1923 - (16) Heksen

I saw screenshots from this movie in an encyclopedia as a child. Never thought i was ever going to watch this though. Also, this is a part Danish. I'm a Dane, making this even more interesting for me.

Title: Heksen, Häxan, The Witch, who knows...
Director: Benjamin Christensen 

Year: 1923 

Runtime (My version): 87 mins.
Seen: 2009

How i got this: Archive.org, and I was extremely surprised to find this there.

Plot Outline: This is a pseudo-documentary, part shock-movie, that describes how people saw witches as something very real in the old days, showing dark rituals and interrogations, and even a nunnery running amok. All of this being wrapped in a frame narrative, telling us how all of this crazyness was probably caused by prejudism, fear and ignorance.

First impression: I really have NO idea about what this movie will be like.
But on second thought: There was NO way I could have figured out what this would be like beforehand.

General comments: Sometime in the future I will have to watch a movie called "Pink Flamingoes" it is supposedly made to shock people. Now, this movie must have been kinda' like watching "Pink Flamingoes" back in 1923. The scenes are very surreal and a lot of crazy outfits and decorations makes this movie borderline disturbing, and in any case very unusual even today. The acting in this movie is somewhat secondary to the details of the masks, outfits and models of the various demons and rituals. I find it hard to judge this movie because it is so unlike anything I have ever seen, and probably ever will see.

In any case this MUST have caused quite the stir when it was released. It involves ass-kissing, human sacrifice, and scenes that would make Freudian people run amok in "I told you so".

Music: I really can't remember.

Pictures: These are what mainly carries the movie, and they manage to do so by being well-shot, shocking and obscure.

Essentially this is: Undefinable, provoking and generally hard seeing the point in.

Why you should see this: This is so obscure, that it might be work bragging about if you are the artsy type.

Why you shouldn't see this: There really isn't that much to carry the story.

Honorable mention: The demon with the tongue in the womans nightmare. He is genuinely peverted. Really, he is a dirty dirty guy.
 

Final rating: 62/100, yeah, this was not really for me.

 

BTW: I don't think anybody will be able to put this movie in a box.

1922 - (15) Nosferatu

And here comes the first movie that I was actually a bit afraid to watch.

Title: Nosferatu
Director: F.W. Murnau 

Year: 1922
Runtime (My version): 94 mins. Apparently, there are some different versions out there, I believe mine was a bit shorter, but it nonetheless felt complete.

Seen: 2009

How i got this: Archive.org

Plot Outline: A young man from Bremen is sent to help an obscure count in the Carpathian mountains with some juridical problems. He discovers that his host is a vampire, flees back to Bremen, but is followed by the count, who know sets his sights on the young lawyers wife.

First impression: This is scary, I bet it's scary.... (I saw some vampire-themed episode of a series called troldspejlet as a kid, and never really recovered from the shock.)
But on second thought: This was scary back in the day, must have scared people shitless.

General comments: Oh yeah, this was a nice horror movie, and being as old as it is, it didn't manage to scare me. There aren't that many characters in the movie, but that really helps you to feel the story up close and personal.

The acting is good, especially Max Schreck is doing an awesome job portraying the vampire Nosferatu. Right from the beginning this movie makes you feel that something is wrong, and when Hutter, the protagonist, goes to see count Orlock aka Nosferatu, things take a violent turn for the worse.

To make this movie really work, a lot of special effects are used, and it just kicks ass. I wouldn't like to have been forced to watch this in 1922, and then having to ride my bicycle home through a dark forest.

Music: Mine had a soundtrack that I think is newer than the movie itself, a kind of spooky distorted horror-jazzy theme, but for me it worked excellent.

Pictures: Very very well-shot movie, and on top of that the special effects are clever, and not overdone.

Essentially this is: What made you scream in the 1920's

Why you should see this: Because this does everything right.

Why you shouldn't see this: Although this was made in 1922, it maybe should have been able to scare me a bit. Also, if you are 5 years old, this might cause a heart-attack.

Honorable mention: The scene where Nosferatu stands up stiff in his coffin, like if he was made of wood. Now that must have haunted some peoples dreams the last 90 years.

Final rating: 85/100 A true classic, go see this.

BTW: Nosferatu will return in a newer version. In maybe 10 years or so... I'll probably get the review ready in 2022...

1922 - (14) Nanook of the North

From protothriller to protodocumentary, huah!

