Top 5 Top 5 Lists Related To, But Not Including, Gone With The Wind

Top 5 Clark Gable Films:

1. Mogambo (John Ford, 1953)
2. It Happened One Night (Frank Capra, 1934)
3. Red Dust (Victor Fleming, 1932)
4. Mutiny On The Bounty (Frank Lloyd, 1935)
5. Manhattan Melodrama (W. S. Van Dyke, 1934)


Top 5 Victor Fleming Films:

1. The Wizard Of Oz (1939)
2. Red Dust (1932)
3. Captains Courageous (1937)
4. Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde (1941)
5. Bombshell (1933)


Top 5 Films In Which The Original Director Was Fired:

1. The Wizard Of Oz (Victor Fleming, King Vidor, Richard Thorpe & Mervyn LeRoy, 1939)
2. Ratatouille (Brad Bird & Jan Pinkava, 2007)
3. Spartacus (Stanley Kubrick & Anthony Mann, 1960)
4. Macao (Josef von Sternberg & Nicholas Ray, 1952)
5. Superman II (Richard Lester & Richard Donner, 1980)


Top 5 Melodramas:

1. Sunrise: A Song Of Two Humans (FW Murnau, 1927)
2. Written On the Wind (Douglas Sirk, 1956)
3. Letter From An Unknown Woman (Max Ophuls, 1948)
4. Waterloo Bridge (Mervyn LeRoy, 1940)
5. Brief Encounter (David Lean, 1945)


Top 5 Films Of 1939:

1. The Rules Of The Game (Jean Renoir)
2. Stagecoach (John Ford)
3. Young Mr. Lincoln (John Ford)
4. Mr. Smith Goes To Washington (Frank Capra)
5. Only Angels Have Wings (Howard Hawks)

Links: Gone with the Wind

The Guardian gives us a behind-the-scenes look at the making of Gone with the Wind.

As per usual Roger Ebert has an informed and entertaining take.

An unnamed staff writer at The Australian provides an excellent summary of the Scarlett O'Hara and feminism arguments, including quotes from critic Molly Haskell, whose book Frankly, My Dear is one I really need to read.

Heading to L.A. anytime soon? Movie-locations.com shows you where many iconic scenes for Gone with the Wind were filmed.

And finally, just because I find it so adorable, here is a picture of Miss Piggy and Kermit the Frog dressed up as Scarlett and Rhett.

Damn.

Coming Attractions: Gone with the Wind

Wednesday, December 2nd at 7:00

Giveaways: It Happened One Night DVD courtesy of Scarecrow Video and a gift certificate for Rain City Video.

See you there!

Tonight!

At 6:50 & 9:15

Top 5 Top 5 Lists Related To, But Not Including, Sherlock Jr & The General

Top 5 Buster Keaton Features:

1. Steamboat Bill, Jr (Charles Reisner & Buster Keaton, 1928)
2. Our Hospitality (John Blystone & Buster Keaton, 1923)
3. Seven Chances (Buster Keaton, 1925)
4. The Three Ages (Buster Keaton & Edward Cline, 1923)
5. The Navigator (Donald Crisp & Buster Keaton, 1924)


Top 5 Buster Keaton Shorts:

1. The Play House (Buster Keaton & Edward Cline, 1921)
2. One Week (Edward Cline & Buster Keaton, 1920)
3. Cops (Edward Cline & Buster Keaton, 1922)
4. Neighbors (Edward Cline & Buster Keaton, 1920)
5. The Balloonatic (Edward Cline & Buster Keaton, 1923)


Top 5 Movies About Movies:

1. Singin' In The Rain (Stanley Donen & Gene Kelly, 1952)
2. 8 1/2 (Federico Fellini, 1963)
3. Histoire(s) du cinema (Jean-Luc Godard, 1998)
4. F For Fake (Orson Welles, 1973)
5. The Purple Rose Of Cairo (Woody Allen, 1985)


