Safety Not Guaranteed (2012)

 



Dir: Colin Treverrow
Writer: Derek Connolly
Starring: Aubrey Plaza, Mark Duplass, Jake Johnson

I saw this movie this past summer and it was quite the difference from the movie I'd seen earlier in the day -- Prometheus. However, I took to the small, independent, and heartfelt movie. It may also be because I love Mark Duplass in everything.

The movie is about a loner magazine intern who doesn't quite fit in with her surroundings, no matter what they might be. Plaza plays Darius with her usual acerbic wit, but the softer side of her was there, too. Her boss (Johnson) brings her along on his assignment to seek out the author of the 'Safety Not Guaranteed' ad (on the poster), and that's where we find Duplass as Kenneth, a slightly weirder loner, but one that Darius instantly connects with.

While the plot was a bit shallow--never diving too deep--the movie was enjoyable, especially the scenes betwen Darius and Kenneth. I was not as taken with Johnson's secondary plotline of finding an old love, but it makes sense with the themes of the movie.

The ending was probably the part that really got me. I liked the movie, but then the end had me grinning from ear to ear. It's not the year's best movie, but it might be its most feel-good. At least for me.

The Best: Mark Duplass. Because he's having quite a year, for good reason! See his other 2012 roster: Your Sister's Sister, Darling Companion, People Like Us, The League, The Mindy Project, Zero Dark Thirty.

 



Fact: The ad that the movie revolves around is a real ad that was run in a 1997 issue of Backwoods Home Magazine. It was a last-minute filler by a guy who worked at the magazine, and eventually circulated on television and the internet. In the movie, the original author of the ad makes a cameo as the first guy to open a PO box that Darius and her co-intern are watching.

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

Dir: Stanley Kubrick
Writers: Arthur C. Clarke (story, screenplay), Stanley Kubrick
Starring: Keir Dullea, Gary Lockwood, William Sylvester

This film was a rarity from my collection: I hadn't seen it when I purchased it. However, the blu-ray was sitting in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart for $5, I simply couldn't pass up that deal on a movie with such a reputation. That was a couple of years ago.

I finally picked it out of my collection to watch because Hurricane Sandy was descending on New York and my cable went out. My power and blu-ray player still working, I decided this would be the best time to settle in for the three hour film; it's not like I could go outside.

The movie is certainly an enigma, but watching it I understood everything that could be attributed to it. It was truly a a giant step for film innovation. The pristine shots of the spacecrafts from space are beautiful (like much of the film's visuals) and there would be no Star Wars or Alien space shots without Kubrick's 2001. In fact, I was amazed this film was made in 1968. The technology seemed so far advanced, and that's when I realized this was the first.

The film itself has an abstract story, but it's momentous to take in from the visuals to the music to the nearly philosophical aspect of questioning humanity. The dialogue is barely audible at times, but that's because it's not the point. While it may be hard to keep your attention because there's not much story happening, the images, production design, cinematography and directing kept mine.

I loved the iconic music over the man-ape throwing his tool into the air in the beginning and I also loved the shot-to-shot cuts in the room in Jupiter near the end.

The Best: Obviously HAL's meltdown is the most plot this movie has; my favorite moment in the film is a mechanic that Kubrick repeated and many others copied. When the astronaut is trying to get back onto the spacecraft with his friend and HAL won't let him in, he has to let the other man go and blast back into the spacecraft without his helmet. Such an intense scene would usually be paired with loud and bombastic music -- but it's all played in silence though the image vibrates with flashing lights and the actor flying across the screen. The silence made me hold my breath. It was beautiful.

 



Fact: HAL 9000 never once says, "Good morning, Dave," despite this line being one of his most recognized quotations. It is hard not to think about 2001 when watching many sci-fi movies, even this year, Prometheus' character David opens a computer and it greets him with "Hello, Dave."

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

The Devil Wears Prada (2006)

Dir: David Frankel
Writers: Lauren Weisberger (novel), Aline Brosh McKenna
Starring: Anne Hathaway, Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, Emily Blunt

[Editor's note: time to get this blog back on track!]

This film is one of those highly enjoyable flicks that never feels too corny--mainly because you've got great acting and a fun premise. Hathaway plays Andy, a burgeoning "serious" journalist who lands herself an assistant-to-the-editor job at Runway magazine (a stand-in for Vogue). She's out of her element: as colleagues clack around in their stilettos and throw their shiny hair over their shoulders, Andy wears clunky shoes and doesn't look like she believes in getting her hair cut. This set-up leads to meeting her boss, the Anna Wintour-based character of Miranda Priestly, played to Oscar-nominated level by Meryl Streep.

