I’m a lousy writer of journals, if for no other reason than most of the thoughts I’d have any interest in putting down on paper are more often than not at least tangentially about movies. But, after a stint watching—as we all occasionally go on—old episodes of Siskel & Ebert and reading several of Ebert’s books*, I felt like I could create some kind of chronicle of my life by the movies I watched. What else is there, really**?
The mission was simple: write at least 300 words about every movie I watch. If I had already reviewed the film, then I wouldn’t write a new one. At this rate, I probably could have written a review of both Batman (1989) and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) about nineteen times a piece over these years. The moment after the thought flitted through my mind, I watched Sneakers (1992).
And then I never stopped. I have a document of all the reviews I’ve written, and at press time, I’ve written 411,366 words on these reviews. There have been times it’s been a lot of fun. I don’t know why the time I decided Three Men and a Little Lady (1990) was a horror film (it is, just look into Steve Guttenberg’s eyes) comes to mind, but it does. There are other times it was something of a chore. I opted out of writing two reviews of Justice League (2017), because I had nothing more to say about it, regardless of how many times they re-cut it. Generally, it’s been fun to have writing I didn’t feel the need to perfect, and could just exist not only as a view on the film in question, but a picture of where my mind was at that moment. I steadily stopped blogging any other kind of blog, and only make an exception at the end of the year, and the blog you’re reading now.
A funny thing happened towards the end of last year. It wasn’t exactly the kind of year that a lot of funny things happened in, but I realized that I was writing over 100 reviews per year, and I went past 900 before the end of 2024. It was almost guaranteed that I would hit review number 1,000 sometime in 2025. Every time I got ten closer to the magic number, I shared it, and now I’ve hit reviews 991-999:
991. Spinal Tap II: The End Continues (2025)
992. Quicksand (1950)
993. A Big Bold Beautiful Journey (2025)
994. Clear and Present Danger (1994)
995. Speedy (1928)
997. One Battle After Another (2025)
998. Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954)
999. Code 3 (2024)
And so now I have come to the question that’s been hanging over my head for most of the year: What movie should I watch for my 1000th review? At first, I thought it should be something I deeply loved. The only problem is that it was going to be tough to come up with a film I already love that I have not watched once in the last seven years.
Despite what Anton Ego (Peter O’Toole) said in Ratatouille (2007)***, writing a negative review is not as fun as writing an enthusiastically positive one. So, a movie I’ve always harbored an antipathy for was out. Sorry, Robocop (2014). You’ll have to wait for another day for me to find that the Michael Keaton Rule™**** will only take a film so far.
Ultimately, though, it is more fun than having to come up with at least 300 words on a film that failed to make any impression whatsoever. I couldn’t just leave the 1000th review up to chance. I had to go with a filmmaker who has never missed, and doesn’t look like they will be capable of missing anytime in the near future. I needed my best bet in finding a film that would mean something for the 1000th review.
And it would have to be something that, for one reason or another, I haven’t watched in the last seven years.
And so, without further ado, I offer my 1000th review: Ryan Coogler’s Fruitvale Station (2013).
I think I picked pretty well. So, where do I go from here? There was a moment when I considered that 1,000 may be enough. Maybe I will finally break down, get actually active on my Letterboxd account, and remain content with a quick line and a star rating before moving on with the rest of my life. There wasn’t likely to be another huge milestone like this. If I were to keep up my average rate of reviewing, I wouldn’t hit the 10,000th review until sometime after my 106th birthday. And we all know I’m only really interested in living long enough to see the works of Ayn Rand enter the public domain. Everything after 2052—when you might be reading my 3737th review—is extra credit in my book.
But something was alluring about doing the review, and not just the fact that I could keep blogging without having to constantly think of topics to fill such a thing. So I’ll remain a movie review guy, so I think for the moment, I’ll just plug right along. I’d talk more, but there are already reviews number 1001-1004 pending on my to-do list. They won’t write themselves!
*Just as it did then, it boggles my mind a bit that Siskel never wrote a book while he was alive, even though he was just as prolific—if not more so—than his partner during those years they were together.
**I’m kidding. Kind of.
***It’s only as I type this reference that it occurs to me that Ratatouille should have at least been considered for number 1000. My bad.
****Wherein a film is automatically 15% better than it otherwise would be, owing simply to the presence of Michael Keaton. It is why Multiplicity (1996) manages to score 102%.