Charles Foster Kane was a very rich man. He was raised by a rich banker, Walter Thatcher, who Kane’s mother let look after him until he was 25 and old enough to be on his own. He starts getting into the newspaper business and owns many newspapers and takes over the Inquirer. On his death bed he utters one word, “Rosebud” while dropping a mini snow globe as it crashed to the floor. A reporter by the name of Thompson goes out to interview people who were close to Kane and try to find the meaning of “Rosebud.” He dies alone after he divorced his first wife and his second wife left him. He becomes a big political leader and tries to win the election but loses and builds an Opera House for his wife, Susan Alexander who doesn’t even have a desire to sing, and apparently isn’t very good anyways. Kane is a man of fame and fortune and he never knows the meaning of love, only money. He collected statues and many things and bought so much pointless stuff that in the end just became trash.
I don’t think this movie was the greatest film of all time. It was interesting and Orson Welles played Charlie Kane very well in his own film, however, it’s not on my top favorite movie list. It was a good movie overall because in the end it makes you think about what Rosebud really was. It was the name of his sled, which he remembers as a kid, which must have been why he was holding the snow globe because it is relevant to sledding. It all comes together in the end once you see the sled burning and the word “Rosebud” melting away on the wooden sled. Kane even said so himself that he probably would be a very good man if he wasn’t rich. I think he was raised by money and not love. If his real parents raised him or maybe if he stayed with his mother he would have known how to love and what it really meant. Being successful and rich isn’t everything and I think Kane realizes that once Susan left him.
The film was well made and I enjoyed noticed the shots and different angles that were used. One of the beginning shots of the snow globe falling into pieces on the floor was an interesting shot. I also thought it was interesting how we never really saw Thompson’s face in full light, he was always just finding out information and what he looked like didn’t seem important to the audience. I also enjoyed experiencing a newsreel in the beginning of the movie showing all the information about Kane’s death. I guess for the 1940s this was a very well made classic film. It’s unique shots and cinematography really created a spectacular movie. I liked how it was similar to that true story, even though it got the real man who was suppose to resemble Kane was mad that this movie was made, the overall aspect of the film was good.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Analytical Review-The Maltese Falcon, Touch of Evil, Chinatown, and BRICK
The Maltese Falcon, Touch of Evil, and Chinatown were all black and white films. They all have many similarities within the Film Noir “genre.” All relatively old, there are always murders and a major twist in the story. The movie Brick is a new kind of Film Noir movie because it’s more recently made and it’s in color. All four of these films have a femme fatal and/or a damsel in distress. Watching these four movies had all the stylistics in Paul Schrader's Notes on Film Noir on page 235. "Like all film movements, film noir drew upon a reservoir of film techniques, and given the time one could correlate its techniques, themes, and casual elements into a stylistic schema." All these films were mostly set in the night time because it makes it more mysterious. Touch of Evil (1958) and the Maltese Falcon (1941) was made around the time of WWII which were dark crime thrillers for people to watch to get their minds off the war and what was happening in reality. People wanted to think about other problems rather than their own to get their mind off the times they were going through.
The lighting was dark for the most part in all four of these film noirs. Brick (2005) was different because it was mostly set during the day because many scenes were filmed at a high school. The main character Brendan (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a high school student trying to solve a murder mystery of his ex-girlfriend. Like all film noir main characters, the point of view is with a hero and intelligent investigator trying to figure things out alone with no police or government involved. These aspects of Brendan are similar to the character JJ Gittes (Jack Nicholson) in Chinatown (1974). They both also fell for the ‘femme fatal’ character. Brendan fell for the suspicious Laura (Nora Zehetner) and Gittes has a strange relationship with Evelyn Mulwray (Faye Dunaway). However, the style of the femme fatal character changes throughout the movie in Chinatown because I think Mulwray became the damsel in distress in the end. There’s always an important female character in every film noir that is always beautiful and up to something.
The theme of film noir has a lot to do with moral ambiguity. One character always must decide what to do whether if it’s ethical or not, right from wrong; keeping important information to yourself and figuring things out on your own. They always take it upon themselves to get the job done. Corruption is common in film noirs. There’s always someone you can’t trust. There’s always someone being dangerous and destructive. It normally is the case with each character having an aspect of danger. In Touch of Evil, the lead detective, the obese Captain Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles) becomes the bad guy in the film. There is always betrayal involved in a film noir.
In Paul Schrader’s notes on film noir he discusses the compositional tension that is preferred to physical action in Film Noir. The cinematography is more aware and the actor’s area of surroundings stands out more than the physical action that the actor is making. The scene is controlling the action. As dramatic as the action would be the composition is more artistic rather than gory and brutal to watch. Normally there isn’t an extreme close up of the action, just a general long shot or medium shot of the action taking place because the background is usually important in the style of film noir.
I think that film noir is a bunch of genres all mixed in one and it originated in the 1940s and 1950s. Just because it’s history starts in that generation doesn’t mean all film noirs have to be in black & white and have mostly dark lighting. I think Brick is a new form of film noir that involves the more recent generation of film. It’s based off of what was defined as a film noir back in the 40s and 50s but it is more modern-day crime and mystery. There doesn’t always have to be trench coats and fedoras in a film noir, but there sure always is cigarettes! Props in these kinds of movies stood out a lot more to me while watching this area of film.
The lighting was dark for the most part in all four of these film noirs. Brick (2005) was different because it was mostly set during the day because many scenes were filmed at a high school. The main character Brendan (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a high school student trying to solve a murder mystery of his ex-girlfriend. Like all film noir main characters, the point of view is with a hero and intelligent investigator trying to figure things out alone with no police or government involved. These aspects of Brendan are similar to the character JJ Gittes (Jack Nicholson) in Chinatown (1974). They both also fell for the ‘femme fatal’ character. Brendan fell for the suspicious Laura (Nora Zehetner) and Gittes has a strange relationship with Evelyn Mulwray (Faye Dunaway). However, the style of the femme fatal character changes throughout the movie in Chinatown because I think Mulwray became the damsel in distress in the end. There’s always an important female character in every film noir that is always beautiful and up to something.
The theme of film noir has a lot to do with moral ambiguity. One character always must decide what to do whether if it’s ethical or not, right from wrong; keeping important information to yourself and figuring things out on your own. They always take it upon themselves to get the job done. Corruption is common in film noirs. There’s always someone you can’t trust. There’s always someone being dangerous and destructive. It normally is the case with each character having an aspect of danger. In Touch of Evil, the lead detective, the obese Captain Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles) becomes the bad guy in the film. There is always betrayal involved in a film noir.
In Paul Schrader’s notes on film noir he discusses the compositional tension that is preferred to physical action in Film Noir. The cinematography is more aware and the actor’s area of surroundings stands out more than the physical action that the actor is making. The scene is controlling the action. As dramatic as the action would be the composition is more artistic rather than gory and brutal to watch. Normally there isn’t an extreme close up of the action, just a general long shot or medium shot of the action taking place because the background is usually important in the style of film noir.
I think that film noir is a bunch of genres all mixed in one and it originated in the 1940s and 1950s. Just because it’s history starts in that generation doesn’t mean all film noirs have to be in black & white and have mostly dark lighting. I think Brick is a new form of film noir that involves the more recent generation of film. It’s based off of what was defined as a film noir back in the 40s and 50s but it is more modern-day crime and mystery. There doesn’t always have to be trench coats and fedoras in a film noir, but there sure always is cigarettes! Props in these kinds of movies stood out a lot more to me while watching this area of film.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Chinatown (1974)
Chinatown (1974) by Roman Polanski
Chinatown starred Jack Nicholson as a private detective named “Jake Gittes” who is hired to spy on Hollis Mulwray, the chief engineer for the city’s water department, by an imposer who comes into his office and claims to be Mrs. Evelyn Mulwray. (She thinks he’s having an affair.) Once Gittes starts spying on Hollis, he snatches pictures of him with a young blonde and another time with an old man that looks like they are in a heated argument. Later we find out who the young blonde is, and the old man is Evelyn’s father, Noah Cross (played by John Hutson). The real Evelyn Mulwray comes into Gittes’s office and proclaims she is going to sue him if he doesn’t stop following her husband. However, once Hollis ends up killed, a huge investigation breaks out and Gittes tries to figure out why this man died and who killed him.
