Customer Reviews

The Film 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential People in the History of the Movies

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Unlike the other individual who allegedly "reviewed" this book, I have actually read the entire book cover to cover. If the other armchair critic had actually spent the time to read the book (instead of admittedly only glancing at a few chapters), he would have seen that "The Fillm 100" is a smart, insightful look at the lives, careers and continuing influence of the true pioneers of the film industry. The book is intelligent, entertaining, informative and a must-read for all film lovers.

The above reader has taken some liberties in recounting the passages of my book; Lasky's essay does not state that SQUAW MAN was the first film "shot" in Los Angeles, nor does it credit De Mille with Cruze's COVERED WAGON. In actuality, the point made was that SQUAW MAN was the first film made by Lasky in Hollywood, and that De Mille efforts as a "director-general" involved him in a number of productions, including Cruze's influential western. It seems while browsing through a bookstore, the reader managed to steal away with a few lines, and missed the context of the essays completely. It would be unfortunate if a few slight ambiguities in the text should warrant a wholesale disregard for the valuable lessons these 100 lives still offer.

Scott Smith has undermined a good idea with extremely poor research. I read the book with interest and nearly threw it away in disgust.

My expertise is on Cecil B. DeMille and even though he is mentioned only in passing, there are just too many mistakes.

p. 35 I doubt that that DeMille used the Ten Commandments (1923) to get around Hays. I think he means Sign of the Cross where he did have some issues. But let us give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

p. 52 Lasky did not move DeMille from the Covered Wagon to romantic comedies. DeMille had directed romantic comedies before going back to epics in 1923.

p.52 DeMille did not direct Covered Wagon.

p.238 DeMille did not direct Ben Hur (1959).

p. 293 DeMille did not direct Ben Hur (1923).

DeMille gets about six or seven mentions in the book and there are four errors.

As I said, I can only comment on DeMille and if this is any indication at all of the fact checking, the book is beneath contempt.

I received this book as a gift from a friend, who knew I was an avid film buff. Reading through the table of contents, I was initially stunned that I was unfamiliar with so many of the names. But within minutes of scouring a few chapters, I must say that I was floored by the audacity of the ranking, and after a bout of dissapointment over seeing some of my favorites omitted, I dived in and thoroughly committed myself to the task of understanding these innovators. This book is truly amazing, mainly because it takes so much of the glitter out of the eyes of filmlovers and forces them to see the honest contributions of the behind-the-scenes people. I have returned to it frequently for insight and have journeyed off to seek out the films Smith recommends. What an eye-opener! I whole-heartedly advice anyone interested in cinema to get their hands on a copy.

The author's love & respect of the film industry began at 6 years old. The Marx Brothers and Mae West/W. C. Fields movies filled our home with laughter. He watched and enjoyed all types of movies. This pastime was to inspire The Film 100, a book he researched meticulously. The 100th anniversary of cinema was a perfect time for Scott to commemorate film. This book has been commended by film professors and scholars as research material. Newspaper reviews have been extremely favorable. An avid reader of biographies, I often find authors exploiting their subjects in print. Scott has not compromised the intregity of "The Film 100." Most of all, he is a kind and caring person.

If the handful of essays I read in this book are at all representative of the whole, the book is virtually worthless as film history. The article on Jesse Lasky, for instance, contains numerous errors and distortions in its account of the early movie industry. It repeats cliches and myths that have long since been debunked (i.e., that THE SQUAW MAN (1914) was "the first film shot in Los Angeles"), and contains some just plain howlers that would never have escaped a competent fact-checker (i.e., that James Cruze's THE COVERED WAGON (1923) was directed by Cecil B. DeMille). The other chapter that I read carefully was about Leon Schlesinger, producer of the Warner Bros. cartoons. Even putting aside the question of giving undue credit to Schlesinger for the incredible artistic creativity displayed by the likes of Bob Clampett, Chuck Jones, Tex Avery, et al., this account is so chock-full of factual errors that it's hard to know where to begin. I note from the blurb that this is "the first book that actually originated on the Internet," or some such. I find that easy to believe, since it follows the pattern of so much "information" that appears on the web, in that it's little more than an attractively-packaged but poorly-written assemblage of myths, half-truths and just plain mistakes. The whole thing just strikes me as a cut-and-paste job; it's certainly hard to believe that any serious research went into it, and it's obvious that whatever safeguards the "traditional" publishing industry might have provided to save the author from himself (i.e., a competent editor, fact-checkers) were nowhere in sight.