Title: Nanook of the North
Director:Robert J. Flaherty

Year: 1922
Runtime (My version): 79 mins, in perfect agreement with the book.

Seen: 2009

How i got this: Torrent, but it is also on the Archive, so it does seem perfectly legal.

Plot Outline: We follow Nanook on his everyday exploits in the cold and unforgiving plains and ice shelves of the north. He lives a life that may end tomorrow, being totally dependent upon his ability to feed himself and his family.

First impression: Eskimoes are boring
But on second thought: You had me at hello!

General comments: I saw this on a train, and right from the start, this movie had me smiling and just staring in awe. Some people dismiss this movie by pointing out that some scenes are staged. But for me it is impressive to catch a seal with a harpoon whether you are asked to do so or not. And I don't think any of the scenes in this movie shows something that wouldn't take place from time to time out there on the ice. Nanook is more badass than most protagonists. He even beats Bear Grylls AKA Survivorman from Discovery Channel if you ask me.

 

This movie just feels so genuine, it made me feel lucky to be able to watch it. It is a snapshot of a time that will probably never come again, perhaps it is best that way, but one can't help but feel a slight sting of remorse when you see Nanooks apparent joy over his way of life.

If this was on TV today I would watch it almost over anything else that was on.

Music: The music is secondary in this movie.

Pictures: Beautiful, thrilling and touching. Nice quality on my version too.

Essentially this is: Quite a surprise, and a must see.

Why you should see this: Because it's a must see.

Why you shouldn't see this: If you have a fear of eskimoes, this might just be best to avoid.

Honorable mention: Nanooks wifes, yes he had two. They would have to trust him so bad.

Final rating: 88/100 Made me glad I started this project.

BTW: Nanook vs Chuck Norris... Nanook just might stand a chance, after all he allegedly slayed several polar bears with just his spear.

1922 - (13) Dr. Mabuse, Der Spieler

German protothriller is next on this long menu.

Title: Dr. Mabuse, Der Spieler (Dr. Mabuse, the Gambler)
Director: Fritz LAng
Year: 1922
Runtime (My version): 195 mins. 3½ hours, as the book also says.

Seen: 2009

How i got this: Torrent, I believe. I was not able to trace this copy, but it seemed legal.

Plot Outline: The movie follows the exploits of a young detective, as he tries to bring down the criminal mastermind Dr. Mabuse.

First impression: This is too long. I am not going to like this.
But on second thought: An okay thriller, but still a long movie.

General comments:So, this is the thriller anno 1922, it is better than Les Vampires from 1915, but still has a lot of things in common with its forebear with regards to people using disguises and operating under alter egoes. It is, however, clear to see how the movie as an artform has matured greatly in 7 years, and what we have in this movie is suspense being built up, and some secrets remaining secrets for quite a while, maintaining the viewers interest in the movie. The antagonist in this movie is both charismatic and cunning, but doesn't seem very real or scary. It seems to me that so far, none of the movies in this book has made me forget that this wasn't reality, and really make me believe thorougly in the story. It all still just has a strong feel of being staged.

Music: Yes. Well, I don't remember it as something special.

Pictures: Fine, some special effects in the end, not going to blow your mind.

Essentially this is: Thriller 0.2, where Les Vampires was thriller 0.11 beta.

Why you should see this: Because this is good and fresh for its time.

Why you shouldn't see this: Thrillers come more thrilling today.

Honorable mention: The protagonist. He really does have many alter egoes.

Final rating: 65/100 It didn't really get me.


BTW: Nudity in this one too. Yes, anything to make money, even then.

1922 - (12) La Souriante Madame Beudet

More of the french stuff.

Title: La Souriante Madame Beudet (The smiling Madame Beudet)
Director: Germaine Dulac
Year: 1922
Runtime (My version): 38 mins. The book and imdb.com says 54 mins. I don't know what to say to that. My version told the story described in the book, and had all the elements described in the book as well, so maybe my version was a bit fast forwarded? Who knows?

Seen: Summer 2010

How i got this: Archive.org

Plot Outline: A lady is bored and frustrated in her marriage with her dominating and indifferent husband. She ends up trying to kill him, but fails even at that.

First impression: This is short - ergo will I be able to sit through it no matter how bad it might appear.
But on second thought: This was not for me, not even for me in 38 mins.