This movie was a film noir because it had a big investigation about a murder that needed to be solved. The black and white made it more of a cinematic feel to it. I didn’t understand why that lady impersonated Evelyn Mulwray and who hired her to do that. I didn’t understand why they wanted him to be spied on and why the impersonator lady turned up dead in her apartment later on in the film. I understand the overall point of the film, just not that particular detail. The movie was pretty good, it definitely had the film noir aspects to it. It was a mystery with one character trying to solve the problem without getting the cops involve because of course, they ruin everything. The moral of the story was that something bad always happens whenever Gitte is in Chinatown. The entire movie was not set in Chinatown expect for the end of the film where something horrible happens! And that’s the point is that good things don’t come out of being in Chinatown. Horrible things will always happen there!
Chinatown starred Jack Nicholson as a private detective named “Jake Gittes” who is hired to spy on Hollis Mulwray, the chief engineer for the city’s water department, by an imposer who comes into his office and claims to be Mrs. Evelyn Mulwray. (She thinks he’s having an affair.) Once Gittes starts spying on Hollis, he snatches pictures of him with a young blonde and another time with an old man that looks like they are in a heated argument. Later we find out who the young blonde is, and the old man is Evelyn’s father, Noah Cross (played by John Hutson). The real Evelyn Mulwray comes into Gittes’s office and proclaims she is going to sue him if he doesn’t stop following her husband. However, once Hollis ends up killed, a huge investigation breaks out and Gittes tries to figure out why this man died and who killed him.
This movie was a film noir because it had a big investigation about a murder that needed to be solved. The black and white made it more of a cinematic feel to it. I didn’t understand why that lady impersonated Evelyn Mulwray and who hired her to do that. I didn’t understand why they wanted him to be spied on and why the impersonator lady turned up dead in her apartment later on in the film. I understand the overall point of the film, just not that particular detail. The movie was pretty good, it definitely had the film noir aspects to it. It was a mystery with one character trying to solve the problem without getting the cops involve because of course, they ruin everything. The moral of the story was that something bad always happens whenever Gitte is in Chinatown. The entire movie was not set in Chinatown expect for the end of the film where something horrible happens! And that’s the point is that good things don’t come out of being in Chinatown. Horrible things will always happen there!
Monday, November 16, 2009
BRICK (2005)
Brick (2005)
Written and directed by Rian Johnson, Brick is a detective story set at a high school, which is very surprising to me because I never once saw any of the characters attend class. When Brendan Frye (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) gets a desperately frightening phone call by his ex girlfriend Emily (Emilie de Ravin), he immediately makes her business, his business. With the help of his friend he calls The Brain (Matt O’Leary), he figures out a crime investigation to why he found Emily’s body dead in a sewer tunnel two days after her phone call. Throughout his journey, Brendan gets beat up plenty of times to the point where he should not be standing, but pushes to find who his ex girlfriend’s murderer is, and why she died. The investigation has to do with an eccentric drug lord they call “The Pin” (Lukas Haas) and the femme fatal character is Laura (Nora Zehetner). The twist to this movie is rather striking. The damsel in distress would be Emily in this movie. Brendan starts off trying to figure out the investigation with the words “brick” and “pin.”
I enjoyed this movie. It definitely fits into the film noir genre because it has a lot of crime, violence, drugs, and love story attached to it. It’s very entertaining, however very confusing to follow, because it’s a fast pace and you need to catch every word in the dialogue to understand Brendan’s next move. A better understanding and more appreciation of Brick would be advised if watched a second time. Brendan’s character is hard boiled and very tough. He knows what he wants and he does his best to get what he wants. He is a very intelligent boy who strives for the answers, and achieves his goals. The twist is amazing! I was not expecting the ending, which was unpredictable, which I love about movies and is what makes movies a hit!
Touch of Evil (1958)
Touch of Evil (1958) directed by Orson Welles was an older film and a classic film noir. It’s an American film about an investigation that involves both United States and Mexican police force because it happens near the borderline of both countries. A Mexican detected named Vargas (Charleston Heston) and his new wife (Janet Leigh) who hears a loud explosion from afar, realizing it’s a car that just blew up near the border that had a bomb implanted in it. The newly wed couple was supposed to be on their honeymoon but instead, Vargas decides to inspect this investigation. Captain Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles) is in charge of the American police investigating this situation. He is not the friendliest man and seems to be very suspicious. He claims to stand up for the law, yet he tries to blame the investigation all on a young Mexican man. Vargas tries to fight against this because it is a false accusation, and he gets into a lot of trouble, meanwhile his wife is held captured back at the motel where they are staying by a man by the name of Grande. As the plot develops, it becomes very clear that Vargas cannot trust Quinlan because he is corrupt. Vargas then has to prove that the heroic head investigator or the American police is really making things worse than better.
This film was kind of confusing at times because it was all over the place. I had problems following the plot and where exactly it was going. Once I kept found out information a little bit at a time it all came together at the end. I think a lot of people in this film are not what you expect them to really be towards the end of the film. I didn’t enjoy watching this movie. It was too old for me and it didn’t grasp a lot of my interest.
This film was kind of confusing at times because it was all over the place. I had problems following the plot and where exactly it was going. Once I kept found out information a little bit at a time it all came together at the end. I think a lot of people in this film are not what you expect them to really be towards the end of the film. I didn’t enjoy watching this movie. It was too old for me and it didn’t grasp a lot of my interest.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
The Maltese Falcon (1941) Review
This film was written and directed by John Huston. It stars Humphrey Bogart as private investigator Sam Spade, Jerome Cowan as Miles Archer, his partner in investigation. Mary Astor as Brigid O' Shaughnessy, Spade's femme fatale client, is a suspicious liar throughout the film and she becomes the suspect in the investigation of Mile's Archer's killing. The maltese falcon is a statue that is what the entire movie's fuss is all about, which in the end turns out to be a fake anyways. What was the significance of the Falcon in the first place?
The Maltese Falcon is known to be the first film noir ever created, because it is filled with crime, drama, romance, and mystery. With three scoundrels all trying to get their hands on the falcon statue, which has a great significant value and trade a lot of money for it. Ms. Shaughnessy is a curiosity to the audience throughout the movie because she doesn't explain her full story until Spade figures it out in the end. I didn't really understand the relationship between Ms. Shaugnessy and Spade, and Mile's wife and Spade. Was he just a ladies man? He randomly kept kissing each of them even though he seemed like he had no attraction to either one. This film was eventful and a knockout for 1941, however, I didn't enjoy it too much because I never grasp the concept of what the big deal was about this falcon statue in the first place!
The Maltese Falcon is known to be the first film noir ever created, because it is filled with crime, drama, romance, and mystery. With three scoundrels all trying to get their hands on the falcon statue, which has a great significant value and trade a lot of money for it. Ms. Shaughnessy is a curiosity to the audience throughout the movie because she doesn't explain her full story until Spade figures it out in the end. I didn't really understand the relationship between Ms. Shaugnessy and Spade, and Mile's wife and Spade. Was he just a ladies man? He randomly kept kissing each of them even though he seemed like he had no attraction to either one. This film was eventful and a knockout for 1941, however, I didn't enjoy it too much because I never grasp the concept of what the big deal was about this falcon statue in the first place!
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Casablanca, Daughters of the Dusk, Monsoon Wedding..Analytical BLOGGGYBLOG
Analytical Blog for Casablanca, Daughters of the Dusk, and Monsoon Wedding
Casablanca (1942) is a classic Hollywood film with classic film narrative because it presents a close relationship between the individual lives of Rick (Humphrey Bogart) and Ilsa (Ingrid Bergman). The setting is based on the main social history that was occurring after World War II. Daughters of the Dusk has an alternative film narrative because it focuses on a large group of individuals that live their lives by traditional patterns and they’ve been living that way for so many years because it’s been the history in their family for years way back to their first ancestors. The characters all live on an island and most of the family wants to move north and leave the island to start a new life. Monsoon Wedding challenges Hollywood convention as well as Daughters of the Dusk because it is also an alternative narrative that has cultural differences since it’s a “bollywood” film.
