Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Citizen Kane

Image from: http://www.takegreatpictures.com/content/images/citizen_kane_4.jpg


I really enjoyed this film. However, I felt that this film required some previous knowledge of the background and history of the film before it could be enjoyed or appreciated. Had I not known what the repercussions of the film were both for Orson Welles and and Hearst, I do not feel as if I would have been able to appreciate the film. Even so, I simply enjoyed the film in terms of aesthetic delight.

I really liked a lot of the different artistic aspects of this movie. I agree with Professor Maness when he said that it seemed as though the camera men and individuals who worked on this film really enjoyed it. I could feel that they enjoyed working on this film through what they produced on the screen. For a movie created in the 1940’s, I felt that this movie was really up to date and almost had a modern feel to it.

In all, I really enjoyed Citizen Kane. I cannot say I would consider this the best movie created, but I definitely would watch it again to really get a feel for the film and an even better appreciation for it.

Monday, November 24, 2008

Film Noir as a Distinctively American Cinematic Genre


I have a difficult time stating that Film Noir is distinctively American. I’m not sure that many styles or Genres of film can be considered distinctively or totally from one specific culture because individuals gather and learn new ideas from many different cultures.

However, because of the history of the style of film noir and the time period from which it developed, I can understand how American film critics could consider film noir as a distinctively American cinematic genre or style.

The style of film noir seemed to have come to a peak in the late 40’s, after WWII. Some of the most popular movies in the film noir style came out during that time. Today, movies which are based on the style of film noir seem to capture or take many aspects of the movies from the film noir genre of the 1940’s.

The style of film noir includes many different characteristics. Through the films mentioned before that I have seen, some of those characteristics include, dramatic lighting, a melodramatic feel even if it’s a comedy, mysterious characters, hard boiled protagonist, moral ambiguity, murder, and so on.

Many of these aspects seem to be predominantly included in many American films, almost as if some of the classic characteristics of film noir, such as ‘good guy/bad guy’ are something significant to American films. However, I still cannot say that the style of film noir is strictly American.

Film noir took many of its characteristics from other countries as have many genres of films across the world. Producers of movies use ideas that have been introduced across the world. Therefore, I cannot say that the style of film noir is specifically American because of diverse influences. Perhaps then, the style of film noir really took off and became popular in America. This creation of popularity among American society for the style of film noir is possibly what puts film noir in the category of specifically American film genres. I feel that if a style or genre of film really takes off in a specific place, or becomes popular among a certain society, then they have almost already claimed that style or genre of film as their own. Therefore, if you look at the popularity and amount of production of movies in the film noir genre, then you could possibly come to the conclusion that the style of film noir is distinctively an American style of film.

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Mildred Pierce

Image From:http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w239/Groban20/MildredPierce.jpg

After viewing Blade Runner, my hopes for finding a film noir styled movie were a bit low. However, after watching Mildred Pierce, my hopes were brought up once again. I really enjoyed this movie. I thought it was a great example of film noir and it really kept my attention.

My favorite part about this film was the suspense and twists. I guess I was really impressed with the “evilness” of the movie. The ‘bad’ guy in the movie wasn’t a guy at all, which also surprised and impressed me. I thought this movie was fairly intense for it’s time as well. The idea of a woman convicted of murder and wrapped up in so much evil even today can sometimes be a little shocking.

In all, this movie really impressed me and I would suggest this movie to anyone interested in film noir. My only disappointment would have to be that there was no use of fog or smoke (other than cigarettes) which I feel are usually typical in movies considered to be film noir. (Obviously I really love the fog-effect)

Blade Runner

I was a little let down after viewing Bladerunner. I suppose that because I heard such great things about the film that my hopes were a bit too high. I’m also not a huge fan of sci-fi films so my opinion of the film could also be a bit biased.

However, as an example of film noir, I thought Bladerunner fit the criteria. The use of a city setting, low, dark lighting and fog are only a few of the characteristics that classify Bladerunner as film noir.

I really enjoyed the use of fog and dark, eerie lighting as well as rain throughout the film. These aspects helped with the suspense and the obscurity of the movie. Additionally these effects helped to convince me that Blade Runner fits into the style of film noir. One particular scene that really sold me on accepting that Blade Runner is indeed film noir was the scene in which Harrison Ford walks into the vacated apartment building. He walks in while fog from the rain surrounds him. He is also pictured wearing a large trench coat. This seems to be one of the typical classic film noir scenes. After viewing this scene of Blade Runner I was convinced that this movie is in indeed film noir. However, other than convincing me of it’s credibility as an example of film noir, I cannot say I enjoyed many other aspects of Blade Runner.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Touch of Evil

Image from: http://www.cesta.cz/photos/tandt/film%20series%202006/touch%20of%20evil%2004_ok.jpg

For the most part, I enjoyed the movie, Touch of Evil. Although a bit corny at times, I thought the characters in the story were great and the actual story line was quite interesting. Orson Wells by far played my favorite character in the film. His acting was great, but what was even more convincing was his actual look. He fit his part extremely well and he really, in my opinion, made the film unique.

