Dec 1: The Sting

"In 1930s Chicago, a young con man seeking revenge for his murdered partner teams up with a master of the big con to win a fortune from a criminal banker."

Directed by: George Roy Hill, Rated: PG, 129 minutes

While The Sting is far from as flashy as the Oceans' 11 series or as action packed as The Italian Job, it's still one of the first heist/con movies of its time. With a memorable soundtrack (thank you ice cream trucks) and acting that leaves you smiling, it's a bonafide classic that must be seen. It's entertaining, full of humor, a bit of violence, and has a lot of twists you can barely see coming (a lot of the twists in the film were first seen with The Sting). Ladies and gentlemen, there are dozens of reasons why this movie won Best Picture in 1974 and it's no surprise it was able to beat out The Exorcist and American Graffiti.

Even the devil can't out-movie The Sting. 

Johnny Hooker (Robert Redford) is a suave con man who makes his living scamming any hapless stranger walking down the street. He's a scamp, never really making it big and losing whatever he makes gambling. His partner, Luther (Robert Earl Jones) is an older man, well past his prime in the conning game. He's ready to retire and settle down and get straight (or legal). After Hooker and Luther steal from the wrong man, Luther finds himself face down in an alleyway, dead. Hooker, angry and scared, heads to Chicago to find Luther's old friend, Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman), to not only have a place to hide but also a place to come up with a plan of revenge against the greedy and evil Lonnegan (Robert Shaw). The two hatch an idea of staging a horse betting ring and figure out a way to draw Lonnegan into betting millions, only to take it away from him for revenge.

Before he hunted a great white shark, he was the swarmy and evil Lonnegan. 

The Sting is a very smart movie that's well ahead of its time. It's a movie from the 70s, set in the 30s, with the humor and charisma you can find in any decade. With each additional viewing, it proves more and more timeless and you can't help but be amazed at what's happening on screen. Robert Redford and Paul Newman have a blast in their roles, and the reunion of them four years after Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid reminds us why they're so perfect together. They both exude masculinity and cool and seeing them work off of each other adds an entirely new level to the film. George Clooney and Brad Pitt were able to emulate this chemistry thirty years later, with Oceans 11, but even then, it's far from as awesome as Newman and Redford. Besides the two leads, The Sting also has plenty of recognizable faces (most of which you're used to seeing much older) and has great supporting performances from Ray Walston, Eileen Brennan, and Harold Gould. Of course, Robert Shaw is also great, as always, and his Irish and angry Lonnegan proves to be a villain you can most certainly stand against.

No matter how hard you try, you will never be as cool as these two men. 

The Sting is a must watch for any fan of film. So many themes and ideas we see in the heist movies of today borrow from The Sting and once you recognize that fact, it looks even greater. The movie also uses the ever-annoying The Entertainer (again, thank you ice cream trucks) but to a much greater effect. It becomes the movie's theme and is more memorable than annoying and helps build the setting of 1930s Chicago. With great acting, witty and smart dialogue, and terrific set design, The Sting is a ride through multiple pasts and reminds us that movies are the perfect escape from reality. 

The Good:

a great capture of the 1930s with an optimistic feeling to it that leaves you more excited than depressed

The Better:

the performances from the entire cast with Robert Redford and Paul Newman more perfect than ever

The Best:

knowing that the film has such an importance in cinema history and being reminded of how influential it is

Overall: 8.7/10

Discussion Question:

Where does The Sting rank in the greatest movies of all time? Has it been a bit forgotten over time?

Trailer:

Sept 20: Sleeper

"A nerdish store owner is revived out of cryostasis into a future world to fight an oppressive government."

Directed by: Woody Allen, Rated: PG, 89 minutes

I have a confession to make. I haven't really seen any of Woody Allen's earlier stuff (yes, even Annie Hall). I always make a note of it to remedy the fact, but for some reason or another I just haven't been able to sit down and watch any of his 'classics'. His newer films, however, I am a huge fan of with Midnight in Paris being one of my favorite movies of last year and Match Point and Vicky, Christina, Barcelona being two great films as well. So, with a little request (that I'm incredibly late on delivering), I sat down and watched Allen's 1973 movie, Sleeper. And I have to say, I enjoyed the living daylight out of it. 

Who would have ever thought that Woody Allen would make a sci-fi comedy?

The movie follows Miles Monroe (Allen), a health food store owner and clarinet player who wakes up 300 years in the future. After an ulcer operation goes wrong, Monroe was put into a cryostasis and eventually shipped away, never to be discovered until now. In the future, the world has completely changed, with government oppression (a la Big Brother), over-sized produce and chickens for food supplies, and man's inability to maintain an erection (thus, the introduction of the Orgasmatron). Revived by a group of scientists working for 'the resistance underground', Monroe is thrown head first into a battle to overthrow the government. Yes folks, a nerdy, scrawny, neurotic Woody Allen is the country's only hope. And boy does it play out wonderfully. While on his journey to "rebel", Monroe runs into the beautiful Luna (Diane Keaton), and the love that blooms between the two is not just awkward, but hilarious to watch. Allen and Keaton work beautifully off of each other and turn their relationship into something that could easily be dismissed, as something pure and true. 

Woody Allen: The Sex-Crazed Robot... 30 years before Futurama.

In my little research I did of Allen, I found that Sleeper is actually one of his most obvious attempts at slapstick comedy, channeling his inner Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton. While most of Allen's comedies rely on the dialogue, Sleeper focuses on chase sequences and physical comedy, something that Allen is actually incredible at. Large portions of the film are just set to music, with the slightly sped up actions of Allen being the highlight of each scene. It's in these moments you can easily see Allen's genius. I am pleasantly surprised at the talent he has when he's not mumbling all nervous-like and would have loved to see more of this version of the man. There are moments where I literally found myself laughing out loud (something I rarely ever do with movies) and genuinely loving every minute of the movie. While the plot just moves every forward, Sleeper really jumps from one-liner to physical joke constantly. It's a series of events strung together that is very reminiscent of Chaplin and turns Sleeper into one of the most fun movies I've ever seen. Of course, not everything in the film is slapstick and Allen's signature style of dialogue is on display as well. Every line uttered by Monroe brings a smile onto your face and Allen's delivery makes everything feel even more natural, as though you're really sitting in the room with him, and being the only one to laugh at his dry, witty, humor .

One of the best scenes in the film features Woody Allen on his quest for food and his discovery of an over-sized produce farm. Hilarity ensues. 

I would highly recommend this film if you haven't seen it already. It's one of Allen's more under-appreciated films (from what I've read), but his experiment into something much different really pays off. My only complaint of the film is that it's just too short (only 89 minutes) and seeing that hours upon hours of footage was filmed but never shown makes me wonder what else is out there. It's a movie that leaves you wanting so much more in nearly every aspect and also leaves you wondering if anything like it could ever be made today. I remember discussing in my review of Duck Soup that that the genre of slapstick seems dead, and while Sleeper showed hopes of a revival (40 years ago), I honestly don't see anything like this coming out today. It's a terrible shame as the humor is universal. Seeing a real-life cartoon play out is just so much fun to watch and the simplicity of the humor seems to be far from what the "general population" seeks today. F**k. 

The Good:

Woody Allen carrying a film with more than just his dialogue, delivering countless moments of physical comedy that leaves you in stitches

The Bad:

a short-ish running time that leaves a lot more to be desired, as what you see on the screen shows so much genius

The Ugly:

realizing slapstick is dead and any hope for a revival seems far from reality

Overall: 9.0/10

Trailer: