As the owner of an Amazon Fire stick for a few years now, I would say it is my main & best source of watching films and TV. I have always found there is a mine of quality in the back catalogue of Amazon Prime that doesn’t exist on Netflix, or others, for a very similar price. Alongside the primary service there is also the option to try a free week or two of dedicated channels that specialise in specific genres or content type. There are dozens of them!
I have tried several of these to get access to a certain rare film I want to watch, but the only one I have wanted to stick with after the free trial is the superlative BFI player – a collection of vintage classics and independent films that could be thought of as arthouse cinema. The difference being that BFI takes pride in selecting what should be included in the library very carefully, based on quality and critical esteem. There is nothing in there that is simply weird for the sake of being weird.
It is a treasure chest for foreign language cinema through the ages, and minor masterpieces from interesting directors all over the globe, in every era, from pre 1920 to only a few years old. As someone who really wanted to broaden his knowledge of classic cinema, for only £4.99 a month I am getting far better value for money out of it than any other subscription service. Using it as a chance to fill in gaps in my watch history and ticking off highly rated obscure titles on my IMDb watchlist, it is like everytime I turn it on I am going to film school. Which is a great way to pass the time and feel like you are doing something worthwhile too!
Most of the time I have no idea what to expect from something on there, other than knowing how it is thought of by its critical reputation, and often its IMDb rating, which for vintage films is almost always fair. I made a watchlist within the BFI player based on directors I haven’t seen enough of – Bergman, Godard, Truffaut, Kurasawa, Ozu, Fellini, etc. Alongside titles that I recognise as things I should have probably seen by now as a movie lover. Then I just dip into the one I am most in the mood for, usually during the day as a matinee.
More than half the time, I find them heavy going, like study instead of watching for pleasure. But they are invariably informative about the history of cinema, and how the art form fits together like a mosaic the more you understand what has been done before. So many times I see a direct influence or comparison with modern movies that is fascinating! Scenes, moments, moods and angles in many newer films from my own lifetime that I love (and thought original) are so often “stolen”, or pay homage to, these classics created by the masters through the years.
The word “enjoyed” seems moot in many cases. This isn’t fast food cinema, generally. This is stuff to be thought about and considered artistically, in the main, and in the context of over 100 years of an art form. Liking something takes on an entirely different criteria, and this 12 of the Best lists the films so far that have had the biggest impact on me. Some I know I will never watch again, some I wouldn’t casually recommend to be watched for pleasure, but all of them have a lot to be admired and applauded.
I hope you enjoy the list, and find something you know and already love, or something that inspires you to watch something new (but old) and out of your usual viewing comfort zone. As always with a 12 of the Best, they are not in any ranking order; in this case they appear in the chronological order I watched them. Do leave me comments at the end if you have something worth saying about anything included. Shantih Kx
Yasujirô Ozu – Japan
As elegant, patient, polite and deliberately still as a side of civilised Japanese life that existed both at the time and for decades before and after. Difficult for our modern western sensibilities to readjust to. It is just so slow and seemingly eventless. It concerns the life of 27 year old Noriko, played by Ozu’s muse Setsuko Hara, with whom he made many of his best loved films. She is constantly hassled by family members and friends to get married, but is much more concerned by her relationship with her sick father, who she is content to care for. The more she is pushed the more her polite smile becomes a rictus of hidden sadness and anxiety. Small meetings, quiet words and subtle gestures take on larger meanings, and the story becomes more tragic the more you engage with Hara’s lovely performance.
I did find it hard to relate to, and couldn’t quite find the stillness within myself to just go with it. Its pace made me jittery to do something more exciting, and it wasn’t quite as transcendingly beautiful as I’d been led to believe. Saying that, I appreciated the skill of Ozu’s camera work, in framing and capturing delicate scenes and moments. I also learned the phrase “tatami cam”, which describes the low angle he often uses to demonstrate humility and respect. A gentle tale with great resonance regarding our responsibilities to others and our own repressed desires. Most interesting in how it contrasts with western cinema of the same time.
