1. Wall-E

By far the best movie of the year, Pixar has done it again. This movie works on so many levels which is all the more amazing considering the first half of the movie has no dialogue. Simply amazing.

2. Let The Right One In

This moody and atmospheric Swedish import is the best vampire movie the Moose has ever seen. It’s not about the terrors of blood and gore as much as it is about the horrors of loneliness.

3. Gran Torino

Both satisfying and thought provoking, Clint Eastwood shows everyone how to play to an audience’s expectations and then subvert them.

4. Taken

Although released in America in 2009, Taken was produced and released in Europe in 2008, hence it’s place on this list. Producer Luc Besson and his co-writer Robert Mark Kamen have crafted a tense and satisfying kidnapping thriller which Liam Neeson improves on with his resonating performance.

5. Bolt

Disney returns to its roots with this classic animated tale that harks back to the magic of Walt Disney’s laugh and a tear philosophy.

6. The Ruins

A good adaptation of the book, this movie will make you think twice about going off the beaten path in foreign countries. Terrifying.

7. Changeling

Clint’s second movie on this list lacks drama but makes up for it with masterfully crafted tale of one mother’s nightmare in a dark time in Los Angeles history.

8. Iron Man

Ok, this movie isn’t great but it is great fun. Robert Downey Jr. has finally found a vehicle to tap into his energetic and spontaneous talents. Forget Mickey Rourke, this was the big comeback of 2008.

9. You Don’t Mess With the Zohan

An unexpected comedy that combines silly and adult humor to great effect. Adam Sandler’s best and funniest movie since?Happy Gilmore.

Twilight

Movie adaptations of books tend to fall into two categories: those that are better than the book and those that are worse than the book.Most film adaptations fall into the latter category. Books rely on the power of the reader’s imagination. Movies use the combination of visual images and sound to tell the story and constantly run the risk of showing the zipper on the back of the monster suit. Filmmakers are also hampered by the issue of length. You can tell a much grander and richer story over five hundred pages than you can over two hours. Because of issues like this, filmmakers have a difficult time capturing all of the qualities and details of the book that its readers love.

Based off the book of the same name by Stephenie Meyer, Twilight fails into a third category. It is the rare movie that brings to light just how awful the book really is. For those who don’t know, the story of Twilight revolves around a teenage girl named Bella Swan who moves to a new town and falls in love with a boy named Edward Cullen. The twist? Edward is a vampire.

The movie is pretty faithful to the book, which means that nothing happens for most of the movie. Mainly, Bella meets Edward and they stare at each other. A lot. Then they declare their love for each other and then stare at each other. A lot.

Only a minor subplot about an evil vampire who thirsts for Bella’s blood interrupts the gooey eyed staring sessions. This subplot is meant to be exciting and showcase the vampires in action. The problem is that there are seven good vampires and only one bad vampire (there are two other “bad” vampires but they conveniently leave the story) so Bella’s safety is really never in question.

But I digress, and so does the movie as this action subplot is nothing more than an excuse to put Bella in danger so Edward can save her and then stare into her eyes yet again.

In the movie, there are several MTV-music video sequences that show Bella and Edward bonding and talking. The audience can’t hear what they’re saying as there’s no sound in these scenes other than the generic rock songs. What exactly is the audience missing in these scenes? Nothing. You can’t hear what the characters are saying because Stephanie Meyer didn’t write anything for them to say in her book and the filmmakers didn’t know what to have them say to each other.

Having read the novel, I can tell you that there is nothing more to Edward and Bella’s love than mere physical attraction. They never have any conversations about anything other Edward being a vampire or their lurv. The book does delve into the character’s thoughts, but that doesn’t help the reader understand their fatal attraction. Almost every thought from Bella is a variation of “Edward’s so beautiful” or how she can’t get over his white, marbled skin. Edward adds little to the conversation other than reminding Bella that he’s a “dangerous” vampire and that he’s perfect.

