The Silence of the Lambs (list number 74)

Okay, so if you read the review of 'Gone with the Wind,' you'll know that constantly loud music playing in the background bugs me. A lot. And guess what? 'Silence' is another offender, though its music isn't quite as loud. Now I understand that the music was used to set the overall mood of the movie, and I must admit the creepy tones did compliment the story, it was overused. I mean, come on.

The rest of what I didn't like about this movie has to do with the way it is presented. Now, I’m gonna have a hard time describing this here, but what I mean will become much clearer when I do 'Apocalypse Now' (aka one of my least favorite movies ever). See, the entire film (aside from some of the interactions between Foster and Hopkins) feels like a bad dream. Not a nightmare, mind you; typically those are real enough that you jolt awake feeling like you're about to have a heart attack. No, this thing feels like a bad acid trip thanks to the sensations of uneasiness you get throughout the film. I mean, even when Foster is at the training academy in Quantico it feels as though something sinister could happen at any time. If that was what director Jonathan Demme was going for, then he sure succeeded.

Now for the positives...

First off, the story was good. There was some excitement, a couple of twists, etc. I just can't complain about the narrative itself.

Secondly, Anthony Hopkins. I really shouldn't have to say more, but I guess I will anyway. It seemed as though he was truly born to play the role of Hannibal Lector; his charming Britishness (which is a word now that I say it is) and overall sophistication contrasts well with the doctor's inner demons. Every line, every movement is delivered perfectly, and anyone who says otherwise is clearly as mad as Lector himself.

Third... I don't have one. The fact that it teaches people the proper pronunciation of 'Chianti,' I guess.

Here's the breakdown:

Story: 3/3

-An excellent tale.

Acting: 3/3

-due mainly to Hopkins, but Foster and company did well enough that I won't subtract points.

Music: .5/1

-While the music was well written, I feel as though it should have been turned down a bit at several points along the way.

Tone: .5/2

-I get it, serial killers are creepy, but I really don't need to be reminded of it throughout the entirety of the film.

Production value: 1/1

-Well made for its time period

After effect: .5/1

-It left a lingering feeling of anxiety that was appropriate for a thriller, but the constant bombardment of the creepiness made me somewhat bored with it.

Total: 8.5/11

When translated to a ten point scale, that's a 7.7. So it's a good movie overall, but does not belong on a list of the 100 Greatest Films.

Review #1: Gone with the WInd

I'll start with number 5 on the list: Gone With the Wind.

Okay, so this movie is loooooong, and while that can be a bad thing, this classic is able to keep me entertained (for the most part) throughout. There are sad moments, funny moments, sad moments, happy moments, and did I mention sad moments? Sheesh, half the movie is a downer, but that's clearly intended and to be expected in what I would call an 'epic tragedy.'

The acting was... well... let's just say I don't feel it would work that well for a modern movie. It all felt so theatrical and overdone that sometimes I thought I was watching a play. Vivian Leigh (Scarlet) is probably the biggest offender here, but I can forgive it because it was considered to be the norm during that time period. Two standouts I do have to mention, though: Clark Gable (Rhett Butler) and Hattie McDaniel (Mammie). Gable is just perfect for his role; playing Butler is effortless for him and he makes it one of the most memorable performances I've seen in cinema. McDaniel, though playing a somewhat smaller role, outshines anyone she shares the screen with (excepting Gable; seriously, the guy's a boss). It's no wonder that she was the first the first black person (not just woman) to win an Academy Award.

The music, I feel, is overdone; it is loud and dramatic throughout, even during some dialogue. However, I cannot dock very many points because it is a product of its time period.

Now for the ever-important score (because being rated by me is the most important thing that can happen to a movie). While I may have some personal issues with “Gone With the Wind,' there's just nothing I can find that is objectively wrong with it. However the acting, cinematography, score, story, and pacing are superb (once you take in consideration the time in which the film was made), so I therefore cannot give this masterpiece anything less than a perfect 10/10. It belongs on the top 100 list.

Note: 10/10 does not mean I love the movie; I would actually give it a subjective score of about 6/10 because I just don't like it all that much.

Introduction

Okay people, since I've started this medical school journey I've either had no time for anything (90% of the time) or time to kill (weekends after exams). During this past lull/break I've come up with an idea: I'm going to review all of AFI's 100 Greatest Movies (2007) and determine how good those films really are. I rate films on a 10 point scale, and nothing less than a 9 should belong on a 'Greatest Movies' list.
I won't be going in any particular order, and movies I've seen recently I'll review without actually rewatching them. My short reviews will be posted here, probably an average of one a week.
As I go, I'd love to hear everybody's opinions on the movies in question.