Top Five Favorite Films: #1 Gettysburg (1993)

It’s been an interesting week. I don’t believe I’ve ever written as much for personal reasons, only in cases for school or work. Nor do I believe I’ve ever written about something as personal before without a clue as to if it would be read by anyone. If you have followed this blog for the past week and been amused, bemused, or at least a bit interested, then thank you for reading it. It’s been a bit of an experience.

Gettysburg (1993)

When I set out to write this week’s blog postings, I started with this one. Shortly after starting this blog I decided to write a review of my favorite film and have it posted around the time of the anniversary of the battle. This year marks the 149th year since that horrific battle which claimed the lives of more Americans than fell in all the years of the Vietnam War. July 1st through July 3rd 1863 was pivotal in the history of the United States. It was the time when our country came into its own, and became, for good and for bad, the country that exists today.

The film Gettysburg is based on the award winning novel written by Michael Shaara. It is a narrative of the battle as seen through the eyes many of the field commanders and several of the soldiers. It is a portrayal of the battle itself, but it also dives into the motivations of each of the battles many participants, and attempts to examine why and how they came together for those three days.

Primary told through the experiences of General Robert E. Lee (CSA), General James Longstreet (CSA), and Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (USA), the viewer is taken through many of the battles pivotal moments, and we see how circumstances, faith, and ego came into play to ultimately determine the outcome.

Harrison the Scout

The film opens on a lone Confederate Scout who is tasked with determining the movements of the Union Army as it chases the Confederate Army through the state of Pennsylvania. The Confederates have invaded to force a major action that will force the Union Army to suffer many losses. This would give the Confederate States the pretense to sue for peace and form their own country. The scout reports the movements of Union Calvary under the command of General John Buford who have moved into the town of Gettysburg, a small junction that seems to be in the center of everything.

General John Buford played by Sam Elliott

The Confederates attack Buford’s Calvary the morning of July 1st but fail to break the lines. Buford is then reinforced by Union infantry under John Reynolds. The Confederates move forward from all directions and are able to push back the Union Army to the ridges and hills South of Gettysburg. Reynolds himself is killed on the first day, and while the Confederates seem to have won, they, in fact, have been placed at a disadvantage.

Jeff Danials as Colonial Chamberlin

The Union Army digs in for a major action on the hills and is reinforced heavily. Lee, placing too much faith in the ability of his men to succeed, orders a full charge up into the hills on July 2nd. It is here, on the extreme edge of the Union lines that the 20th Maine Regiment under the command of Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain is able to stop the Confederate advance. After repelling attack after attack from the Confederates, and despite running dangerously low on ammunition, Chamberlain orders a bayonet charge which completely surprises the Confederates and stops the advance.

Tom Berenger as James Longstreet and Martin Sheen as Robert E. Lee

By July 3rd, Lee realizes that he is stuck between a rock and a hard place. If he withdraws, his army would have fought for two days at the cost of many lives and achieved nothing. If he attacks, he could risk losing everything. With an entire lifetime of experience working against him, he orders the only thing he thought he could, a major charge on the center of the Union lines.

This charge proves to be completely futile and the Confederates are soundly defeated. They move their way back to the south living to fight until April of 1865 when the war is finally ended.

As a film, Gettysburg focuses less on the horrific sights of battle, and instead attempts to really get to the heart of the conflict and understand what drove the soldiers, commanders, and the people of this country to resolve their differences in the most horrific way possible. By killing each other. This is, in my belief its greatest asset. War films these days tend to focus primarily on the horrible sights of war (people being blown to bits, the bloody mess and shear carnage of battle) and I believe that many times, this is necessary in order to get the feel right. But sometimes, I think that films focus on that at the expense of trying to make sense of the driving forces behind the battle.

If one is to truly understand how our forefathers (and mothers) came to believe that the only rational course of action was to kill each other, they need to really get to the heart of the conflict and listen to all the factors that played roles, instead of only those stories that reinforce pre-conceived notions.