Director Catherine Hardwicke and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg keep the movie faithful to the book. That includes such awful dialogue as “and so the lion fell in love with the lamb”. What comes across as mildly cheesy in print becomes laughably bad and corny when spoken out loud by actors. Even the best actors couldn’t save Stephenie Meyer’s dreadful dialogue let alone the two stiff actors that star in Twilight. Just how bad is the acting by these two? There’s a scene where Bella and Edward are sitting in a tree (just like the nursery rhyme) and it becomes hard to tell what is more wooden, the actors or the tree.

But that’s nothing compared to the short soliloquy Kristen Stewart gives in the hospital when she thinks that Edward might leave her. It’s a masterpiece of hammy overacting by someone who can’t emote. If Keanu Reeves ever wants to win an Oscar, he should hire Kristen Stewart as his co-star. She makes him look like Laurence Oliver.

Of course, the acting fits in perfectly with the cheesy low-rent production values of the movie. Sometimes it’s difficult to tell whether the cheap look is because of the filmmaker’s incompetence or their devotion to Stephenie Meyer’s book. For instance, take Edward’s fast running where his feet don’t touch the ground. He looks like some type of vampire fairy.  Or the “glitter” effect when the vampires are exposed to sunlight. Or even the vampires themselves. Edward and the rest of his family, the Cullens, try their best to fit in with the rest of human society but, come on! They are so pasty white and obvious, how could you not think they were vampires? Seriously.

Of course, this will matter little to the devoted teenage girls who’ve based ideals of romance off of Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight book series.

Quantum Of Solace

Let’s just call a spade a spade and say that the new James Bond movie Quantum Of Solace sucks. It’s confusing, dizzying, generic and, worst of all, boring. The movie is as dull as the title is confusing. The title is taken from an Ian Fleming short story but the movie has nothing to do with that short story. Or Fleming’s character of Bond for that matter.

In his second outing as Bond, Daniel Craig does little to change the Moose’s low opinion of his Bond. Once again, he plays Bond as a construction worker thug with an English accent. You would be forgiven if you thought this Bond was the guy you hired to pave your driveway. While there was some depth to Craig’s performance in Casino Royale, his performance here is more one note. Bond is out for revenge and nothing more. He barely finds any time for bedding women.

Some people have noted that James Bond has become a British Jason Bourne. There is some truth to that. Like Bourne, Bond has and is no fun. He’s a stuntman posing as an action hero. Take a moment to think about James Bond. What pops into your head? Tireless playboy who beds anyone without a Y chromosome, vodka martini shaken not stirred, classic introduction (Bond…James Bond). Without the mannerisms and stylish flourishes that Bond is known for, the character becomes little more than your generic action hero that could be played by any muscle bound meathead with an English accent.

But what about the story? Well, it’s both simple and incomprehensible. At its core, it’s basically Bond looking for revenge against the people that killed Vesper. But in the hands of Monster’s Ball director Marc Forster, it’s a confusing, convoluted mess that wants to be both realistic and fantastical. And did I mention stupid?

The villains are a super-evil organization named Quantum that has people everywhere. Why do I say that they’re super-evil? Because instead of world domination, they want to become a utility company. That’s right, the whole motivation of the bad guys in this movie is to become the sole water supplier of Bolivia. Very exciting stuff. The bad guys are headed by a goggle-eyed, effeminate, tofu eating Frenchmen Dominic Greene in a tuxedo who Bond somehow has trouble defeating in a fight despite the fact that he can take out rogue MI6 superagents and an army of evil militants with no problem.

As for the Bond girl, only an incompetent idiot would take a beautiful Ukrainian model (Olga Kurylenko) and cast her as an unsexy Bolivian out for revenge armed with a pout and a bad haircut. Oh, hello Marc Forster. Are you the one that decided to place the boring finale in a luxurious hotel that looks like a Motel 8 in the middle of the desert? That makes about as much sense as the rest of the movie.