I usually have a difficult time enjoying black and white films, but I didn’t even notice that this film wasn’t in color. I was extremely surprised during the movie that I wasn’t finding myself becoming bored because of the lack of color. I was enjoying a black and white film. My bias towards black and white movies may now hopefully be diminished.

In all, I definitely felt like this film was a great representation of film noir. It had most, if not all of the characteristics of film noir which helped contribute to its diversity and entertainment.

According to the film, Touch of Evil, there are a few “rules” and “characteristics” that contribute to film noir. These rules and characteristics are ideas I have compiled from my own knowledge of film noir and also from what I’ve noticed through viewing movies that are specifically film noir.

Rules and Characteristics of Film Noir

Black and white
Smoke – in terms of cigarettes and just smoke that’s intended to create a sense that there is fog or ‘smoke’ in the air
Drastic use of lighting to create moments of intensity or drama
Token female characters – strong but usually the victim
Strong, male – hero (usually in love with the female victim)
Dramatic music during intense moments
Drugs and guns (and explosions)
Betrayal
Money - Fame
Big Cars
Token ‘bad guy’ (or in the case of Touch of Evil, a few ‘bad guys’)

Sunday, November 9, 2008

Ran

I’m not quite sure what to think about the movie, Ran. I was excited about the movie at first, however, throughout the rest of the movie, I found myself getting very bored of the film.

The visual aspects of this movie were great. I loved the scenery of the entire film. The first few shots really caught my attention and kept my attention for a majority of the film. The only visual parts of the film that I was not really fond of were the fighting scenes. I thought they were way too long and I felt like I was watching the same scene over and over again. In fact, at one point during one of the fighting scenes, I turned to the person next to me and we agreed that we had seen the same exact shot more than once during one of the major fighting scenes.

The movie became boring to me only because I felt like the situations with the characters were much too drawn out. The movie could have ended much earlier than it actually did. By the end of the film, I was ready to leave and had been ready to leave 45 earlier.

Even so, I admired the costumes and the makeup that was used for the characters. They created some extremely interesting and intense characters that had unique personalities all throughout the movie. There was also some humor in Ran which I admired and found quirky and fun.

I suppose I’m indifferent to this film. I really enjoyed the visuals in terms of the scenery and costumes and makeup. I did not, however, enjoy the length of the film or the major fighting scenes which I found repetitious and a little boring.

Friday, November 7, 2008

Standard of Greatness

I believe that every individual will have different standards of greatness, especially in terms of film. There are so many different types and styles and genres of film in today’s culture that it is difficult to define one specific style of greatness. However, I feel that, even though Daughters of the Dust was at times extremely difficult to watch, it really contains some aspects that I would consider to be characteristics of one of the greatest films.

First of all, it is an all black cast and was made by a black female producer. This in and of itself calls for some recognition because of the statement that both the actors and the producer in this film made by creating a film consisting of all African American actors.

As I mentioned before, this film was a bit difficult to watch because it was extremely slow and at times, the dialogue was difficult to understand. It was not until after I watched some of the ‘director’s cut’ of the dvd did I really begin to understand why this film contains greatness.

This film shocked the viewers when it first came out. Many viewers may have been expecting to see a different type of film, especially because it was an all African American cast. This film not only has an interesting message, one that celebrates the African American female, but it was presented in an extremely creative way.

What really made this film in my definition great was the fact that it sent a distinctly diverse message by containing an all African American cast and by having the lead roles and most influential roles in the film all played by women. Creatively and unusually presented, this film makes the viewer want to go back and watch it again to catch the entire message of the film and to fully recognize how unique, diverse and great this film is.

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Daughters of the Dust

Image from:http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/cultural/1998_99/daughters.jpg

It took me a while to watch this movie. I found it difficult to watch and understand in only one night. I had to watch Daughters of The Dust in pieces throughout a few days. It was also not until I viewed the director’s commentary that I could fully understand the significance of this film and appreciate the director’s intentions for the movie.