Top 5 Civil War Films:

1. Gone With The Wind (Victor Fleming, 1939)
2. Glory (Edward Zwick, 1989)
3. The Horse Soldiers (John Ford, 1959)
4. Gettysburg (Ronald Maxwell, 1993)
5. Major Dundee (Sam Peckinpah, 1965)


Top 5 Films Of 1927:

1. Sunrise: A Song Of Two Humans (FW Murnau)
2. Seventh Heaven (Frank Borzage)
3. Wings (William Wellman)
4. Metropolis (Fritz Lang)
5. It (Clarence Badger)

Links: The General & Sherlock, Jr.

Slate tells you why you really need to see the General.

Screen Savour praises Sherlock, Jr.

Roger Ebert knocks it out of the park with an overview of Keaton's career and a more detailed take on the General in his Great Movies series.

Why Buster Keaton Is Better Than Charlie Chaplin

Earlier this week Sean posted a reasoned, well thought-out, but ultimately misguided essay on Charlie Chaplin's superiority. I am now charged with the thankless task of setting him straight.

Buster Keaton's Sherlock, Jr. is the most sustained forty-five minutes of comic timing, cinematic invention and boundless creativity I have ever witnessed on film. In the eighty-five years since its release, the film has been imitated and spoofed endlessly but no one has come close to equaling its distinct brilliance. Keaton was an innovator, a genius and a clown of the first rank. When he was at the top of his game, which he was for over a decade, he was untouchable, even by the world's biggest movie star.

Certainly Keaton's career did not have the longevity of Chaplin's but that is far from Keaton's fault. I find the argument of quantity to be ridiculous and a completely baseless way of judging the merits of both geniuses. Had Keaton the resources of wealth and critical acclaim that Chaplin received during his career, he may very well have been able to continue producing his films independently well into the sound era. Sadly that was not the case. During his lifetime Keaton not only trailed behind Chaplin in box office draw, he followed the mediocre Harold Lloyd as well. The last three films Keaton produced independently, including the two masterpieces Steamboat Bill, Jr. and the General, were huge critical and commercial flops upon initial release. Chaplin may very well be timeless but Keaton was most certainly ahead of his time. These financial failures all but bankrupted Keaton and forced him to look for outside support for his work.

It was at the end of the 1920s after a decade of making the most forward-thinking pictures anyone had ever produced that Keaton signed a disastrous contract with MGM, a decision he would later consider the worst mistake of his life. Like their signing of the Marx Brothers a decade later, the MGM partnership started off entirely promising with the fantastic feature The Cameraman (suspiciously absent from Sean's dubious ranking of the artists' work, the film is easily as good as the Circus). Unfortunately after this last burst of creative freedom, MGM straitjacketed Keaton to their whims, ultimately relegating him to second banana roles in Jimmy Durante pictures, a place where Keaton's numerous talents were not given the least bit of opportunity to shine. There was no room for improvisation and the comedy was verbal, not physical. The studio confines and his crumbling marriage drove Keaton to drink and his alcoholism further crippled his output through the thirties and forties. But when he was given the opportunity to be creative, Keaton still showed that his genius was still very much intact. The fact that he managed to keep up with Chaplin in Limelight twenty years after his last significant work is a testament to Keaton's ability as much it is to Chaplin's graciousness in inviting Keaton to work on the film.

I have no qualms with Chaplin's sentimentality. I cried at the trailer for WALL*E for goodness sake. No, it's Chaplin's self-consciousness that often puts me at a distance. Being the biggest movie star of all time (a fact that will never change), Chaplin was practically drowning in accolades, largely to his detriment. Early on in his career, as highbrow critics began expounding on his inimitable genius (which I will not deny), Chaplin began trying to reach out to these intellectuals with decidedly mixed results. This tendency to be an "artist" and a "genius" seeps into Chaplin's work as early as the short Sunnyside (which sees the Tramp cavorting with nymphs in an extended, completely superfluous dream sequence) and stretches throughout his career into his later films, The Great Dictator and M. Verdoux which are deflated ever so slightly in their third act by Chaplin's proselytizing.