Gettysburg tells all sides of the story. We know, of course, why some in the Union Army joined up. Many individuals could not fathom that States could simply quit the Union if they were so inclined, and wanted to preserve the country that their fathers shed blood for. Many, like Chamberlain, joined up to free the slaves of the South. They couldn’t believe that in a rational and educated society, how something as barbaric as slavery could possibly exist.

Kevin Conway as Buster Kilrain

And yet others had their own reasons. The film showcases the fictional character of Buster Kilrain who, having fled the class wars of Ireland in his youth, fights to end the idea of class warfare. When Chamberlain asks him what he thinks about the black slaves, He says one of my favorite lines in this film by simply stating;

“Well, if you mean the race, I really don’t know. This is not a thing to be ashamed of. You see, Colonel, you cannot judge a race. Any man who judges by the group is a peewit. You take men, one at a time.”

It’s one of the most poignant moments in a film full of them.

The Confederates also get the chance to tell their side of the story, and in doing so, we find that their motivations, though grossly misguided, were based more on their allegiance to their homes themselves rather than to their country. They followed a truly American belief that a man’s home is his castle, and fought to preserve that castle.

This is best exemplified by some captured Confederates, when questioned by a Union soldier as to why they were fighting.

“We’re fighting for our rats [rights]. Why can’t you people just the way you want, and let us live the way we do? Live and let live I heard some folks say. It might not such a fuss or bother if more people took it to heart.”

When you consider that the majority of the soldiers in the Confederate Army and many of the generals didn’t own slaves and still fought, you have to open your mind and really try to understand why. That doesn't mean they were right, but if one is to make sense of something as horrific as the Civil War, they need to really get to the heart of the driving forces behind it.

My favorite moments, though, feature the Confederate General Lewis Armistead. Commanding a brigade under General George Pickett, he is torn because he finds his lifelong friend, a friendship tested in battle and peacetime, Winfield Scott Hancock, on the opposite side of the battle. Armistead was like a brother to Hancock and was quite taken by him and his wife, Almira.

It’s futile to try to explain it to people who only view such companionship through the prism of modern day sensibilities, but it existed. Armistead is a solider, through and through, and though he would never consider killing his dear friend, he knows his first duty is to his home. He leads his brigade into battle on the third day and makes it closer than any other commander. It is here, that he is struck down by a shot, and to his great dismay, finds that Hancock has fallen as well. Armistead would go on to die several days later from complications from his wounds.

Armisteads death is even more poignant when you consider that the actor who played him, Richard Jordan died from a brain tumor shortly after filming.

There was much more to the story than the movie portrays. Many key moments are left out, as well as an explanation that General Grant, on the same day as the battle, proved successful at the Battle of Vicksburg thus cutting the Confederate States in two. The two battles provided the key turning point of the conflict and the country would be changed forever. It is not a perfect film by any standards, including my own. But I have never seen a film that really explained why an event such as the Civil War could have been fought in the first place or how each participant came to believe in their righteousness of their cause. Justice, honor, truth, and bravery have never been made as clear, and when you are forced to view the motivation of your enemy through their eyes, you might find them to be just like yourself.

Given many of the issues we face daily, it’s a lesson that I wish more people would take to heart.

Top Five Favorite Films: #2 Apollo 13 (1995)

All this week, I have been reviewing my top five favorite films and explained how each came to be on the list. I may, at some future point, move to the top ten, but for now these will suffice. To recap;

#5 Back to the Future (1985)

#4 Phantom of the Opera (2004)

#3 The Avengers (2012)

#2 Apollo 13 (1995)

Among my friends, there are a number of films that we sometimes find ourselves quoting depending on a given situation, usually in an attempt to be funny. Whether it’s a scene from Twister, Office Space, or SuperTroopers, there is usually one line that fits in a given situation. The same can be said for Apollo 13.