General comments: Supposedly this is a ground breaking movie, that deals with the issues of patriarchal society, and shows us the feminine side of such a society. I say that the messages this movie has to tell us have already been told in movies like "The Phantom Carriage" and perhaps "Way Down East" and "Within Our Gates".

Then if this movie is not groundbreaking in its message it has to be groundbreaking in some other way, or really good at telling us its story. And this movie fails to do or be so. The actors are doing an okay job, the music is plain and not something you notice. It's just a plain movie, nothing else.

Music: It's there, and that's about it.

Pictures: Some creative use of pictures on top of pictures fading in and out, but nothing that spectacular.

Essentially this is: French, the sad and kinda boring way.

Why you should see this: Because you might learn to make out attempted murder when it comes around.

Why you shouldn't see this: There might just be something funnier to spend the evening doing...

Honorable mention: The way the husbands co-worker/business partner is bullyed by his wife.

Final rating: 50% This is not what i would call good, nevertheless it was the early days of film, and I don'r want to be too hard on it.


BTW: French... Lucky for them they have the Tour de'France...

1921 - (11) Orphans of the Storm

An evening with lots of french decadence by good old D W...

Title: Orphans of the Storm
Instructor: D. W. Griffith
Year: 1921
Runtime (My version): 2 hr 30 mins approximately..

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: Torrent, no copyrights I know of. This is on the archive too...

Plot Outline: Two girls, born under different circumstances grow up in the same middleclass family. They lose their parents to the plague, and one of the "sisters" ends up blind. They go to Paris to seek a cure for her, but end up caught in the maelstrom of the French Revolution.

First impression: Too long, too melodramatic and besides, France is boring. I am not going to like this movie.
But on second thought: Well, D W got me again.

General comments: This is a very good movie. It is also a D W Griffith movie, for better or worse. It is melodramatic, and possibly over-acted, but it manages to remain interesting throughout, and though not as epic as Intolerance, the sets and the scenes are extremely impressive and detailed.

The movie makes you feel the indignation the Average Joe in pre-revolutionary France must have felt, due to the indifference and extravagance shown by the aristocracy.

The acting is good, especially by the Gish sisters. I hope to see more of Lillian Gish although I am done with the D. W. G. movies...

Music: Well fitting, sometimes dramatic.

Pictures: Crazy costumes, palace extravaganza and angry mobs, this movie has it all, and portraits all of these very well.

Essentially this is: Another D. W. Griffith movie.

Why you should see this: Because what it sets out to do, it does quite well.

Why you shouldn't see this: It somehow just feels a lot like any other D. W. G. historical movie to me...

Honorable mention: The evil manly woman, who bullies her son. Man that's one nasty old hag.

Final rating: 65% Yes, it is good and impressive, but the freshness is somewhat lacking.

BTW: France is still kinda boring... And the next movie is French... 

1921- (10) The Phantom Carriage

Yeah dudes, I'm 1% there.

Title: Körkarlen (The Phantom Carriage)
Instructor: Victor Sjöström
Year: 1921
Runtime (My version): 1 hr 46 mins

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: Torrent, no copyrights I know of.

Plot Outline: Alcoholic David Holm dies New Years Night, and his soul is picked up by the phantom carriage. Whose driver is the reaper of souls. With him, David Holm is confronted with the evil deeds he has done through his life, and all the suffering and death he has caused.

First impression: Might be spooky.
But on second thought: Yet another example of how old movies can carry a message as relevant today as ever.

General comments: Adressing issues as alcoholism, abuse, responsibility and forgiveness this movie throws up some heavy balls, but manages to catch them all safely again. The mood in this movie is sad, almost turning desperate at times, and Victor Sjöström delivers an excellent performance as David Holm.

Seeing how one man can cause sorrow to the lives of so many people makes you wonder how some people can be as emotionally detached or simply ignorant as is the case with David Holm. In the scenes where the full extent of the consequenses of his livelihood becomes clear to him, one can only wonder how he keeps sane.

The overall message of this movie is, that it's never too late to make a change, and that is something that should be a relief and an inspiration to all of us.

Music: Eerie, sometimes going on spooky.

Pictures: This movie is brilliantly made, with lots of spectacular visual effects, with pictures laying on top of eachother and that kinda' stuff. I think the right word may be double exposure... The scenery and decorations fit the mood of the movie well, and overall, the movie is visually very succesfull.

Essentially this is: A reminder that our actions have consequences, influencing those around us.

