On Wednesday, I went back to my old stomping grounds, the building that stands on 485 Clawson St. This was the 3rd time that I had received a visitor's pass but each time I do it, it is still very strange to realize that as close as Tech was from my heart, I am not a part of it anymore. The other sad part of my visitor's pass experience was that it could no longer be hung among the other legendary visitors in Room 313.
But beyond that, going back to Tech, was very interesting and it was good to see some old faces, although there were far too many new faces for my liking. It was also good having a mini-reunion with about 40 past students from our grade all standing outside Manzo's new office - Room 319.
In the four hours I was there, I was able to go back and visit Ms. Johnson, Ms. Brown, Mr. Olsen, Ms. Chachkes, Mr. Manzo, Mr. Erlenwein, and of course the incredible Mr. Callahan (even though he is a Red Sox fan). It was great to see these teachers but I still lacked a connection because of the whole school, there was really no other teacher that I felt a deep connection to. (If the opportunity arose I would have visited Ms. Kirschbaum, Mr. Andrews and Ms. Cibelli, but unfortunately Ms. Cibelli was absent because of her grandfather's funeral, and Mr. Andrews was just MIA).
But still, maybe it was just a romanticized view of what returning to Tech would be, but I just felt like I was as connected to the school as I would have hoped. Even the teachers I didn't get to visit, I knew most of, but it didn't really seem like their classes have profoundly affected me in a way that is still relevant today, they taught me when I was younger or their class was just less important in my eyes.
Despite this, I loved going back to Tech, and feeling like I was at home again! The teachers that I spoke to extensively were happy to see me I hope and I was equally if not more happy to see them. Manzo said that it was his favorite day of the year because we all come back to visit, and I agree because it shows the staying power of the meaning of Tech to the kids and also how caring the teachers of Tech were about us, and how the welcomed us back into the school with open arms.
It was a strange feeling entering the school now as an Alumnus because I barely felt like I ever left, and that is not taking anything away from my college experience because I love it, but I think Tech just dominated such a huge part of my life, that it will remain there for a very long time.
A blog post has been a long time coming, and at least I got one in the month of November now, but just barely. Hopefully I will post some more over Christmas break, especially if I see some Oscar contender movies, even though I know that you don't care about the Oscars', Mr. Bennett.
Now that finals are coming up though, I know we will all be experiencing a very big work crush, and I was all of you luck on the finals, as we very speedily move through our first college semester. Good luck to all and I hope to see as many of you as possible over the Winter Break.
As an added aside, to speak to you Mr. Bennett, I have been informed by others that you know have a Facebook. I was unaware of this fact earlier, but I don't know if that form of communication will replace this blog.
Also, when I went back to Tech, both Ms. Brown and Ms. Johnson mentioned your name in highly complimentary terms. Ms. Johnson said that with you gone, "We have lost our sage." And Ms. Brown said that she was very disappointed that she did not see you during the Ticker-Tape parade, and missed how you could just command the respect that you did of your peers.
I hope to post and speak to all of you again very soon!
Monday, November 30, 2009
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
The Incomparable Mr. Bennett
Well, I was recently told on this blog that I no longer had to write about film since the film class is over. So for the first time, I will digress from a post about film and instead inform everyone of the continued greatness of the so-titled Mr. Bennett.
Last night, Staten Island hosted a town hall meeting on Healthcare Reform with Congressman Michael McMahon. In attendance was the aforementioned Mr. Bennett, along with my brother and parents, of whom I have gotten this data from.
According to Michael Cassidy, the environment was very hostile with many people vehemently opposed to the proposed reform. As well, almost everyone who spoke either, "was a firefighter, nurse (medical profession), or a military veteran. However, when people were asked to speak, Mr. Bennett had sat very close to the microphone in order that he could speak, and he was in fact approximately the 2nd person to speak.
As Mr. Bennett stepped up to the microphone and stated that he was for some sort of Healthcare Reform, he was greeted by hundreds of people booing him and calling him names, and several other catcalls. However, Mr. Bennett endured and began explaining why he thought that this reform was necessary. In response to the large majority of his opponents, he bravely asserted, "Are you really against this before it will give other people something that you won't get? Is that why you are against it?"
Then, Mr. Bennett went on a described rant similar to "one that you would remember from his old history classes." He then began to according to the great philosopher of Facebook, Michael Cassidy, "Bennett faced down a room of hundreds of hostile opponents of health reform and gave them a history lesson. Too bad they were too stupid to understand." In his history lesson, Mr. Bennett claimed that many of our essential decisions were unpopular at the time, as the Selective Service of 1940 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 were only passed by very few votes and yet what would we do today without them?