I appreciated much about this film. I appreciated the sense of African American womanhood which was translated into family values and also a sense of independence within the characters. I also appreciated the acting from most of the actors in the movie. Although I could not always understand what was being said, I could always feel the emotion or the intensity or frivolity of a particular scene.

Although containing an obscure and often confusing plot line which did not really follow one clear path, I thought that many ideas were clearly expressed through this film. Family values were expressed as well as acceptance of the new, valuing of the old and familiar, a sense of independence, and freedom as a particular race and as an individual being. These ideas and values are really what made this movie interesting to me and I appreciate Daughters of the Dust for clearly and creatively expressing the ideas, emotions and values of African American women at the turn of the 20th century.

Monday, November 3, 2008

Casablanca

On many movie lists such as “Top 100 All Time Best Movies Ever” I have always noticed that the film Casablanca is always on the lists. Since I had never seen Casablanca before, I really did not understand why it was on the list. However, after viewing Casablanca, I can understand a little more as to why it is regarded as one of the best movies ever made.

For the most part I really enjoyed this movie. However, there were times when I felt a little bored with the film. I mostly enjoyed the plot. I thought it was cleverly twisted and humorous as well. It was definitely a movie to sit down and not think and simply relax to.

However, I felt as if some parts in the film were pretty corny. This could be because of the time during which it was made. For people back in the 1940’s, this movie probably was not as corny or goofy as I felt it was. The murder scenes were ridiculously unrealistic. The famous “Here’s looking at you, Kid” line, I felt, was a little over used and almost used at inappropriate times. I felt like when the line was used, it was in the wrong context or it was just so random. It could have been because throughout the entire movie I was expecting to hear the line and so when I finally did hear it, it just jumped at me and made too much of an impact. Even so, I felt as if that specific line had been a little played up and therefore made it kind of silly when I actually heard the line.

In terms of one of the greatest movies ever made, I feel as if people regard this movie as one of the best because of the plot and some of the ‘twists’. And, because of this movie’s creative plot, I too enjoyed this movie. However, I’m not sure I would regard Casablanca as one of the best movies ever made.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Feeling Connected...

When you view a movie for the first time, you aren’t always consciously analyzing the film to decipher why a specific shot is used, why a certain camera angle is used and so on. Most of the time one views a movie simply for entertainment. However, if you would decide to watch a movie in pieces, analyzing specific shots or scenes, it is possible that you may be able to take more from the film than just a few laughs or a few shed tears.

I took part in analyzing a specific scene in the Spike Lee film, Do the Right Thing. I analyzed the final scene in which Mookie and Sal are engaged in conversation, arguing about the money and Sal’s Pizzeria.

Through looking at this scene closely, timing each shot, recording the set up of each shot, and looking at each piece in relation to the others, I was able to notice a few different things about this scene. First off all, most of the shots were extremely short. Each shot was only a few seconds long. This was because most of this scene was based on a conversation between Sal and Mookie. Because the shots were very short, it made the viewer feel like they were actively engaged in the conversation. For one second I was Mookie looking at and listening to Sal. The other second I was Sal, listening and looking at Mookie. Many of the shots were also close ups of Mookie and Sal which also actively engaged me in their conversation.

The fact that these shots were so short and frequently switched from character to character allowed for a bit of intensity which was appropriate because the conversation itself was a bit tense. The only time when I felt as if I was taken out of the intensity was when the camera left the individual shots of the two characters and pulled back to a shot of both Mookie and Sal. This I remember quite clearly because I felt like I had left the conversation and was reminded that I was not actually part of their conversation.

In all, I believe the shorts shots and close-ups of Sal and Mookie were extremely effective in creating a conversation in which the viewer could feel a close connection to. Many of the other shots followed the characters’ movements as well. One shot in particular is a shot of Mookie picking up money that Sal threw at him. The shot follows Mookie from behind, almost ‘bending over’ with Mookie as he picks up the money. I think this shot is really great because I remember kind of being confused while I was watching this shot but realizing what was happening and feeling even more connected to the conversation and what was going on between Mookie and Sal.