Why you should see this:  Nice theme and special effects, what's not to like?

Why you shouldn't see this: The ending might be too romantic and forgiving for some of us, only some.

Honorable mention: The part where David rips his jacket to pieces out of sheer spite. Oh! And the part where he cuts through the door!

Final rating: 74% This is a good movie, but still I feel something is missing to create a complete masterpiece.

BTW: If alcohol was presented as a new drug today, it probably would be outlawed...

1920 - (9) Within Our Gates

Presenting the earliest preserved movie made by an african american.

Title: Within Our Gates
Instructor: Oscar Micheaux
Year: 1920 (although the movie says in its intro that it was made in 1919)
Runtime (My version): 1 hr 15 mins

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: Torrent, no copyrights on this one as far as I know. No copyrights stated in the movie itself either.

Plot Outline: A black teacher from the south travels north, to raise money for the school educating black people she works for. We follow her quest to raise money for the school, as well as get a glimpse of her past.

First impression: None really, didn't know what to expect.
But on second thought: Ok, well, thats just one less movie to go...

General comments: Dealing with important issues and viewing a problem from the eyes of numerous stakeholders, this movie sets out to adress the problems with suppression of the black part of the population in early 1900 america.

The story and acting however is nothing that really strikes me as something amazing or well done, and to me, this movie stands out more as an achievement for a black movie-maker, and a step on the right way to racial equality, than it does as a movie that I enjoyed watching. That being said, some scenes effectively shows the problems and wrongs done by both the white population against the black, and even displays how the black population in some cases where held back by members of their own community.

The history with this movie being lost for 70+ years, then suddenly reappearing in Spain is interesting, but does not make the movie itself any better.

The whole case with black people and white people is still relevant today, and I even find myself thinking ef the term black people is okay for me to write. In that sense, the movie is still relevant, as is the history surrounding it. However, in the end, I judge the movies in this book a lot based on my gut feeling, and this movie overall didn't keep the pace it set out in some scenes.

Music: No sound.... Boooooring.....

Pictures: Nothing special.

Essentially this is: A historically important achievement rather than a movie for the ages.

Why you should see this: It might be of interest to you.
Why you shouldn't see this: This is hardly even a good movie if you ask me.

Honorable mention: The scene with the black priest really was one of the high-points in this movie for me.

Final rating: 57% Maybe I'll change my mind in the future if I ever watch it again, but for now....

BTW: This whole prejudice thing may seem over-discussed and over-used. But still, I myself can't help being prejudice in some situations although I try to fight it. I wonder if there is ever any means to make it go away?

1920 - (8) Way Down East

Onwards onwards! With even more D.W.

Title: Way Down East
Instructor: D.W. Griffith
Year: 1920
Runtime (My version): 2 hrs 25 mins

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: Torrent, no copyrights on this one as far as I know. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Plot Outline: Anna Moore (Lillian Gish) is a young and naive girl who is tricked into a false marriage. Her mother dies soon thereafter, and her baby is born weak, and soon dies. She is now an outcast, and with no home, or hope to make a future for herself in the place she grew up, she goes looking for a job in the country.

She finds a good job in a good family, falls in love, but her past is not going to let her off the hook just yet.

First impression: This looks so boring.
But on second thought: But almost made me cry.

General comments: This movie was a real sleeper to me, meaning that it looks so darn ordinary and dull, yet suddenly makes me feel all kinds of stuff. For a defenition of the term sleeper, check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_%28car%29


Lillian Gish is so unbelievably good in this movie, not only as an actress, her character is all that is good and selfless in this world. To see her fall to pieces when she is betrayed by her first love, or when her future catches up with her is simply heartbreaking. You actually want to interfere in this movie. This is one of the movies ever that has affected me the most, when i saw it. Her performance is what carries this movie, and she outshines the rest of the cast.


This is all nice and fantastic, but the movie tries to do multiple things at once. Amongst all the drama going on, there is a lot of seemingly pointless slapstick humour going on. I really don't see how this fits into the rest of this movie, but it's there, and thats just the way it is. Maybe it was to make sure that everybody who went to see this movie back in the day got something they liked, I dont know.


The ending really got my heart pumping. Filming it must have been unbelievably risky.

The movie actually made me want to be a better person. I really felt inspired to stop judging people too hard, and to always look on what is on the inside.

Music: Fits nicely into the movie.

