Reflections. By RevBruce.

Of course you knew these were going to be on here! How could they not? The Godfather Part II is better than Part I, but you really have to put them together. It focuses on the story of Vito Corleone played by Marlon Brando, and his son Michael played by Al Pacino. This is a coming of age story, in a gangster sort of way. Michael Corleone at first wants nothing to do with the “family business,” but reluctantly gets drawn in as events unfold. Godfather part II is a sequel and prequel at the same time, with Robert Deniro playing the young Vito Corleone as he first comes to America. There are so many great performances. From Brando, Pacino, James Caan, Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall. And of course Rober Deniro as the young Vita Corleone in Part 2. There is so much that could be said about both of these movies, but they really speak for themselves. The pathos, the tragedy, the violence. And the most important piece of advice that I learned. From Michael Corleone: “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.” 

I love this movie. Why? I like heist movies, I like movies set in Boston. I like Fenway Park. And I like Ben Affleck. He plays Doug MacRay (I like that last name too. His name is spelled differently, he is Irish Catholic and I am Scottish Presbyterian, but who cares). In a bank robbery in Charlestown, Doug falls in love with a bank employee, played by Rebecca Hall. Determined to get out of the “family business” of committing robberies in Charlestown, Doug under duress agrees to commit one final robbery. Of Fenway Park. After a 4 game stand with the hated Yankees. “The Town” is filled with fabulous car chases through Boston, family dysfunction, and settling old scores. Doug’s impulsive younger brother, played by Jeremy Renner, is an accident waiting to happen at every moment. There are also a fantastic supporting performances by John Hamm and Blake Lively. In the end, Affleck loses Rebecca Hall. But gives her a lifetime gift as he disappears for good. One that gives her a new purpose for her life. Somehow you hope they will see each other again, even though you know they won’t. Seriously heart warming.

I need a Martin Scorsese movie. I could put Goodfellas here, but I like “The Departed” better. Not the same movie, but both are in Marty gangster territory. Set in Boston, Leo Decaprio and Matt Damon start in the same direction, in law enforcement, and then diverge. Leo undercover, Damon not. But neither is exactly what they appear on the surface, and they spend the entire movie playing a game of cat and mouse. There is incredible interweaving and double crossing right up until the end. With an amazing cast of characters: Jack Nicholson as famous Whitey Bulger, Vera Farming as the love interest to both Leo and Matt, a hilarious over the top hot-tempered Mark Wahlberg, Alec Baldwin, and Martin Sheen. Matt Damon, the above ground but ultimately corrupt cop, gets away with it until…. Well, you know… Mark Wahlberg was fired from the force, but he’s still around… The film is filled with all of the familiar Martin Scorcese narration and cutting back and forth in time. Just thrilling.

Top movie lists are subjective. But this is the greatest film of all time. Vertigo is set in 1950s San Francisco. The haunting shots of the city set the stage for many later films set in San Francisco. Jimmy Stewart is John Ferguson, known as Scottie, who retired from the police force because of a traumatic experience caused by Vertigo. He becomes obsessed with two women. One, who he is hired to follow around by a friend. Another, Kim Novak, who reminds him of the first woman. Scottie’s former fiance, Midge, is his constant companion on the journey. Throughout the movie, I ‘m thinking, “come on, Scottie, go back to Midge! What more do you want?” Oh well…. After a mysterious, circuitous story, the mystery is solved at the top of a bell tower at a California mission, in a massive twist. Vertigo captures haunting loneliness, summarized in this short dialogue: Scottie: “Don’t you think its kind of a waste for the two of us…” Madeleine: “To wander separately? But, only one is a wanderer; two together are always going somewhere.”

Non Spoiler Alert. If you are not familiar with the Helter Skelter/Charles Manson/Sharon Tate story, read this before watching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Manson.  Or somewhere else.

