Mr. Holmes (2015)

Mr Holmes was a pleasant surprise. Ian McKellan is a fantastic Sherlock. The film is very thoughtful and touching. It follows an aging Sherlock, looking back on his final case. The film goes through his process of memory recovery. But his memory is failing and it is deeply affecting to watch a great mind in deterioration and then to watch an old man evolve. It lacks the glamour that we've become accustomed to in the most recent adaptations of the detective (Benedict Cumberbatch and Robert Downey Jr.). It lacks the brilliant intricacy of the cases in those stories, but rather this is about solving his own case. What it lacks in flash it more than makes up for with emotion.

All the President's Men (1976)

After seeing Spotlight last year, I had to watch the original journalism thriller. And I was not disappointed. Journalism is tough work. It's not glamorous. But it's important. Redford and Hoffman as Woodward and Bernstein are both excellent. The story unfolds in such a way that keeps the audience on edge throughout. The nitty gritty of the politics behind the Watergate scandal is fascinating. I also love where it ends, right at the beginning of the uncovering of the truth, not hashing it all out. I didn't realize it would end so abruptly, but it leaves a lot to typewritten postscript. It perhaps shows the scope of the investigation and the amount of effort and dedication that the Washington Post put into this investigation. Solidly acted, interesting and important.

Gone With the Wind (1939)

Let's say it's a 5 of respect. Because there are some incredibly epic things about this movie. It is THE epic--on a scale that matches the grandeur of the classical old South. It's all about big production value. The film is technically brilliant. And watching this movie in this day and age, you can't ignore how iconic the film has become. But no one wants to hear pure praise.

It is about ostensibly about Scarlett O'Hara's love life, but it is really a portrait of the old South. The film is charming. If you find antebellum racism and slavery charming.  What I guess I'm trying to say is that while I can appreciate the cinematic value of the movie, the story is kind of offensive with our contemporary hindsight. Of course, to provide an accurate depiction of the South, you can't ignore slavery. However, the depiction of slavery is not indicative of 19th century sentiments as was probably intended; but rather it is reflective of contemporary 20th century sentiments, which were very negative though they probably didn't think so at the time. Racism remained a problem through Jim Crow all the way to 1939 when the film was made and on to the present day. We always think that we've made progress, but it moves at a snail's pace and with hindsight we can see how our progress is stalled. I think it is interesting to analyze the film as a primary source on America in the 1930s rather than as a secondary source on 19th century American South (thanks to Professor Mason's History and Film class).

Also, I saw this on a ten hour flight. That is the optimal time to watch a four hour movie--when you are trapped and have nothing to do but watch movies. You don't even have to set aside a giant block of time.