The short intense shots throughout this scene made the scene between Mookie and Sal more appealing to the viewer in that they could become actively involved in the conversation. However, it also effectively pulled the viewer away so that the viewer could remember that they were not actually a part of the conversation. When you view a movie in its entirety, you do not always catch why a particular scene or shot is used the way it is used. You do not always catch the intentions of the director. However, when you are able to analyze a small portion of the film and really look at how it is constructed, you may find something more to the movie or feel more of a connection and know the reasons why you may feel that connection.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

The movie, Raging Bull directed by Martin Scorsese was an intense film during specific scenes but was unable to keep my attention. The movie was mainly about the life of boxer Jake LaMotta. It went through LaMotta’s (The Raging Bull) fights and personal life, mostly consisting of nasty fights with his wives and friends/relatives. The story line was okay, but I wasn’t left too impressed. I was mostly left angry at Robert De Niro, who played the part of The Raging Bull. I was left angered at how ‘instantly’ fat he became towards the end of the film and how mentally and emotionally unstable his character was throughout the movie. I was hoping for some sort of reconciliation with reality for the Bull, or some sort of change of lifestyle, perhaps a realization of how completely awful he was to everyone and how his entire life was a testimony of the selfishness and pride that consumed him. However, I was left feeling uneasy, like he hadn’t changed at all. The only time I felt a little hopeful, that there could possibly be a renewal of the Bull’s mindset, was when he was thrown into prison and was pitching a fit, pounding his head and fists against the wall. However, at the end of the film, he was back where he began; working for himself, convincing himself that he was better than anyone else. I felt as if the movie was a long sequence of fights, verbal and physical, and mental instability.
Although I did not enjoy the story line, I thought the acting was great. If Robert De Niro was able to play a part convincingly enough to actually get me angry and frustrated at Robert De Niro himself, not just the character he was playing, I’d say that his acting was pretty influential. I also was impressed with the editing and particular shots that they used throughout the film. The shots that stood out to me the most were the shots during the actual boxing scenes. The use of slow motion, close ups and different camera angles created some very realistic and gruesome fighting scenes. Nevertheless, other than the acting and camera work, I wasn’t impressed with the story line which resulted in causing me to be distracted and withdrawn throughout the entire film.

Monday, October 20, 2008

I Wasn't Left so Breathless After all...

Image from: http://blogs.indiewire.com/reverseshot/archives/breathless%20criterion%20PDVD_020.jpg


To be completely honest, I’m not quite sure how I felt about this film. The movie Breathless was one of the most awkward movies I have ever seen. It was confusing, it made no sense, and I feel like it demanded a lot of patience from the viewer. However, I really enjoyed the beginning of the film, but towards the middle-end of the movie, I was lost in the confusion.
I feel that what made the movie so confusing was the confusing dialogue between the actors. Things that the actors said to each other were very confusing and usually did not make any sense. It didn’t seem very natural or realistic whatsoever. Many parts of the movie seemed almost goofy or tacky. Part of this goofiness and confusion was seen directly from one of the main characters; Patricia. Patricia Franchini was dramatic one second, calm the next. She knew what she wanted and then confused everyone, even herself, the next second.
I feel like the confusion and uncomfortable feelings I felt throughout the entire movie simply built up so that when the movie was finished I almost felt relieved. I felt relieved that the main character, Michel had died so now Patricia could go on with her life, hopefully in a sane fashion, and I felt relieved simply because the movie was finished.
However, the film did use some interesting editing techniques that could be worth mentioning. Still, other than to observe or analyze the obscure use of editing in this film, I’m not completely sure this movie is one that I would want to watch again.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Do the Right Thing 2

Image from: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e9/DRT_Mookie_Sal.jpg/800px-DRT_Mookie_Sal.jpg

Do the Right Thing incorporated many aspects of mise en scéne throughout the duration of the film. Along with the creative camera angles, I believe mise en scéne was one of the most influential parts about this film that made it so powerful. I believe props and the setting were two aspects of mise en scéne that were effective in this film.

First of all, props were used effectively. One prop that really stood out to me was the use of pizza boxes. Every time Mookie was sent out to do a delivery, he took with him a pizza box. The fact that he had a pizza box gave him the excuse to spend time walking around town and talking to people around the city. Because he was a delivery boy and had ‘pizzas’ to deliver, he was able to get away from his job and walk around the city which also allowed for him (and the audience) to experience different situations between other characters in the film. Another prop that was extremely influential in the film was obviously Radio Raheem’s boom box. The destruction of the boom box by Sal is what set off the entire town in an uproar that destroyed Sal’s Pizzeria and which killed Radio Raheem. Throughout the movie, however, the audience learns to almost despise the boom box because it is so loud and obnoxious. The radio is owned by an individual who is very tough and unkind which is ironic since the radio itself sets off a wildfire of hatred and violence.

Secondly, the setting throughout this film was influential. The fact that the entire story takes place in the city really makes this film work. Imagine if the same characters were living in the country or on a farm or in a suburban neighborhood. Most of what happened throughout the film takes place on the block. The most influential setting for me personally were the scenes which depicted the three men in front of the red wall. Those scenes always seemed to take me away from the reality of ‘city’ life and it is not until the end of the film that you realize that the red wall is actually across the street from Sal’s Pizzeria.