It’s only been recently that I decided that this film is my second favorite film of all time. In a way, it’s something I’ve always known, but I never really wanted to admit to myself. The fact remains that I’ve seen this particular film more times than any other film. When I was younger, and we would visit my grandparents, we would watch this film. They owned it, and it seemed like it was the thing we would do each and every time. Through the years since it was released, I have viewed it on each available format, and owned each available format. I can quote the film at length, if not the entire film itself. But given all of that, it isn’t enough to place it on this list, especially at this position, so why?

Well, simply put, the film contains many of the things I look for in a great film. It has a great story, rich characters, tension, amazing effects, awesome score, a historical film, and above all, it is highly entertaining and fun to watch.

Apollo 13 is the story of the ill-fated mission to the moon back in April 1970. Apollo 11 lands on the moon in July 1969 and Neil Armstrong makes the first steps, thereby wining the so called Space Race, and fulfilling the goal of President Kennedy to beat the Soviet Union to the moon. NASA has many future missions planned, but public confidence in the program has waned and people have moved onto other matters.

The film centers on the participants of the mission. Jim Lovell (Tom Hanks), Fred Haise (Bill Paxton), Ken Mattingly (Gary Sinise), and Jack Swigert (Kevin Bacon). Additionally, the astronaut’s families, primarily Marilyn Lovell (Kathleen Quinlan), are featured as well as those in Mission Control, which is led by Eugene Kranz (Ed Harris).

The superstition around the number 13 comes into play a bit as the mission suffers some setbacks. Lovell and Co. were originally supposed to fly on Apollo 14 but the crew led by America’s first astronaut, Alan Shepherd, is grounded. Then a few days before launch, Mattingly, is exposed to the measles by backup, Charlie Duke, and the backup, Swigert, is brought in to replace him. Then while enroute and close to the moon, suffers an explosion in its oxygen tanks. The mission to the moon is over, and the crew must now use their brains and available resources to get back to Earth. Mission Control is then moved into action, tasked with providing the astronauts with all the support it can from the ground, and the pain and anguish that the families suffered while not knowing what happened or if their loved ones will return.

And when compared to real photos of the time, you can see the filmmakers captured the essence completely

Apollo 13 is an epic film, told through the lens of history and through the voices of all the participants. The film flashes between the space ship itself, Mission Control, and the home front, keeping tabs on what was happening in each. It is through this narrative structure that the real story lies. We see how all of these factors played significant parts in order to have these men return to Earth alive, and a bit of the true cost of exploration and discovery.

What makes Apollo 13 a bit better than many other films set in space as well is the fact that it was actually shot in space, in a manner of speaking. While doing research for the film, the producers liked the idea of using the weightlessness in the film itself and had the sets built inside the cargo plane that is used for that training. Then, in a series of flights, were able to shoot many of the scenes that take place in space. As opposed to other films which would simulate such an environment, the film opts for the real thing.

However, I believe that the best moments in the film belong to the Mission Control. Here are the brightest minds in the world all in one room and are tasked with determining courses of action which can be helpful or fatal to the crew. They have no ability to see any more than the readings on their consoles and have to rely on information and educated guesses in order to make life or death decisions. And Harris captures the essence of Kranz completely.

Gene Kranz is a bulldog general, who demands as much out of his crew as he does himself. He keeps everyone in check with reality and drives the team to find solutions that would otherwise not be considered, and he refuses to accept anything but total victory. One of my favorite lines, ever spoken on film is spoken by Kranz as he assembles his team.

KRANZ: “We’ve never lost and American in space and we’re sure as hell not going to lose one on my watch. Failure is NOT an option!”

It’s a great mantra to adopt and one which I try to take to heart and live by. Truth is I have always been a fan of Kranz and largely due to Harris performance in this film, I once wrote to him, thanking him for his service. He sent me back an autographed copy of the Mission Control mission statement, which remains today one of my most prized possessions.

In spite of its virtues, the film does contain two moments which have never set well with me, one, involving Lovell’s young son. Early in the film, while talking with his son about the Apollo 1 fire, which killed three fellow astronauts, Lovell tells him that the door malfunctioned and failed to open which led to their deaths. After the accident, when Marilyn tells this young boy about the accident, he innocently asks “Was it the door?” The moment, in and of itself isn’t much but, for some reason, it always sounds like nails on a chalkboard to me each time I view the movie.