The narrative point of view was different in all three of these movies. In Daughters of the Dusk, there were so many main characters but not all of them I fully understood. For example, I felt like the audience didn’t get a chance to be emotionally attached to a particular character because the narrative point of views kept changing from one person to the next. For instance, we see the point of view of Viola (Cheryl Lynn Bruce) in the beginning of the film when she is returning from the mainland, and right away I thought the focus was going to stay on her. Then it ended up being Yellow Mary (Barbarao)’s perspective since she was returning home in what looked like a wedding dress. We also hear the Unborn Child (Kai-Lynn Warren)’s narrative point of view when she runs through the island watching over her parents. It was interesting to see how the film jumped from one person to the next. There’s also a side love story between Iona (Bahni Turpin) and St. Julien Lastchild (M. Chochise Anderson) which seems unimportant until the very end of the film when Iona decides to stay behind on the island with him as her family moves to the mainland. I don’t see parallelism in all these combing characters except for the fact that they are all in the same family.
In Monsoon Wedding, the narrative was extremely bilingual using various subtitles to understand the Indian language. Many characters were very important to the plot. It had several parallel romantic situations between many members of the Verma family and even between their housemaid and the wedding planner. The film showed how traditional Indian weddings would occur and the many traditional engagements that occur before the wedding like woman gathering for rituals to put henna on their hands.
Both these movies challenge the conventional Hollywood films because they are not focused on one or two main characters. There are several narrations and the western style is not based on social historical events. The classical Hollywood narrative focuses more on the times between and during World War II and the alternative narrations are focused more on cultural narrations. Daughters of the Dusk and Monsoon Wedding create a visible distinction between the classical Hollywood film Casablanca. The love triangle between three characters in Casablanca form an emotional attachment to the characters especially the ending when Rick makes a decision because it was the safest way since certain historical events were taking place. Daughters of the Dusk avoids concentrating on the motivations of a single character. Monsoon Wedding lets the audience get to know certain characters, like the father of the Verma family. For example, he was very emotional when he found out about his niece being sexually abused by his in-law and was now doing the same to his youngest (daughter?) We see how much it impacted him because he makes the decision to not let his in-law take place at the wedding anymore. These films have nontraditional narratives that vary between the cultural aspects and traditions. Daughters of the Dusk was portraying an African American family lifestyle, Monsoon Wedding was portraying a lifestyle in India, and Casablanca was a typical American movie that portrayed Caucasian lifestyle during the particular time and generation.
Casablanca (1942) is a classic Hollywood film with classic film narrative because it presents a close relationship between the individual lives of Rick (Humphrey Bogart) and Ilsa (Ingrid Bergman). The setting is based on the main social history that was occurring after World War II. Daughters of the Dusk has an alternative film narrative because it focuses on a large group of individuals that live their lives by traditional patterns and they’ve been living that way for so many years because it’s been the history in their family for years way back to their first ancestors. The characters all live on an island and most of the family wants to move north and leave the island to start a new life. Monsoon Wedding challenges Hollywood convention as well as Daughters of the Dusk because it is also an alternative narrative that has cultural differences since it’s a “bollywood” film.
The narrative point of view was different in all three of these movies. In Daughters of the Dusk, there were so many main characters but not all of them I fully understood. For example, I felt like the audience didn’t get a chance to be emotionally attached to a particular character because the narrative point of views kept changing from one person to the next. For instance, we see the point of view of Viola (Cheryl Lynn Bruce) in the beginning of the film when she is returning from the mainland, and right away I thought the focus was going to stay on her. Then it ended up being Yellow Mary (Barbarao)’s perspective since she was returning home in what looked like a wedding dress. We also hear the Unborn Child (Kai-Lynn Warren)’s narrative point of view when she runs through the island watching over her parents. It was interesting to see how the film jumped from one person to the next. There’s also a side love story between Iona (Bahni Turpin) and St. Julien Lastchild (M. Chochise Anderson) which seems unimportant until the very end of the film when Iona decides to stay behind on the island with him as her family moves to the mainland. I don’t see parallelism in all these combing characters except for the fact that they are all in the same family.
In Monsoon Wedding, the narrative was extremely bilingual using various subtitles to understand the Indian language. Many characters were very important to the plot. It had several parallel romantic situations between many members of the Verma family and even between their housemaid and the wedding planner. The film showed how traditional Indian weddings would occur and the many traditional engagements that occur before the wedding like woman gathering for rituals to put henna on their hands.
Both these movies challenge the conventional Hollywood films because they are not focused on one or two main characters. There are several narrations and the western style is not based on social historical events. The classical Hollywood narrative focuses more on the times between and during World War II and the alternative narrations are focused more on cultural narrations. Daughters of the Dusk and Monsoon Wedding create a visible distinction between the classical Hollywood film Casablanca. The love triangle between three characters in Casablanca form an emotional attachment to the characters especially the ending when Rick makes a decision because it was the safest way since certain historical events were taking place. Daughters of the Dusk avoids concentrating on the motivations of a single character. Monsoon Wedding lets the audience get to know certain characters, like the father of the Verma family. For example, he was very emotional when he found out about his niece being sexually abused by his in-law and was now doing the same to his youngest (daughter?) We see how much it impacted him because he makes the decision to not let his in-law take place at the wedding anymore. These films have nontraditional narratives that vary between the cultural aspects and traditions. Daughters of the Dusk was portraying an African American family lifestyle, Monsoon Wedding was portraying a lifestyle in India, and Casablanca was a typical American movie that portrayed Caucasian lifestyle during the particular time and generation.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Monsoon Wedding-film review
Film Review- Monsoon Wedding
The director Mira Nair of Monsoon Wedding created a colorful film that was set in India. It was a gathering of the Verma family, as their daughter Aditi, accepts a marriage with a man that her father arranged for her. The groom is an Indian living in Texas, and once they are married they plan on moving to America. At first Aditi is confused because she has a subtle affair with her ex lover, a married TV producer. However, that ends quickly and she makes her decision and realizes that she wants to be with the man her father picked for her. The engagements and arrangements for the wedding last for a couple days, while Dubey, the wedding planner, is a bit behind in his work. He falls in love with the family’s housemaid, Alice. All relatives from both families come to this wedding from distant places like Australia, USA, and all over India. Some family conflicts occur, Ria, a cousin to the bride, is scarred from an in-law who sexually abused her, and speaks up when she notices that he is doing the same to another young girl of the family. Once the chaotic planning and setting up for this huge event is over, it turns out to be a happy wedding with everyone dancing in the rain to the exotic Indian music.
There is a lot of romance in the air between so many people in this film. It seems to be a very important aspect of the Indian culture to get married. Why does Dubey always eat flowers? That was one of my main concerns throughout this film…it struck me as strange. This movie has a different narrative because it’s a western style that includes old traditions of the Indian culture. It has several main characters all having problems; it reminded me of a soap opera. It presents parallel stories between romantic couples. The culture of India and it’s old traditions is shown clearly in this bollywood film. I thought it was humorous at times as well as depressing, exciting, and fun. I enjoyed the music and all the jewelry and outfits the woman wore!
The director Mira Nair of Monsoon Wedding created a colorful film that was set in India. It was a gathering of the Verma family, as their daughter Aditi, accepts a marriage with a man that her father arranged for her. The groom is an Indian living in Texas, and once they are married they plan on moving to America. At first Aditi is confused because she has a subtle affair with her ex lover, a married TV producer. However, that ends quickly and she makes her decision and realizes that she wants to be with the man her father picked for her. The engagements and arrangements for the wedding last for a couple days, while Dubey, the wedding planner, is a bit behind in his work. He falls in love with the family’s housemaid, Alice. All relatives from both families come to this wedding from distant places like Australia, USA, and all over India. Some family conflicts occur, Ria, a cousin to the bride, is scarred from an in-law who sexually abused her, and speaks up when she notices that he is doing the same to another young girl of the family. Once the chaotic planning and setting up for this huge event is over, it turns out to be a happy wedding with everyone dancing in the rain to the exotic Indian music.
There is a lot of romance in the air between so many people in this film. It seems to be a very important aspect of the Indian culture to get married. Why does Dubey always eat flowers? That was one of my main concerns throughout this film…it struck me as strange. This movie has a different narrative because it’s a western style that includes old traditions of the Indian culture. It has several main characters all having problems; it reminded me of a soap opera. It presents parallel stories between romantic couples. The culture of India and it’s old traditions is shown clearly in this bollywood film. I thought it was humorous at times as well as depressing, exciting, and fun. I enjoyed the music and all the jewelry and outfits the woman wore!
