Sean, I don't remember that tidbit in particular since I only read the book once, but I remember there is more sex than the movie shows, being more explicit about the deal Forrest's mother makes to keep him in school. I know the movie does show that his mother has sex with the school official, but I can't remember if the movie shows the conversation or if it's inuendo and then a cut away so to hearing what's going on and Forrest imitating the sex sounds.

The only other thing I remember clearly is Forrest at college trying to make peach ade with a sweat sock.

That said, I think the AFI gives it the No. 1 slot out of a knee-jerk response to its reputation

Oh, of course. It's been THE GREATEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME OMG for so long that there would be public outcry if it were dethroned.

I haven't seen it again since I first saw it eight years ago. I ought to. Just to point out the pterodactyls.

I think I first saw Casablanca in that same film class, senior year. I believe I really liked it but spent the entire movie waiting for someone to say "Play it again, Sam."

Citizen Kane has an astoundingly interesting Rashomon-like structure. It's not a movie for kids.

I have mad love for Citizen Kane. Much like Casablanca, it made many innovations that are thought of as routine now, and the script is so nicely twisty.

One of the best courses I took in college was Film History - we went from the Lumiere Bros. all the way up to the present (then) day. Lots of movies, and the context that surrounded them. Shakespeare In Film rocked, as well.

I don't get why people refuse to watch black-and-white films (or, for that matter, foreign films as well). I grew up watching the cheesy horror flicks on Creature Feature, and the old musicals on late-night tv, so I just don't understand rejecting films because they're not in color.

Oh, and a super-seekrit response to Sean: LIMPA BREAD RULZ!!!

The Spectral Bovine One speaks truth: Citizen Kane has an astoundingly interesting Rashomon-like structure. It's not a movie for kids. That said, I think the AFI gives it the No. 1 slot out of a knee-jerk response to its reputation, which is also how I think the criminally overrated Network maintains a slot on the list.

My heretical statement is that, much as I love KANE, and as groundbreaking as it was, I prefer TOUCH OF EVIL, lack of any definitive version and all.

I prefer TOUCH OF EVIL, lack of any definitive version and all.

I'm with you there, but I think we're pretty far outside of the typical AFI voter's response.

Citizen Kane is one of those movies I always approach reluctantly, as if it were a spinach movie, and halfway through I'm dazzled and breathless and in love.

I still kinda like Touch of Evil just a bit more, but that's because somewhere deep inside me is a dirty dirty girl. But Citizen Kane is definitely the one I'd bring home to mama and marry.

eta: AH HA HA!!! Touch of Evil triple-cross-post!

My heretical statement is that, much as I love KANE, and as groundbreaking as it was, I prefer TOUCH OF EVIL, lack of any definitive version and all.

I'm with you, man.

One of the best courses I took in college was Film History - we went from the Lumiere Bros. all the way up to the present (then) day. Lots of movies, and the context that surrounded them.

I took History of Film in college, too! The film class I took in high school was also basically a film history course, since we went chronologically, for the most part.

Shakespeare In Film rocked, as well.

Yes, it did. Ian McKellan's Richard III FTW!

AH HA HA!!! Touch of Evil triple-cross-post!

I didn't care much for Touch of Evil ! But then, there was this whole pages-long discussion about that after I saw it.

Touch of Evil triple-cross-post!

It's some kind of a movie. What does it matter what you say about cinema?