In all, the most influential aspects of mise en scéne that the film Do the Right Thing incorporates are props and the setting. Props help to develop the story line of the film while the setting helps to create a realistic feel for the movie. Although there are many aspects of mise en scéne that are influential throughout this film, I believe that the use of props and the setting are the most dominant pieces.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Do The Right Thing


Image from: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/05/24/arts/25cell650.4.jpg


I wasn't really sure what to expect from this film. I knew a little about Spike Lee as a director, but I really did not know what was in store for me. However, I was pleasantly surprised. Do The Right Thing kept my attention from the beginning. I really enjoyed the entire film. The characters were funny and unique. Each character had a distinct personality which really made the movie unique as well.
My only criticism of the film was the violent ending. I was not expecting that specific ending at all and it really caught me off guard. The fact that I was left feeling like nothing had been resolved and that we were being told “such is life” and that violent uproars like the one at Sal’s Pizzeria are expected and in a sense ‘ignored’, made me a bit disappointed. I wanted more from the movie to feel better about what had happened, to feel reassured that friendships would be re-established, or that maybe they really hadn’t killed Radio Raheem.
Even so, possibly this lack of a concrete ending was the purpose. It left me feeling as if things needed to be reconciled. Maybe the reason things were not reconciled or explained was so that the viewer could simply imagine for themselves what would happen or what the next day would be like.
In all, I loved the style of this film. The bright colors, the frequent use of a diagonal camera angle really made this film distinct. Even though I was frustrated with the ending, I still feel as if this film was great and definitely worth watching again.

Monday, October 6, 2008

The Godfather (mise-en-scene)

According to the book, The Film Experience, an Introduction, written by Timothy Corrigan and Patricia White, the meaning of mise-en-scéne “refers to those elements of a movie scene that are put in position before the filming actually begins and are employed in certain ways once the filming does begin” (42). In viewing the movie, The Godfather, there are many aspects that the producer and those involved in creating this film had to take into consideration when developing an influential mise-en-scéne. Lighting plays a large role in The Godfather, specifically when used in scenes in which Don Vito’s eyes are darkened because the lighting is only illuminating his face, not his eyes exactly. This specific lighting creates a unique image of Don Vito which relates to his personality and his profession. Various props are also used in the movie. The gun in the scene in which Michel assassinates the two men in the Italian restaurant signifies Michel’s start in a new profession: the family business. However, I believe one of the most significant parts of this film in terms of mise-en-scéne were the costumes used in this film because they represent a realistic picture of the mob and they also signify different important changes in the lives of the main characters.
When you think of the mob, you think of classy, dangerous men who wear black suits, drive black cars and carry large guns. In The Godfather, the characters are exactly this: they wear black expensive suits, drive black expensive cars and carry guns. When you are first introduced to the Godfather, Don Vito and his men, you see men in very expensive black suits and ties. Granted it is Don’s daughter’s wedding, throughout most of the film, the viewer sees these men mainly dressed in suits. Even the men who are not part of the Corleone family wear expensive suits. They are always dressed professionally and look the part of a classic “mob” character.
Not only did these costumes accurately portray the ‘mob’ personality of the time and what the viewers were expecting a classic character in the ‘mob’ business to look like, but the costumes the main characters wore also represented changes in the lives of those main characters. Specifically, after Don Vito is shot, he is no longer shown in a dressy, pressed expensive suit. Rather, Don is now shown in sweaters and more casual pants. He is shown with his hair disheveled. These costumes make Don look a bit older and more relaxed. As the costumes digress from class and the ‘expensive’ look, Don Vito also begins to stray away from the position he held as The Godfather.
On the other hand, Michel Corleone begins to take the place of his father and his costumes represent this change. In the beginning of the film, Michel is shown in his military outfit. He is not seen in an expensive suit which most of the members of the family are consistently shown in. Once Michel begins to engage in the family business however, his style seems to change. By the end of the film when Michel is becoming The Godfather, his costumes have changed completely. He is now shown in expensive black suits, hats and ties. He now looks the part of his father, a wealthy mobster, and he is also taking the part of his father: The Godfather and head of the family business.In all, costumes play a large role in sending a message throughout the movie, The Godfather. Costumes are only one important part of mise-en-scéne in regards to The Godfather. Lighting is also important as well as props and other aspects. However, mise-en-scéne is important when creating a film like The Godfather and is crucial to the overall message that the film is designed to send.