Throughout this speech, he continued to be criticized by his ignorant counterparts there but he continued to bravely address these people and make his point. When he finished his speech, only two people stood up and gave him his rightful praise, while the rest of the crowd remained ignorant. I applaud you, Mr. Bennett, for giving these remarks and standing up proudly and courageously and professing your beliefs against a crowd that was very likely armed.
Thank you for continuing to educate the masses despite the fact that you are no longer teaching in the classes. Glad to hear that you are see making yourself known, Mr. Bennett.
Whether or not you agree with the Health Care Reform or not, I want you to realize the courage of this men to stand up against hostility, much like Socrates, who was put to death because he made people question their beliefs and think. Mr. Bennett you are a modern Socrates. You don't need to agree with this post but I want everyone to know what Mr. Bennett continues to do.
I hope people are still reading these.
Last night, Staten Island hosted a town hall meeting on Healthcare Reform with Congressman Michael McMahon. In attendance was the aforementioned Mr. Bennett, along with my brother and parents, of whom I have gotten this data from.
According to Michael Cassidy, the environment was very hostile with many people vehemently opposed to the proposed reform. As well, almost everyone who spoke either, "was a firefighter, nurse (medical profession), or a military veteran. However, when people were asked to speak, Mr. Bennett had sat very close to the microphone in order that he could speak, and he was in fact approximately the 2nd person to speak.
As Mr. Bennett stepped up to the microphone and stated that he was for some sort of Healthcare Reform, he was greeted by hundreds of people booing him and calling him names, and several other catcalls. However, Mr. Bennett endured and began explaining why he thought that this reform was necessary. In response to the large majority of his opponents, he bravely asserted, "Are you really against this before it will give other people something that you won't get? Is that why you are against it?"
Then, Mr. Bennett went on a described rant similar to "one that you would remember from his old history classes." He then began to according to the great philosopher of Facebook, Michael Cassidy, "Bennett faced down a room of hundreds of hostile opponents of health reform and gave them a history lesson. Too bad they were too stupid to understand." In his history lesson, Mr. Bennett claimed that many of our essential decisions were unpopular at the time, as the Selective Service of 1940 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 were only passed by very few votes and yet what would we do today without them?
Throughout this speech, he continued to be criticized by his ignorant counterparts there but he continued to bravely address these people and make his point. When he finished his speech, only two people stood up and gave him his rightful praise, while the rest of the crowd remained ignorant. I applaud you, Mr. Bennett, for giving these remarks and standing up proudly and courageously and professing your beliefs against a crowd that was very likely armed.
Thank you for continuing to educate the masses despite the fact that you are no longer teaching in the classes. Glad to hear that you are see making yourself known, Mr. Bennett.
Whether or not you agree with the Health Care Reform or not, I want you to realize the courage of this men to stand up against hostility, much like Socrates, who was put to death because he made people question their beliefs and think. Mr. Bennett you are a modern Socrates. You don't need to agree with this post but I want everyone to know what Mr. Bennett continues to do.
I hope people are still reading these.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
A Post --- Finally
So, reading Mr. Bennett's continued blog post finally inspired me to contribute to write on his film blog again, despite my limited time. This mainly means that my posts will now just have far less rambling. But since this is a film blog (and I can compete with Mr. Bennett's sentimentality or skilled diction), I will continue to write about movies.
I have continued to look deeply into the movies that are coming out as the better movies come out as Awards Season approaches. Movies that I personally looking forward are:
The Informant! - with Matt Damon and just looks like a very clever dark comedy, somewhat similar to the Coen Brothers Burn After Reading. (September 25th)
And speaking of the Coen Brothers, they have a new film coming out that I am looking forward to called "A Serious Man". Now normally they have some big stars, this however is not true in this film, but since it the Coen Brothers, I assume it will be quality. (October 9th)
Personally, I am never a big fan of musicals but the movie Nine looks terrific to me and with its SUPERSTAR cast, including my favorite actor Daniel-Day Lewis, I don't see how the movie isn't a great quality picture (November 25th)
Another surefire hit, in my opinion will be Invictus. Directed by Clint Eastwood, Starring Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela and Matt Damon. Enough said.
Other movies that I am looking forward to (and think will be very high-quality films) include:
Sherlock Holmes, The Men Who Stare at Goats, Up in the Air, Avatar (I'm not convinced, but I have only heard good things), and The Road.