Pictures: All good, the very last part of this move sports some almost unbelievable pictures.

Essentially this is: A story of love, and the worlds cruelty.

Why you should see this: Because it just might make you feel something.
Why you shouldn't see this: Weel, you might have to be a bit sentimental to really enjoy this one.


Honorable mention: Richard Barthelmess is quite excellent as the young David Barlett, who falls in love with Anna.

Final rating: 80% I liked this one.

BTW: Lillian Gish suffered frost-related injuries in the right hand, lasting her entire life, from the shots on the icy river.

1919 - (7) Broken Blossoms

And now for some social realism, D. W. Griffith is back

Title: Broken Blossoms
Instructor: D.W Griffith
Year: 1919
Runtime (My version): 1:28:49

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: Archive.org remains my friend it seems.

Plot Outline: A young man from China travels to London to spread the message of piece to the "sons of turmoil and strife" the British. Upon arriving in London he soon finds himself living from day to day and deteriorating in opium joints. However, this is to change when he meets Lucy, a young girl abused by her violent father, whom she lives with. The two people end up being lights in a dark and uncaring world to one another, but how can a fragile flower cope in the distorted world of man?

First impression: Yeah ok, I'll give it a shot.
But on second thought: This really touched me.

General comments: London is a bleak and heartless place in this movie, people care little of one another, and have distorted views, thinking themselves selfless and caring when they are abusive and selfish. The working class is, as it probably was back then, living lives with no prospects for the future, occupying small imprisoning apartments. The film oozes of hopelessness and anubility to change your fate.

While not as sharp and directly believable as the social realism of today, this movie deals with important issues, and carries direct messages to its viewer. The story and message is one that is as valid and important today as ever. The actors are delivering top performances, and even though you may not like them all of them, they have something very human and believable in them. Lillian Gish is amazing as the abused and selfless girl, who deserves none of what is coming her way. She really excels in this role. The other actors deliver pretty good performances in this movie, but nothing out of the ordinary.

The buildup towards the ending is effective, the climax is well done, and overall, this movie works quite well.

Music: Good, lots of organ.

Pictures: Well, some scenes are very beautiful, where others are nothing out of the ordinary.

Essentially this is: A film relevant today, and though many new movies handles the same subject, possible even better than this one, it deserves credit for being a first-mover.

Why you should see this: This is a beautiful drama.
Why you shouldn't see this: It has aged some, and I am not sure this is a true essential in its genre.

Honorable mention: The decorated text screens. Nice to see something new once in a while.

Final rating: 70% Despite the fact that this undoubtedly is a good movie, I would not call it a real masterpiece.

BTW: The boxing scenes kinda remind me of the Rocky movies...

1919 - (6) Dr. Caligari

Next entry, a surrealistic and allegedly scary movie.

Title: Das kabinett des Dr. Caligari (Dr Caligaris cabinet.)
Instructor: Robert Wiene
Year: 1919
Runtime (My version): 1 hr. 11 minutes, finally a short movie.

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: This is on the internet archive i mentioned before.

Plot Outline: A man and his friend goes to a fair, where a somnambulist is exhibited by an iconic man called dr. Caligari, not only is the somnambulist a somnambulist, he is also able to foretell the future. The friend asks when he is going to die, and gets the answer "Tonight". Throw in a kidnapping, a mad doctor, and a mental asylum, and you got yourself a movie that made people scream in 1919.

First impression: This movie looks unique and special. I look forward to seeing it.
But on second thought: The style and plot of this movie is a bit tiresome.

General comments: The settings in this movie are all made in a surrealistic way, where both shapes and lighting gets distorted. This gives a unique feel to this movie. The plot, albeit not really catching me, is quite original, and credit must be given to the twist in the ending.

The camera is stationary, making this movie a bit like watching a play, only with faster changing of the background. But what a surreal atmosphere this play has. What the movie sets out to do, it does good, but I think its niche might be rather narrow, and to be frank, this was not a movie I enjoyed in particular.


That being said, the movie deserves its applause for its accomplishments , and the frame narrative works quite well, along with the surrealistic framework of the flashback, that constitutes most of this movie.

Music: Nice, sometimes eerie music, that really does help the movie.

Pictures: Interesting, an unlike anything I'd seen before, with nice special effects at points.

Essentially this is: One of those movies that only really appeals to some of us.