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Daughters of the Dust-Film review
Daughters of the Dust (1991) Film Review
This movie is a lot different from typical Hollywood films. The English language that the characters use are so hard to understand it almost sounds like a completely different language. The director, Julie Dash, is an African-American female which is not surprising seeing that this film was all about African-American women and their family. There are several main characters in this film. The entire Peazant family is important to the plot. Nana Peazant (Cora Lee Ray) is the Peazant family matriarch who plans to stay at the island where they all grew up, Ibo Landing, when the rest of the family moves to the mainland (migrates North). Yellow Mary (Barbarao), another Peazant woman, comes back to the island to visit the family, with her companion, Trula (Trula Hoosier) who doesn’t seem to speak much but it always by Yellow Mary’s side. Viola Peazant (Cheryl Lynn Bruce), is returning from the mainland who’s trying to get her family to move North and brings along a photographer Mr. Snead (Tommy Redmond Hicks). Eula (Alva Rogers) and Eli Peazant (Adisa Anderson) are a married couple that has a situation where Eula was raped by a white man. They have an Unborn child (Kai-Lynn Warren) who narratives some of the film, that runs around the island as a little girl with a blue ribbon in her hair. Is this child Eli’s daughter, or is it from the white man that raped Eula? That is a question that I wasn’t sure of, even though it was clear that the girl resembling the “Unborn Child” was clearly fully African-American.
Haager Peazant (Kaycee Moore) is married into the family is a stubborn character who doesn’t hold to the family traditions. Her daughter Iona Peazant (Bahni Turpin) is in love with St. Julien Lastchild (M. Cochise Anderson), a youg Cherokee man who loves her in return, and ends up making her stay behind with him on the island.
This film was hard to follow. I was really confused because I didn’t understand the concept of why they were leaving in the first place. It looked like a beautiful island and from a long shot of the sun setting and two women running on the sand. The scenes when the “Unborn Child” was running through the island was in a dream-like slow motion effect that stood out in the film. I liked the concept of the child because it was as though she was in their presence in spirit even though she wasn’t out of her mother’s womb yet. I would not recommend this film to be watched because I didn’t enjoy watching it because it was hard to understand and didn’t have much of a thrill.
This movie is a lot different from typical Hollywood films. The English language that the characters use are so hard to understand it almost sounds like a completely different language. The director, Julie Dash, is an African-American female which is not surprising seeing that this film was all about African-American women and their family. There are several main characters in this film. The entire Peazant family is important to the plot. Nana Peazant (Cora Lee Ray) is the Peazant family matriarch who plans to stay at the island where they all grew up, Ibo Landing, when the rest of the family moves to the mainland (migrates North). Yellow Mary (Barbarao), another Peazant woman, comes back to the island to visit the family, with her companion, Trula (Trula Hoosier) who doesn’t seem to speak much but it always by Yellow Mary’s side. Viola Peazant (Cheryl Lynn Bruce), is returning from the mainland who’s trying to get her family to move North and brings along a photographer Mr. Snead (Tommy Redmond Hicks). Eula (Alva Rogers) and Eli Peazant (Adisa Anderson) are a married couple that has a situation where Eula was raped by a white man. They have an Unborn child (Kai-Lynn Warren) who narratives some of the film, that runs around the island as a little girl with a blue ribbon in her hair. Is this child Eli’s daughter, or is it from the white man that raped Eula? That is a question that I wasn’t sure of, even though it was clear that the girl resembling the “Unborn Child” was clearly fully African-American.
Haager Peazant (Kaycee Moore) is married into the family is a stubborn character who doesn’t hold to the family traditions. Her daughter Iona Peazant (Bahni Turpin) is in love with St. Julien Lastchild (M. Cochise Anderson), a youg Cherokee man who loves her in return, and ends up making her stay behind with him on the island.
This film was hard to follow. I was really confused because I didn’t understand the concept of why they were leaving in the first place. It looked like a beautiful island and from a long shot of the sun setting and two women running on the sand. The scenes when the “Unborn Child” was running through the island was in a dream-like slow motion effect that stood out in the film. I liked the concept of the child because it was as though she was in their presence in spirit even though she wasn’t out of her mother’s womb yet. I would not recommend this film to be watched because I didn’t enjoy watching it because it was hard to understand and didn’t have much of a thrill.
casablanca-film review
Casablanca (1942) film review
This 1942 Michael Curtiz film Casablanca is an American classic. In the beginning of the film the narration is in third-person omniscient. It gives a little background before the film begins. The three main characters which the film is based upon is Rick (Humphrey Bogart), owner of the Rick's Cafe Americain in Casablanca, Victor Laszlo (Paul Henreid) a leader of the French resistance who’s wanted by the Nazis, and Ilsa (Ingrid Bergam) a beautiful woman caught between these two men whom she falls in love with both and can’t decide who she wants to be with. This love triangle between these three characters is a conflict that’s created all because Ilsa doesn’t ever explain herself until the very end of the film. (Which was very frustrating, especially when she went to go talk to Rick the first night and just walked out on him after he made some drunken comments). Ilsa’s actions in this film propel the film forward because she keeps her big secret about why she left Rick in France at the train station. Once we figure out the situation and she has to decide, Rick decides for her and does what’s the safest for the both of them.
Casablanca is a movie that I will remember because of its repetitive romantic line that Rick says to Ilsa, “Here’s to looking at you kid” every time she sees her. This film was a good film of it’s time, and had a rather astounding twist to it. Throughout the entire film I was very conspicuous about Captain Renault (Claude Rains). He was a corrupt German soldier that tried to do what was right but still ended up following the law and pursue his duty as a German soldier. I was confused about his actions because he seemed to be very carefree which caught me off guard. The final scene made me like him for his actions that showed true friendship between him and Rick.
After watching this film I didn’t really like it because the plot confused me. Certain aspects of the film, like why the soldiers that came into Rick’s café didn’t arrest Victor Laszlo right on the spot. He escaped from concentration camps, was he Jewish? However, once I thought about it this movie was really well put together. Ilsa was the only character who made me angry because of her secretive ways and stupid actions. But in the end Rick fixed the conflict and did it for the best.
This 1942 Michael Curtiz film Casablanca is an American classic. In the beginning of the film the narration is in third-person omniscient. It gives a little background before the film begins. The three main characters which the film is based upon is Rick (Humphrey Bogart), owner of the Rick's Cafe Americain in Casablanca, Victor Laszlo (Paul Henreid) a leader of the French resistance who’s wanted by the Nazis, and Ilsa (Ingrid Bergam) a beautiful woman caught between these two men whom she falls in love with both and can’t decide who she wants to be with. This love triangle between these three characters is a conflict that’s created all because Ilsa doesn’t ever explain herself until the very end of the film. (Which was very frustrating, especially when she went to go talk to Rick the first night and just walked out on him after he made some drunken comments). Ilsa’s actions in this film propel the film forward because she keeps her big secret about why she left Rick in France at the train station. Once we figure out the situation and she has to decide, Rick decides for her and does what’s the safest for the both of them.
Casablanca is a movie that I will remember because of its repetitive romantic line that Rick says to Ilsa, “Here’s to looking at you kid” every time she sees her. This film was a good film of it’s time, and had a rather astounding twist to it. Throughout the entire film I was very conspicuous about Captain Renault (Claude Rains). He was a corrupt German soldier that tried to do what was right but still ended up following the law and pursue his duty as a German soldier. I was confused about his actions because he seemed to be very carefree which caught me off guard. The final scene made me like him for his actions that showed true friendship between him and Rick.
After watching this film I didn’t really like it because the plot confused me. Certain aspects of the film, like why the soldiers that came into Rick’s café didn’t arrest Victor Laszlo right on the spot. He escaped from concentration camps, was he Jewish? However, once I thought about it this movie was really well put together. Ilsa was the only character who made me angry because of her secretive ways and stupid actions. But in the end Rick fixed the conflict and did it for the best.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Analytical Review- Bonnie and Clyde
Bonnie and Clyde was an amazing film. It showed rhythmic editing especially at the final scene where Bonnie and Clyde are gunned down from people hiding in the bushes across the street. The killing of Bonnie and Clyde was so dramatic and featured many cuts to each of their facial expressions to the people in the bushes that were about to catch them for good.
The short cuts make the scene go at a faster pace, especially when the shooting starts. It picks up right after the man who set them up dove underneath his truck to hide for safety so he wouldn't get shot accidentally.