Keaton never considered himself an artist and subsequently I find his art ever more surprising. If Chaplin was a ballerina as W.C. Fields famously stated, then surely Keaton is a master magician (entirely fitting for a man whose famous nickname was bestowed by Harry Houdini.) The illusions that Keaton was capable of executing on the most primitive of equipment is nothing short of astounding. His acheivements are comparable to the Beatles recording "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" on a four-track tape machine. On the end of his first day on a film set, Keaton asked Fatty Arbuckle if he could take the camera home for the evening. With Arbuckle's consent Keaton took the machine home and spent the night dismantling and reassembling the camera just to see how it works. This insatiable curiosity permeates Keaton's best work. His inventiveness with the medium of motion pictures is unparalleled to this day. Most of Chaplin's films could have been plays, his camera simply sits there inert, documenting the gags that Chaplin unleashed in a frenzy. They are often hilarious but rarely are they truly cinematic. Not until the end of the silent era did Chaplin begin to truly become a filmmaker, several years after Keaton. From the onset Keaton stretched the form to the breaking point, finding ever ingenious ways to use the medium itself to his clever ends. This was evidenced as early as Keaton's first release as a star, the magnificent short One Week. In his essential book "The Silent Clowns", Walter Kerr sets the scene, much more eloquently than I ever could:

There is a magnificently composed shot at the end of One Week in which Buster and his wife, having moved their house onto the railroad tracks and got stuck there, clasp each other in terror and shut their eyes tight because a roaring locomotive is bearing down on them. At what should be the moment of impact, the train bypasses them entirely. It is on another track. We are as startled as they, the path of the locomotive has seemed so certain. We have been warned that depth exists, somewhere, in the image, because the train has come into view on a sweeping curve, curves suggesting breathing space. Yet the flat composition--house, Buster, wife, advancing train--so compresses our expectation that we can, for the moment, imagine nothing more than the trajectory we see. And we are fooled, thunderingly fooled. The fact that another locomotive, coming from the opposite direction, does plow into Buster's house and turn it into a sea-spray of splinters just as the couple are congratulating themselves on their narrow escape is good additional comedy but not of the essence. The essential comedy has been made of our terrible uncertainty of vision in this elusive form.

Keaton knew that we, in the role of the audience, would only see what he wanted us to see. This being so, his onscreen characters act accordingly. He and his wife hug and kiss in joy because they, like us, cannot see or hear the train that is mere meters from their home. Chaplin never once looked at the potential of cinema in this regard, yet time and again Keaton managed to subvert our expectations in ways that seemed effortless.

This is where I make the argument that if we are comparing these two towering giants we must scrutinize their shorts above all else for this is the only place where the playing field was level. As much as I love him for his agility and storytelling gifts, Chaplin's shorts are on the whole, pretty unremarkable. I have seen about fifteen of Chaplin's shorts, many of them his most well-regarded and frankly, save The Immigrant, Easy Street and One A.M., they're all pretty abysmal. The gags are executed flawlessly but they're simply not great gags. Scenes tend to overstay their welcome on a fairly consistent basis, just waiting to get to the final punch line. There are fine moments for sure but they are few and far between. Compare that with Keaton. Of the 35 shorts he made, in comparison to Chaplin's 70, I count nine that are undeniably fantastic (I have seen thirteen), not just intermittently funny but laugh-out-loud, gag-a-minute gems. These include the aforementioned One Week, where Buster and his wife build a do-it-yourself home; the endlessly clever the Goat where Buster is mistaken for a wanted criminal; and Neighbors, a side-splittingly funny story of star-crossed lovers living in the slums. Even the High Sign, the first short Keaton self-produced but shelved because he didn't think it was good enough, is in my opinion better than every Chaplin short, save the Immigrant.

The Playhouse is a good Keaton short to analyze in-depth because it shares some surface similarity to Chaplin's A Night in the Show. Both shorts take place in music halls where a night of vaudeville entertainment is underway. The two films also see their creators playing multiple roles and contain some of the most adventurous filmmaking in their respective oeuvres.

In A Night in the Show it is nice to see Chaplin branching out and playing two non-Tramp characters, although their mannerisms are practically indistinguishable from his alter ego. In the film he portrays both "The Pest", a drunken playboy out for a night on the town, and "Mr Rowdy", a drunken bum living it up in the balcony. The film is mostly made up of violent back-and-forths between Chaplin's drunks and members of the audience, orchestra and performers. There are some subtle moments that I find worthwhile, Chaplin's rapid blinking when he discovers that the hand that he has been caressing does not belong to the gorgeous Edna Purviance, but to her portly, mustachioed suitor is one example. The ever-so brief interaction between the two Chaplins, when the bum pours his beer over the balcony and onto the Pest, is another fine moment, but ultimately the film suffers from Chaplin ceding too much screen time to his plethora of co-stars.

The Playhouse on the other hand does not suffer from this last fault for the very fact that for the first third of the film all of Buster Keaton's co-stars are played by well, Buster Keaton. He is the conductor, the orchestra, the stage hand, the couple in the gallery, the ahem nine black-faced minstrels onstage, the baby and his grandmother in the audience, everyone. Due to a broken ankle suffered on his previous film, The Playhouse is not Keaton's best example of physical comedy (neither is A Night in the Show for Chaplin) but it is a delight for other reasons. The timing that he manages to pull off when the multiple characters interact onscreen is astounding. Not only in the obvious moments when there are two Keatons performing the same dance but even in the throwaway moments of a husband chiding his wife to applaud. Another fascinating aspect of the film is how well Keaton inhabits the characters he is portraying. He gives them all much more personality than Chaplin affords his two drunks in A Night in the Show.

The final two thirds of the picture are less technical achievements than the much-lauded opening but they still contain some very impressive comedy. It's enjoyable to see the twinning nature of the opening recalled with the two sisters that visit Buster backstage. The addition of mirrors is a perfect tutorial in how to build a gag. So is putting out a fire on a man's face with an ax and then using it to shave off his beard. And oh yeah, did I mention Buster's spot-on impersonation of a monkey? Your honor, I rest my case.

To his unending credit, Charlie Chaplin imbued every frame of his later films with a delicate balance of love and pathos. No one has ever done it better. But it is unfair to slight Keaton for his lack of emotion. His concerns have always been more existential. He is a man adrift in an indifferent universe. His charms may be more slyly cerebral than Chaplin's masterful tugs at our heartstrings but their rewards are just as stunning. Buster Keaton's implacable defiance in the midst of this chaotic world manages to impart some much needed peace in my neurotic mind.

It is most certainly true that I wouldn't trade anything in Keaton's world for the last five minutes of City Lights, but as contradictory as it may seem, the reverse is also true. I have never been as continually thrilled or filled with absolute joy then I am when watching the acrobatic and cinematic collide in Sherlock, Jr. and frankly, I wouldn't trade it for curing all of the blind girls in the world. Luckily, we don't have to. We live in a world large enough for two very different geniuses who approached the same form, took it in their inimitable hands and molded it into something no one had ever seen. I am happy and humbled that I get the opportunity to bask in the glow of their bold, distinctive visions.

Keaton's still funnier.

Coming Attractions: The General w/ Sherlock, Jr.

Wednesday, November 25th at 6:50 & 9:15

Giveaways: Glory DVD courtesy of Scarecrow Video and a gift certificate for Rain City Video, respectively.

See you there!

Tonight!