The AFM calls itself the “Home of the Independent” and it’s true. This is the one main places where independent film deals get put together. However, it’s not the type of independent film that you’re most likely familiar with. These are not the independent films that rule Sundance. You’re not going to find movies starring Parker Posey, Sam Rockwell or whatever indie darling that is currently in vogue. No, the AFM is where you find the other type of “independent” film, the straight to video movie.

The straight to video world is a completely different universe than Hollywood. These are the movies that line the shelves at your local Blockbuster or other video store. This is a world where action, horror and franchises rule the day. Where the biggest stars are Steven Seagal and Dolph Lundgren and the biggest franchises may be ones you’ve never even heard of.

This is a different world operating on a completely different margin. Movies here are made for a fraction of what your typical Hollywood film budget is. The companies that attend these markets operate under the model of making movies cheap enough with desirable elements (action, nudity, more nudity) so that they can be sold to the international market. Quality is not as important as marketability and genre. Drama and comedy are more dependent on dialogue and cultural influences and thus are harder to sell. But boobs and blood will sell anywhere. That’s why action and horror are king at the AFM.

Some of you may ask, why doesn’t quality matter? It’s because the AFM has no pretense of art. The movies here are nothing more than widgets to be sold. You see, America has a thriving film industry. Most countries do not. Sure, the UK makes a fair amount of movies as does France and Asia, but the majority of the world just do not have the infrastructure nor the economy to support a prolific film industry. But that doesn’t mean that the rest of the world doesn’t need content to fill their movie theaters or to program their television networks. And that’s precisely the market for these schlock, straight to video (in the US) movies that are made and traded for the American Film Market. Making a quality film with a good story takes too much time and energy. It’s much easier for the companies that rely on AFM to make movies to a formula. Recycle the plot from this movie, change the setting, add some boobs, maybe an alien monster and that’s about all the innovation that you’re going to get here.

So how does the American Film Market work? To oversimplify it, there are sellers and there are buyers. The buyers are people who represent distributors (theatrical, TV or DVD) from the US and other countries. The sellers are either production companies trying to sell their finished product or pre-sell their future product or individual producers trying to the same. The AFM represents a place where all of these buyers and sellers come together with the hopes and intent of commerce taking place.

In a future post, the Moose will talk more about how an independent filmmaker can use the AFM to help find financing for their film. In the meantime, enjoy a sampling of the movies that are made for and sold at the AFM.

Writer E.M. Forster once wrote in Aspects of the Novel, defined a story as ‘a narrative of events arranged in their time sequence.’ Forster wrote: ‘it (a story) can only have one merit: that of making the audience want to know what happens next. “The king died and then the queen died” is a story.’

‘A plot’, Forster wrote, ‘is also a narrative of events, the emphasis falling on causality.’ Thus, ‘“The king died and then the queen died” is a story.’ But ‘“The king died, and then the queen died of grief’ is a plot. The time-sequence is preserved, but the sense of causality overshadows it.’

Confused? That’s ok. The Moose is here to explain the difference between plot and story in a less abstract manner. To put it simply, “plot” is the sequence of events that happen in a story. On the other hand, “story” is what the work is all about. Another way to put it is that plot is what happens, story is what it is about. Still a little abstract, I know. That’s why I’m going to illustrate these concepts with the following three examples. Let’s start with one of the Moose’s favorite movies, Rocky.

Rocky

Plot:

The champ, Apollo Creed, needs a new opponent when his scheduled opponent pulls out due to injury. In a decision of promotional genius, Creed gives a title shot to down-on-his-luck journeyman Rocky Balboa on the country’s 200th anniversary. Rocky goes on to shock the world by going the distance with Creed in a competitive fight.

Story:

Rocky, the underdog, overcomes great odds to find love and self-worth in going the distance with the champ.

The Godfather

Plot:

Michael Corleone, the son of Mafia kingpin Don Vito Corleone, returns home from the war. In a meeting with other mob bosses, Don Corleone refuses to get into the heroin business. Someone attempts to murder Don Corleone who is shot several times in the attempt. Don Corleone’s top man, Tom Hagen, is abducted and an ultimatum is issued to Sonny, the oldest Corleone son. Sonny retaliates by killing the son of another mafia boss.