The reaction shots of Bonnie and Clyde were interesting as they kept being shot constantly by the non stop bullets that kept shooting until they were both fallen to the ground unable to move. The way Clyde died was intriguing because he fell the the ground and after he was shot more than 30 times he was still able to roll over on his side to his final breath. As Bonnie fell out the car door she was able to die in an awkward position with her hand hanging out the car and her body halfway falling out of the side of the car. It was a very dramatic and rhythmic editing.
The way Dede Allen edited this film was phenomenal to time it was released because the pattern was different then the typical Hollywood style.
The short cuts make the scene go at a faster pace, especially when the shooting starts. It picks up right after the man who set them up dove underneath his truck to hide for safety so he wouldn't get shot accidentally.
The reaction shots of Bonnie and Clyde were interesting as they kept being shot constantly by the non stop bullets that kept shooting until they were both fallen to the ground unable to move. The way Clyde died was intriguing because he fell the the ground and after he was shot more than 30 times he was still able to roll over on his side to his final breath. As Bonnie fell out the car door she was able to die in an awkward position with her hand hanging out the car and her body halfway falling out of the side of the car. It was a very dramatic and rhythmic editing.
The way Dede Allen edited this film was phenomenal to time it was released because the pattern was different then the typical Hollywood style.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Bonnie and Clyde film review
Arthur Penn's classic movie, Bonnie and Clyde, is based on a story of a couple in love that rob banks in the 1920s. Bonnie Parker is bored with her life and wants a change. She is dreading to go to work one day and looks out her window and sees Clyde about to steal her mama's car. She runs downstairs and meets him and he tells her that he robs banks. His charming good looks and dreams of living carefree in the Great Depression, finalizes Bonnie's decision to join Clyde on his crime spree that extends from Oklahoma to Texas. The two fall in love and begin robbing banks together and forming a gang that becomes disperse once the police are close to catching them, but always seem to get away. They become wanted celebrities known across the country. People who have encounters with Bonnie and Clyde are proud to be interviewed and speak with the press about their experience.
This film is a story about an ongoing car chase and doesn't end until Bonnie and Clyde are defeated. Bonnie writes a poem that Clyde sends to the newspapers to be published that describes their adventure and it foreshadows their future. I enjoyed watching this film because it showed the point of view of being rebels and trying to get away with taking money when everyone else had none at this time. They were breaking free from the chains of society and were ambitious enough to last as long as they did on their long run from the cops. This movie seems a bit too long but the ending made up for it because it got straight to the point and ended abruptly which made up for the dragged on events that happened leading up to the last scene.
This film is a story about an ongoing car chase and doesn't end until Bonnie and Clyde are defeated. Bonnie writes a poem that Clyde sends to the newspapers to be published that describes their adventure and it foreshadows their future. I enjoyed watching this film because it showed the point of view of being rebels and trying to get away with taking money when everyone else had none at this time. They were breaking free from the chains of society and were ambitious enough to last as long as they did on their long run from the cops. This movie seems a bit too long but the ending made up for it because it got straight to the point and ended abruptly which made up for the dragged on events that happened leading up to the last scene.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Run Lola Run Analytical Editing Review
In this film the editing is astounding. The same event occurs 3 times and it replays Lola's running encounter different ways each time. The movie includes all types of editing. From split screen, black and white, animation, point of view shots,and the sequence of still shots. The plot is easy to follow except when she bumps into the random people and the series of shots of their life flash before the screen and it's so quick and random it symbolizes fate and destiny of each person that Lola runs by. Every time the event plays over, the person's series of still images change.
The director, Tom Tywker, used interesting techniques throughout the film. I enjoyed watching the animation sequence while Lola ran down the stairs and out the door of her home. Right when she runs out the door it shows an overhead shot and goes back to real footage. Another memorable sequence in this film was each time Lola ran into someone on the street. The picture images of each person was quickly shown on screen but it gave enough information to understand what happened in their life. I really liked that way of editing because it made characters that didn't have a major role have a major effect on Lola. It was a film that made me think "I wonder what I would do if I could have done it a different way". This film definitley shows that and I was satisfied with the last result.
The director, Tom Tywker, used interesting techniques throughout the film. I enjoyed watching the animation sequence while Lola ran down the stairs and out the door of her home. Right when she runs out the door it shows an overhead shot and goes back to real footage. Another memorable sequence in this film was each time Lola ran into someone on the street. The picture images of each person was quickly shown on screen but it gave enough information to understand what happened in their life. I really liked that way of editing because it made characters that didn't have a major role have a major effect on Lola. It was a film that made me think "I wonder what I would do if I could have done it a different way". This film definitley shows that and I was satisfied with the last result.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Run, Lola, Run! Film Review
The 1998 German film, Run Lola Run seems longer than only 81 minutes. The same event happens 3 times and each time it gets better and better. Lola needs to fulfill a task that helps her boyfriend who is at risk of being killed if she doesn't come up with 100,000 dollars in 20 minutes. This film seems longer than what it is because it shows the same event happen 3 times with different ways of Lola getting the money.
This film is really cool because it shows animation and reality. I was really attracted to the soundtrack and the bright red color of Lola's hair. It really grasp my attention how there was so many different kinds of lighting in this film. There was black and white, and all red scenes when Manni and Lola are laying in bed together talking about their love for each other. The editing caught my eye because I enjoyed how they created quick flashes of people and places in a certain scene. For example, in the beginning of the film when Lola is trying to figure out who to ask for help, it flashes quickly to so many faces of who she is thinking of. This film is thrilling and has issues of fate and destiny about each person who Lola runs into. I recommend watching this film because it's high sense of urgency really drew me in and it is spontaneous editing.
This film is really cool because it shows animation and reality. I was really attracted to the soundtrack and the bright red color of Lola's hair. It really grasp my attention how there was so many different kinds of lighting in this film. There was black and white, and all red scenes when Manni and Lola are laying in bed together talking about their love for each other. The editing caught my eye because I enjoyed how they created quick flashes of people and places in a certain scene. For example, in the beginning of the film when Lola is trying to figure out who to ask for help, it flashes quickly to so many faces of who she is thinking of. This film is thrilling and has issues of fate and destiny about each person who Lola runs into. I recommend watching this film because it's high sense of urgency really drew me in and it is spontaneous editing.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Analytical Review- Do the Right Thing
*spoiler alert* Do the Right Thing had a very scattered plot with several main characters. I noticed that Spike Lee was a fan of dutch angles because they were used very often in this film. The screening was askew because the whole movie didn't make much sense until you realize in the end that Buggin Out (Giancarlo Esposito) just wanted justice in Sal's (Danny Aiello) pizzeria shop, by having some African-American's up on his "wall of fame". I want to focus on the last scene of the movie because that is a very good example of mis en scene. There was a lot going on, from screaming black folks to Sal breaking Radio Raheem's (Bill Nunn) boom box. The bat that Sal uses as a weapon to destroy Radio Raheem's boom box is a metaphorical prop, because it wasn't used for hitting a baseball, it was used to show the emotions and feelings of how Sal felt about the loud music blasting in his restaurant. Once the beating was over, the black folks had a rage and once Raheem pulls him over the counter to beat him up everyone starts attacking him. At this point, everyone is ganging up on Sal while his two sons are trying to pull people off him. Once they drag him outside, other locals notice the riot and start running towards the chaos. Walls and windows are a great significance to this film, especially with Mother Sister's windowsill where she "sees all" and DJ Mister Senor Love Daddy's window is like a window to the entire neighborhood: he watches the entire destruction occur. The Wall of Fame is the basis of the issue, where only Italians and whites hang up on it. Another wall that stuck out to me that is of importance was the big red brick wall behind where Sweet Dick Willie (Robin Harris), ML (Paul Benjamin), and Coconut Sid (Frankie Faison) sat all day discussing and observing what is going on amongst the town.
Do The Right Thing features costumes that reflect styles of 1980s fashion. Each character's costume created realism to their personality. Radio Raheem's costume included a boom box, because it becomes his instrumental prop and you never see him without it throughout the entire film. Da Mayor (Ossie Davis) outfit was dirty, wrinkled suit was very different from the younger characters with bright crazy outfits. Mookie (Spike Lee) wore Jackie Robinson jersey with long shorts and tall socks. Everyone had their own style. Costumes play a big racial role in this film. For example, when a white man on a bicycle runs over Buggin Out's Air Jordan sneakers, it becomes a very violent problem.
