The Grapes of Wrath

1940.
#21 / #23
Winner of 2 Academy Awards

The Joads lose their Oklahoma farm during the Great Depression and make the arduous worker to California to become migrant farm workers.

Eddie: This is one of the bleakest movies on the list. It's black and white cinematography has more charm and sunshine than the story or any of its characters, and that's barely any sunshine to begin with. Henry Fonda does a good job playing Henry Fonda, looking like a hurt puppy while staring past the camera. The real gem is Jane Darwell, who plays Ma Joad. Her character holds the family together, and her performance holds the film together.

One thing I took away from the movie is a sense of perspective. If this is an accurate depiction of the Great Depression, which I'm sure it is, then the so-called Great Recession is nothing more than a rainy day in June compared to the decade-long hard times of the 1930s. I mean, I've faced unemployment, but I've never had to bury my grandfather on the side of the highway.

Sarah: This, like NETWORK, is a film that is just as relevant today as it ever was. Sure, things are not nearly what they were in the 30's, but how can someone watch this film and then say that unions are bad?

This film is a showcase of masterful performances all across the board (Ma Joad was my favorite) so if you just focus on that, maybe you can watch this movie without it sucking away all of your energy and hope.

Why You Should See It: Ma Joad packs up her mementos, choosing which to keep and which to leave behind. She says so much in this moment without any dialogue.

Wuthering Heights

1939.

#73 / Unlisted

Winner of 1 Academy Award.

The housekeeper at Wuthering Heights tells a traveler the story of Heathcliff (Rex Downing and Laurence Olivier) and Catherine (Sarita Wooten and Merle Oberon) and their lifelong relationship. Heathcliff was an orphaned Gypsy boy who gained wealth to win Catherine's heart, and Catherine was a rich girl who married a wealthy husband, Linton (David Niven).

Eddie: WUTHERING HEIGHTS reminded me a lot of the 1998 film version of GREAT EXPECTATIONS. Even though the first hour drags its feet, the movie delivers a great heartbreak story. The Heathcliff-Cath love story is up there with Rick and Ilsa and Alvy and Annie as one of my favorites. HEIGHTS had the misfortune of being released in 1939, so I think it got lost in the shuffle of the other huge movies released that year.

I don't think I had ever seen Olivier in a non-Shakespearean role, so it was nice to see him exercise a little more leeway with his character. Both he and Oberon did a great job. Oberon, in particular, finds all the nuances between the two sides of her character - spoiled, rich princess and vulnerable sweetheart. (Reminded me of someone I know.)

Sarah: Can you find a more tortured, brooding love story than Wuthering Heights? No, you can't. It is one of my favorite books, so I was really excited to see how the film adaptation handled it. This version has some pretty awesome moments, including our "Why You Should See It moment," as well as the closing shot. A great portion of the dialogue is straight from Bronte's masterpiece, so the script is powerful and heartbreaking.

All that said, I think this movie is due for an update, and I never say that about the classics. The film is so condensed that the story seems rushed and unnatural. The old-timey acting style turns the film to melodrama. I think if given more time, the film could really explore everything from passion to the crazy, ghostly obssesion. Why isn't this a mini-series? Ohhhh Colin Firth as Heathcliff! Make my dreams come true BBC!

Eddie: Ask and you shall receive. Andrea Arnold is currently directing an adaptation of the novel. Also, there is no shortage of Wuthering Heights adaptations, the most recent including a 1998 British version, a 2003 MTV modernization, and a 2009 PBS version.

Why You Should See It: In the scene where the candle flickers, Heathcliff stands outside the door, listening to Catherine describe why she hates him so much. Then she admits, "And yet, he's more myself than I am. Whatever our souls are made of, his and mine are the same. And Linton's is as different as frost from fire... Ellen, I am Heathcliff."

But Heathcliff has already gone.

Citizen Kane

1941.

#1 / #1

Winner of 1 Academy Award.

CITIZEN KANE tells the life story of newspaper tycoon Charles Foster Kane from the point of view of a journalist trying to uncover the meaning behind Kane's dying word, "Rosebud."

Eddie: I saw this movie for the first time when I was in the eighth grade and AFI released its initial list. Upon first viewing, I thought it was vastly overrated. Rosebud is a sled. Big deal, right? Wrong.

Rosebud is a MacGuffin. The real story is Kane's egomania and complete self-betrayal. (How stupid of me.) The film's complexity is a testament to the air-tight screenplay by Orson Welles (who was only a year older than I am now when production started) and Herman Mankiewicz, and it's a testament to Gregg Toland's dynamite cinematography. He uses deep focus, and my eyeballs explode with joy.

Sarah: I'm still under the impression that this movie is overrated. Sorry, Eddie. I mean, yes, it's complex and it's beautiful, and film school people use it as their bible. But to me, it is not very fulfilling. The movies that wow me the most are the ones I could watch over and over and find new meaning. Movies that seem new every time because even though I know every line, I'm lost in them all over again. I see why it's a masterpiece, but is it really anyone's favorite?

Why You Should See It: The ceilings. Or the scene where Kane barges into his wife's bedroom after she's attempted suicide. You decide.

The Best Years of Our Lives

1946.

#37 / #37

Winner of 7 Academy Awards.

THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES chronicles three veterans returning from combat in WWII. One soldier comes home to a family that he hardly recognizes, another to a wife he barely knows, and the third (Homer) returns home having lost his hands. They meet on the return flight home, and their lives intertwine as they re-adjust to civilian life.

Sarah: Though the movie is long, and a bit slow paced, it was rewarding. I was most impressed with the performances, especially the man who played Homer (Harold Russell). The man who played him wasn't an actor, but a real-life war-amputee. This added a lot of honesty to the movie. His performance is so inspiring that he won two Oscars for it.

The film touched on a lot of issues - angry vets who feel betrayed by the people they fought forand the loved ones who were forced to build a life without them. However, it didn't dive deep enough into any one topic. Alcoholism and post-traumatic stress is hinted at, but danced around. The movie never fully goes there.

Still, it was a sensitive and beautiful film, that's worth checking out.

Eddie: I enjoyed the movie, even though it's one of the heaviest ones we've seen so far. It was made right after the war, and one of the lead actors (as well as the director) were actually in the war, so it's pretty real. The movie doesn't let up. Besides a few drunk sequences, it's wall-to-wall seriousness, which was taxing on us as we watched the nearly three-hour film. (It took us three sittings to get through it.)

The film was shot by Gregg Toland of CITIZEN KANE fame, and he brings with him his mastery of both deep focus shots and black and white photography. In those ways, BEST YEARS embodies what is great about movies from this era (the 30s and 40s). Its deliberate pace and carefully composed shots reveal a story that is layered and complex, yet highly insightful, evocative, and compelling.

One of my few complaints is that the film is very neat. Its ending ties up all the loose ends. The only thing missing is a Porky Pig iris and a "That's All, Folks."

Why You Should See It: Homer. He may not have any hands, but God damn it, he can still use those hooks to tug at our heartstrings.