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

The Godfather

Image from: http://www.filmreference.com/images/sjff_01_img0198.jpg

I'm really glad that I was finally able to view this film. The Godfather has been my father’s favorite movie for many years and now I can finally talk to him about the movie. I was a little skeptical at first because I had seen bits and pieces of the movie on television here and there and it seemed a little boring. However, I was wrong. I really enjoyed The Godfather. I thought the story moved well and kept my interest the entire time. Marlon Brando was excellent and now I can finally laugh when people do his impression (although too many people do the Godfather impression way too often).
Although I was a bit confused towards the end of the film, especially with all of the Italian names and the five families and heads of the families, I think I left with a clear idea of what happened throughout the duration of the film. I have to be honest, however, that this is probably one of those films which I am going to have to watch over again to understand the story line a bit better. But, I still thought that the story was great; filled with action and deception and love – all the stuff we enjoy watching.
The ending was probably my favorite part only because of the irony of it all. While Michel Corleone was becoming a godfather he was also having each of the heads of the five families killed off. He was going through a ‘spiritual’ godly affair while on the other side of his ‘personality’ he was murdering many people. I thought the difference between the two was great and the way the director corresponded the killings with Michel’s promises to God made for a great ending.
In all, I really enjoyed The Godfather and I can finally now share this movie with my own father. The story line was great, the acting was done well and the ending was satisfying. I will definitely watch this movie over again and hopefully continue to love it just as much.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Apocalypse Now - A Look at the Elements

I found my image at: http://www.hfg-karlsruhe.de/~jtolk/art-writing/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/apocalypse-now_01.jpg


It is easy to admit that Apocalypse Now is an intense story. Based on the Vietnam War, this movie’s script does a fine job of keeping the viewer interested. However, what makes this film even better is how various elements of cinematography are used to convey messages to keep the audience pulled in. More precisely, the way in which space is used and camera angles are used in this film, I believe, sets this film apart from other movies.
First of all, camera angles seem to be important in this film. The uses of high angled shots are most prevalent in my mind. Many of the fighting/action scenes were introduced by a shot that depicted an island, as if the viewer was flying overhead looking down onto the island. Obviously the scene that most accurately used high angles was the scene in which Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore and his men are flying over a village (so that they can surf of course). The viewer is first introduced through a ‘high’ angle because the scene starts with the helicopters flying overhead, the viewer up in the sky along with them. The scene proceeds with shots from the helicopters looking down, as if the viewer is part of the Lieutenant’s crew. Flying over the village, the viewer can see villagers scattering and fighting back, shots flying down towards the village, etc. My favorite shot of this particular scene in the film, however, is when the jet fighters come into the scene and blow up the village. This is yet another use of high angles in which the viewer watches the village explode from above. In all, I believe that high angles during this scene in particular were accurately used.
Second of all, specific camera shots seemed to play an important role in this film, particularly during the ending moments when Captain Willard finally meets Colonel Kurtz. When the viewer is first introduced to Colonel Kurtz, they are greeted with darkness, but with a little light showing on Kurtz’s face. However, the camera shot is a medium close up shot of Kurtz face and shoulders which allows for the distinct use of light and dark to half hide Kurtz’s face while half bringing his face to light. Had this shot been a medium shot or a medium long shot, I do not believe the same effect would have occurred. It would have been too difficult for the viewer to see the distinction between light and dark areas on Kurtz face. This shot, I believe, really keeps the viewer focused and interested in Kurtz. The fact that they are greeted with a shot of his face, half of his face in clear view, I believe satisfies the viewer’s initial intuitions as to what Kurtz may have looked like. Another important scene which uses a specific camera shot is the scene in which Kurtz is standing in the doorway before Captain Willard assassinates him. The use of darkness and light again is used in this scene but the fact that a long shot is used is more important. Kurtz is almost entirely black in this scene because of the use of light, and the world around him seems to be lighter. His entire body can be seen in this scene standing in the doorway looking out upon what he had created. He turns to return to his room where he awaits death. It is almost as if he is turning his back on what he had been working on for an extremely long amount of time, just so that he can find some sort of solace in the fact that he is going to die soon. Despite this, the camera shot that is used in this scene is particularly effective because had a medium shot or close up been used, one may not have been able to get the entire message during that scene. The viewer would not have been able to see that Kurtz turned his entire body around and the viewer would not have received the message that he was looking on his creation for one last time. In effect, this camera shot was successful in portraying the message that the director was trying to get across to his viewers.
In all, the intensity of the story line of Apocalypse Now was possibly more imperative than anything else used in this film. However, the director uses elements of cinematography effectively as well to keep the viewer interested. Particularly, the use of light and dark but more convincingly the use of camera angles and shots achieve a spectacular job of allowing this film to be influential. Apocalypse Now is a great example of a film in which elements of cinematography are effectively used and which develops a great story.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Apocalypse Now