One of the reasons I like this movie so much is that I do see a bit of myself in it. When I first moved to New York, I had a job interview at Conde Nast, though not for Vogue, but for another fashion magazine. I, too, was severely out of my element, and though I've moved on to another fashion-centric job, I am still  unable to keep up with my colleagues. I mean, I don't have a giant closet at work from which to handpick designer clothes. I digress.

The movie shows Andy choosing her career over her relationships, high-end over bargain bin, and many other classic tropes. However, Hathaway is charming and Streep is wonderfully menacing and they are both fun to watch even though it can be predictable. Each scene and montage works to pace the movie just right and I found myself laughing out loud all over again in rewatching the DVD.

The weakest element was the supposed romantic storylines of her boyfriend played by hum drum Adrian Grenier and a journalist flirt played by a not very charming Simon Baker. But they're pretty peripheral, and their scenes go by quickly. I understand their need, but always wanted to get back to the work scenes between Andy, Miranda, and Emily (played by Emily Blunt).

The Best: can anybody best Meryl Streep? It's hard to, and I loved the scene in which she asks Andy to get her daughters the next unreleased Harry Potter book--a revenge move for having overheard a private conversation.

Fact: Helen Mirren and Kim Basinger were both considered for the role of Miranda. But again, would either of them been able to best Meryl?

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)

Dir: David Fincher
Writers: Stieg Larsson (novel), Steve Zaillian
Starring: Rooney Mara, Daniel Craig, Christopher Plummer, Stellan Skarsgard

Having seen Stieg Larsson's novels all over the subways a couple of years ago, I did some research into the brightly-covered book and learned that it might be something interesting to read. If anything else, I'm a sucker for cultural phenomenons--I begrudgingly read the Twilight novels, after all. So I read all three books pretty rapidly, watched the Swedish films, and though I wouldn't call the books or the Swedish movies my favorites, I do think Lisbeth Salander is one of fiction's greatest characters.

When I heard Hollywood would be adapting the book, I was sure to be disappointed with their directing choice, since the book was so mainstream, and they'd probably want to make it palpable to a broad movie-going audience. I almost jumped with joy when they named my favorite gothic auteur, David Fincher, as director. He's directed some of my favorite films of all time, like Seven, Fight Club, and The Social Network. If there's something Fincher readily understands it's human darkness and high-tension atmosphere.

I liked Rooney Mara as Salander, who admittedly played Lisbeth completely differently than the stellar Noomi Rapace in the Swedish versions. The extras on the blu-ray show how closely she worked with Fincher on getting this character across on screen - with the clothes, make-up, sideways glances, demeanor, and telling camera angles. One of my favorite angles was in the scene after Lisbeth is raped by her government-appointed guardian, after she has washed away the pain, and she sits smoking, thinking and the camera zooms from above and goes over her until her face is up-close, but upside down. She's hatching a devious plan.

And though Lisbeth is the epitome of darkness, Mara still plays her with vulnerability just under the surface. She's intelligent, offputting, and cold but she can still feel sadness, pain, and even love. Daniel Craig also impressed me as Lisbeth's foil--the straight-laced, kind of metro journalist. When I think of Craig, I think of Bond, and he easily shed that persona here with his somewhat bumbling ways. When he gets scraped by a bullet, leaving a slight gash, he is frightened and needs Lisbeth to take care of him. Bond would have kept running after the bad guy, and save the girl for after.

All in all the film impressed me more than the Swedish film and even the book. The story might have been hard to follow at times, but Fincher still had me. I hope he gets to direct the sequels!

The Best: Rooney Mara. She redefined Lisbeth and carried the entire movie; you couldn't look away when she was in a scene. I'm eager to see her in her next role...I hear she's already filmed a Terrence Malick flick with Ryan Gosling (though I'm sure that won't come out any time soon) and she's currently filming mere blocks away in Central Park with Steven Soderbergh for something called The Bitter Pill.

Fact: While filming a scene in a diner, the cast and crew were surprised to find out that Ellen Nyqvist, daughter of Michael Nyqvist, the first actor to play Mikael Blomkvist, was working there as a waitress while attending school. Upon finding out, they wrote in a few extra lines for her, allowing her to interact with her father's successor, Daniel Craig.