Although it is already in and out of the theaters, I am very interested in The Hurt Locker.
There may be more quality pictures that come out and I will add to my list but these are the films coming out before the end of the year that I am legitimately interested in.
I hope this will be the first of many more posts of mine and others will continue posting here. Thanks for the inspiration Mr Bennett!
I have continued to look deeply into the movies that are coming out as the better movies come out as Awards Season approaches. Movies that I personally looking forward are:
The Informant! - with Matt Damon and just looks like a very clever dark comedy, somewhat similar to the Coen Brothers Burn After Reading. (September 25th)
And speaking of the Coen Brothers, they have a new film coming out that I am looking forward to called "A Serious Man". Now normally they have some big stars, this however is not true in this film, but since it the Coen Brothers, I assume it will be quality. (October 9th)
Personally, I am never a big fan of musicals but the movie Nine looks terrific to me and with its SUPERSTAR cast, including my favorite actor Daniel-Day Lewis, I don't see how the movie isn't a great quality picture (November 25th)
Another surefire hit, in my opinion will be Invictus. Directed by Clint Eastwood, Starring Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela and Matt Damon. Enough said.
Other movies that I am looking forward to (and think will be very high-quality films) include:
Sherlock Holmes, The Men Who Stare at Goats, Up in the Air, Avatar (I'm not convinced, but I have only heard good things), and The Road.
Although it is already in and out of the theaters, I am very interested in The Hurt Locker.
There may be more quality pictures that come out and I will add to my list but these are the films coming out before the end of the year that I am legitimately interested in.
I hope this will be the first of many more posts of mine and others will continue posting here. Thanks for the inspiration Mr Bennett!
A Post --- Finally
So, reading Mr. Bennett's continued blog post finally inspired me to contribute to write on his film blog again, despite my limited time. This mainly means that my posts will now just have far less rambling. But since this is a film blog (and I can compete with Mr. Bennett's sentimentality or skilled diction), I will continue to write about movies.
I have continued to look deeply into the movies that are coming out as the better movies come out as Awards Season approaches. Movies that I personally looking forward are:
The Informant! - with Matt Damon and just looks like a very clever dark comedy, somewhat similar to the Coen Brothers Burn After Reading. (September 25th)
And speaking of the Coen Brothers, they have a new film coming out that I am looking forward to called "A Serious Man". Now normally they have some big stars, this however is not true in this film, but since it the Coen Brothers, I assume it will be quality. (October 9th)
Personally, I am never a big fan of musicals but the movie Nine looks terrific to me and with its SUPERSTAR cast, including my favorite actor Daniel-Day Lewis, I don't see how the movie isn't a great quality picture (November 25th)
Another surefire hit, in my opinion will be Invictus. Directed by Clint Eastwood, Starring Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela and Matt Damon. Enough said.
Other movies that I am looking forward to (and think will be very high-quality films) include:
Sherlock Holmes, The Men Who Stare at Goats, Up in the Air, Avatar (I'm not convinced, but I have only heard good things), and The Road.
Although it is already in and out of the theaters, I am very interested in The Hurt Locker.
There may be more quality pictures that come out and I will add to my list but these are the films coming out before the end of the year that I am legitimately interested in.
I hope this will be the first of many more posts of mine and others will continue posting here. Thanks for the inspiration Mr Bennett!
I have continued to look deeply into the movies that are coming out as the better movies come out as Awards Season approaches. Movies that I personally looking forward are:
The Informant! - with Matt Damon and just looks like a very clever dark comedy, somewhat similar to the Coen Brothers Burn After Reading. (September 25th)
And speaking of the Coen Brothers, they have a new film coming out that I am looking forward to called "A Serious Man". Now normally they have some big stars, this however is not true in this film, but since it the Coen Brothers, I assume it will be quality. (October 9th)
Personally, I am never a big fan of musicals but the movie Nine looks terrific to me and with its SUPERSTAR cast, including my favorite actor Daniel-Day Lewis, I don't see how the movie isn't a great quality picture (November 25th)
Another surefire hit, in my opinion will be Invictus. Directed by Clint Eastwood, Starring Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela and Matt Damon. Enough said.
Other movies that I am looking forward to (and think will be very high-quality films) include:
Sherlock Holmes, The Men Who Stare at Goats, Up in the Air, Avatar (I'm not convinced, but I have only heard good things), and The Road.
Although it is already in and out of the theaters, I am very interested in The Hurt Locker.
There may be more quality pictures that come out and I will add to my list but these are the films coming out before the end of the year that I am legitimately interested in.