Decinemal Rating: 71
Buster Keaton – USA
I have seen and very much enjoyed the work of Buster Keaton in the past, most notably The General, which knocked me sideways by how inventive and genuinely funny it was. My main movie love for the silent era is Charlie Chaplin, and much like it is possible to like The Beatles and The Rolling Stones but only truly love one, Keaton will always be second best for me. But what a second best. Genius is an overused word, of course, but pioneer says it better anyway. The sheer volume of invention per minute is magnificent – from the technical editing techniques that were created just for this film, to the forms of visual comedy that broke the mould and raised the bar in every scene.
Most memorable is the cinema scene where Keaton’s love sick amateur sleuth tries to hide by actually entering the screen – a trick paid homage to in many movies since, including Woody Allen’s The Purple Rose of Cairo. It is astonishing to think he not only thought of doing this in 1924, but also pulled it off with jaw-dropping special effects for the time. It’s also really funny. You don’t have to force a laugh because you feel you should, it is still clever and amusing almost 100 years later. In fact, the entire 46 minute print still looks so good it is hard to believe it is that old in any way. Surely one of a handful of half length films from the period that will always be watched for what they are and not just museum pieces.
Decinemal Rating: 78
Fritz Lang – Germany
The maestro of dark shadows, Fritz Lang already had 14 feature films under his belt by 1931, including the much loved and much borrowed from Metropolis in 1927. It is said that he was such a slave driver with cast and crew alike that he had very few friends and was detested as a man. His work spoke for itself, however, and was always miles ahead of anything happening at the same time in Hollywood. Take the dark, sinister and serious M as an example. It tackles the subject of child abduction and murder, homelessness, crime in general and the punishment of a mob – subjects American cinema would never have touched in 1931, let alone done with such an exquisite non- melodramatic feel.
Peter Lorre as the killer compelled by his own weakness and madness gives an unfeasably nuanced performance for the era also. He is mesmerically creepy and unforgettable. Images and motifs (such as the whistle that indicates the murderer is lurking) abound, creating a landscape of pure mood and disease. As a morality tale it touches on issues of vigilantism and true justice that still has some relevance today. It also works as an entertaining thriller, and there wasn’t a minute I felt bored or distracted. The only jarring element are the scenes where Lang cuts the sound entirely to create tension and focus – they feel like technical mistakes, not deliberate choices. Otherwise, I could not have been more impressed and pleasantly surprised by this Euro classic for all time. If I were making a list of the best films ever made that disregarded the limitations of the age, then M would definitely make the cut.
Decinemal Rating: 81
Luis Buñuel – France, Italy, Spain
The self confessed king of cinema surrealism, Luis Buñuel has 15 feature films listed as 7.5 or higher on IMDb, proving his life’s work is more loved and respected as you might think. This title was the only one I had really heard of being talked about by serious film folk that stuck in my mind, so it was as good a place as any to start with. It is an odd beast that I had a little trouble getting onboard with. It feels entirely 70s and kitsch, and on the surface feels at times little better than The Confessions of a Window Cleaner, or some such bawdy farce. To say it is a comedy is to take comedy to mean intellectual absurdism that pokes fun at the conventions and habits that lurk inside humanity, and the sophistication that masks our base instincts and flaws. I got the “joke”, it just all feels very dated now.
The cast have a lot of fun in the dreamlike landscape of manners and appetites, and the symbolism that abounds is indeed quite clever and arch if you want to analyse it. What I did like is how it feels increasingly like an actual dream, where things done and said begin to lose true meaning, and events and places merge into one flow of madness. You can definitely see a lot of ideas here that have been borrowed by other films since, and I appreciate what it tries to do, but ultimately this one left me a little cold. It has a pompous and smug air about it that is not for me, although I totally understand why it is held in high regard. I will probably never choose to watch it again.
