that this film was not only filmed in my home city, but also my very home town, Hackney. So the realism there is overwhelming. I don't know if this makes me more partial to this film than most would be, but I do think it deserves it's place in British cinema history.
There are many films with the same premise, but they always come off as lectures and preachy ****. This is one of the most unpretentious of it's kind. Like I said before, it's about the way the film speaks to you that really sets it apart, and this speaks to me on a level. I remember crying once the film had finished. I cried in my girlfriend's arms because it really felt like a positive film that didn't just have something to say, but it said it in a way where I felt everybody could understand and take something from it. This should be shown in schools for god's sakes.
But back to Walters. He is quite a powerful presence and there are hints of a hardened heart of darkness in his moments of brooding. He's one of my favourite actors because of this film (and the fact that he's from my home town) and I am confident that you will all be seeing a lot more of him.
I wish I could mention the supporting cast who are all EXCELLENT, but I fear that i've spoken about this film way too much and I don't want to spoil it for anybody.
37: Psycho (Alfred Hitchcock, 1960)
No introduction necessary for this classic contribution to cinema. Hitchcock's coffee black comedy is an exercise in turning conventions on it's head and violating audiences expectations.
Killing the film's biggest star (Janet Leigh's Marion Cane) was a stroke of genius. You can imagine the impact it must've had on viewers back then. I imagine that they felt a lot more vulnerable watching any film afterwards, particularly horrors and thrillers. This film was one of the few in Hollywood to show an 'anything goes' mentality.
Any readings of Freud in Psycho is reserved for those who fail to see this film for what it is - a thrill ride. Psycho is all about the ride, baby cakes. Yes, there are social observations as with all of Hitch's films, but it's the technical expertise that transcends any academic readings about the film.
To put it bluntly, this is Hitchcock's 'picture perfect' film. He reaches Stanley Kubrick levels of meticulous camera compositions and extreme close ups on specific parts of the mise-en-scene to further emphasise tension. But this film wasn't about technical experimentation. This film is a paradigm of a man who refused to see the limitations of cinema and set out to take the audience out of their comfort zones. And he succeeded..
36. Terminator 2: Judgement Day (James Cameron, 1992)
Yes, I do realise that I have a lot of sequels in my list (with a couple of more to come). But most of the ones I do have have surpassed their originals. This one....is not exception as the first Terminator film will eventually make it's appeareance on my list. However, that's not to say that T2 isn't a good sequel. On the contrary, it's an excellent film, hence the reason for it's 36th position.
The original Terminator is a bit more of a masterpiece because of it's tech noir approach - I feel it even rivals Blade Runner as one of the best sci fi films of the 80s. However, this one is still an exuberant rollercoaster ride of popcorn entertainment that keeps you on the edge of your seat at all times. And it does so big willy style .
It's loud, humourous, expensive and full of adrenaline pumping action scenes that, at one point, set the standard for action in Hollywood. The CGI was impressive back then aswell and it's clear that James Cameron used every single penny of his mega budget to get the best vision possible.
Arnie's T-800 is suitably monotone and robotnic, pumping out wry one liners with a dead pan enthusiasm.
I really wish I had not known that Arnie was going to be the good guy the 2nd time round. I understand that it was supposed to be a twist. Stupid cousin told me.
Another interesting aspect about the film is that Arnie is now the underdog instead of the fearsome and relentless killer. This is another reason why this film doesn't surpass the original - it takes away some of the aura and presence that made The Governator unique in the first one. Some may say it makes him more sympathetic...but that's missing the point - he's a ******* robot.
That said, there surprising moments of savagery from him. Witness the scene in which Arnie shoots a poor security guard several times in the shins and knees, ensuring John Conner that 'he'll live'. It's crazy **** from a director who believes in the 'more is more' philosophy of filmmaking. And in this case..he's right.
I would just like to say that I really appreciate the comments everybody has made to the thread. Without the comments the thread would be pretty much useless and I thank everybody in taking the time out to read my list so far, which I feel pales in comparison to other guy's lists like Pyro, Mark F and Swedish and many others. But yeah, thanks for the replies thus far guys, and we're almost there!