Once Radio Raheem is killed by the white police officer, there becomes a fine line between the Italian's and the blacks and Latinos. The film ends with many racial conflicts and it's very ironic because it goes against the title of the film.
Do The Right Thing features costumes that reflect styles of 1980s fashion. Each character's costume created realism to their personality. Radio Raheem's costume included a boom box, because it becomes his instrumental prop and you never see him without it throughout the entire film. Da Mayor (Ossie Davis) outfit was dirty, wrinkled suit was very different from the younger characters with bright crazy outfits. Mookie (Spike Lee) wore Jackie Robinson jersey with long shorts and tall socks. Everyone had their own style. Costumes play a big racial role in this film. For example, when a white man on a bicycle runs over Buggin Out's Air Jordan sneakers, it becomes a very violent problem.
Once Radio Raheem is killed by the white police officer, there becomes a fine line between the Italian's and the blacks and Latinos. The film ends with many racial conflicts and it's very ironic because it goes against the title of the film.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Do the Right Thing- Film Review
This film was extremely ironic. Director Spike Lee starred himself as the main character Mookie. Samuel L. Jackson also stars in this film as the town DJ whom they call “Mister Senor Love Daddy.” Samuel Jackson is one of my favorite actors and right when I saw him in this motion picture I knew it was going to be a phenomenal and well designed film. Do the Right Thing is based on a 24-hour period on the hottest day of summer in Brooklyn, NY. Throughout the beginning of the film, we are introduced to the town locals (all of them played a pretty important role) and watch them go about their daily lives.
There’s the Italian father Sal (Danny Aiello) and his two sons Vito (Richard Edson) and Pino (John Turturro) who own Sal’s Famous Pizzeria, a very popular and delicious pizza place in town. Mookie (Spike Lee) works for Sal and a friend of Mookie’s, Buggin’ Out (Giancarlo Esposito), causes a dispute about Sal’s business. In the tiny restaurant there is a “Wall of Fame” that is filled with all Italian and white folks; Buggin’ Out complains that there should be some “black brothers” up on that wall. Radio Raheem (Bill Nunn), a towering black man who spends the day wandering around the neighborhood blasting the same song on his boom box, gets involved with this controversy and tries to do something about this issue with Buggin’ Out. The results are not pleasant, especially for Radio Raheem. Da Mayor (Ossie Davis), the town drunk, always seems to give the best advice and even tells Mookie in the beginning of the movie to just “do the right thing.” Unfortunately, this movie was the exact opposite of its title.
The movie confronts racism to its fullest, with each race present in this film being discriminated against. Lee’s set up of this film just creates a situation, then allows the events to play out. At first I was getting a little bored because I didn’t think there was a main plot, but then it all came together in the end. Buggin’ Out and Radio Raheem tried to force Sal to put important African-American people on the wall, like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. The irony was the way they went about doing it: in violence and destruction. Malcolm X and Martin Luther were speakers of peace and diversity. It is not a good way to be put on a wall of fame through the exact opposite of what these political leaders stood for. I enjoyed watching this movie I was so scatter brained and distorted because so many controversial issues arose all in one scene in the end with the huge riot and fire. It kept me thinking about how race is such an issue and it really shouldn’t be!
There’s the Italian father Sal (Danny Aiello) and his two sons Vito (Richard Edson) and Pino (John Turturro) who own Sal’s Famous Pizzeria, a very popular and delicious pizza place in town. Mookie (Spike Lee) works for Sal and a friend of Mookie’s, Buggin’ Out (Giancarlo Esposito), causes a dispute about Sal’s business. In the tiny restaurant there is a “Wall of Fame” that is filled with all Italian and white folks; Buggin’ Out complains that there should be some “black brothers” up on that wall. Radio Raheem (Bill Nunn), a towering black man who spends the day wandering around the neighborhood blasting the same song on his boom box, gets involved with this controversy and tries to do something about this issue with Buggin’ Out. The results are not pleasant, especially for Radio Raheem. Da Mayor (Ossie Davis), the town drunk, always seems to give the best advice and even tells Mookie in the beginning of the movie to just “do the right thing.” Unfortunately, this movie was the exact opposite of its title.
The movie confronts racism to its fullest, with each race present in this film being discriminated against. Lee’s set up of this film just creates a situation, then allows the events to play out. At first I was getting a little bored because I didn’t think there was a main plot, but then it all came together in the end. Buggin’ Out and Radio Raheem tried to force Sal to put important African-American people on the wall, like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. The irony was the way they went about doing it: in violence and destruction. Malcolm X and Martin Luther were speakers of peace and diversity. It is not a good way to be put on a wall of fame through the exact opposite of what these political leaders stood for. I enjoyed watching this movie I was so scatter brained and distorted because so many controversial issues arose all in one scene in the end with the huge riot and fire. It kept me thinking about how race is such an issue and it really shouldn’t be!
Friday, October 2, 2009
Analytical Review- the Godfather
Analytical Review- The Godfather
Mise en scene, also known as what’s ‘onstage’, is a way that films display scenic elements in a shot. When the movie is paused at a certain point, the particular objects and lighting in that scene is what mise en scene is. In the Godfather, there are many props that are metaphorical and instrumental. The lighting is a very important aspect of this film because it’s mostly darkness throughout the entire film.
At the beginning of the movie there is darkness. It’s in Don Vito’s office (Marlon Brando) and we see his first client asking for a favor. There is very little lighting, the only light you really see is the top of the man’s head as he speaks; everything around him is dark. It’s aware that when someone talks to Don Vito and is on the other side of his desk, it means they are doing business. The desk is an instrumental prop in this scene because it’s a source of power and distance. The first shot we see of Don Vito is the back of his image sitting in a chair with the point of view of the client in focus. The room is dark, and once we see Don Vito, he is stroking a cat while listening to the man’s request. The cat is a prop as well, and I think it’s a metaphorical prop. The cat symbolizes how the Godfather takes care of so many people and grants requests to his friends and people who honor him. He strokes the cat gently and carefully just like his care for his clients. When he pets the cat it makes him look like less of a powerful mafia man and more of a caring Italian family man. It makes the audience have a soft side for him even though his job is to order murders and commit crimes.
It’s important to notice that there is a fine line between business and family in this film. In the office it’s all business. There is a part in the scene where children run into the office and Tom (Robert Duvall) puts his hands out and abruptly leads them out of the room. Light shines on them as they enter the room and the girls have colorful dresses on; however, they are rushed out. There is symbolism there because it makes it clear that family and business should not intertwine. I think the children resemble a metaphorical prop because they wouldn’t have had that happen in the film if it wasn’t significant. It also shows that Don Vito is a family man, because he wasn’t angry or concerned that the children ran in so suddenly.
The setting of the wedding creates a whole new atmosphere. The sun is shining on a beautiful day and all the woman and children are wearing colorful vibrant dresses. It’s very distinct that it is an Italian family wedding. Everyone has dark hair dark brown eyes. One thing I thought was interesting was how the family wouldn’t allow pictures being taken for the wedding. When a man tried taking a picture of a large group of men, they kicked him out of the wedding and smashed his camera. The costumes of the men really stand out especially outside in the bright sunny weather. The large group of men were all wearing very similar attire, a black suit and tie, and it was aware that they were all ‘business’ men. The darkness of their suits can symbolize the darkness and suspicion of the family business. They stood out amongst the crowd because everyone else was so colorful. The only man who wasn’t wearing a black suit was one of Don Vito’s sons, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), who was wearing an army suit.
It’s ironic that Michael is the only one not wearing a black suit; in the beginning of the film he was the only son that didn’t want to get involved with the family business, however, as the movie goes on he has no choice and ends up just like his father, and I think even worse. Michael’s set of costumes change throughout the movie. He slowly starts to wear all black as he becomes more involved with the family business. Lighting, costumes, and props are three main products of mis en scene in The Godfather. Lighting is one of the main ones because throughout the entire film it’s all dark shadows and there’s barely any light. This symbolizes the tasks and events that happen in the film because everything that happens in this movie is dramatic, murderous, and illegal.
Mise en scene, also known as what’s ‘onstage’, is a way that films display scenic elements in a shot. When the movie is paused at a certain point, the particular objects and lighting in that scene is what mise en scene is. In the Godfather, there are many props that are metaphorical and instrumental. The lighting is a very important aspect of this film because it’s mostly darkness throughout the entire film.