I hope this will be the first of many more posts of mine and others will continue posting here. Thanks for the inspiration Mr Bennett!
Saturday, July 4, 2009
My Favorite Movies
Here is my newest list of what I thought personally were the best movies, the worst movies, and the in-between movies. I believe I remembered all of the films but if I forgot one, I will add in it later. I will begin with my least favorite film, #15, and go down to my favorite #1. I know this will be an unexpected and strange list but I think this is the order that I believe. Each will have a little explanation and if more is necessary, I will add more. You may argue with me if you disagree, and we can discuss it. Honestly, however, there is not one movie I didn't enjoy this year but I still need to make an order, so even if I am harsh to a film, I still liked it but it wasn't as good as some of the other films we saw. But here is the Professor's Definitive Order of Mr. Bennett's Films:
15) Signs - There was not much there and I felt like the director and actors were hitting us over the head with doctrines. Despite that I still enjoyed the film but it was not the same caliber as the rest.
14) Top Hat - A good musical but a musical nonetheless. It had a predictable, simple plot. It was enjoyable but nothing amazing beyond the terrific dancing and choreography of the film.
13) A Simple Plan - Personally, there was just a missing element in the film that I never felt attached to it, despite it having characters you could relate to and personal situations. Also, I am still appalled by the scene where the women is blown away. I can't take a movie seriously that does something like that. I'm sorry.
12) Atomic Cafe - A very good documentary, but it was a documentary and although far superior to other documentaries, I wasn't hooked as much as if it were another more exciting film, but I still enjoyed its cleverness.
11) Citizen Kane - Often hailed as the greatest movie ever, but I just didn't feel it was that great. I was slightly bored and I thought that the film wasn't told great. It had a clever premise and it was filmed beautifully, but I didn't love it. I guess I'm just a product of a different era.
10) Fargo - Again I'm sure people will disagree vehemently with me but again I just saw something missing. Good acting and clever writing as you would expect from the Coen Brothers but I didn't see anything special in it.
9) Midnight Cowboy - Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman were outstanding but it seemed like the supporting actors weren't very good and the story itself could have been worked on. Also, the filming seemed slightly amateurism and the use of flashbacks did not further the story as effectively as it could have.
8) Dr. Strangelove - I thought it was very funny, very clever, brilliantly satirical, great acting, but that was about it. I didn't think the filming was great and all of the scenes were not outstanding and I thought it should have been longer with more substance, but still a great film. These top 8 movies were all so close in my opinion that many of the films could be switched around.
7) Memento - Brilliant storyline, very clever plot twist, and the way to tell the story but I didn't think the acting was outstanding and I felt a little confused so it is probably better than I give it credit for but I wished there was more to the movie, although I may just be asking for too much.
6) All Quiet on the Western Front – An truly epic old time film. Not terrific acting, but an outstanding story, an amazing war film for the time period in terms of showing the true grittiness of war and the dehumanization that occurs.
5) Unforgiven – Probably the most technically sound and polished of all of the films, amazing script, acting, directing, and cinematography, brought this film together. I only wished that there were a couple more elements because it wasn’t my favorite film but it was very close.
4) The Seventh Seal – It is very difficult to know what to say about this film other than that it is hauntingly scary and thought-provoking, and a film that can seem so utterly different, is in fact a story and a challenge that we all must face. I have seen it twice now, and both times I could not look away, all of the elements were there and it spoke to such a high meaning.
3) Dark City – Both of my brothers felt this film was too strange for their taste, but something about this drove me into the universe that Proyas created and the way that there was truly no reality or truth and that everything was strictly manipulation was just shocking and awed me. It is the film that I have thought about the most by far in the film class, and its ideas still fascinate me.
2) Runaway Train – Just a great story and a microcosm about how we cannot control our outside world and that events are going to happen no matter what, and we cannot stop them even if we know they are coming and think we can stop them. Terrific acting, a great story, a film I could not take my eyes off of, and I actually made the most blog posts about this film.
1) The Asphalt Jungle – Many people will strongly disagree but in my eyes this film had perfect execution of a crime caper gone wrong. It was just perfect and the way that all the elements combined made it by far the most compelling movie I saw all year. The way that Doc Riedenschenider could have escaped if he just left a few minutes earlier. My own flaw is that I wish Dix would have escaped but that was beyond the director’s control.
This was a very difficult list to comprise and it took much thought so I apologize for it being posted so late. I hope people will challenge and question me, but in terms of the films I enjoyed the most, this is the list.
