![\"So](\"http:\/\/images.amazon.com\/images\/P\/0764157019.01._SCLZZZZZZZ<p><p><p><p>_.jpg\")
Sure I had seen Janet Leigh before, but that title! Starting with Voyage To The Moon<\/em> ending with Chicago<\/em>, the book truly was a thing of beauty. It had it all avant garde masterpieces by Bunuel, crowd pleasing blockbusters such as Independence Day<\/em>. All in chronological order, from the 1890’s to 2002. Kubrick and Hitchcock, Lang and Fellini. ONE THOUSAND AND ONE MOVIES I MUST SEE BEFORE I DIE?!<\/a> Well I better get to it.\u00c2\u00a0My first count in Steven Jay Schneider’s masterful book was 180 films, a paltry sum indeed. On that first count I had only reached 20 by the time I got to It’s\u00c2\u00a0a Wonderful Life<\/em>. My experience with silent films was especially lacking. It was unacceptable and\u00c2\u00a0I needed to get going. Over the past two and a half years I have been on this journey, making great strides in cinematic knowledge. I used to dog my friends into flipping through and getting their counts tallied, always interested in what different people had scene. I was fascinated to know one girl who had seen and loved A Clockwork Orange<\/em>.\u00c2\u00a0Based on my previous\u00c2\u00a0talks with her\u00c2\u00a0I never would have expected that. My high school drama teacher and film mentor Mr. Gelzer was more than happy to count through it with me seeing 548 of them and explaining which\u00c2\u00a0he loved and which he could not stand.\u00c2\u00a0The book is certainly simply a guide, recommending certain titles, and with such a high number,\u00c2\u00a0its interesting to see what makes the cut.<\/p>\nPresently my count is 416 of the titles, along with a being more well versed with Chaplin, Godard, Altman and many others. Even though the spine is broken on my copy, I imagine I’ll be carrying it around for a long time.The publishers of the book have two very clever offshoots to their original: 1001 Books<\/a>(my count was painfully low), and 1001 Albums<\/a>(where I fared much better). They also updated the movie book to 2004, of which I have seen all the new additions except for Passion Of The Christ. As time passes and I watch film after film, it’s getting more frustrating to both find the more obscure ones. It’s easy to\u00c2\u00a0rent Shaft <\/em>or\u00c2\u00a0to Tivo Prizzi’s Honor<\/em>\u00c2\u00a0(undeserving of\u00c2\u00a0making the\u00c2\u00a01001 cut by the way) but\u00c2\u00a0much harder to come across the 1915 serial Les Vampires<\/em>.\u00c2\u00a0<\/p>\n Also, I have recently come across two blogs based on the films: This guy<\/a> focuses on about two movies a week in the book, doing his own research and reviewing. Another site<\/a> has less research done, but the couple who blogs (and seem to have never seen a movie beforehand since they both have only about 80 counted) just give each film a score\u00c2\u00a0from one\u00c2\u00a0to five.\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0I feel quite conflicted with these two blogs, since they’re judging their evaluations on the editors’ own evaluations. Its what they think of someone elses list, rather a list of what they feel are the most important movies. Furthermore, the book itself does not rate any<\/strong> of the films in order, it’s merely a chronological list. As Ebert says, the ratings are meaningless anyways. The first blogger even recommends that you catch some of the films on youtube. This does\u00c2\u00a0not pertain to just the five minute avant garde films either, things like My Man Godfrey<\/em>, which might possibly benefit from an actual cinematic experience rather than a 4 inch or even 12 inch screen.\u00c2\u00a0Perhaps it’s more Salieri-like envy.<\/p>\n This is probably because I am hoping for criticism (film\/music\/literature\/television) as a viable career. I’ve been writing\u00c2\u00a0 reviews<\/a> since 10th grade and in both the world of academics and criticism there is a huge urge to not only have everything catalogued in your brain, ready to be pulled out and displayed to prove your validity amongst your peers, but also to keep up with the current trends so you can be culturally relevant. I can’t help but consider it a competition with these other people, regardless of whether they know I’m there or not.<\/p>\n Dateline – August 2004, The Borders in Central Park I did not mean to come across it I assure you. Who wants to be enslaved, forced into a servitude for a much more powerful being? No, it could only have … Continue reading ![\"I](\"http:\/\/www.hotbadguys.com\/images\/abraham.jpg\")
The other drawback is the one that plagues Salieri in Milos Forman’s Amadeus <\/em>(definitely deserves its place in the book). It’s that feeling that no matter how hard you’re trying. There are people out there who are doing better than you. They don’t even seem like they’re trying and you wonder, “Are they being as\u00c2\u00a0perceptive a filmgoer as I? Do they really get what’s being conveyed?”\u00c2\u00a0<\/p>\n![\"No](\"http:\/\/www.filmlinc.com\/wrt_old\/programs\/6-2005\/jpegs\/malle-my-dinner-with-andre.jpg\")
I do not think this book is the be all end all. It’s a great concept. It’s a trying concept. There are a few things that I cannot believe were\u00c2\u00a0omitted (The Coen’s Blood\u00c2\u00a0Simple<\/em>, Disney’s Beauty and the Beast<\/em>, and Louis Malle’s My Dinner With Andre\u00c2\u00a0<\/em>are my 3 big issues) And I’ll probably never manage to get through the\u00c2\u00a0nine John Ford movies featured. What such books do is make\u00c2\u00a0the aquisition and cataloguing\u00c2\u00a0of a decent cinematic education\u00c2\u00a0so much easier. Sure, it’s a rat race, I’ll probably always consider it a rat race, but at least it’s a rat race where I get to do something that I love, watching and writing. I’m tired now.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"