At the beginning of the movie there is darkness. It’s in Don Vito’s office (Marlon Brando) and we see his first client asking for a favor. There is very little lighting, the only light you really see is the top of the man’s head as he speaks; everything around him is dark. It’s aware that when someone talks to Don Vito and is on the other side of his desk, it means they are doing business. The desk is an instrumental prop in this scene because it’s a source of power and distance. The first shot we see of Don Vito is the back of his image sitting in a chair with the point of view of the client in focus. The room is dark, and once we see Don Vito, he is stroking a cat while listening to the man’s request. The cat is a prop as well, and I think it’s a metaphorical prop. The cat symbolizes how the Godfather takes care of so many people and grants requests to his friends and people who honor him. He strokes the cat gently and carefully just like his care for his clients. When he pets the cat it makes him look like less of a powerful mafia man and more of a caring Italian family man. It makes the audience have a soft side for him even though his job is to order murders and commit crimes.
It’s important to notice that there is a fine line between business and family in this film. In the office it’s all business. There is a part in the scene where children run into the office and Tom (Robert Duvall) puts his hands out and abruptly leads them out of the room. Light shines on them as they enter the room and the girls have colorful dresses on; however, they are rushed out. There is symbolism there because it makes it clear that family and business should not intertwine. I think the children resemble a metaphorical prop because they wouldn’t have had that happen in the film if it wasn’t significant. It also shows that Don Vito is a family man, because he wasn’t angry or concerned that the children ran in so suddenly.
The setting of the wedding creates a whole new atmosphere. The sun is shining on a beautiful day and all the woman and children are wearing colorful vibrant dresses. It’s very distinct that it is an Italian family wedding. Everyone has dark hair dark brown eyes. One thing I thought was interesting was how the family wouldn’t allow pictures being taken for the wedding. When a man tried taking a picture of a large group of men, they kicked him out of the wedding and smashed his camera. The costumes of the men really stand out especially outside in the bright sunny weather. The large group of men were all wearing very similar attire, a black suit and tie, and it was aware that they were all ‘business’ men. The darkness of their suits can symbolize the darkness and suspicion of the family business. They stood out amongst the crowd because everyone else was so colorful. The only man who wasn’t wearing a black suit was one of Don Vito’s sons, Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), who was wearing an army suit.
It’s ironic that Michael is the only one not wearing a black suit; in the beginning of the film he was the only son that didn’t want to get involved with the family business, however, as the movie goes on he has no choice and ends up just like his father, and I think even worse. Michael’s set of costumes change throughout the movie. He slowly starts to wear all black as he becomes more involved with the family business. Lighting, costumes, and props are three main products of mis en scene in The Godfather. Lighting is one of the main ones because throughout the entire film it’s all dark shadows and there’s barely any light. This symbolizes the tasks and events that happen in the film because everything that happens in this movie is dramatic, murderous, and illegal.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
The Godfather-Film Review
*spoiler alert.
In viewing The Godfather, there are many aspects of creating this film that involved Mise en scene. The lighting throughout the film represents the dark side of the “gangster life,” especially because the eyes of characters were mostly shadows and the costumes were always dark suits. Lighting plays a huge role in this film, specifically when used in scenes which create the “villain” in each of the characters in the Corleone family. The entire film was overall dark and gloomy. There was so many people in the Corleone family I had to keep going back to review the character sheet that was given out in class to remember who was who and which person died at this moment and who killed who and why. I never understand why all the killing was necessary, and why there were so many families involved with each other and why they all were enemies. I never grasped the main point of why everything was so murderous and how certain families were more powerful than others. All I really got out of this film was not to marry an Italian man who never tells you about his “business” and wears a black suit, because you might end up being blown up in a car. Always be honest to your spouse! Everyone was evil in this film; I couldn’t decide who was right from wrong, because in the end, all the important people died anyways.
I was able to follow the Al Pacino’s character (Michael Corleone), because at first he was not all about going into the family business, but in the end, it turns out to become the next godfather and is just as bad as his father, maybe even worse! There were so many unethical things that happened in this movie, but I guess that’s what makes it so interesting and messed up. The props in this movie were a huge part, especially when Michael kills those two men at the restaurant. It signifies Michael’s start in the family business. The costumes were important as well because it represented the dark and realistic aspect of being a mob family. They are all about the color black: black cars, black guns, and black suits; there was barely any color. The only color difference I saw was the brightness in the dresses of the wives at weddings; which was the only delightful experience in the film. These kinds of movies (dark, mobster, films) are the kinds of movies I need to see a few times till I get the full comprehension. I’m the type of person you want to punch in the face during a movie because I ask too many questions! I’ve realized that I do that for a reason because at the end of movies I don’t understand; my reactions are confused and scattered. If you’re like me, I’d recommend watching this film with someone who has already seen it plenty of times so they can walk you through it.
In viewing The Godfather, there are many aspects of creating this film that involved Mise en scene. The lighting throughout the film represents the dark side of the “gangster life,” especially because the eyes of characters were mostly shadows and the costumes were always dark suits. Lighting plays a huge role in this film, specifically when used in scenes which create the “villain” in each of the characters in the Corleone family. The entire film was overall dark and gloomy. There was so many people in the Corleone family I had to keep going back to review the character sheet that was given out in class to remember who was who and which person died at this moment and who killed who and why. I never understand why all the killing was necessary, and why there were so many families involved with each other and why they all were enemies. I never grasped the main point of why everything was so murderous and how certain families were more powerful than others. All I really got out of this film was not to marry an Italian man who never tells you about his “business” and wears a black suit, because you might end up being blown up in a car. Always be honest to your spouse! Everyone was evil in this film; I couldn’t decide who was right from wrong, because in the end, all the important people died anyways.
I was able to follow the Al Pacino’s character (Michael Corleone), because at first he was not all about going into the family business, but in the end, it turns out to become the next godfather and is just as bad as his father, maybe even worse! There were so many unethical things that happened in this movie, but I guess that’s what makes it so interesting and messed up. The props in this movie were a huge part, especially when Michael kills those two men at the restaurant. It signifies Michael’s start in the family business. The costumes were important as well because it represented the dark and realistic aspect of being a mob family. They are all about the color black: black cars, black guns, and black suits; there was barely any color. The only color difference I saw was the brightness in the dresses of the wives at weddings; which was the only delightful experience in the film. These kinds of movies (dark, mobster, films) are the kinds of movies I need to see a few times till I get the full comprehension. I’m the type of person you want to punch in the face during a movie because I ask too many questions! I’ve realized that I do that for a reason because at the end of movies I don’t understand; my reactions are confused and scattered. If you’re like me, I’d recommend watching this film with someone who has already seen it plenty of times so they can walk you through it.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Analytical Review- Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now is a well put together film that creates imagery and illusions to the world of war. Francis Coppola directed this film and the shots and angles show a lot of cinematography. The introduction to this film begins with a song "The End" by the Doors and it is what drew me into watching the rest of the film because it foreshadowed chaos and destruction. It begins with the main character, Captain Willard, laying in bed and thinking about past memories of his experiences in war. It first fades into a shot of large plants with brown smoke rising from the bottom of the screen. Several helicopters fly by and when they do, a huge fire explosion takes place within the fields of the green plants. After the fire explosion became transparent with a close up of Captain Willard's face appeared and he looked frightened with his bright blue eyes opening wide. Then the shot of his face overlaps with the fan on the ceiling of Willard's room. The blades were spinning so fast it sounded like helicopter propellers.
The color scheme in this sequence had a lot of orange because of the fire and black background. It was very smoky and chaotic because it was Captain Willard’s flashbacks of the Vietnam War. Then the camera pans to the right over Willard’s desk, which has a bunch of letters and a picture of his wife lying on top. As it pans from the desk to Willard’s head on his pillow with his eyes closed, it fades into more flashbacks of the war.
The lyrics of the song are very relevant to what the audience sees on the screen. The persistence of vision is amazing in this sequence. For example, when Jim Morrison (singer of The Doors), sang, “Lost in a roman...wilderness of pain and all the children are insane all the children are insane,” It goes along with the sequence of shots. It starts from Captain Willard’s head on the pillow and the transparent background of actual ‘wilderness of pain’ with the war images of explosions and forests. Then it pans over to a night stand next to Willard’s bed with a lighter, a pack of cigarettes, a glass of scotch, and a spoon lying on top. This shot is in a mobile frame as the song plays, “And all the children are insane,” at that point of the song it’s on a low angle of Willard’s head with his eyes closed and slowly moves to a close up shot of a his hand holding a cigarette. I think it can mean that the soldiers of war are the children and all of the pain and murder that he’s been through he has gone insane. The symbolism here is that he doesn’t know what he wants to do with his life, and got a divorce with his wife because he can’t handle living back in reality. And all he thinks about is being in the jungle when he’s not there.