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

Bridesmaids (2011)

Dir: Paul Feig

Writers: Annie Mumolo, Kristin Wiig

Starring: Kristin Wiig, Maya Rudolph, Melissa McCarthy, Chris O'Dowd, Rose Byrne

I remember seeing this movie in the theater last year on opening weekend with a group of my best girlfriends, all of us giddy at our recently engaged friend choosing us to be her bridesmaids. We all laughed to the point of crying, and I noticed many other movie-goers were busting up as well. I left the theater thinking, yes, finally a good comedy that isn't filled with a bunch of man-boys who refuse to grow up (Apatowian film culture).

Last weekend I watched it again with the one bridesmaid who didn't come with us that first time, and hadn't seen it yet. And though it was perhaps my tenth time watching the film in the past year, I still laughed to the point of hysteria.

Annie (Kristin Wiig) and Lillian (Maya Rudolph) are best friends--and Annie is floundering in adulthood with a failed bakery, creepy roommates, and the worst 'friend with benefits' situation ever (except for the fact that he is played by, and therefore looks like, Jon Hamm). Lillian just got engaged to some nothingburger and has asked Annie to be her Maid of Honor. Cue the hilarity.

The group of bridesmaids, even called by Lillian at one point as a "stone-cold group of weirdos," brings on the laughs from the engagement party to the wedding. Rose Byrne's treacherous Helen serves as a threat to Annie, but comes around by the end. Melissa McCarthy's Megan steals every scene she's in.

The Best: Kristin Wiig, hands down. Not only for her wonderful script, but for her acting. The airplane scene alone in which she becomes inebriated midflight and thinks she sees a colonial woman on the wing? Priceless. (I also have to mention that her impression of a penis had me gasping for breath.)

Fact: The woman sitting next to Kristin Wiig on the plane, who talked about having a dream with Annie in it, is the co-writer, Annie Mumolo. And Melissa McCarthy's air marshal is her real-life husband.

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

13 Going on 30 (2004)

Dir: Gary Winick
Writers: John Goldsmith, Cathy Yuspa
Starring: Jennifer Garner, Judy Greer, Mark Ruffalo, Andy Serkis

On Saturday I met my friend Jaime for brunch and when we realized that the L train was not running into Manhattan from Brooklyn, we decided to spend the afternoon on the couch watching movies. While I was scanning my DVD collection, I mentioned, "Well, you've probably already seen 13 Going on 30..." and to my astonishment, she had not. I popped in the DVD and gleefully jumped onto the couch next to her, to watch her watch it for the first time.

I want to say that this movie was critical to my adolesence, but since it came out when I was 21-years-old, I think that statement is probably pushing it. There are many things wrong with the 'rom-com' genre, but I absolutely love some of them--usually the least offensive ones to my tastes as a woman who likes good comedy.

13 Going on 30 is probably one of the most sugary rom-coms in existence - it stars Jennifer Garner as Jenna Rink, a girl who at 13 faces all those awful mean girls, and then wakes up at age 30 in a swanky apartment with her dream job--but finds out all the things she wanted at 13 aren't as glossy as they seemed. Garner is absolutely perfect in her role; I may even use the word delightful.

I've loved Garner since the tv show ALIAS, and this movie made me love her even more. She plays the 13-year-old brain in a 30-year old body so well! Add in perennial sidekick Judy Greer (who really needs a starring role already, she's so good) and  a romantic interest played by Mark Ruffalo (hubba hubba - I am not ashamed), I'm smiling the whole way through!

The plot sure is sweet, but I enjoy the lighthearted every once in a while. Garner and cast are pretty convincing, and in the land of the woeful rom-com, it's 10 stars. When it was over, Jaime exclaimed, "Why haven't I seen that?!" in the way that one does when she's a rom-com lover that hasn't seen a good one in a while.

Best: Garner, in every scene. There are so many good scenes to love, too. The scene where she wakes up as a 30-year-old, the scene where she makes an entire elitist party of magazine snobs dance to Michael Jackson's "Thriller," the scene where she has a sleepover with other 13-year-olds as a 30-year-old and teaches them that "love is a battlefield," or the scene where she finds her massive walk-in closet--I can't choose!

Fact: The girl who plays young Jenna Rink is currently on my favorite new television show, Revenge, and also played the younger Jennifer Garner in Ghosts of Girlfriend's Past--an example of a truly terrible, no good rom-com.