I took this picture from: http://www.follow-me-now.de/assets/images/Apocalypse_Now-1.jpg

The first time I viewed this film was in high school, so I didn't remember much going into to Tuesday night's viewing. All I could remember was that the film was dark and a little scary but important to see. Coming out of Tuesday night's viewing of Apocalypse Now (1979), I can still say that the film was very dark, a bit scary but important to watch. Even though I left the viewing a little sick to my stomach, I still enjoyed this film very much.
What I liked most about this movie were the details and the use of color. There were many different colors used for every scene. In fact, it almost seemed as though each scene was a completely different color than the last. From yellow, to purple, to white, to black, etc, each scene was presented with a different color scheme.
Probably my favorite use of color/light and dark were the scenes in which the viewer was first introduced to Captain Kurtz. Almost the entire introduction, or the entire time the viewer first 'views' Kurtz, they only can see part of his bald head because his face is completely black. The viewer can only see half of his head which is also a bit of a yellowish color. It isn't until later that the viewer sees Kurtz in his entirety. I think that was smart because you, as the viewer, probably already know what Marlon Brando looks like, and even if you don't, you already know what his character is supposed to look like from the pictures shown of him previously in the film, so you're left in a state of suspense because you think you know what to expect, but do you really? But you can't tell because you can't see his entire face! But you DO know what he looks like! It's an extremely intense part of the film.
I also loved the details in this film. The final scenes in the jungle when Martin Sheen finally finds Marlon Brando are especially full of little details. From the chopped off heads on the ground and dead bodies in the trees to the 'apocalypse now' written accross the stones, the details give this part of the film a bit more of an intensity. I'm not sure you even need more 'intensity' at this point in the film, but it definately works.
In all, although this film was gruesome and dark and almost evil, it was a great film to analyze in terms of how color and details were used to invoke intensity or other emotions in the viewer. And, even though I could hardly sleep last night because of thinking about the message of the film and the darkness of the war, Apocalypse Now really is an important film for people to watch.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly - on a personal level...

[ I recieved this image from: http://aycu27.webshots.com/image/44106/2005242261641953671_rs.jpg]

After reviewing some of the specific scenes in the film, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, I was able to more closely analyze some of the specifics of the film. I believe the most compelling part of this film was the fact that a majority of the film was based on a point of view shot which the book The Film Experience – an Introduction written by Timothy Corrigan and Patricia White tells us is a camera shot that “re-creates the perspective of a character and may incorporate camera movement or optical effects as well as camera angle in order to do so” (88-89). In The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, point of view shots are used effectively to portray the feelings of the main character, Jean-Do so that the audience could feel or get some sort of sense of what Jean-Do was going through.
Most of these point of view scenes were more towards the beginning of the film. They were used so that we, as the audience, could be introduced to what Jean-Do might have been feeling those first few days he woke from a coma and realized that he had gone through a major stroke and could no longer speak or move. Probably the most excruciating part for Jean-Do and for the audience was the scene in which the doctor sews Jean-Do’s eye shut. The camera shot is again, a point of view shot, but literally it is as if you are Jean-Do; your eyes are Jean-Do’s eyes…it is almost as if your own eye is being sewn up. You want to fight along with Jean-Do, to yell at the doctor and tell him to stop. But, similarly to Jean-Do, you cannot do anything because you are the audience, the viewer and the doctor can not hear you. This helps you to experience the feelings of Jean-Do even more because all he can do is observe; he cannot speak or move to encourage the doctor to stop.
Throughout the rest of the film, the audience is taken away from Jean-Do’s perspective so that you can see Jean-Do through the perspective of other individuals in the film. However, towards the end of the film, when Jean-Do is beginning to creep towards death, the shots again turn to point-of-view shots in which the viewer is again Jean-Do, experiencing death. In the final scenes, the viewer is Jean-Do with much clouded vision. Low angles, point of view shots are used to give the effect that you are Jean-Do lying in bed, hardly understanding the words of the visitors who come to see you, waiting for death. It is an extremely difficult scene to end on, mainly because your vision, the vision of Jean-Do, is so clouded and unclear. However, it is effective because it once again brings the viewer back to the point of no control. You can not yell at Jean-Do’s wife for only visiting him when he is almost dead. You can not reach out and touch any of the visitors. Jean-Do can not do any of these things, either, therefore you are brought back to the sincerity of Jean-Do’s condition and the viewer is once again in the shoes of the main character, pulled from their own reality into the reality of Jean-Do.
In all, I believe the most effective part of this film were the point of view shots. They created feelings, in me and in others I’m sure, of confusion and frustration not only for Jean-Do, but for yourself because you could do nothing to speak or yell at the other characters in the movie for Jean-Do’s sake. Without these camera shots, the film would not have been quite as moving or effective. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly was a deeply emotional, intimate, and personal movie that I will continue to love and view again in the future.