Decinemal Rating: 69
Gillo Pontecorvo – Italy, Algeria
This film-maker was unknown to me entirely before I decided to watch this film. In fact, I had only heard of the film itself quite recently from seeing it mentioned as one of the best films in the genre as a commentary on political insurgency and civil unrest. It is so well regarded that even the US military used it to prepare troops for entering Iraq. The main actors are largely unknown and many of the supporting cast and extras are not actors at all. The camera is allowed to wander and wobble, and such is the feel of random chaos at times you’d be forgiven for thinking this was a documentary. Nominated for 3 Oscars, and faultless in achieving its goal of humanising both sides of an argument, you can see the influence on Oliver Stone and Paul Greengrass, to name but two better known directors with a political edge.
It’s not a film I would feel the need to go back to, unless demonstrating to someone how to make something staged feel entirely real. I admire this film very much, but wouldn’t exactly call it entertaining or even rewarding as a story. Its purpose is to reinforce the tragedy of a people facing oppression and to realise the lengths both sides will go to in protecting their ideals and relative freedoms. The excellent hand held photography and score by the always inspirational Ennio Moricone are other reasons to watch it. As a history lesson of North Africa post WWII it also has a lot to offer.
Decinemal Rating: 74
Ingmar Bergman – Sweden
I have been familiar with Bergman for a long time, having seen Summer With Monika, Wild Strawberries and The Seventh Seal at a young age. They were more or less my first experience of foreign language art cinema that I sort of understood and liked. Something about the practical and economical way conversations happen in Bergman appeals to me. They tend to lack melodrama and romance, but are intellectually satisfying and often dramatically devastating. None more so than this mindbendingly sad tale of a mother and daughter in conflict. Bergman’s regular muses Ingrid Bergman and Liv Ullmann go head to head in a masterclass of acting that left me in utter awe. It reminded me of the first time I saw Gena Rowlands in A Woman Under the Influence – such soul-wrenching honest of emotion, it is almost unbearable. In a good way.
The fact that something is bleak has never put me off, and Bergman too is completely unafraid of leaving you entirely depressed. In fact, I wish Hollywood wasn’t so afraid of it. Very few films with personal conflicts this strong spring to mind – perhaps Blue Valentine is as close as it gets. But on the scale of rhetorical blows to the emotional solar plexus, that would be a 4 and Autumn Sonata would be a 9. Truthfully, I have seen few things so brutal and painful played out in film form. Guilt, blame, regret, denial, shame and loss cut to the bone, making the key scenes at the crescendo very hard to watch, but also brilliant because of it. Visually it is warm and cosy enough, but quite static, like a stage play, but of course Bergman was aware of this. He wants us to focus on the people, and so we do. A blindingly strong work of art all round. Just not something you want to revisit too often.
Decinemal Rating: 80
Akira Kurasawa – Japan
This movie is often touted as one of the finest non-American crime thrillers out there. It appears on many top 10 lists from renowned directors, and stands untouchable in the pantheon of post WWII Japanese cinema dealing with 20th century issues rather than samurai or traditional religious concepts. Kurasawa is known for masterpieces in both genres, and in this sphere is very much the Hitchcock of the East. The story sees self made entrepreneur Kingo Gondo, played by the ubiquitous Toshirô Mifune, being blackmailed by a kidnapper who believes he has his son, but has taken his chauffeur’s son by mistake. Cue huge moral intrigue and dilemma, leading to a chase and an unexpectedly symbolical climax and resolution.
It plays like two films for the price of one, the first a claustrophobic mood piece with a staged feel, reminding me of Hitchcock’s Rope, and the second a frantic chase movie where the forensic evidence is picked apart in intricate detail, like a less graphic Seven. The print on BFI is not great, so it actually feels older than it is. It is also pretty long at 143 minutes, and feels like it takes an age to get going. Therefore, although some moments and key images have stayed with me, I can’t honestly say I felt gripped or tense in any way. The stakes didn’t feel as high as I would have hoped for, and tonally it is a little uneven. In conclusion, it has much to offer and details in isolation are very impressive, but for me it was something of a let down.