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

Reprise (2006)

Dir: Joachim Trier
Writers: Joachim Trier, Eskil Vogt
Starring: Anders Danielsen Lie, Espen Klouman-Høiner, Viktoria Winge

While packing for Paris, I looked at my DVD collection scanning for something that Jesse and I could watch together. I picked Reprise because Jesse grew up watching foreign movies with his father (it's Norwegian), and there are a few important sequences that happen in Paris that I wanted to rewatch. On our third night in Paris, after three days of constant walking and exploring and reveling in the nightlife, we chose to get into our comfortable hotel bed and watch the movie.

The film centers on two best friends, Phillip and Erik, who are writers. The film opens with both of them dropping their novel manuscripts in a mailbox in Oslo, Norway. From that moment the viewer jumps to an imaginary sequence (narrated) about their impending fame from being intellectual writers with published novels, to the reality set six months after that fateful send-off. It's an interesting premise, and the characters and setting of Oslo really guide the film through it's many plots and subplots.

What's most relevant among these plots is the major theme (the titular subject) that sometimes we'd like to do things over. That perhaps we don't have regrets, because through no fault of our own, something disastrous lay in the path we had set for ourselves and we can't go back. One character tries to adjust to his new path, the other tries to repeat everything as it was when it was 'good.' It's definitely a universal feeling, to want things to turn out differently--but, sometimes it simply doesn't.

It's not the best film in the world, but it's an interesting film from a young filmmaker. It finds influences in Jean-Luc Godard's French New Wave style and even Jean-Pierre Jeunet's more updated slick directing. But though it has many elements that sometimes collide over the narrative, I love it. It's sometimes frenetic, sometimes slow, but I'm always curious as to where the story and the characters will go next. The movie may have its flaws, but it's successful. I probably love it more because of it's weird nuances. And I'm looking forward to Trier's next endeavor.

On a sidenote, the subject matter of the film, and perhaps even the way it is filmed was particularly inspiring to me when I saw it a couple of years ago on a random Netflix recommendation. I was then working on my first attempt at a novel (NaNoWriMo), and I thought back to this movie frequently and believe it did motivate me and influence the narrative in certain ways.

The Best: There's really so many great elements in the film, from the interesting voice-over narration and quick cuts to the performances. I suppose the sequence I enjoyed the most was the heartbreaking 'reprise' trip to Paris that Phillip takes with his ex-girlfriend Kari, played with alien beauty by Viktoria Winge. It made me shudder with relatable emotion.

Fact:  In the movie, there is a reclusive Norwegian author both Phillip and Erik idolize and want very much to meet and follow in his footsteps. In the movie his name is Sten Egil Dahl, and apparently he's based on Norwegian writer Tor Ulven. Ulven gave only one interview in his career, but he is regarded as one of the most important writers in Norway during the eighties and nineties.

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

Before Sunrise (1995)

Dir: Richard Linklater

Writers: Richard Linklater, Kim Krizan

Starring: Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy

This movie is a conversation. If you're interested in fast-paced or action-packed movies--this movie is not for you. Young, American 20-something Jesse (Hawke) is on a European rail when he meets Céline, a beautiful French girl. They talk. Everybody at some point has felt that energy when your conversation with a person just goes on and on and there's no pause or stalling. Those conversations are quite honestly some of life's best moments, aren't they?

And so we get to witness Jesse and Céline's. He asks her to spend the day with him in Vienna before he flies back to America, and she accepts even though she's on her way back home to Paris via the train. What ensues is a beautiful, spontaneous series of activities with Jesse and Céline as we listen in on their conversation--oh, and Vienna, Austria is the background.

Their characters seem so genuine and they are funny and flawed but I want to be their friends. I want them to be together. By the end of the movie, they decide not to share their phone numbers and addresses but because their connection is so strong they make a pact to meet back at the Vienna train station in exactly six months. The ambiguous ending leaves it all up to the viewer: do Jesse and Céline rejoin and continue their burgeoning romance? Does one make it and the other doesn't? Do neither make it out to Vienna? It's almost a Rorschach test for how idealist or realist you are as a person. I always thought they'd meet back up.

The Best: The chemistry between these two characters just oozes off the screen! I love them both and they are both played wonderfully by Hawke and Delpy.