Why you should see this: As an early bold experiment with the movie medium, this deserves some attention.
Why you shouldn't see this: The movie just isn't that good.


Honorable mention: The decorators for this movie. In a time without LSD, this movie is quite the achievement.

Final rating: 58% It just doesn't talk to me, not really.

BTW: A somnambulist is a sleepwalker. Yep, fancy pantsy word.... Really artsy...

1916 - (5) Intolerance

D. W. Griffiths' second entry on the list! Let's see if he's still doing a poor job of being politically correct...

Title: Intolerance
Instructor: D.W Griffith
Year: 1916
Runtime (My version): Just below 3 hrs.

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: I think this was a torrent? Maybe I got it from the same website as Les Vampires actually, but I can't remember.

Plot Outline: Using multiple parallel storylines, this movie tells us exactly how much misery and human tragedy intolerance in one form on the other can bring. With parallel storylines, this movie deals with genocide in France, the fall of Babylon, a family man framed for murder and even a bit with Jesus himself.

First impression: I liked the first Griffith one, but this might be boring...
But on second thought: I just got my mind blown by a movie that's more than 90 years old.

General comments: If you thought Birth of a Nation was epic, then prepare to get your mind blown by Intolerance. This impressive even by todays standards. Some scenes are so massive that literally over a thousand extras must be involved. Everything is insanely well done, and it shows that this was a movie that broke all records as far as budget and models goes. A city wall was built in hollywood, just to make this movie. A city wall so big people could walk on it, and lay siege to it. They just don't do this kind of stuff anymore.

The stories are quite involving, especially the story of the former criminal, who starts a family, just to see his past catch up on him. They supplement eachother, and serves the director well in making a suspenseful movie by cross-cutting between them. I feel that the french part is kinda lacking in some ways, but that might be mainly because the two main stories are so well told.


Also, this must have been the first movie to introduce a couple of things. Let's take for example the siege tower. I wonder how many movies have a siege tower that isn't made entirely on computer... This movie has a real one of course. Also, this movie shows people losing heads in swordfights, brutal! Finally this movie may just have been the first to do the "car chasing a train in order to overtake it and get to a crossing in front of it" scene.


This is not just a good story, it's also eye-candy, and should have been quite capable of blowing peoples minds back in the day.


This has to be seen to be believed.

Music: Nice music in my version, fits the story quite well.

Pictures: Cutting edge, one has to wonder just how expensive this was back then.

Essentially this is: An example of how a silent doesn't have to be primitive as far as pictures and props go.

Why you should see this: This brings a new meaning to the term epic.
Why you shouldn't see this: Well, even if you dislike silents, this should be given a try.


Honorable mention: All the extras! A lot of people were injured during the filming of the battle scenes, and the resulting scenes are just brilliant. Apparently being on camera made people do silly things even then.

Final rating: 84% Mainly because of the grandness of Griffiths vision for this movie. Go see!

BTW: Oh, and theres Nudity, partial at least!

1915 - Les Vampires (4)

Ooop, here comes a long one. Actually this a series of shorter films all contributing to making a big picture.

Title: Les Vampires
Instructor: Louis Feuillade
Year: 1915
Runtime (My version): 440 minutes (7+ hours!), according to the book, I think my version is actually like 5-10 minutes shorter.

Seen: Spring / Summer 2009

How i got this: I got this on a video site hosting abandoned movies, took me forever to find btw. Was thrilled to find it online, as the dvd was like almost a hundred bucks.

Plot Outline: Phillipe Guérande, a parisian reporter combats a sinister gang of criminals known as The Vampires.

First impression: This is so long, how on earth am I going to sit this through?
But on second thought: This is such a positive experience, albeit long, it kept me interested.

General comments: Okay, this must have been the first movie to do a lot of things. Like having people shoot a cannon out of an apartment, having people climb drain pipes and a lot of other cool stuff. It really continued to amaze me with its creativity. Lots of crazy plans in this one folks. This is guaranteed to make you laugh at points, just because it does everything with such a fresh attitude.

You never know what's coming and that made me like this series. The plot, albeit maybe a bit thin at points, is entertaining and fresh.

The settings are nice, and fits into the story. Strangely though, there almost doesn't seem to be anyone on the streets. This is probably meant to make the viewer feel that all of Paris is suffering and afraid of the crimes commited by the vampires.


As the series progresses, the episodes become better and better, so be prepared to give this an extra chance when watching.

