While I generally avoid the plethora of lists and list-based TV shows that dominate the media during this festive season, I was rather impressed by Phillip French & Co's "50 Lost Movie Classics" effort in Sunday's Observer. First of all, they've wisely avoided asking the usual gang of celebrity idiots who dominate the TV versions of these affairs to contribute. Secondly, their manifesto (such as it is) is quite laudable:
This isn't just another list of great movies. It's a rallying cry for films that for a variety of reasons - fashion, perhaps, or the absence of an influential advocate, or just pure bad luck - have been unduly neglected and should be more widely available. You know that feeling when someone hasn't heard of a film you've always loved and you want to show it to them?
It's mightily refreshing to see a movie list that doesn't have The Shawshank Redemption or (*shudder*) Gladiator in prominent positions…possibly because that other gang of idiots – the general public – have had no opportunity to vote on its contents [Mee…oww]. For those Jeff Bridges fans among you I draw your attention to two Bridges classics included in the 50 – John Huston's Fat City (1972) and Ivan Passer's Cutter’s Way (1981). Mr. Bridges may have put himself back atop the "cult" pile with The Big Lebowski, but he’s every bit as fantastic in these two oft-neglected gems.
Anyway, the list has put me to thinking about what films in my own collection I'd consider "unduly neglected", so over the next few days I'll see if I can come up with a few suggestions (restricting myself to the 150 [or so] word limit of the Observer's entries). Without further ado…
1. The Hitcher
Robert Harmon (1986)
While the aesthetically similar Near Dark (another Eric Red penned flick) often garners plaudits from critics trying to prove their pop cultural grooviness, The Hitcher tends to end up lumped into the dreary mire of mid-80s stalker/exploitation shockers. A pity, as it's easily one of the most satisfying and interesting "unstoppable psycho" films made during that decade. Given its hackneyed ingredients, it should be a typical, straight-to-video pile of cack - a fact slyly acknowledged by the title of a documentary on Momentum's (excellent) Special Edition DVD: "How Do These Movies Get Made?" - yet its sustained tension and moody bleakness help set it far apart from its (forgettable) contemporaries. The complex and ambiguous relationship between prey and predator actually leads to something approaching intimacy by the end, while Rutger Hauer's murderous "spirit of the desert" subverts our genre expectations by displaying a clear, weary will to die - inviting his young foe/apprentice to relieve him of a "burden" he still can't help but take pleasure in.
More tomorrow…
Update 20/12/06: Well maybe not tomorrow…I mean today…em whatever…I'm tired and I need to hit the hay. More…er…shortly.
Tags: Hitcher, Rutger Hauer, Observer, Near Dark


Also, apart from the Hitcher and Blade Runner, why did Rutger Hauer’s career go straight to video?
December 20th, 2006 at 4:42 pmWell…he has enjoyed something of a “theatrical release” comeback in recent years (Sin City, Batman Begins etc) but I take your point. Still, even in the crap movies he’s made (of which there are many) he’s often the one thing you remember from them.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:14 pm