The other scene is shortly before the accident, when the Lovell family is at Mission Control to watch a closed circuit broadcast from the spaceship. None of the networks had an interest in carrying this broadcast so the families came to Mission Control to view it. As they go to leave, the fictional NASA Press Officer, Henry Hurt (played by Xander Berkeley) leans in to Lovell’s 16 year old daughter and says “hey” much as a creep would do while hitting on women at a bar. It’s not much, and doesn't add anything to the story, nor is it a long moment, but I always found it to be a bit out of place and unsettling.

In spite of those moments, the film remains my second favorite film of all time. As I noted above, I have owned this film in just about every format that it exists in. Just looking at my iTunes log, I have viewed it ninety-four times as of this writing, and that’s just one format. Any film viewed as much would have to resonate with the viewer and Apollo 13 does. It is a gripping epic of survival and a showcase of the talent, wisdom, and attitude that makes America great. It is a story of all of us. Frankly, as said by Gene Kranz himself, in response to all the factors going against the mission right before reentry:

And, it was.

Top Five Favorite Films: #3 The Avengers (2012)

All this week, I have been reviewing my top five favorite films and explained how each came to be on the list. I may, at some future point, move to the top ten, but for now these will suffice. To recap;

#5 Back to the Future (1985)

#4 Phantom of the Opera (2004)

#3 The Avengers (2012)

At first glance, it would seem that including a film that I only first saw a couple of weeks ago, let alone making it a top five favorite film, would be asinine, and frankly, I can understand that. On paper, this is a film that had everything going for it, and everything going against it. Marvel Pictures set up all of the main characters in a truly remarkable fashion, which did nothing but raise expectations on this film to completely ridiculous levels. There was simply no way the film could ever be as good as expected because the bar was set so high. And yet, upon viewing The Avengers, all of those factors came together to craft a great piece of film.

I wonder what the planning process was originally for this film. Was it to simply tell the story itself, diving into the characters backgrounds in the short span of time that the film could give? Perhaps, but somewhere along the like, someone got the bright idea that it might work better to introduce, or reintroduce each main character in their own story and then pull the best features from each of those stories and combine them together into one large film. By combining the talents and established characters of Tony Stark (Iron Man), Bruce Banner (Hulk), Natasha Romanoff (Black Widow), Thor, Steve Rogers (Captain America), and Clint Barton (Hawkeye) into one grand epic, and yet not allowing the enormity, or ego of each dictate the rules of the film over the others, is what makes it such an amazing feat.

The film begins at a secret research facility run by the Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistics Division, or SHIELD. Run by a mysterious and charismatic individual, Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), the agents of SHIELD are trying to tap the power hidden inside this blue cube, (first seen in Captain America). The cube contains what is purported to be unlimited power. But before they can, they are attacked by Loki (Tom Hiddleston), brother of Thor and banished from Asgard, the home world of Thor.

Loki intends to use the cube to open a portal into another world in an attempt to bring an army to earth to conquer and rule it. His initial attack succeeds and Fury is then forced to initiate the Avenger’s Initiative, a secret project that would only be used in extreme circumstances. The first part of the film is the rounding up of all the various players from each of the previous movies and making them jive together in a working mechanism. Predictably, this doesn’t happen at first as the different characters and egos are exploited by Loki in an effort to gain the upper hand. However, extreme and deadly measures taken by Loki bring each of the fabled parts together in perfect motion to bring the battle literally to Loki’s (and Starks) front door. What happens thereafter is what can only be described as the most epic final showdown in movie history.

There is so much to love about The Avengers. It is an action film that doesn’t take its own material so seriously that it forgets to inject humor at appropriate moments. It’s an interesting take on character and motivation, as well as what factors can drive that motivation, and it doesn’t fall into the typical pitfalls that most team up films fall into. Sure the main characters get into a pissing contest with each other, but only in a manner which makes sense to the overall plot. Loki also serves as an excellent foil in being able to frustrate each of the main characters and still maintaining that selfish and childlike ego that despots throughout history have all shared. Loki is quite pathetic, but when someone like this also has access to powers and abilities, it can combine for a deadly combination.