Michael, the lone Corleone son who stayed away from the family business, volunteers to kill a mob boss and a corrupt cop to avenge his father and succeeds in doing so. Michael is sent to Sicily for his protection and Don Corleone is distraught to learn that Michael has taken up the family business. Sonny is gunned down at a toll booth. Don Corleone meets with the mob bosses and agrees to back the drug trade in an effort to end the mob war.

Michael returns from Sicily and takes over the family business. He promises to his girlfriend Kay that he will legitimize the family business within five years. Michael attempts to get into the casino business and is forced to resort to tactics even more brutal than his father’s to get his way. He also confronts his older brother Fredo, who was passed over because of his weakness, and warns him to never again takes sides with anyone against the family.

Vito passes away from a heart attack. Michael arranges for the murder of the heads of the Five Families. This completes Michael’s rise to power as the new “Godfather” and finishes his revenge against those who attacked his family.

Story:

The movie is about the corruption of Michael Corleone as he takes over the family business replacing his father after his death.

Sling Blade

Plot:

Karl Childers, a simple, bordering on retarded man, is released from the psychiatric hospital where he was committed for the murder of his mother and her lover. He wanders back into the town he was raised and befriends a young boy named Frank. Karl becomes a kind of father figure for Frank and moves in with him and his mother Linda and soon meets Linda’s abusive boyfriend Doyle. Realizing that Doyle’s abusive behavior will bring unending misery for Frank, Karl kills Doyle and turns himself in. He is returned to the psychiatric hospital from which he was released at the beginning of the movie.

Story:

A simple man bonds with a young boy, becoming the father figure and protector the boy never had.

Final Thoughts:

As you can see from the examples above, plot is almost aways more complicated and long winded than story. Plot is nothing more than the logical progression of events that is used to tell the story. Story is what the movie (or book, etc.) is about. Very rarely are the two ever the same. Some of the Bond movies come to mind as examples when plot and story are the same. When in doubt, just remember that plot is what happens and story is what it is all about.

Feel free to leave comments or your own examples of movie plots and stories.

Let The Right One In

It’s difficult to make a good vampire film. Why? Because vampires have lost their mystique. From The Count on Sesame Street to the campy vampires on Buffy The Vampire Slayer, vampires are not only accepted but embraced by the public consciousness. It’s hard to be scared or moved by vampires anymore in a traditional horror or creature feature film.

Leave it to the Swedish to turn vampires on their head and make them fascinating again. Adapted from him own novel Let the Right One In, writer John Ajvide Lindqvist and director Thomas Alfredson have crafted a unique vampire movie unlike any other I have ever seen. Instead of cheap thrills and loud action and Eurotrash seduction, this movie is smart and literate and resonant. It’s part horror film, part coming of age film and part love story, yet the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

The story of Let The Right One In deals with the relationship that forms between 12 year old milquetoast Oskar and his new friend Eli, who just happens to be an age old vampire stuck forever at the awkward age of 12. Both Oskar and Eli are lonely and damaged and their friendship and budding romance help bring out the life in each other, even after Oskar realizes that Eli is a bloodsucking vampire.

Let The Right One In is not your traditional horror film. The movie is not about the plot or the events that unfold. It’s a story of awakening and love and acceptance. It’s about the awkwardness of adolescence. The director Thomas Alfredson doesn’t shy away from the darkness of the violence, yet he does not linger on it as one would expect in a traditional horror film. Instead, the movie’s horror is brought out by the atmosphere and the no-nonsense, realistic approach the director takes the supernatural elements. He plays to the emotional impact of the horror as opposed to the shock factor.