Fact: Linklater based the film on an evening he spent with a woman in Philadelphia. That just makes me think he probably took the Amtrak, on a line I'm very familiar with, and it amazes me when I think about how un-magical Philadelphia and the Northeast Corridor rail-line is in comparison to Vienna, Austria. The backdrop really adds to the movie's magic.

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

Belle de Jour (1967)

Dir: Luis Buñuel
Writer: Joseph Kessel (novel), Luis Buñuel, Jean-Claude Carrière
Starring: Catherine Deneuve, Jean Sorel, Pierre Clémenti

I remember seeing this movie as a teenager, and though it's not particularly racy, it was still about something taboo to me at the time. It was also my introduction to one of my favorite French actresses, Catherine Deneuve.

The film centers on Séverine (a name I've come to love, it's so French!), the frigid and elegant housewife to Pierre, a handsome surgeon. They look the perfect couple, but Séverine has a lot of inner turmoil regarding her sensuality - she brushes off her adoring husband constantly, but dreams of being dominated sexually. So, she does what anybody would do and decides to become a prostitute--but only during the day! Thus, Belle de Jour is her name.

Directed by Buñuel, who was famous for working on psychological and surrealist films with Dalí (Un Chen Andalou - I'll never forget that eye-slicing shot!), the plot definitely fits with his asthetic. He loves exploring the inner mind and the reasons people do what they do. The movie is not abstract but has abstract moments of daydreams, quick cuts, and silence as Séverine ponders her existence. It still has a very '60s feel, and I enjoyed it for that, but also because I was intrigued by this female central character and her motivations.

The film looks great, and that also extends to the beautiful Deneuve, whose profile is mesmerizing. I recently saw a screening of the 1965 Polanski film Repulsion and she was in attendance--she's still gorgeous. The DVD was just released on Criterion, and I bought it with good reason since I know I'll be watching this movie several times over and make new observations each time.

The Best: Deneuve, the center of the film, whose seemingly vacant stares evoke so much more to the viewer than to her clueless husband.

Fact: "Belle de jour" is a day lily in French, a flower that blooms only by day, as Séverine is available only during the afternoons. "Belle de jour" is also a sort of pun, as it reminds us of "belle de nuit," an euphemism for prostitute.

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

(500) Days of Summer (2009)

Dir: Marc Webb
Writers: Scott Neustadter, Michael H. Weber
Starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Zooey Deschanel

When I first saw (500) Days of Summer, I was fully prepared to write it off as a quirky rom-com without much to it. However, it surprised me in its clever storytelling and assessment of modern romance. More interestingly, the movie acts as a sort of Rorschach test.

The anonymous narrator says from the beginning: "The is a story about love, but this is not a love story."

The relationship of Tom and Summer spans 500 days, and because it is told through the eyes of Tom (with varying amounts of sad moments and funny, imaginary asides), the audience inevitably will root for him. Upon rewatching this, I realized how it really resonates with my generation more than it might with others. It's more than just the Smiths references - it's the fact that Tom builds a relationship on a girl liking "the same stupid crap" he does (Chloe Moretz playing his all-knowing little sister spouts truths throughout the movie).

Many relationships these days begin because of shared interests, but I get the feeling that finding a mutual, obscure band to bond over was not such a prevalent romantic inspiration until these more modern years. And in another part of the movie Tom blames greeting cards, pop music, and movies for leading him astray about romance - and that may be the most universal moment in the whole movie.

Because though Summer embarks on a sort-of relationship with Tom, from the beginning she tells him she does not believe in love, she does not want "anything serious," and when he asks her what they are doing later into their time together, she doesn't give in and tell him what he wants to hear. They continue on, and she breaks it off with him in a scene where she calls herself the Sid to his Nancy - the scene happens early on, and it's hilarious.

The writer Neustadter apparently based this in part on his own relationship, and cringingly calls her out in the opening credits. But the breakup scene happens early on because the movie carries it's audience back and forth between day (1) and (500). We see the promising beginnings to the bleak post-breakup days.

The movie is a Rorschach test because people opine so differently on who they relate to or side with. Some people come away with thinking Summer is a complete and total bitch and Tom is their dream guy. The movie does a good job of making these characters three-dimensional, because I don't think you can make any black-and-white decisions about these two personalities. And Summer, I believe, is so misconstrued as "the bitch" to some people, I can't grasp it - do people hate her character because they are Toms that have been done in by a pretty girl before? Do they not see all of her verbalized views of the non-relationship? Did they also watch The Graduate the way that Tom did in the movie?

