Today I Watched: The World’s End (Edgar Wright, 2013)

The World’s End (dir. Edgar Wright, 2013)


Score: 8½ to 9− out of 10.


Today I Watched: The Night of the Hunter (Charles Laughton, 1955)

The Night of the Hunter (dir. Charles Laughton, 1955)


Score: 8 to 8+ out of 10.

Today I Watched: Paths of Glory (Stanley Kubrick, 1957)

Paths of Glory (dir. Stanley Kubrick, 1957)


Score: 7½ out of 10.

Today I Watched: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (Steven Spielberg, 1984)

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (dir. Steven Spielberg, 1984)


“In this follow-up to Raiders of the Lost Ark, Steven Spielberg creates an atmosphere of happy disbelief: the more breathtaking and exhilarating the stunts are, the funnier they are. Nobody has ever fused thrills and laughter in quite the way that he does here. Momentum has often been the true—even if not fully acknowledged—subject of movies. Here it’s not merely acknowledged, it’s gloried in. The picture has an exuberant, hurtling-along spirit. Spielberg starts off at full charge in the opening sequence and just keeps going, yet he seems relaxed, and he doesn’t push things to frighten us. The movie relates to Americans’ love of getting in the car and taking off—it’s a breeze. … This is one of the most sheerly pleasurable physical comedies ever made.” —Pauline Kael

Score: 8 to 8+ out of 10.

Today I Watched: Dressed to Kill (Brian De Palma, 1980)

Dressed to Kill (dir. Brian De Palma, 1980)


Score: 9− to 9 out of 10.

Today I Re-Watched: The Shining (Stanley Kubrick, 1980)

The Shining (European version, dir. Stanley Kubrick, 1980)


“When we see a flash of bloody cadavers or observe a torrent of blood pouring from an elevator, we’re not frightened, because Kubrick’s absorption in film technology distances us. Each shot seems rigorously calculated, meticulous, and he keeps the scenes going for so long that any suspense dissipates. … Over and over, the camera tracks the characters, and by the climax, when we’re running around in the hedge maze on the hotel grounds, the rhythmic sameness has worn us down. It’s like watching a skater do figure eights all night, or at least for two hours and twenty-six minutes. … It took nerve, or maybe something more like hubris, for Kubrick to go against all convention and shoot most of this Gothic in broad daylight. … There isn’t a dark comer anywhere; even the kitchen storerooms have a fluorescent boldness. But the conventions of Gothics are fun. Who wants to see evil in daylight, through a wide-angle lens? We go to The Shining hoping for nasty scare effects and for an appeal to our giddiest nighttime fears—va­porous figures, shadowy places. What we get doesn’t tease the imagination. Visually, the movie often feels like a cheat, because most of the horror images are not integrated into the travelling shots; the horrors involved in the hotel’s bloody past usually appear in inserts that flash on like the pictures in a slide show. … What’s increasingly missing from Kubrick’s work is the spontaneity, the instinct, the lightness that would make us respond intuitively. We’re starved for pleasure at this movie; when we finally get a couple of exterior nighttime shots with theatrical lighting, we’re pathetically grateful. As Wendy, trying to escape from Jack, opens a window and looks at the snowstorm outside, and then as she pushes Danny out and he slides down the snowbank, we experience, for a second or two, the spectral beauty we have been longing for. Earlier (in the film’s most imaginative, chilling scene), when Wendy looked at the pile of manuscript that her husband had been working on, she found only one sentence, ‘All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy,’ typed over and over. Well, all work and no play makes Stanley a dull boy, too.” —Pauline Kael

Score: 6½ to 7− out of 10.

Today I Watched: On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (Peter R. Hunt, 1969)

On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (dir. Peter R. Hunt, 1969)

“For me there’s no question that cinematically On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is the best Bond film and the only one worth watching repeatedly for reasons other than pure entertainment … Shot to shot, this movie is beautiful in a way none of the other Bond films are—the anamorphic compositions are relentlessly arresting—and the editing patterns of the action sequences are totally bananas; it’s like Peter Hunt (who cut the first five Bond films) took all the ideas of the French New Wave and blended them with Eisenstein in a Cuisinart to create a grammar that still tops today’s how-fast-can-you-cut aesthetic.” —Steven Soderbergh

Score: 8+ to 8½ out of 10.