Compared to most movies in theaters today, Let The Right One In is a breath of welcome fresh air. The movie is paced perfectly and avoids the fast cutting and over-the-top stylistic flourishes that plague most American movies. There is also a return to classical compositional framing that burns the stark images from the movie into your mind. You could freeze frame the movie at any point and be left with an image as haunting as a painting by Johannes Vermeer. And there is a stillness in the movie that only accentuates the depth of the moving relationship between Oskar and Eli. Let The Right One In is a movie that will stay with you after you have seen it. The Moose thinks that this is not only the best vampire movie of the year, sorry Twilight fans, but also one of the year’s best movies.

Well, for starters, you can’t really go wrong with the ones listed above. Also this question generally refers to actors that people have heard of or are stars. Some of the best acting in movies today are done by unknown character actors or bit players. Beg to differ? While many critics often argue about the believability of stars in certain roles (Harrison Ford as a Russian submarine captain?), how many arguments have you heard about whether or not the actor playing the garbage man is believable. Sure, the role may not be large enough or memorable enough, but if that actor was not believable in their performance you would notice. So for the sake of argument, let’s stick with actors or movie stars who are well known or famous.

If you were to use the Academy Awards as a measuring stick, the winner would be Jack Nicholson who has 3 Oscars for acting. But, the Academy Awards are as much about politics and popularity as they are about quality so that should not be the lone factor in determining our answer. In fact, I think we shall only use the Academy Awards only as a starting point for discussions about who the best actor is. Our main criteria will be memorable roles and believability. So let’s start with the usual suspects

Jack Nicholson

Argument For:

Jack is so well known as an icon and bad boy that people sometimes forget what an amazing actor he is. A winner of three Academy Awards (Best Actor for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and As Good As It Gets and a Best Supporting Actor for Terms of Endearment), Jack has had more iconic movies and memorable performances than other actors have had roles on their entire resume. Easy Rider, Five Easy Pieces, Chinatown, The Shining, A Few Good Men… the list goes on.

Argument Against:

A tendency to overact and chew the scenery when allowed, Jack has oftentimes been blamed for just playing himself instead of creating a character. Also, his larger than life persona can sometimes overpower the story and hijack the movie.

Be Sure To Check Out:

The Crossing Guard, The Pledge, About Schmidt.

Al Pacino

Argument For:

If anyone can match Nicholson in terms of iconic movies and roles, it’s Pacino. His resume reads like a critics Top movies list. The Godfather, Serpico, The Godfather Part II, Dog Day Afternoon, Scarface, Glengarry Glen Ross, Donnie Brasco, The Insider… . It’s hard to imagine another actor doing all these roles. And he does Shakespeare too! Is there another actor as good at delivering monologues?

Argument Against:

Hooya! His post-Scent of a Woman roles often come in two varieties: loud and louder.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Looking for Richard, The Merchant of Venice

Dustin Hoffman

Argument For:

A brilliant actor capable of tackling a diverse range of challenging roles and making you believe him. The Graduate, Midnight Cowboy, All the President’s Men, Lenny, Marathon Man, Kramer vs. Kramer, Tootsie, Rain Man.

Argument Against:

Has a reputation for being difficult to work with. Hasn’t really seemed interested in pushing himself since Rain Man.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Straw Dogs, Papillon.

Robert De Niro

Argument For:

An intense actor known for his extreme Method preparation for his roles. Gained over 60 pounds to play Jake La Motta in Raging Bull where he won an Oscar for Best Actor. Also won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for The Godfather Part II. His best roles include Taxi Driver, The Deer Hunter, Raging Bull, The King of Comedy, Once Upon a Time in America, Heat. He can almost make a Martin Scorcese movie tolerable.

Argument Against:

Limited range. Doesn’t do comedy well. De Niro’s great at playing intense characters prone to violence and psychopathic behaviors. Anything else and he often resorts to mugging for the camera (best seen in the Analyze This and Meet the Parents movies). Now he’s only a paycheck actor. Don’t believe me? How else can you explain Hide and Seek and The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle?

Be Sure To Check Out:

The Untouchables and Cop Land.