True Confessions. I am not a huge Quentin Tarrantino fan.  I’m not crazy about Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, or Django Unchained. But Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is sensational. It’s a buddy movie featuring Leonardo Dicaprio and Brad Pitt. Leo is an aging actor, who is starring in a cheesy western TV show.  Brad Pitt is his stunt double. The entire narrative intersects with the real life (kind of) story of Sharon Tate and Charles Manson, i.e. Helter Skelter. Margot Robbie is fantastic as Sharon Tate, replete with lots of shots of her feet.  Indulging QT’s “foot fetish,” as usual. Ending with a spectacular, and I mean spectacular, Tarrantino rewrite of history. If only Tarantino’s version were true….

With the Covid-19 shelter in place upon us, what better time to write some blogposts on my favorite movies?   I do not have a favorite, that would be impossible.   I have been able to narrow it down to a top 20, but even that is not a large enough list.  And how do you categorize movies?  Is it the best?  Is it my favorite?  Or is it a movie I just keep rewatching regardless of quality?  All of the above?  Probably.

So I will just begin by writing a double feature of two of my favorites, both by Woody Allen.  His 1989 “Crimes and Misdemeanors,” and his 2006 “Match Point.”  I write about them together because in both movies, he is telling the same story, but in very different contexts.

Both films are a play on Dostoyevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment,” the story of Raskolnikov, who commits two murders and lives with the mental and moral anguish until he confesses.  Both of Allen’s films involve this same plot arc.  In each, a married man, played by Martin Landau and Jonathan Rhys Meyers, is having an affair with another woman, played by Anjelica Huston and Scarlet Johansson.  In each, he promises he will leave his wife, but he can’t.  In each the lover gets impatient, and threatens to expose him.  And in each…  well, you know what happens.

Both Landau and Rhys Meyers live with the moral anguish of what they have done.  They cover their tracks as best they can, but at every point, they fear they are going to be exposed.  They live in incredible guilt.  They almost confess to the police.  But they never do.  You think they are going to get exposed, but they don’t.  Instead of the typical Hollywood ending where there is justice for the victim, there isn’t.  The perpetrator gets away with it, and goes on to live his comfortable, wealthy life.

Other than this similar plot arc, the two films are very different.  One takes place in New York, the other takes place in London.  “Crimes” is filled with quirky comic relief (there is a great performance by an incredibly annoying Alan Alda), “Match Point” has none to speak of.  But the most interesting difference is the moral universe in which both stories take place.

In “Crimes and Misdemeanors,” Martin Landau plays Judah Rosenthal, a wealthy, philanthropic Jewish ophthalmologist in New York.  Judah lives in the moral universe of his Jewish upbringing.  Judah himself notes the irony of his profession, since he constantly viewed his life as lived under the all-seeing eyes of God.  His family debates the significance of the holocaust.  He confesses his transgression to his Rabbi, who wisely advises him to “confess, seek forgiveness, and hope for the best.”  He can’t.  At the end, he is finally able to shake off the moral weight of his upbringing.

“Match Point,” on the other hand, has no such moral universe.  It takes place in an empty universe, where everything happens through blind luck and chance.  Rhys Meyers plays Chris Wilton, a former Tennis pro turned businessman, who sees life in terms of a tennis match.  “There are moments in a match when the ball hits the top of the net, and for a split second, it can either go forward or fall back. With a little luck, it goes forward, and you win. Or maybe it doesn’t, and you lose.”  In an extraordinary turn of events, just as Rhys Meyers is about to get caught by the police, the “ball hits the net and falls back” — but in this case he wins, and gets away with it.

And so comes true his philosophy of life: “The man who said “I’d rather be lucky than good” saw deeply into life. People are afraid to face how great a part of life is dependent on luck. It’s scary to think so much is out of one’s control.”  Totally.  By sheer luck, Chris Wilton, without any pangs of conscience, goes back to his life of ease.

Which film is more satisfying?  Both.  Both are incredibly well told.  And neither.  Whether you believe you live under the all seeing eye of God, or whether you believe it is better to be lucky than good, life usually never works out quite the way it does in either movie…