Decinemal Rating: 72
Carl Theodor Dreyer – France
This was another first for me. Previous to watching this silent “masterpiece” Dreyer was a name I had only read in film history essays and when anyone writing for Sight and Sound wants to look clever. As a stepping stone to what could be achieved it is of course a valuable historic document. As a film to be enjoyed almost 100 years later, it is all but unwatchable at 110 minutes. There is perhaps a half hour’s worth of story and images, merely extended and repeated to an excruciating degree. It’s not that it is silent, or has very strange religious overtones that don’t resonate now in the same way they once might – because it is very beautiful and remarkable in small sections – it is that a monotony of accusation, followed by denial, followed by crying, followed by spiritual revelation is all there is to it. And it goes on and on and on until you really could not care less.
The story of Joan of Arc is extraordinary, but this is not the story of Joan of Arc, it is her passion only, as in her trial and execution. The close ups of Maria Falconetti as the eponymous saint are all you can really take away from it in the end. Her odd beauty and commitment to the role do leave a lasting impression, but the two dimensional fire and brimstone evil of her accusers is just too much, even comic, to behold and believe in 2021. For study purposes, seeing where certain techniques and shot ideas had their Genesis, for example, it is of great interest. As a film to watch and enjoy it has sadly outlived its worth. When you consider Fritz Lang’s M was only 3 years later, it all comes into context.
Decinemal Rating: 65
Jean-Luc Godard – France, Italy
This is one of the best bad films I have ever seen. It looks cheap (at one point the camera-man is clearly entirely visible in a mirror), the story is preposterous, the dialogue is insane, the characters behave like no one in reality ever, and it is sci-fi in name only, as no attempt whatsoever has been made to stretch the budget to anything remotely futuristic – and yet, I loved it! Perhaps it reminded me of Blake’s 7 and Doctor Who, and therefore my happy childhood relationship with cheap sci-fi? Or it could have been that there are so many essential ideas and tropes that exist in my favourite big budget sci-fi films, such as Blade Runner (for which it is an obvious influence), that it felt familiar and friendly from the start. Part hard boiled detective story and part pulp fiction fantasy, as with most Godard, I am discovering, it is all about mood and chic, not remotely about the plot.
Eddie Constantine is awful as an actor, but he looks and feels perfect here. And Anna Karina is entirely lovely, oozing intelligent sexuality and seductive vibes in every scene. Not a heroine that needs the man to save her, but a strong and independent woman as much the hero of the story as the trenchcoated lead. Every noir stereotype is adhered to without fail, punctuated with the bizarre and the incongruous whenever possible. Without this film existing there would be so many good things from The Prisoner to Predestination that wouldn’t have been the same. Groundbreaking and charming without even trying. It grows in my imagination as a cult entity by the week – I can’t wait to watch it again fairly soon.
Decinemal Rating: 73
Peter Greenaway – UK
Quite often more interesting in theory than practice, the films of Peter Greenaway can be inaccessible, oppressive and pretentious in the worst way. He himself would say his work is half film, half art, without apologising for it, and why should he? Looking at his CV, I can say there have been some I have enjoyed, or at least marvelled at: The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover being the obvious one. Drowning by Numbers being another – ambitious and ingenious constructions that are startlingly effective if in the mood for such conceits. Whereas things like Prospero’s Books and The Pillow Book cross the line of pomposity and pretentiousness just too far. So it was with trepidation I approached this one, expecting that the wigs and costumes would far outshine the content of the story. I was quite wrong.
The Draughtsman’s Contract is still difficult to engage with, especially on first viewing, as the plot is dense and often hidden within the trivialities, as it unfolds, however, it becomes an ingenious murder mystery with all the clues hidden in plain sight under the artifice of surface detail. The things that are happening are not the story, the story is underneath, much as the real humanity of these people is hidden under ostentatious wigs and skirts. Familiar British actors of the time such as Anthony Higgins, Janet Suzman and Hugh Fraser serve Greenaway as consummate storytellers in a borderline theatre style throughout. It shouldn’t work or be half as compelling as it is, but there is magic at work here of some kind. Unique and marvelous if not always easy. But that is Greenaway!