15) Signs - There was not much there and I felt like the director and actors were hitting us over the head with doctrines. Despite that I still enjoyed the film but it was not the same caliber as the rest.
14) Top Hat - A good musical but a musical nonetheless. It had a predictable, simple plot. It was enjoyable but nothing amazing beyond the terrific dancing and choreography of the film.
13) A Simple Plan - Personally, there was just a missing element in the film that I never felt attached to it, despite it having characters you could relate to and personal situations. Also, I am still appalled by the scene where the women is blown away. I can't take a movie seriously that does something like that. I'm sorry.
12) Atomic Cafe - A very good documentary, but it was a documentary and although far superior to other documentaries, I wasn't hooked as much as if it were another more exciting film, but I still enjoyed its cleverness.
11) Citizen Kane - Often hailed as the greatest movie ever, but I just didn't feel it was that great. I was slightly bored and I thought that the film wasn't told great. It had a clever premise and it was filmed beautifully, but I didn't love it. I guess I'm just a product of a different era.
10) Fargo - Again I'm sure people will disagree vehemently with me but again I just saw something missing. Good acting and clever writing as you would expect from the Coen Brothers but I didn't see anything special in it.
9) Midnight Cowboy - Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman were outstanding but it seemed like the supporting actors weren't very good and the story itself could have been worked on. Also, the filming seemed slightly amateurism and the use of flashbacks did not further the story as effectively as it could have.
8) Dr. Strangelove - I thought it was very funny, very clever, brilliantly satirical, great acting, but that was about it. I didn't think the filming was great and all of the scenes were not outstanding and I thought it should have been longer with more substance, but still a great film. These top 8 movies were all so close in my opinion that many of the films could be switched around.
7) Memento - Brilliant storyline, very clever plot twist, and the way to tell the story but I didn't think the acting was outstanding and I felt a little confused so it is probably better than I give it credit for but I wished there was more to the movie, although I may just be asking for too much.
6) All Quiet on the Western Front – An truly epic old time film. Not terrific acting, but an outstanding story, an amazing war film for the time period in terms of showing the true grittiness of war and the dehumanization that occurs.
5) Unforgiven – Probably the most technically sound and polished of all of the films, amazing script, acting, directing, and cinematography, brought this film together. I only wished that there were a couple more elements because it wasn’t my favorite film but it was very close.
4) The Seventh Seal – It is very difficult to know what to say about this film other than that it is hauntingly scary and thought-provoking, and a film that can seem so utterly different, is in fact a story and a challenge that we all must face. I have seen it twice now, and both times I could not look away, all of the elements were there and it spoke to such a high meaning.
3) Dark City – Both of my brothers felt this film was too strange for their taste, but something about this drove me into the universe that Proyas created and the way that there was truly no reality or truth and that everything was strictly manipulation was just shocking and awed me. It is the film that I have thought about the most by far in the film class, and its ideas still fascinate me.
2) Runaway Train – Just a great story and a microcosm about how we cannot control our outside world and that events are going to happen no matter what, and we cannot stop them even if we know they are coming and think we can stop them. Terrific acting, a great story, a film I could not take my eyes off of, and I actually made the most blog posts about this film.
1) The Asphalt Jungle – Many people will strongly disagree but in my eyes this film had perfect execution of a crime caper gone wrong. It was just perfect and the way that all the elements combined made it by far the most compelling movie I saw all year. The way that Doc Riedenschenider could have escaped if he just left a few minutes earlier. My own flaw is that I wish Dix would have escaped but that was beyond the director’s control.
This was a very difficult list to comprise and it took much thought so I apologize for it being posted so late. I hope people will challenge and question me, but in terms of the films I enjoyed the most, this is the list.
Comments about Mr. Bennett's Speech
Here are some of the comments that people wrote on Facebook about Mr. Bennett's speech after I posted it there: Enjoy!
Tom Brick: a true legend
Arun Chacko: by far one of the best teachers i have ever had along with callahan. im gonna miss him a lot.
Steve Florentino: i second what tom brick said
Ben Zichettello: My favorite speech
Anthony Borruso: great speech, i was luky to take his film class this year
Brianna Cusumano: beautifully written and executed.
Pete Mondello: voice of a thousand angels
Derick Lai: I wanted him to rev up his motorcycle around the courtyard after we graduated. Gonna miss the old fella for sure ;_;
Paul M Sebexen: he's the only teacher we have who could break out into song at graduation without being laughed at... an excellent speech
Some high praise!