No performance outshines another. Robert Downey Jr. brings the raw brains, brawns and large ego of Stark so memorably portrayed in the first two Iron Man films, Mark Ruffalo, replacing Edward Norton, finds the conflicted nature of Banner and the fine like he walks with gusto, Chris Hemsworth channels the reserved nature of Thor, and Chris Evans brings back the heart and determination of Steve Rogers. One line in particular best describes Rogers approach to a situation. When told that Loki and Thor are like gods among men, Rogers, very matter of fact, responds, “There’s only one God, and I don’t think he dresses like that.” Rogers, a natural leader, isn’t swayed by all the fantastic things happening around him. He keeps his mind focused on the mission at hand.

Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner as Black Widow and Hawkeye also are amazing to watch. First appearing as minor characters in earlier films, the two have a bit of a history together, and despite not possessing any of the amazing powers of the others, can hold their own as efficiently. They both deserve to fight alongside the rest. Other performances, from Cobie Smulders, as Agent Hill, and Clark Gregg as Agent Coulson are also great. Smulders takes what would normally be an eye candy role and makes it a fully formed character who can hold her own against any adversity, and Gregg, having played Coulson in each of the previous films, is the silent catalyst that not only brings all the Avengers together but becomes the glue which cements all the parts into one formidable machine.

The Avengers works, because it took the best parts of each earlier film, and combined it into one major epic. I would contend that to truly appreciate the film, one must view each of the proceeding chapters, (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, and Captain America); much like you would if viewing a series such as Star Wars or Harry Potter. Though, frankly it isn’t necessary. I saw the film with my sister, who hadn’t seen any of the proceeding films, and she enjoyed it as much as did I.

Going in, I wasn't really familiar with the characters as I never read the comics. So I approached it with an open mind. The meter by which I judge most films is was it entertaining, and/or fun. With The Avengers, you get the best of both. It’s been a couple of years since I’ve seen a film that was as much fun to watch as The Avengers, a truly remarkable film.

Top Five Favorite Films: #4 Phantom of the Opera (2004)

All this week, I'll review my top five favorite films and explain how each came to be on the list. I may, at some future point, move to the top ten, but for now these will suffice. To recap;

#5 Back to the Future (1985)

#4 Phantom of the Opera (2004)

One of the stories that has been around for many ages, and told countless times, is the one of the mysterious teacher who lives in the shadows of the Paris Opera house, and helping a young woman discover her natural talents, while at the same time taking out anyone who would dare to stand in her way. Based on the “novel” by Gaston Leroux, the Phantom of the Opera is multiple stories in one. It is a forbidden love story, an action flick, a horror movie, and, as in the case of the Andrew Lloyd Webber film, a musical.

There have been many incarnations of Phantom over the years. Lon Chaney, the master of the movie monster, famously portrayed the villain in an iconic performance in the 1925 silent film that seems to more or less, have defined his career. Another great performance was in the 1943 version where the Phantom was played by the legendary Claude Rains (who also played the conflicted, and corrupt, Senator Joseph Paine in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington). Even Freddy Krueger himself, Robert Englund, donned the mask for a gritty and bloody horror take back in 1989. But the film I place on this list is the one released in 2004 with much anticipation, and yet not much acclaim.

From L to R: Chaney, Rains, Englund, and Butler

Andrew Lloyd Webber first developed his vision for Phantom of the Opera back in the 1980’s and it went on to be one of the most successful, and longest running shows in the history of the stage. The music of the show became iconic of the show itself, and as a result, today many of the earlier versions are compared to this one (which is rather unfair.)

Phantom begins in the year 1919 at the run down Opera Populaire (based on the Paris Opéra House) at an auction of the artifacts found throughout the building. The audience is told that many of the artifacts figured into the famous disaster, including the chandelier. The auctioneer commands that the chandelier be risen to showcase the repair work done on it, and as it is, the audience is transported back to the year 1870 when the opera house was in its prime.