Tom Hanks

Argument For:

Good in both comedy and drama, Hanks has shown an increasing range over the years. Impressive in finding the human element in his characters and showing the audience what that character is thinking. He also has the ability to anchor an otherwise silly movie and make you believe in the story. Best roles include Splash, Big, Philadelphia, Forrest Gump, Apollo 13, Toy Story and Saving Private Ryan.

Argument Against:

Range. Tom Hanks has nailed the Everyman role and regular Joe type parts but has yet to prove that he can go darker or tougher.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Cast Away

Kevin Spacey

Argument For:

He’s won two Oscars for acting starting with a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for The Usual Suspects and followed up with a Best Actor win for American Beauty. Spacey’s at his best when he’s slinging bile and venting his anger. His memorable performances include Glengarry Glen Ross, Swimming With Sharks, L.A. Confidential and Seven.

Argument Against:

Pay It Forward, K-Pax and Beyond the Sea

Be Sure To Check Out:

See No Evil, Hear No Evil, The Negotiator

Robert Duvall

Argument For:

A naturalistic and versatile actor, Robert Duvall excels at creating memorable and quietly powerful characters. Capable of playing in almost any genre, Duvall often disappears into his role and makes you remember the character while forgetting who he is. Performances to check out include: To Kill a Mockingbird, The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, Network, Apocalypse Now, Lonesome Dove and Tender Mercies.

Argument Against:

Hasn’t had the challenging roles that many of his contemporaries have had. Doesn’t have as powerful a presence as some of his contemporaries.

Be Sure To Check Out:

The Apostle, Assassination Tango, Open Range

Denzel Washington

Argument For:

Strong presence. Good teeth. He’s won an Academy Award for both Best Actor (Training Day) and Best Supporting Actor (Glory).

Argument Against:

This racist actor has very little range. He takes himself too seriously and is only good at playing strong, proud black characters. Can’t play anything else and has a tendency to overact. With rare exception will he allow himself to look bad or weak on screen. Cries racism if his performances fail to win awards and garner critical support.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Man on Fire

Sean Penn

Argument For:

Powerful and intense performer that is well respected by his peers. Often called the best actor of his generation. Isn’t afraid to look bad. Standout performances include: Fast Times at Ridgemont High, At Close Range, Carlito’s Way, Dead Men Walking, Mystic River and 21 Grams.

Argument Against:

Takes himself too seriously. Can’t play comedy (see We’re No Angels). Often lets his politics inform his roles. Has trouble playing non contemporary roles.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Bad Boys, The Thin Red Line

And the winner is…

Gene Hackman

Argument For:

An impressive resume with brilliant terms in both comedies and dramas. Won an Oscar for Best Actor for The French Connection and an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for Unforgiven. While Gene Hackman has been in his share of bad movies, he is never bad nor unbelievable. Even in tepid crap, his acting is simple and naturalistic and he often steals the movie from bigger stars without ever having to overact or chew the scenery. The Moose can’t think of a single bad Gene Hackman performance. Memorable performances include: Bonnie and Clyde, I Never Sang for My Father, The French Connection, The Conversation, Superman, Reds, Under Fire, Twice in a Lifetime, Hoosiers, Mississippi Burning, Unforgiven, Narrow Margin, Crimson Tide, Get Shorty, The Royal Tenenbaums

Argument Against:

None.

Be Sure To Check Out:

Scarecrow, Young Frankenstein, The Birdcage, Heist

And at a time when special effects dominate the industry, when movies are routinely budgeted over $100 million dollars and when egomaniac directors routinely go over schedule and over budget (that’s you, hack Scorcese), it’s refreshing to see a filmmaker like Eastwood confident and competent enough to make modestly budgeted films ahead of schedule and under budget with an emphasis of story over effects.

So how does Clint Eastwood do it? Well, for starters, he’s been directing for a long time so he has both confidence and experience in his craft. It also helps that he worked in television where the quick production schedules and limited budgets necessitated that a director work quickly and efficiently. The other thing that Eastwood does is his homework. He knows exactly what he wants and needs when he arrives on the set. That way he doesn’t have to waste time figuring things out on the set.