Summer is not the villain here - there are no villains - but it's quite telling if someone watches this movie and makes her out to be the bad guy. That's someone that can't see what's right in front of them at all. They are missing the social cues. And Tom, for much of the time, does too. He's the romantic, she's the realist - and that's all there is to it. I think people get a little too caught up in the gender roles we normally see in film, and this movie turns it around.

Fortunately, that's what makes the movie layered and interesting. Not everybody who falls in love are meant to be together forever. Also, it's the prettiest I've ever seen Los Angeles, the editing is perfect, and the script entreats you to consider your own romantic dealings. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel play the main characters wonderfully, and Webb (previously a music video director) makes a strong and beautifully shot feature-length directorial debut. (And bonus points for a GREAT soundtrack!)

The Best: Zooey's all blue-eyed beauty and adorableness, but Joseph Gordon-Levitt knocked it out the park with his emotional wavering between happy-dancing and all-out depression. (He also "knocks it out of the park" during some choreography in a hysterical song-and-dance number!)

Fact: I had noticed all the blue in the movie (particularly the outfits of all those dancers!), but apparently it was a director decision to do so in order to bring out the color of Ms. Deschanel's very blue eyes (which is very hard to miss!).

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)

Rear Window (1954)

Dir: Alfred Hitchcock
Writers: John Michael Hayes (script), Cornell Woolrich (short story)
Starring: James Stewart, Grace Kelly

My father introduced me to Hitchcock films when I was in middle school, starting with Pyscho. I keenly remember the small video store in Kansas we would frequent, with its bulky, brown plastic VHS covers. I loved horror films, and Hitchcock was definitely a master, so I thank my dad for the introduction.

The other night I was hanging out with two girlfriends pondering what to watch when one of them mentioned a classic, maybe a horror movie. "Do you have any Hitchcock?" she asked.

Do I have any Hitchcock!

I didn't want to go with the obvious Pyscho, nor what I consider his masterpiece Vertigo, so I asked if they'd seen Rear Window. Neither had, and I got to enjoy the movie again with two people who had rarely, if ever, seen Grace Kelly on screen.

Rear Window's brilliance can be surmised simply by how often its premise is replicated in modern thrillers. But none can match the Hitchcock pieces together this mystery, with cunning shots and clues only for the viewer's eyes.

James Stewart plays a photojournalist recently injured and holed up in his New York apartment for six weeks with a broken leg. The window in his apartment overlooks a whole community that loves leaving their shades open - explained easily by the summer heat. He begins to suspect one of his neighbors of murdering his invalid wife and keeps his binoculars trained on the apartment looking for clues. The other characters in the complex add sympathy (Miss Torso, Miss Lonelyhearts), and also become conversation points for his girlfriend that stops by frequently.

His girlfriend (Grace Kelly - probably mostly just playing herself), is a Park Avenue society girl who is unbelievably beautiful and wears designer gowns just to sit in his apartment. Craggy Stewart remarks on how she's not fit for the life he intends to lead of photographing wartorn villages across the globe. But she believes his story about his neighbor, and soon starts doing all his dirty work outside of the apartment.

The movie works slowly, but that's what I love about Hitchcock and classic films - movies these days act like people don't have any sort of attention span. And I understand that a lot of people don't, but there's no need to do away with slow-building tension! There's time to think, which is necessary in this type of storytelling - you have all the clues laid out for you, how will you make your conclusions? Do you agree with Stewart? Do you agree with his detective friend who doubts him? My friends and I debated throughout watching, which added more fun to viewing it with people who hadn't seen it.

The truth and the culmination are a thrilling payoff, and certainly deserved it's Best Screenplay Academy Award nomination. Stewart and Kelly are great, and the directing superb. One of the best Hitchcock films.

The Best: Kelly's entrance scene. I've never seen an actress' beauty illuminated more brilliantly than when Kelly's face comes into focus on screen, first from a side angle then full-on from the front - meant to feel like a dream Stewart's having, and actually wakes up to. Kelly's make-up, beauty, and costumes in the film are all breathtaking!

Fact: There's a sheen on everybody's faces in the movie, since it's supposed to take place during the middle of the summer in New York. It all seemed very realistic, but upon further investigation apparently it was also all real heat: one-thousand arc lights were used on the set to simulate daylight, and once during the movie the amount of heat they produced set off the set's sprinkler system!

Rating: ********* (9 out of 10)