The color scheme in this sequence had a lot of orange because of the fire and black background. It was very smoky and chaotic because it was Captain Willard’s flashbacks of the Vietnam War. Then the camera pans to the right over Willard’s desk, which has a bunch of letters and a picture of his wife lying on top. As it pans from the desk to Willard’s head on his pillow with his eyes closed, it fades into more flashbacks of the war.
The lyrics of the song are very relevant to what the audience sees on the screen. The persistence of vision is amazing in this sequence. For example, when Jim Morrison (singer of The Doors), sang, “Lost in a roman...wilderness of pain and all the children are insane all the children are insane,” It goes along with the sequence of shots. It starts from Captain Willard’s head on the pillow and the transparent background of actual ‘wilderness of pain’ with the war images of explosions and forests. Then it pans over to a night stand next to Willard’s bed with a lighter, a pack of cigarettes, a glass of scotch, and a spoon lying on top. This shot is in a mobile frame as the song plays, “And all the children are insane,” at that point of the song it’s on a low angle of Willard’s head with his eyes closed and slowly moves to a close up shot of a his hand holding a cigarette. I think it can mean that the soldiers of war are the children and all of the pain and murder that he’s been through he has gone insane. The symbolism here is that he doesn’t know what he wants to do with his life, and got a divorce with his wife because he can’t handle living back in reality. And all he thinks about is being in the jungle when he’s not there.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Apocalypse Now- Film Review
Francis Ford Coppola's 1979 film Apocalypse Now is full of tragedy and despair. It was during the Vietnam War and Captain Willard (Martin Sheen) was sent on a secret mission to assassinate one of his fellow American soldiers. A very high-respected soldier became somewhat insane over the years--Colonel Kurtz (Marlon Brando) created his own tribe in Cambodia and he uses his "people" to enforce murder and brainwashes them by his psychotic methods. This movie was hard to follow because it’s chaotic from the first sequence to the mysterious ending. The journey of confusion arose as the movie progressed, but I was so caught up in the visuals of the film I missed the symbolism and meaning to the story. Tons of war scenes with fire explosions and carcasses everywhere was not a type of movie I enjoyed seeing because it put sadness in my heart. However, the soundtrack and beautiful cinematography caught my attention. So many different colors were used in different ways throughout the film. It was depressing but entertaining and filled with action and remorse.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Analytical Review-The Diving Bell and Butterfly
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is shot in a very particular way that I’ve never seen before. It starts off right away as blurry and confusing until the point of view is clear that it is shown from a perspective of the main character. Jean-Do is lying in a hospital and the only shots that are visible are what he can see from his perspective. He is diagnosed with locked-in syndrome where he is paralyzed from head to toe, only able to blink and use his left eye. The four attributes of the Shot are clearly noticed and have a huge impact on the cinematography of the film. The framing, color, depth of field, and movement all play a huge role from the beginning to the final credits of the film.
Throughout the first hour of the film it’s all in subjective point of view of Jean-Do who only sees certain things on screen with his one eye. The entire beginning sequence is canted framing that included a lot of off screen space; which is when you can tell there is more of a scene that exists beyond the shot that it shows on screen. For example, when Celine visits Jean-Do, the framing cuts off her head and can only see her body because she isn’t directly looking into Jean-Do’s eyes. Frames like that make me sit on the edge of my seat because I just want the camera to shift a tiny bit up just so I can see her face. When the doctor is explaining to her how he can respond “yes” and “no” with a blink of an eye, he informs her that Jean-Do can only see if you look directly at him. When he walks over to the left and right of the frame, he disappears from the screen and reappears again to show her that he cannot see from those certain angles. Whenever someone speaks to Jean-Do, it’s always close-up shots of the character’s face and is in focus for the most part which gives the audience a good visual remembrance of who comes and visits Jean-Do.
The value of image is beautiful. When Jean-Do is lying in his hospital bed, the main colors that are noticed are white, red, black, and bright yellow. The hospital room is white and has red curtains and vibrant red flowers sitting next to his bed by the windowsill. Near the window there is a bright light shining in through the blinds that creates a florescent yellow. Whenever Jean-Do closes his eyes there is black and red underneath his eyelids which makes the shot more realistic as the audience was looking right through his eyes.
The way that the depth of field was produced in this film made the perspective much more realistic and understandable. The feeling of confinement and imprisonment overcomes the audience as we are trapped inside Jean-Do’s body just as he feels with his locked-in syndrome. Right when the film starts it opens with Jean-Do’s eyes opening and the blurriness of his focus goes in and out very inconsistently. Every time Jean-Do closes his eyes the screen goes black and when he opens them back up it is blurry and slowly becomes clearer. The focus is all over the place and mostly filled with dutch angles and head shots where certain people from a distance are in focus and the surroundings in the distance are out of focus.
A good example of movement in this movie was the first time we see Jean-Do in a wheel chair. He was with his lady-friend who helped him write his book up on the roof of the hospital and it was when he spelled out to her “I’ve stopped pitying myself.” This shot is meaningful because it goes from a long shot to an extreme long shot in one frame and the movement and cinematography shows that he is let free. A beautiful shot of them and their surroundings is all in focus in that extreme long shot.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The Diving Bell and The Butterfly
If you're looking for a mind-blowing, intriguing and poetic film, The Diving Bell and The Butterfly is a great movie to watch. Based on a true story about a journalist/editor of Elle fashion magazine, Jean-Dominique Bauby wakes up from a deep sleep to find out hes paralyzed from head to toe (this disease is called Locked-in Syndrome), with his left eye the only functional body part, he learns to communicate with the blink of his eye and is determined to write a book even under the circumstances of not having the ability to speak or move. This film shows the courage and determination of a man who is still very intelligent, and expresses himself through the caring patience of those who helped him communicate with his eye to write his book.
It's obvious that this film is an autobiography because it's shot in first person point of view and we are in Jean-Dominique's perspective the moment the film opens. Right when the movie opened it caught my attention because the filming was very limited to what you could see on the screen, since it was only what Jean-Dominque could see it was the way his body was positioned and where his one eye can look (he had to get his other eye sowed up because there was an infection). This type of filming kept me wanting more; especially because you don't get to see what Jean-Dominique looks like until you get a bit more into the film. Jean-Dominique was an excellent writer and poet and had a huge imagination. This movie goes from reality to his imagination and the shots of Jean-Dominique's imaginations were beautiful. One image that sticks out to me is when a woman was standing on a hill with trees and a huge forest in the background. Whenever his imagination scenes were over, the pleasant background music comes to an aburpt stop and goes back to a scene of reality. Although this movie is in French with english subtitles, I feel like I could understand it more that way reading the subtitles because it made me focus more on his words and what he was describing since he speaks in such metorphorical terms. I think it's easier to comprehend things when they are written out and these visuals of subtitles and images of his meanings really drew me in!
It's obvious that this film is an autobiography because it's shot in first person point of view and we are in Jean-Dominique's perspective the moment the film opens. Right when the movie opened it caught my attention because the filming was very limited to what you could see on the screen, since it was only what Jean-Dominque could see it was the way his body was positioned and where his one eye can look (he had to get his other eye sowed up because there was an infection). This type of filming kept me wanting more; especially because you don't get to see what Jean-Dominique looks like until you get a bit more into the film. Jean-Dominique was an excellent writer and poet and had a huge imagination. This movie goes from reality to his imagination and the shots of Jean-Dominique's imaginations were beautiful. One image that sticks out to me is when a woman was standing on a hill with trees and a huge forest in the background. Whenever his imagination scenes were over, the pleasant background music comes to an aburpt stop and goes back to a scene of reality. Although this movie is in French with english subtitles, I feel like I could understand it more that way reading the subtitles because it made me focus more on his words and what he was describing since he speaks in such metorphorical terms. I think it's easier to comprehend things when they are written out and these visuals of subtitles and images of his meanings really drew me in!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