For the next few posts, the Moose will write about some of the various directing techniques that Clint Eastwood uses and how you can use those techniques to better your filmmaking.

The first technique that the Moose would like to talk about is simple enough. Find and trust great material. Of course, this sounds more like common sense than a specific filmmaking technique, but you’d be surprised at how often people ignore this technique. When you’re looking for material to direct, make sure that they story is solid. Any problems that you find in the script when you read it will be there when you shoot it. Make sure the script is sound and all your problems have been worked out before you begin production.

Now here’s where people fall off of the good material bandwagon. When the script is good, leave it alone. When Paul Haggis turned in his first draft for Million Dollar Baby, he expected Eastwood to give him some notes and was prepared to do a rewrite. But Clint Eastwood liked what he read and knew that the story was solid so he started preparing to shoot Haggis’s first draft. In Hollywood, this is the exception, not the rule.

Typically, the standard operating procedure is to rewrite, usually by committee, until you drain all the life out of a story. Oftentimes actors and directors will sign onto a project after reading a great script. The producers and the director take the script through several rewrites (the development process) until the script no longer resembles the story that attracted the director or the actors in the first place. But Clint Eastwood knew that Paul Haggis’s script was solid and had all the story elements that he liked from the source material. Therefore, a rewrite was unnecessary.

Find good material, and then trust your material when you find it.  Simple, but easier said than done.

Many of those screenwriting sites have gone to a paid subscriber format. It’s a harsh world and that’s a tough pill to swallow for many struggling writers. But you shouldn’t really worry as there is still one free script sales archive available online – Hollywood Lit Sales. This isn’t the greatest site in the world, but it’s free. Here you can go through their sales archive and look at every script sold as reported by The Hollywood Reporter and Variety. Does that mean they list every script sold? No. Just the ones reported in the Hollywood trades.

The good news is that the sales archive is searchable. You can filter your script sales search by parameters such as agent, agency, writer’s name, date, buyer, producer, etc. You can even search by writer’s first sale, which is especially useful for fledgling screenwriters interested in seeing how much their stories are worth.

In addition to the script sales archive, there is also a free Story Database that lets producers or whoever search for a type of story. Will you or your story be discovered by a producer and bought through this service? Highly inconceivable but stranger things can happen. The Moose, personally, would not submit to this database as almost any producer who is capable of greenlighting a film or buying your script has a giant stack of scripts that they need to read from established writers. I doubt that they would spend their free time trolling through a free database that anyone can submit when they could be spending time with their kids.

Hollywood Lit Sales also has many other features such as a advice forum and a coverage service. Not really useful, but they are providing you with a service for free. Why not get your script covered by them and subsidize their site? If the coverage is useful, then all the better.

In actuality, the only other useful feature on this site other than the searchable script sales archive is their Hollywood Address Book and their Examples page. The Hollywood Lit Sales Address Book is essentially a bare bones version of the Hollywood Creative Directory. It lists agencies, management companies, production companies, entertainment law firms and guilds. Their Examples page gives examples for a basic screenwriting page, a bad query letter, a good query letter and the script title page. All in all, this site is a decent resource for screenwriters if you just ignore the lame advice they try to give.

1. Lawrence of Arabia

The granddaddy of all epics, few epics can match the scope and awe of David Lean’s masterpiece. AFI has previously honored this movie as #5 on its 100 Years…100 Movies list, #23 on its 100 Years…100 Thrills, #10 on its 100 Years…100 Heroes & Villains, #3 on its 100 Years of Film Scores, #30 on its 100 Years…100 Cheers and #7 on its 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition.

2. Ben-Hur

If you haven’t seen the famous chariot race, go rent this movie, stat! Made during the Golden Era of Charlton Heston before he became a NRA nut, this movie from director William Wyler is truly epic. AFI has previously recognized this movie as #72 on its 100 Years…100 Movies list, #49 on its 100 Years…100 Thrills, #21 on its 100 Years of Film Scores, #56 on its 100 Years…100 Cheers and #100 on its 100 Years…100 Movies -10th Anniversary Edition.

