A film from 2002 still well liked

Stephen Speilburg released the film "catch me if you can" in December 2002. With an all star cast (including Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hanks, Christopher Walken, Martin Sheen, Ellen Pompeo, and Jennifer Garner) the movie was born to be an instant classic. While the Rotten Tomatoes score at 96% shows that the movie is well received and liked, one thing I'm not sure about is this nagging question: Can a film from 22 years ago, that wasn't anything like Speilburg's claim to fame (E.T.) have already achieved a permanent place in the league of "Classic" classification? If I must answer the question myself, I'm going to say Yes, this film and others like it from Speilburg or starring DiCaprio, have done that - They became classic, almost instantly. Not because they were filmed in black and white. Not because they followed the same worn out forumula of another classic. And not because the fans are happy to see a bunch of big name stars. This film became a classic because the artists involved all did exactly what they were supposed to do. They were all in the "zone" and took their roles in movie crafting seriously. And when it all comes together like that in perfect harmony, we get a movie that defies age, defies time, and is relevant and enjoyable forever. Classic!

I'm not going to spoil the plot of the movie for you in this review. You can read that on any google search or another more plot focused review. I want to talk about the reasons why this movie is still well-liked even though it came out 22 years ago.

Movie afficionados (aka film fans) are not as ignorant as some creative teams like to say when their film is not well-received. ("The Departed" also starring DiCaprio only has a 91% rating on Rotten Tomatoes which I think is a bit funny considering that I would rather watch Spielburg's film ten times over the Scorsese film.) Scorsese is often praised as a genius director, but in my opinion "catch me if you can" is a better film than "The Departed" because it holds my attention better. It's like listening to music. When a song doesn't make me feel anything, I don't want to listen to it. I don't listen to music to feel stoic. That's how I feel about my movie watching also. I want to feel something, good or bad, but to feel nothing is a waste of my time.

The music by John Williams in Spielburg's film is absolutely brilliant. The sound is unique, makes a permanent impression on the memory, and actually frames the movie in an artistic perfection that should be praised as high craft.

The cinematography expert Janusz Kaminski uses various camera techniques such as simultaneous track and zoom and long, close up, and medium shots to build the suspense and tension. These details add to the overall likeability of the film and support the classic style of film making.

But if you're not impressed with composers or camera artists, this film will still not fail you. Because the story and the acting are sublime. This is the kind of movie that gets the viewer to care right away about the main characters. We are put from the start right on the fence between the chaser and the chased. We care about both sides and we are wondering throughout the length of the film how it can be possible for both sides to win together or if we will mourn how one side must lose. Yet we get our happy ending, as if the writer was from the Jane Austen school of "Everybody Wins in the End" wrap it up kind of formula. Happy Happy, Joy Joy, we didn't have to watch somebody go down.

Knowing the plot, the suspense, and the characters of this film I want to say that Bogey's end line from Casablanca seems an apt ending line for this film as well. ("I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.")

I don't usually find myself agreeing with Rotten Tomatoes on their approval ratings. 96% is pretty high for a movie that's 22 years old. Yet in this particular case, I agree. It's a great film, worthy of rewatching even all these years later.