Two men, Firmin (Ciarán Hinds) and Andre (Simon Callow) had recently bought the opera house with the help of a wealthy patron, Raoul, Vicomte de Chagny (Patrick Wilson) and all three were touring it. Throughout they heard rumors of a mysterious opera ghost but paid it little mind. The current feature at the company is the lead soprano, Carlotta Giudecelli (Minnie Driver, in an over the top performance). Much of the company finds Carlotta to be quite insufferable, as does the Opera Ghost, who prefers the younger and more natural talent of Christine Daaé (Emmy Rossum).

The Ghost or Phantom (Gerald Butler), through manipulation and intimidation, arranges it so that Christine can sing in Carlotta’s place in the current show. Christine does, to much fanfare and success. Raoul, recognizing Christine as a friend from childhood, is instantly taken by the young woman and afterward goes to her dressing room to court her. However the Phantom has other plans and has decided that the time is right to reveal his existence to Christine and take her back to his lair, which lies in the passages far beneath the opera house.

Christine had come to the opera house at a very young age, as her father, a famous musician, died when she was very young. She knows no life outside of the theater where she lives. Naturally, she is completely taken by the seductive nature of the Phantom.

Eventually, she becomes fearful of the Phantom as he begins to show signs of lust, vengeance, and, she learns, a thirst for blood that takes anyone who might be a person standing in his way. Throughout the film, Christine is torn between her childhood friend, Raoul, and her teacher, The Phantom, which builds to a final climax toward the end of the film that leaves the viewer, oddly, satisfied.

Phantom is not without its faults. The film can be long winded at times, and some of the scenes which were created for the film, and not in the stage show, enable this to happen. One scene in particular, where the Phantom and Raoul are fencing in the cemetery at the grave of Christine’s father in particular is a drag. Much of the acting is a big over the top in many scenes, (especially in regards to the aforementioned Carlotta) and Wilson doesn’t really give the character of Raoul much depth (but to be fair, the character is written as a bit of a priss and a dullard), and the big reveal of the Phantom’s face leaves much to be desired. However, the film overcomes these faults with a great take on character interaction, motivation, and some insight on human nature.

Phantom is really about the coming of age for Christine. Throughout the film, she is transformed from the innocent teenager, to a young woman who is willing to give up all that she is, and ever will be, for someone else. It’s about the ultimate sacrifices that many of us make for each other throughout our lives and the ramifications of our decisions, for good and bad.

What makes this Phantom great is the music. Not simply background noise, or even choppy and cheap setups which are found in many old musicals. The music of Phantom of the Opera has a way of reaching out and grabbing you in your sub conscious (as all great music does.) It’s no surprise, to me, that Webber was married to Sarah Brightman, who played the original Christine on stage, when he wrote the music. Only someone with a deep connection to someone else or a higher power could really dig deep to find that which transcends. It is, and will remain, his greatest work.

Phantom is not for everyone. But I have always found an unusual connection to it. It’s best not to labor on that point too much, but I will say that it’s one of those films you could find yourself identifying with, and appreciating with each viewing, and it is thoroughly entertaining.

Top Five Favorite Films: #5 Back to the Future (1985)

All this week, I am going to try to post my top five favorite movies. I am a fan of films. As far back as I can remember, I have enjoyed movies for the escape they can offer, and over the years, I have developed a mental criterion, as many of us do, when we want to pick our favorites. The films I choose this week, are not necessarily amazing films in general, nor are grand epics as determined by the Academy, or so called industry insiders. Rather they are the films that I enjoy immensely and ones that I go back to enjoy time and time again. I’ll review each film; pointing out how each made my top five list, as well as acknowledging their flaws. At the end, I hope you’ll get a bit of insight as to how I approach a feature film and, who knows? Maybe you’ll pop one of these in someday and find you enjoy them as much as I do.