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

The first time I ever viewed this film, I could barely get past my tears...which were basically flowing throughout the duration of the film. However, this time, there were less tears and I was able to focus on some different elements of the film. The entire film was moving, touching, etc etc. I thought it was fantastic how almost the entire film was shown through Jean-Do's view. The camera shots, specifically the almost fish-eye views through Jean-Do's blurry eyes were particularly convincing and influential. This film intrigued me in some similar ways that Psycho did...it really put the viewer into the main character's position. This film, however, was a bit more convincing because it is based on a true story.
Something that really stuck out to me in this film was how the director was able to make a large portion of the film seem like an advertisement. This aspect of the movie did not strike me the first time I viewed it (probably because of my overwhelming emotions). However, in many of the scenes in which Jean-Do was remembering experiences he had, much of those specific memories were played out in an advertisement fashion. Specifically, the photo-shoot scene with the models, the driving scene depicting Jean-Do's girlfriend's hair blowing in the wind, and the scene in Lourdes, when Jean-Do is walking down the street looking at the shops. A lot of these scenes seemed like advertisements. But they were also supposed to be the images in Jean-Do's head. Much of the music during these scenes were similar to upbeat music you might see in a commercial and, once that particular scene was over, the music would always end abruptly. I don't know if this was because the director was trying to make it seem as though Jean-Do was a successful editor because much of what he sees in life is in 'advertisement' mode, or if was simply for effect. Either way it was effective and I really love this movie...I could watch it over and over and not only recieve the same emotions, but probably find something new every time.

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Psycho Remake Review

This remake of Psycho definitely does not even compare to the original. I did not feel the connection I felt with the original Marion (Janet Leigh). In the original version, especially during the car scene, I felt as if I could relate with Marion, especially with the feelings she was experiencing while she was driving away. In the second version, Marion was not as expressive with her facial expressions and her eyes. The scenes that she imagined in her mind were not as detailed. In the original version, Marion went through more scenes in her mind. I also did not feel as connected with Norman. In the original film, when Marion was talking with Norman and Norman expressed how everyone goes a little crazy, etc, I almost felt myself relating with Norman. In class we even talked about how we ended up sympathizing or feeling bad for Norman in the original version. In the remake, I simply felt that Norman was nuts and I could not feel bad for him because I did not feel as if I knew him as well, or felt sympathy for him.
A final disappointment was the fact that I was not as surprised that Norman was the killer in the remake. This could possibly be because I now know the plot of the movie, but I think that it was pretty obvious that Norman was the killer in the remake. He was much more psycho and his character was portrayed as an extremely creepy and perverted man. In the original, Norman was portrayed as a bit more innocent and “boyish” so that when you did finally realize that he was the killer, you were a bit more shocked or upset that he was the killer. In the remake, I almost felt myself wanting Norman to be the killer so that he could receive his punishment because he was such an extremely guilty, awful character.

Sunday, August 31, 2008

Psycho Review

This film really caught me off guard. To be completely honest, I had initially only thought of Hitchcock films as cheesy horror films from my parents’ childhood…something that I really did not want to waste my time on. I had seen pieces of Hitchcock’s Vertigo (1958) and I had seen Hitchcock’s Rear Window (1954) in its entirety, but I had always thought of Psycho as the cheesiest Hitchcock horror film. However, after viewing Psycho, my mind has been changed. Hitchcock was able to create dramatic and intense moments that the viewer could relate to. For me personally, the most influential moments in this film were the moments when Marion was going through dialogue and different situations in her head; most of these moments taking place while leaving town. I was able to connect with the character, because had I been leaving town, I would have been going through those same circumstances in my own mind. Rather than creating a new scene that displayed the actual situation going on back at the town while Marion was leaving, the scene was restricted to a shot of Marion’s anxious face and different desperate facial expressions while driving her car. This created a more realistic display of what it might feel like or what one might be thinking if they were leaving town.