Tom Brick: a true legend
Arun Chacko: by far one of the best teachers i have ever had along with callahan. im gonna miss him a lot.
Steve Florentino: i second what tom brick said
Ben Zichettello: My favorite speech
Anthony Borruso: great speech, i was luky to take his film class this year
Brianna Cusumano: beautifully written and executed.
Pete Mondello: voice of a thousand angels
Derick Lai: I wanted him to rev up his motorcycle around the courtyard after we graduated. Gonna miss the old fella for sure ;_;
Paul M Sebexen: he's the only teacher we have who could break out into song at graduation without being laughed at... an excellent speech
Some high praise!
Sunday, June 14, 2009
The 1st Annual Professor's Preference and Recognition High Honors
I apologize for the title of the post but I was trying to sound intelligent and academic but it just sounds ridiculous so I apologize but if anyone has another title for my award show, please let me know. It needs a new name. But here are my awards. There will be 5 nominees in each category and then I will put the winner directly below it although I think that will be pretty easy to follow. (In films with less than 5 nominees possible, I will put the maximum, i.e. the Actress categories)
Best Picture Nominees:
All Quiet on the Western Front
The Seventh Seal
Runaway Train
Unforgiven
Dr. Strangelove
Winner: All Quiet on the Western Front
Best Director Nominees:
Lewis Milestone - All Quiet
Orson Welles - Citizen Kane
Alex Proyas - Dark City
Christopher Nolan - Memento
Stanley Kubrick - Dr. Strangelove
Winner: Orson Welles
Best Actor Nominees:
Jon Voight - Runaway Train
Guy Pearce - Memento
Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove
William H. Macy - Fargo
Rufus Sewell - Dark City
Winner: Peter Sellers
Best Supporting Actor Nominees:
Dustin Hoffman - Midnight Cowboy
Gene Hackman - Unforgiven
Morgan Freeman - Unforgiven
Kiefer Sutherland - Dark City
Eric Roberts - Runaway Train
(William Hurt - Dark City)
Winner: Gene Hackman
Best Actress Nominees:
Ginger Rogers - Top Hat
Frances McDormand - Fargo
Winner: Frances McDormand
Best Supporting Actress Nominees:
Rebecca DeMornay - Runaway Train
Dorothy Comingore - Citizen Kane
Bridget Fonda - A Simple Plan
Jennifer Connelly - Dark City
Helen Broderick - Top Hat
Winner: Jennifer Connelly
Best Screenplay Nominees: (Original or Adapted -- it's too much work to see which are which)
Runaway Train
Dark City
Dr. Strangelove
Unforgiven
Fargo
Winner: Dr. Strangelove
I hope these picks are suitable and acceptable although probably slightly unorthodox. I couldn't pick just 5 supporting actors because #3-6 were too close for me to just pick 3 of them. Also, it was very close between Jennifer Connelly and Bridget Fonda. Let me know how wrong I am with my picks and look for my next post where I list my favorite movies, from the top 15. Believe me, it will be a very unorthodox list probably. Enjoy!
Best Picture Nominees:
All Quiet on the Western Front
The Seventh Seal
Runaway Train
Unforgiven
Dr. Strangelove
Winner: All Quiet on the Western Front
Best Director Nominees:
Lewis Milestone - All Quiet
Orson Welles - Citizen Kane
Alex Proyas - Dark City
Christopher Nolan - Memento
Stanley Kubrick - Dr. Strangelove
Winner: Orson Welles
Best Actor Nominees:
Jon Voight - Runaway Train
Guy Pearce - Memento
Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove
William H. Macy - Fargo
Rufus Sewell - Dark City
Winner: Peter Sellers
Best Supporting Actor Nominees:
Dustin Hoffman - Midnight Cowboy
Gene Hackman - Unforgiven
Morgan Freeman - Unforgiven
Kiefer Sutherland - Dark City
Eric Roberts - Runaway Train
(William Hurt - Dark City)
Winner: Gene Hackman
Best Actress Nominees:
Ginger Rogers - Top Hat
Frances McDormand - Fargo
Winner: Frances McDormand
Best Supporting Actress Nominees:
Rebecca DeMornay - Runaway Train
Dorothy Comingore - Citizen Kane
Bridget Fonda - A Simple Plan
Jennifer Connelly - Dark City
Helen Broderick - Top Hat
Winner: Jennifer Connelly
Best Screenplay Nominees: (Original or Adapted -- it's too much work to see which are which)
Runaway Train
Dark City
Dr. Strangelove
Unforgiven
Fargo
Winner: Dr. Strangelove
I hope these picks are suitable and acceptable although probably slightly unorthodox. I couldn't pick just 5 supporting actors because #3-6 were too close for me to just pick 3 of them. Also, it was very close between Jennifer Connelly and Bridget Fonda. Let me know how wrong I am with my picks and look for my next post where I list my favorite movies, from the top 15. Believe me, it will be a very unorthodox list probably. Enjoy!