Decinemal Rating: 75
Federico Fellini – Italy, France
Fellini has six or seven movies that are considered genuine masterpieces, as well as many other perfectly decent efforts in a 40 year career. I love the idea of him and knew I would love his work, but to my shame it took this film for me to finally lose my Fellini cherry, aged 47. I can only begin by saying I adored it – loving each moment as a piece of art in itself, and the whole as a thing of true joy and wonder that has only grown in my imagination since seeing it. It made me laugh, made me sad, made me long for places and people from my past, made me think about my own identity and personality and place in the world. It also very much entertained me; I didn’t find it hard work like some on this list in any way.
Marcello Mastroianni is effortlessly cool and stylish, as is everyone in this semi-fantastical world of memories, dreams and fears. He lounges through the film in a way so naturally relaxed and interesting that you are drawn to every detail of his bizarre adventures. The presence of Claudia Cardinale and Anouk Aimée don’t hurt know bringing some Italian chic to affairs either. Visually, I lost count of the amount of times my jaw hit the ground! Freeze this rich and resplendent film in any moment and it will probably be an image worth framing. The black and white photography is so sharp, using light and dark in astonishing ways. What director since 1963 would not look at this and say “I am stealing that!”? Not a film you could watch every day, but one I know for sure will be amongst my favourites of this period forever. I can’t wait to watch his others!
Decinemal Rating: 83
Jean-Luc Godard – France
Of all the directors I have flirted with in my opening months with the BFI player, Godard is the one I am finding most accessible and least intimidating. He is the guy whose movies I am most tempted by when I don’t want to think or analyse too much, but simply sit back and enjoy for being cool. I also wanted to see why Quentin Tarantino named his production company after this movie. And now I have seen it his whole oeuvre makes total sense, at last! The exact feel of this Nouvelle Vague cornerstone is exactly what you find in 80% of what Tarantino is trying to do. The plot is incidental, of course. What is happening is only there to pin the characters and quirky dialogue on. Being cool is all. And this mid 60s confection is so cool, so French and so much style over content in the best possible way.
On the surface it is about two dodgy guys who take a shine to a girl and rope her into a heist. But the most memorable moments are the trivialities of them dancing the Maddison in a cafe because they are bored; reading the news aloud from newspapers whilst sat in the woods; driving erratically in a speedy little jalopy with a broken roof; and just making faces at one another as they flirt and express the bittersweet tediousness of being alive. It epitomises the time and place almost more than A Bout de Souffle, and in my opinion is the more mature, more knowing film. Ultimately it means very little, but is impossible not to like. It also sparked a greater interest in Anna Karina as a film icon, being the 2nd film on this list in which she impressed me.
Decinemal Rating: 76
In conclusion, there is a long way to go and an awful lot still to discover! This list only scratches the surface of my watchlist on the BFI player, and of vintage film in general. I have however thoroughly enjoyed my little matinee habit so far – educational, enriching and often a lot more fun than expected. It feels almost like popping out to a real cinema to take in an old classic sometimes. It often doesn’t matter what you choose, because you know one way or another it will be an experience worh talking about afterwards.
I hope you enjoyed my list and feel inspired to watch one or two of them for yourselves, or something similar. I can’t recommend the BFI subscription enough to all film fans, serious or casual. Go ahead and find something new you didn’t know was there! Please do leave comments or suggestions if you have any.
Shantih Kx
The Wasteland 
This is a wonderful journey into those films many of us have heard people banging on about when they want to sound smart – I often wonder if that smug lot have seen the films themselves. It’s nice to get a commentary that isn’t bogged down by a need to appreciate and love films that cineasts are supposed to fawn over. Instead it is honest and relevant to our modern viewer eyes. I will definitely get me a fill of 8 1/2 and revisit some Bergman. Godard has always bothered me, mainly because the self-agrandising, self-appointed emperors of cineatic mastery keep referring to him to ruin everyone’s enjoyment of anything Tarantino or Altman or Nolan – even. And also because Breathless was never a film I found was much more than very cool – but think I’ll give it a go now.
Keep up the great posts!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Many thanks for that comment. Yes, 8 1/2 is the place to start, for sure!
LikeLike