Lee Pfeiffer - The Complete Idiots Guide to Classic Movies

Table of Contents

To my daughter Nicole, the best person I know (even if she doesnt appreciate the merits of On the
Beach and Thunderball). I hope to be just like her when I grow up.

Welcome to The Complete Idiots Guide to Classic Movies. I suspect the common consensus is We need another guide to classic movies like we need sequels to Ishtar and Howard the Duck. However, the fact that you are reading this means you certainly have a desire to familiarize yourself with great movies. Perhaps you simply have a passion for Hollywoods heyday, or perhaps your new boss is a movie fanatic and you dont want to sidetrack your career if you are asked at the next Christmas party to name all of The Magnificent Seven. (Note: The one guy you cant think of is Brad Dexter.) Although the format of this Complete Idiots Guide differs from most others, the overall objective is the same: to provide a wealth of facts in an interesting and entertaining way. Its the perfect companion for those of us who always found Cliff Notes to be too intense and hoped someone would come out with an abbreviated version.

This book covers movies produced between 1915 and 1969. Why end the listings in 1969? My publishers theory is that films dating from these eras have indisputably withstood the test of time and can rightfully claim their place among the true classics of the cinema. I initially disagreed and argued that there are plenty of films dating from later years whose pedigree would be beyond reproach. I was then informed that if this book is successful, we would then do a second guide to more recent films. As a devoted capitalist with the backbone of a caterpillar, I immediately folded like a cheap camera in the hope that this book shall beget Son of The Complete Idiots Guide to Classic Movies.

One of the fascinating aspects of modern society is peoples pre-occupation with lists. We love themindeed, it seems as though there is a list made for every conceivable interest. Generally speaking, these lists that people obsess over apply to rather inconsequential subject matters (for example, The Top 100 Moments in Sports, the 100 Sexiest Movie Stars, Elizabeth Taylors Top 100 Husbands, and so on). You rarely find those nifty daily tear-away desk calendars devoted to Albert Einsteins Favorite Mathematical Equations or The Classic Campaign Quotes of Walter Mondale. Its rather ironic that in an age in which many people cant form opinions about the people making life-and-death decisions at the federal government level, you can cause a near riot among men in a bar by debating who was the coolest cast member in the original Oceans Eleven.

Marlon Brando often derided the medium of cinema and the notion that any film could be considered a work of art. Despite his genius as an actor, Brando was certainly proven wrong on this issue. (After all, he did star in that remake of The Island of Dr. Moreau.) Film can most certainly be considered art. More than any other medium, it has the ability to affect the emotions of untold millions of people, making them laugh, cry, or jump with fear. A great movie transcends its status as an entertainment vehicle for mass audiences and can affect individuals on a deeply personal basis. Each of us can recall the movies that matter most to us. They bring back specific memories of times long gone, some happy, some sad, and many bittersweet. Many of us not only recall with whom we saw a certain film but where we saw it as well.

Many years ago, film criticism seemed to be relegated to the upper crust, lifted pinky crowd. That largely changed in 1979 when film critics Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel began to broadcast what would be their long-running weekly TV show devoted to critiquing new film releases. Ebert and Siskel reflected populist sentiments in the films they chose to review. Important movies were analyzed but so was every dead teenager horror film. With the arrival of the Internet age, countless people have become de facto film critics, posting their opinions on websites and blogs, some professionally and many more simply for personal satisfaction. This has brought a liberating aspect to film criticism and has allowed for more discussion of films that were often ignored because mainstream critics did not consider them worthy of attention.

Thus, we come to the contents of this book. There is no such thing as a standard listing of classic films, nor should there be. The greatest challenge I had was trying to decide on the titles for inclusion. There are certain films that one would reasonably expect to find in any book relating to classic cinema. However, as I decided to break the book down by genre, I found it necessary to give significant representation to films in each categorya process that was more difficult than I had expected. I was not concerned if certain directors, producers, or stars appeared with disproportionate frequency. I judged the films on their individual merits and did not look to include or exclude any specific personalities. Thus, certain legendary names in movie history are not represented in this book. As I limited the listings to actual feature films, this excluded The Three Stooges, whose best work was seen in short films. Similarly, greats like Abbott and Costello were omitted simply because I did not feel any of their individual films merited inclusion. I also did not include documentary films because few have enjoyed widespread exposure from the eras covered.

Some well-regarded titles still rank as good movies, but somehow seem to not resonate with the importance they once did. Others were excluded because their vast success and popularity still doesnt mitigate their status as bad movies (for example, Demilles 1956 knee-slapping remake of The Ten Commandments). If all critics agreed on the same basic choices for classic films, there wouldnt be a need for more than one book analyzing them. Therefore, I have tried to think outside the box and include a number of quirky, less obvious choices. The omission of a film does not mean I do not see merit in it. Is Kurosawas Ikiru a more important film than Frank Perrys little-seen The Swimmer? Undoubtedly, yes. However, as the latter film has few defenders, I was swayed by the desire to champion it here. I did not include any film simply because it might be expected to be found here. Some movies deemed as classics are the equivalent of taking a dose of medicinethey may be good for you, but somehow theyre not much fun to experience. Thus, I offer no apologies for excluding the admirable but glacially paced A Man For All Seasons at the expense of including Jerry Lewis wacky-but-inspired The Nutty Professor.

By breaking the films into genres, it has allowed me to recognize films that stood out within their individual subject matters. In the case of the horror and science fiction categories, this allowed me to include films that were derided as schlock during their initial release but have proven to withstand the test of time and have influenced many other films that followed. Thus, the presence of The Blob and several of the horror movies made by Britains Hammer Studios. You can take me to task on this, but if youre willing to be brutally honest with yourself, you know youre more often in the mood to watch The Abominable Snowman of the Himilayas