At 7:00 & 9:10

Why Charlie Chaplin Is Better Than Buster Keaton

A brief break from my cold-inspired marathon of Ken Burns's Jazz documentary on the instant netflix to throw down a gauntlet in response to this week's poll question. Mike voted for Keaton, and quite obviously he is wrong. Chaplin is better for several reasons, which conveniently fall into two general categories:

Quantity:

Chaplin did more work than Keaton, and he did it for a significantly longer period of time. Chaplin directed 75 films (including shorts) to Keaton's 47. Of those, Chaplin also wrote 62 (Keaton 39), edited 56 (Keaton 8), produced 36 (keaton 14), and scored 13 (Keaton 0). Every Charlie Chaplin film was quite literally a film by Charlie Chaplin. He was the most auteurish director of all-time. Chaplin got his first directing credit the same year he began acting in films, 1914, and made his last film in 1967: a 53 year career that's as long as any great director in film history (it's even longer than John Ford's; Martin Scorsese has another 11 years before he matches Chaplin's longevity). Keaton's last film as a director, however, was 1929's Spite Marriage (co-directed actually, like many of Keaton's features), a mere 12 years after his first directorial effort. Keaton, of course, continued to act, but his stardom died with the advent of the talking picture (imdb credits him with a surprising number of TV appearances in the 50s). His greatest post-stardom role, in fact, comes in [i]Limelight[/i], written, directed by and starring Charles Chaplin. In his spare time, of course, Chaplin also managed to co-found a studio (United Artists), get married four times and get himself exiled from the US under suspicion of communism.



By my count Chaplin had eight great features: The Kid, The Gold Rush, The Circus, City Lights, Modern Times, The Great Dictator, M. Verdoux, and Limelight. Keaton had six: The Three Ages, Our Hospitality, Sherlock Jr, Seven Chances, The General and Steamboat Bill, Jr.

Throwing them all together, I'd rank them thusly:

1. City Lights
2. Steamboat Bill, Jr
3. Sherlock Jr
4. The General
5. The Gold Rush
6. Modern Times
7. Limelight
8. M. Verdoux
9. Our Hospitality
10. The Kid
11. The Circus
12. Seven Chances
13. The Great Dictator
14. The Three Ages

Keaton's got three of the Top 5, but Chaplin pulls ahead with six of the Top 10.


Quality:

Chaplin's bad rap in comparison to Keaton tends to come down to the issue of sentimentality. We live in an ironic age, and Chaplin is wholly incapable of not being sincere: he always means everything he says and desperately wants you to see things the way he does. Keaton's persona is that of The Great Stone Face, impervious to the anarchy that surrounds him, he is the calm, oblivious center (even houses fall around him). Keaton has no point of view. Chaplin, however, was The Little Tramp, a persona that begs for identification and sympathy from the audience. He's the underdog, the happy-go-lucky bum, the loser struggling to hold onto his dignity. Keaton wants to make you laugh: either at his elegant slapstick or the ingenuity of his visual tricks. For Chaplin, making you laugh is too easy. The mechanics of slapstick, the physicality of the style came so effortlessly to Chaplin that I suspect it bored him. It was easy for Keaton too, but Keaton's response to that was to come up with ever more elaborate stunts and set designs and camera tricks. Chaplin's was to create ever more complex and moving stories within which to situate his comedy (with 1921's The Kid, he essentially invented the comedy-drama). Both are brilliant, but Chaplin aspires to do more.



True, there's nothing as breathtaking in Chaplin as the hurricane in Steamboat Bill, Jr, or as ingenious as the movie theatre sequence in Sherlock Jr, but neither are there images in Keaton's work as iconic as the Tramp trapped in the machine in Modern Times, or his Hitler stand-in bouncing the globe as a balloon in The Great Dictator, or as elegant as the dance of the rolls in The Gold Rush or as heartbreaking as the close-ups of Jackie Coogan crying in The Kid.