The villains are brutal in Les Vampires, they kill without mercy, but are met with no mercy either, this actually is quite a heartless movie when dealing with villains/ the enemy. Maybe this fits nicely into the context of France being involved in WW1 at the time. I don't know if I'm right, but it seems plausible.


About the acting, well, it wouldn't work in a movie from today, but back then looking into the camera at certain intervals seemed ok. I don't know if it's for the good or worse, but it's there...


Oh, and there's a poisenous pen! Yeah I know, it's so fresh!


Music: Nice piano music.

Pictures: Many a cunning stunts in this one is what makes the pictures stand out, apart from the stunts, they are quite ordinary.

Essentially this is: A firstmover in many ways, I think, and a humourus, yet a cold and merciless series.

Why you should see this: This was so fresh!
Why you shouldn't see this: 95 years can be a real killer of freshness, maybe also in this case for some of you.

Honorable mention: Mazamette, he made me laugh and smile many times, maybe he's not for everyone, but I liked him.

Final rating: 70% Appealing and creative, but still not perfect.

3 - The Birth of a Nation

Number 3 coming in hot!

Title: The Birth of a Nation
Instructor: D.W. Griffith
Year: 1915, big jump up from number 2 (1903)
Runtime (My version): Long, I am not sure, explains later. The movie should be around 3 hours though. And I think mine was too.

Seen: Spring 2009

How i got this: Was able to watch it on youtube along with some pretty entertaining comments. Got a version from a torrent too, thought it might be abandonedas well...

Plot Outline: Epic tale of how wars make friends kill each other, how the civil war in America influenced everyone and how negroes cant be given too much influence if society is to remain intact. Seriously, that's what it's about!

First impression: All this civil war and KKK must make a weird but entertaining movie. The screenshots in the book made it all look very interesting actually.
But on second thought: WTF? This effing movie just made me root for the KKK. What the effing F? Apart from that fact, nice movie!

General comments: When it comes to making a solid movie, D. W. Griffith must have been the man back then. Seriously, the battle scenes are huge! Secondly, the camera techniques are amazing. And even more when compared to the older entries in this book! This was the most expensive movie ever made at the time as far as I'm informed, and it shows. There are scenes with hundreds of people fighting. Really expensive impressive stuff.

The movie is long, yes, but it is bearable as the plot moves on in a tolerable pace most of the movie.

Settings are great, beautiful scenery. Especially funny are the "Historical Facsimiles" or what ever they were called. Short entries in the movie, stating that the following scene is an exact replica of what really happened back then. Talk about selective representation of reality man.

The plot is good, well told, and develops well, when you disregard the countless directly offensing portrayals of coloured people. The suspense in the end is really genuine, it had me going and this surprised me very much. Especially considering how old the first two movies of this book had looked.

The acting is generally good, but very dramatic. This may take some getting used to, but ends up working fine with me.

The movie does not look almost a hundred years old to me actually. Worth watching.

Music: Nice music, catchy and quite traditional, I thought I heard some old american traditional tunes in there as well...

Pictures: Really beautiful and impressive, approaching amazing.

Essentially this is: A fatastic movie with a wrong, wrong message. Especially considering that people might very well have been even more receptive of its message back in the day.

Why you should see this: An early truly epic movie, this is not to miss out on.
Why you shouldn't see this: If you are very easily manipulated, pass out on this one, you might just end up wearing sheets and pointy hats along with the local gang of heroes.

Honorable mention: In this movie, boys make out when they die in war. The dying scene with the two boys being way too close for comfort made me consider stop watching the movie in the train. Seriously. It was just so embarrasing. And I know that being gay is okay and all. It just freaked me out. Sorry.

And oh yeah, that silly guard, see the movie, you'll know what i mean. Silly silly man.

Final rating: 84/100% - This has undeniably shaped the movie industry, no matter how wrong the message of the movie may be.

2 - The great train robbery

Been a long time, but here's number 2.

Title: The great train robbery
Instructor: Edwin S. Porter
Year: 1903, although my book says 1902
Runtime (My version): 11:51

Seen: Christmas 2008

How i got this: I believe that this too is an abandoned movie. Meaning noone has the copyrights for it. I got my copy using a torrent.

Plot Outline: A band of men hijacks and robs a train, passengers included, and flees the crime scene, only to have the local authorities chase after them.