Thursday, June 11, 2009
I Am Shocked
When Mr. Bennett announced at the end of the class today that he was leaving, I was literally shell-shocked, amazed and saddened at the same time. After finishing watching the Atomic Cafe and the effect of dropping the Atom Bomb, Mr. Bennett dropped an atomic bomb on our class with the revelation.
Let me just say, and Rob Marotta also said this, but the school will not be the same without you Mr. Bennett. I don't want to speak for the whole class but I will anyway, I know we all loved the film class and were so happy that we were able to take it. Same goes for myself in AP American and I'm sure for all those who had you in Global. (I hope I'm not stealing Nick's role as mayor). But without your presence Mr. Bennett, the school will be lacking an essential element that we all enjoyed, and I'm saddened that I won't be able to come back and visit you at Tech next year. But I am happy for you that you are leaving and also it is pretty cool to say that we get to be the last class to have Mr. Bennett as a teacher. I guess when the statue is built in honor of you at Tech in a few years, we can all say that we were there the last time you taught.
I don't want to keep going on but I want to thank you for everything you have taught myself (and the class) about American History, Film, and most importantly in Life. You will be missed and I hope you enjoy the next chapter of your life. Getting to know you has been an honor, privilege, and a blessing. (I don't want to get too melodramatic here though like Requiem for a Dream.)
I will continue posting on this blog over the months and years to come, including a few more this year on a summary of the class and my favorite movies of the year.
Thank you again for everything Mr. Bennett!
Let me just say, and Rob Marotta also said this, but the school will not be the same without you Mr. Bennett. I don't want to speak for the whole class but I will anyway, I know we all loved the film class and were so happy that we were able to take it. Same goes for myself in AP American and I'm sure for all those who had you in Global. (I hope I'm not stealing Nick's role as mayor). But without your presence Mr. Bennett, the school will be lacking an essential element that we all enjoyed, and I'm saddened that I won't be able to come back and visit you at Tech next year. But I am happy for you that you are leaving and also it is pretty cool to say that we get to be the last class to have Mr. Bennett as a teacher. I guess when the statue is built in honor of you at Tech in a few years, we can all say that we were there the last time you taught.
I don't want to keep going on but I want to thank you for everything you have taught myself (and the class) about American History, Film, and most importantly in Life. You will be missed and I hope you enjoy the next chapter of your life. Getting to know you has been an honor, privilege, and a blessing. (I don't want to get too melodramatic here though like Requiem for a Dream.)
I will continue posting on this blog over the months and years to come, including a few more this year on a summary of the class and my favorite movies of the year.
Thank you again for everything Mr. Bennett!
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Dr. Strangelove - Late Thoughts
I know that Dr. Strangelove is nearly out of us teenagers, short attention-spans but I have been unable to post anything the last couple of days because I was doing stuff for college, and then last night I didn't get home from my track meet until after 10:30 PM so I didn't have time but there was one thought that I wanted to make about something that Mr. Bennett mentioned during the film. (Almost all of my other ideas were covered during our 1.5 day long discussion on the film.)
When Major Kong was speaking on the plane and he says "Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff." Now, as Mr. Bennett said, the original screenplay said the city Dallas, but because it was released the month after Kennedy's assassination they didn't want to bring back memories of the city where he was killed. However, throughout the film, at least twice, as Mr. Bennett also stated, the movie referenced a Gap, like the mine-shaft gap and a doomsday gap. Now, I felt that if they were trying to avoid breaching the topic of Kennedy then why did they include these two references to Kennedy.
It just seemed odd personally that they would include some references to Kennedy that would be fresh on people's minds since his Presidency had just ended, but remove the line about Dallas, unless they felt that was too close to home. I don't know, maybe someone could enlighten me on the quasi and selective censorship of the Kennedy dialogue. It was just something I had thought about since we finished the film.
When Major Kong was speaking on the plane and he says "Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff." Now, as Mr. Bennett said, the original screenplay said the city Dallas, but because it was released the month after Kennedy's assassination they didn't want to bring back memories of the city where he was killed. However, throughout the film, at least twice, as Mr. Bennett also stated, the movie referenced a Gap, like the mine-shaft gap and a doomsday gap. Now, I felt that if they were trying to avoid breaching the topic of Kennedy then why did they include these two references to Kennedy.