This is a big reason why Chaplin was able to transition into sound: his filmmaking wasn't as dependent on the genre of silent slapstick as Keaton's was. Chaplin was interested in more than just film for its own sake, so when film styles changed, he was able to change along with them. Fitfully at first, of course, as he continued making dialogue-less films well into the sound era. But his late sound films, M. Verdoux, Limelight, A King In New York are wonderful, and as funny as any of the other comedies being made in the late 1940s and 50s.

I love Buster Keaton, and if you'd asked me this question ten or even five years ago, I would have said Keaton was the best without a doubt. Maybe I'm just going soft in my old age, but at this point, I wouldn't trade any of Keaton's brilliant jokes for the crushingly beautiful last five minutes of City Lights.



Be sure to check out Mike's response, Why Buster Keaton is Better than Charlie Chaplin.

Links: City Lights & the Immigrant

Roger Ebert throws down for City Lights in his Great Movies series.

Spectacular Attractions praises and analyses City Lights.

A.O. Scott presents a nice video essay on the film over at the New York Times.

A detailed history of Chaplin's Mutual shorts (of which the Immigrant is one) comes from where else, but charliechaplin.com.

Top 5 Top 5 Lists Related To, But Not Including, City Lights & The Immigrant

Top 5 Charlie Chaplin Films:

1. The Gold Rush (1925)
2. Modern Times (1936)
3. Limelight (1952)
4. M. Verdoux (1947)
5. The Kid (1921)


Top 5 Silent Films Not Directed By Chaplin, Keaton or Murnau:

1. Passion of Joan of Arc (Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1928)
2. Seventh Heaven (Frank Borzage, 1927)
3. Man With A Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929)
4. I was Born, But. . . (Yasujiro Ozu, 1932)
5. Broken Blossoms (DW Griffith, 1919)


Top 5 Films About Blind People:

1. Les Amants du Pont-Neuf (Leos Carax, 1991)
2. Magnificent Obsession (Douglas Sirk, 1954)
3. On Dangerous Ground (Nicholas Ray, 1952)
4. Night On Earth (Jim Jarmusch, 1991)
5. The Village (M. Night Shyamalan, 2004)


Top 5 Films About Immigrants:

1. Stranger Than Paradise (Jim Jarmusch, 1984)
2. The Godfather Part II (Francis Ford Coppola, 1974)
3. The Quiet Man (John Ford, 1952)
4. Ruggles Of Red Gap (Leo McCarey, 1935)
5. Cat People (Jacques Tourneur, 1942)


Top 5 Films of 1931:

1. Tabu: A Story of the South Seas (FW Murnau)
2. M (Fritz Lang)
3. Le million (René Clair)
4. Tokyo Chorus (Yasujiro Ozu)
5. À nous la liberté (René Clair)

Roses are Edna

Pray tell, what is the spell

Tell me what is the science

That made someone so swell

As Edna Purviance??

Silent siren of the silver screen

Your marvelous mug in the magazines

In beautiful bliss and in pitiful peril

You acted much better than Virginia Cherrill

As a lover and mother

There were no others

To compete with your beauty

You irascible cutie

So peerless and fearless

No one was left tearless

By Charlot's bien-amie

In films I count as thirty-three.

And wouldn't you dare us

As A Woman of Paris

To have us pining away

Til the end of our days?

Oh Edna Purviance

You've got my compliance

To follow your face

Of wonder and grace

Your orbital eyes

That no men despise

Oh heavenly skin

That knows no sin

As you are untouched by reality

But Edna dear let's make one thing clear

Before I bid adieu

There's something I must tell you

A secret I should speak before next week

My heart is a flutter, I hope I don't stutter

For as I prepare myself to retire

I really love Kathryn McGuire

Coming Attractions: City Lights w/ The Immigrant

Wednesday, November 18th at 7:00 and 9:10

Giveaways: Magnificent Obsession DVD courtesy of Scarecrow Video and a gift certificate for Rain City Video, respectively.