First impression: I loved westerns as a kid, this is going to be great.
But on second thought: This does not feel like a western to me. Nor does it feel like a movie.

General comments: Okay, so in this movie we have bad-guys as we know them from westerns. They rob and kill, and have a cunning plan. This is ok, no more. I have a hard time seeing why this movie could be ground-breaking, as the plot is simple, but unexplained, and it can be hard to get what actually is going on. I know how this sounds, but try seeing the movie, then reading the explanation of what is going on, and see what i mean.

The camera-angles are quite stationary, and the film seems less dynamic because of that. However, there is one scene that is shot atop a moving train, which must have been quite a feat back then.

Additionally, the setting isn't actually what i would call western-like. This is not a good thing, especially when this according to the book is supposed to be the mother of all westerns.

As for the ending scene; whats the big deal? Nothing in the movie makes this ending scene relate to the rest of the movie as I see it, and therefore it loses impact.

Music: No music in my version.

Pictures: Quite dull really, simple shots, except for the atop-a-train scene.

Essentially this is: A pseudowestern, that albeit short and simple manages to be confusing.

Why you should see this: This is the first western, that has to mean something, to someone...
Why you shouldn't see this: It really is no big movie, in any way.

Honorable mention: The dancing man in the saloon.

Final rating: 46/100% - The way I see it, this could have been done way better even in 1902.

1 - A trip to the moon (1902)

Okay, so as this is the first movie in the book, this will also be the first reviewed.

Title: A trip to the moon.
Instructor: George Meliés
Year: 1902
Runtime (My version): 11:48 (although some youtube versions are longer, and feature additional ending scenes. These versions are 12+ mins long. Finally the book states that this is approx. 14 mins long.)

Seen: Christmas 2008

How i got this: I believe this is an abandoned movie. Meaning that noone has the copyrights for it. I got my copy using a torrent. This is also accessible on youtube.

Plot Outline: A group of scientists goes to the moon using a cannon. They meet hostile aliens, battle it out with them, and return to the earth as heroes.

First impression: This movie looks extremely cool, especially for its time.
But on second thought: This is still 1902, and the movie-media has a long way to go in many, many ways.

General comments: This movie must have blown peoples minds back in the day. This is the official first Sci-fi flick, and I honestly don't believe that anything even remotely close to this had been done before this was released. The word epic might just be applied to some of the scenes in this movie. This movie really is innovation at its finest. Especially i find the scenes where the cannon is molded very beautiful and ingenuous.

With that being said it still shines through that this movie is quite the dinosaur. The movie is narrated all the way through, no lines here, and there is only one camera-angle on every scene. This movie manages to get people to the moon, meet aliens, and back to earth in less than 15 minutes, but I still got kinda bored in the opening scenes! This does not mean that A Trip To The Moon is a bad movie, but it indicates that there was still much experience in movie-making to be had at the time.

As to the plot there really isn't that much to say, as the main quality here really is the special effects. The story is a bit childish in my opinion, and you really don't get to care about the characters at all.

Music: This is just the basic tam-ta-tam piano, nothing here to raise the tiny hairs in the neck.

Pictures: This is as i said awesome for its time, and what makes this movie a classic.

Essentially this is: A thin story covered in the most amazing special-effects seen at the time.

Why you should see this: This is movie history, and it is short, so you won't end up feeling this was a waste of life.
Why you shouldn't see this: Special effects, story, acting, everything is done better today, so if you want to spend the evening getting your mind blown, this is getting kinda tame.

Honorable mention: The girls on line-up at the launch, man would they look tame in a nudie-mag today.

Final rating: 55/100% - the story is too flimsy for me.

So it begins...

So, I have decided to document my way through the 1001 Movies you must see before you die. I got the book as a christmas-gift, and immediately decided that this was an opportunity for me to broaden my cinematic horizon.

So far this really has been my own private project, with me keeping scores in my book, but I decided that others should have the opportunity to follow me on my journey. Also, making this blog will enable me to really look back and see what I thought years ago when I watched a movie. But perhaps most importantly of all, it might put me in contact with people on the same quest as I am. This thing is very likely going to take me more than a decade to accomplish, and I look forward to recieving your comments and recommendations along the way. Also, this is my first english blog, so here´s to a fruitful cultural journey for you and me!

I will focus more on reviewing the movies than on outlining the plot, as this is meant as my supplement to the book 1001 movies.

Welcome aboard.