3. Schindler’s List

Along with the Nanjing Massacre, the Holocaust was one of the great war tragedies of the 20th century. Somehow, Steven Spielberg has managed to reduce this atrocious stain on human history to a manipulative cartoon about dead Jews. If only a good director has made this movie…. AFI has previously recognized this movie as #9 on its 100 Years…100 Movies list, #13 on its 100 Years…100 Heroes & Villains list, #3 on its 100 Years…100 Cheers and #8 on its 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition.

4. Gone with the Wind

One of the highest grossing movies of all time and a perennial classic shown on TV every year, this is Southern fried Civil War soap opera is one of the first, great epics. AFI has previously recognized this movie as #4 on its 100 Years…100 Movies list, #2 on its 100 Years…100 Passions, #59, #31 & #1 on its 100 Years…100 Movie Quotes, #2 on its 100 Years of Film Scores, #43 on its 100 Years…100 Cheers and #6 on its 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition.

5. Spartacus

Many Kubrick fans look down on this epic because it was a movie that Kubrick was a hired gun on. Producer and star Kirk Douglas brought Kubrick in to direct after the original director Anthony Mann was fired. The resulting movie is, in the Moose’s opinion, Kubrick’s best and effectively ended the blacklist of screenwriter Dalton Trumbo. AFI has previously honored this epic as #62 on its 100 Years…100 Thrills, #22 on its 100 Years…100 Heroes & Villains, #44 on its 100 Years…100 Cheers and #81 on its 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition.

6. Titanic

One of the most expensive movies of all time became the biggest hit of all time with over $1.8 billion dollars grossed worldwide. James Cameron’s deftly mixes human drama and ill-fated romance with special effects spectacle. AFI has previously honored this movie as #25 on its 100 Years…100 Thrills, #37 on its 100 Years…100 Passions, #14 on its 100 Years…100 Songs, #100 on its 100 Years…100 Movie Quotes and #83 on its 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition.

7. All Quiet on the Western Front

One of the all time great war films, this is a gripping and realistic account of World War I and has been selected by the Library of Congress for preservation in the National Film Registry. AFI has previously recognized this movie as #54 on its 100 Years…100 Movies list.

8. Saving Private Ryan

This movie’s reputation and subsequent Oscar win was made on the opening sequence Omaha beachhead assault. In reality, the opening sequence is nothing more than a Dolph Lundgren-esque action sequence shot with a bigger budget and a handheld camera. As for the rest of the movie, you’re better off watching the Dolph Lundgren film. If you want to see a better movie about WWII, watch Terrance Malick’s The Thin Red Line. AFI has previously recognized this junk as #45 on its 100 Years…100 Thrills, #10 on its 100 Years…100 Cheers and #71 on its 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition.

9. Reds

The Moose has not seen Warren Beatty’s movie about Communist and journalist John Reed. AFI has previously recognized this movie as #55 on its 100 Years…100 Passions list.

10. The Ten Commandments

Another classic film from Charlton Heston’s Golden Age, this Cecil B. Demille movie about the life of Moses is on television every year. You don’t get much more epic than this. AFI has previously honored this movie as #43 on its 100 Years…100 Heroes & Villains and #79 on its 100 Years…100 Cheers.

COMMENTS

AFI’s list for epics is good, but not great. There are too many great films left off and too many mediocre films chosen in their place. If it were up to the Moose, the list of the 10 greatest epics as defined by the AFI would be, in no particular order Lawrence of Arabia, Ben-Hur, Spartacus, The General (1927), Braveheart, The Passion of the Christ, The Thin Red Line, Doctor Zhivago, The Bridge on the River Kwai and Apocalypse Now.

Other great epics you might want to check out include Bertolucci’s The Last Emperor, The Last of the Mohicans and Patton.