#5, Back to the Future (1985)

Let’s start this list off with, what has to be my first favorite film. I remember first seeing this movie when I was very young. It was made a year after I was born and I believe I first saw it in the late 1980’s or early 90’s so it had been out for several years. I can remember being completely immersed in the story to the point where my brother and I built our own flux compasators in an effort to mimic time travel ourselves. (TRUTH: Several years ago we were cleaning our parents’ home and ran across these which provided a health laugh and trip down memory lane)

Back to the Future is the story of a teenager (Marty McFly, played by Michael J. Fox) in the mid 1980’s who befriends an eccentric scientist (Dr. Emmitt L. Brown, played by Christopher Lloyd in what has to be his signature role). McFly is a bit down on his luck, but like most of us at that age, has an ideal view of what he wants to achieve in life and how to get it. He is burdened, however, by the circumstances that life has dealt him. Dr. Brown, or Doc, as he is referred to, is also a bit of an outsider, and in order to escape the nature of the world he sees develops a time machine to travel throughout history. The two connect, I believe, because they are drawn to each other’s ideals and can identify with one another.

Doc, at this point in life, is an older man and wishes to see the future beyond his years. However, is gunned down before he can depart. McFly, in an effort to elude the gunmen, commandeers the time machine to simply outrun them, but instead travels back in time to the year 1955. Obviously, putting a teenager from the present (1985) to the past will present many challenges, one of which is his interfering with his parents first meeting, an event which can potentially destroy his entire existence.

In an effort to correct history, and get home, he locates the younger Doc Brown of 1955 and implores upon him to help. Doc is skeptical at first, but realizes that he is the only man alive that could potentially help, and being a student of science, and having a thirst for knowledge, realizes he can’t pass up an opportunity like this.

Naturally, the protagonists of the film are successful, but it is how the payout works that makes the film so interesting. It also demonstrates how our everyday experiences can shape our futures in ways that we cannot possibly understand. Every action we take, determines every action thereafter, and can change our lives in many ways.

Back to the Future is a dated film, ironic of course, and by watching it, you can clearly see the influences of the 1980’s. Brand names and attitudes of the 1980’s are clearly in force, with an emphasis on material wealth and objects, and it’s for this reason that it is dated. However, the film overcomes this with its heart. At the end of the day, it’s about a teenager, not clear about his place in this world, and is trying to make sense of it. (And how many of us haven’t been there?)

The best performance of the film is, by far, Christopher Lloyd as Doc Brown. Lloyd was able to craft a character that was a combination of many of the great minds of history into one solid character. Many talk of the like between genius and insanity, and it’s a line that Doc Brown walks each and every day. Ultimately, Doc Brown begins as a selfish individual, but realizes that he needs to help McFly get home, because without that, he can never hope to achieve time travel, and frankly, he seems to like McFly and wants to help him.

I would also argue that a great performance in the film belongs to Tom Wilson as Biff Tannen. Tannen is the ultimate bully. He bullied McFlys father throughout his entire life, had a desire for McFly’s mother, and felt that simply yelling or threatening anyone who stood in his way was the way to get things done. But, as all movie antagonists, Tannen finally gets his, and when it happens, it’s done in a way that makes sense and is completely satisfying. Bullies, as portrayed by Hollywood films, don’t get much better, nor cliché as Biff Tannen, and Tom Wilson was able to make that role as solid as it needed to be.

Tom Wilson also has a stand up comedy act which is simply AMAZING.

When released, Back to the Future was a major success, shortly followed by two sequels. The film was originally intended to be a standalone film, a fact which is made clear by watching the other two. Parts II and III are interesting films and ones which I enjoyed when I was younger (especially Part III) but, today, they pale in comparison to the original film.

Back to the Future is not a perfect film, but it is highly entertaining and fun to watch. The problem with films released today, is that many of them might be great movies, but they’re simply not fun, and sometimes that’s what we, as a public need. Back to the Future is a film that I’ve watched countless times over the years, watching it more than some of the other films of this list, and I have enjoyed each and every viewing.