See you there!

Tonight!

At 7:00 & 9:10

Our 100th Post!!!

Yay us!!!

In honor of this most historic occasion, here are 100 things Sean and Mike could have been doing instead of publishing verbose and utterly inane posts on this digital bulletin board:

100 - Sleeping.

99 - Reading books.

98 - Learning a trade, like carpentry or plumbing. That would come in handy.

97 - Teaching ourselves a foreign language.

96 - Talking to our significant others.

95 - Walking the dog.

94 - Playing Scrabble.

93 - Making dinner.

92 - Writing that pesky novel.

91 - Vacuuming.

90 - Napping.

89 - Chatting with the neighbors.

88 - Picking up the telephone.

87 - Writing letters to our pen pals.

86 - Listening to NPR.

85 - Listening to Slayer.

84 - Volunteering at our local soup kitchen.

83 - Cleaning the bathroom.

82 - Writing sonnets for our loved ones.

81 - Remembering 9/11.

80 - Dozing.

79 - Becoming better bowlers.

78 - Landscaping.

77 - Trying to wrap our puny little minds around quantum physics.

76 - Taking another remedial math class.

75 - Exercising.

74 - Working on our tans.

73 - Doing the dishes.

72 - Scrap booking.

71 - Plotting our next Disneyland vacation.

70 - Resting.

69 - Investing in a hammock.

68 - Putting money away in a CD.

67 - Giving money away.

66 - Developing a healthy drug addiction.

65 - Selling our bodies to science.

64 - Selling our bodies to lonely men.

63 - Selling our bodies to blind women.

62 - Teaching illiterate adults how to read.

61 - Teaching bears how to read.

60 - Taking a siesta.

59 - Becoming fathers.

58 - Becoming grandfathers.

57 - Getting a goddamn haircut.

56 - Retaking the Myers-Briggs personality test.

55 - Signing up for a credit card.

54 - Remembering our loved ones' birthdays.

53 - Memorizing Shakespeare.

52 - Buying a smoking jacket.

51 - Smoking.

50 - Dreaming.

49 - Killing our dinner with our own two hands.

48 - Building a fort.

47 - Learning to dance.

46 - Working on our magic act.

45 - Working on our magic act (with the ladies.)

44 - Sending away for free samples.

43 - Becoming lumberjacks.

42 - Wandering around aimlessly.

41 - Finding a trampoline. Proceeding to jump on it.

40 - Passing out.

39 - Making hot chocolate.

38 - Riding bikes down to the park.

37 - Swinging on the swings.

36 - Jumping off the swings.

35 - Hurting ourselves.

34 - Crying.

33 - Donating blood.

32 - Donating plasma.

31 - Loitering.

30 - Being unconscious.

29 - Debunking numerology.

28 - Protesting something.

27 - Protecting something.

26 - Reading the thesaurus.

25 - Waxing on.

24 - Waxing off.

23 - Designing miniature golf courses.

22 - Making mimosas.

21 - Drinking mimosas.

20 - Just shutting our eyes for a few minutes.

19 - Reliving the '90s.

18 - Sighting wrongs.

17 - Writing songs.

16 - Making mixtapes.

15 - Taking our vitamins.

14 - Finishing what we sta

13 - Robbing banks.

12 - Graduating from clown college.

11 - Making our parents proud.

10 - Did I mention sleeping? It's like my favorite thing to do.

9 - Working on our rap skills.

8 - Contemplating the meaning of it all. And by it, we mean women's volleyball.

7 - Selling our souls for fun.

6 - Building an ark.

5 - Skateboarding.

4 - Finding our keys.

3 - Making lists with actual, tangible importance, like one for groceries. Did we even realize we were out of bread??

2 - Watching movies.

1 - Getting real jobs.

A Filmography Of Wong Kar-wai In Eighteen Images (Or, Yay! Pretty Pictures!)