It just seemed odd personally that they would include some references to Kennedy that would be fresh on people's minds since his Presidency had just ended, but remove the line about Dallas, unless they felt that was too close to home. I don't know, maybe someone could enlighten me on the quasi and selective censorship of the Kennedy dialogue. It was just something I had thought about since we finished the film.
Friday, May 29, 2009
The 2005 Academy Award Nominated Short Films
I was going to make a post last night about the next 36 minutes of Dr. Strangelove, but I got distracted when my brother and his friend began watching a DVD of the 2005 Academy Award Nominated Short Films. Although a Dr. Strangelove post may happen, I must much more interested in understanding what constitutes a short film, how they were done, and how impressed I was by them.
I only saw four out of the five nominated films, but they were each terrific in their own way. The films were:
Cashback (United Kingdom, 19 minutes) directed by Sean Ellis
Sidasti Baerinn (The Last Farm), (Iceland, 15 minutes)directed by Runar Runarsson
Our Time is Up (USA, 14 minutes) directed by Rob Pearlstein
Six Shooter (Ireland, 27 minutes) directed by Martin McDonagh, director of In Bruges
Each of these films were absolutely incredibly, in their own way, and although I don't know much about short films, they seemed to be the best of the best. I believe that my brothers' friend got the DVD of all 5 from Blockbuster so I'm sure it might be available through Netflix or something.
I must say, it was very interesting, how each movie how its own technique of brilliance, but none of them had all of the perfect characteristics. In terms of the filmmaking, the most original and ambitious film in terms of story was Cashback which told the story of a night shift supermarket worker who survives the boredom of the day through his daydreams, but I won't give away what those are.
The 2nd film, The Last Farm, was honestly the most beautifully shot movie that I have ever seen. The cinematography was simply outstanding and although it was a slow, also silent film, it worked better that way because the actors' emotions and the way the story was told, through the filming, was far more effective and truly beautiful. It was very interesting however, and I wonder if it was conscious but one of the first shots of this film reminded me almost exactly of the first shot of The Seventh Seal when Antonius Block is on the rocks of the beach. Here, once again, the shot begins in the ocean and slowly pans to a rocky beach, just like in the Seventh Seal. Immediately, when I saw the shot, I said, "It's the Seventh Seal in color" and the shot was done just as effectively although the character of Death specifically was not standing there. This film also had a very good story, in which it told the story of an older man, who had the last remaining farm, the rest were abandoned, and how he spent his time. It was a vivid, emotional story.
The 3rd movie, was an American comedy, called Our Time Is Up. This movie was brilliantly hilarious and just cleverly written. The entire film, almost a satire but with more obvious humor, had me laughing nearly the entire film. The cast of characters were absolutely terrific actors and the editing of the film was its other great strong point. The way the movie was shot and how scenes were edited together, and repeated with variations, was impressively done, and the comedy was first-rate. This film, tells the story of a psycharitrist who treats his patients much like a normal, detached psycharitrist, and the events that ensue. The length of it and the comic timing just worked perfectly, and I thought that its acting stole the movie.
The final film, Six Shooter, as I mentioned, was directed By Martin McDonagh, director of In Bruges. (Ok, so now I have forced Benny to go out and see this movie, and make him watch all of them in the process.) Interestingly enough, it also started Brandon Gleeson, the fat Irish friend of Colin Farrell (He also plays Mad-Eye Moody in Harry Potter) and who had the main role in In Bruges. This film had the most compelling story, as it told the story of a man dealing with the loss of his wife and his trip back home, dealing with the grief. The strongest point of this film was the deep, complex story as well as the vivid interaction between the different characters. It was filmed much like In Bruges, and because McDonagh also wrote the film, it of course, had incredibly witty and hilarious dialogue, and the writing was clever as always. This was the longest film, and certainly had the most substance, because of its length. The way McDonagh filmed many of the scenes, the character interaction, mimicked or even mirrored much of the action in In Bruges, which isn't a bad thing necessarily. As well, much of the morally ambiguous points of In Bruges are present in this film.
All of these films were terrific, told compelling stories, were beautifully shot, and I enjoyed each of them immensely for their own reasons, except Cashback which was my least favorite, but it was certainly creative. I would suggest each of you, or at least anyone interested, should try to get a copy of it, because it opened my eyes to the world of shorts, and showed me four terrific films. Although I want tell you which movie won the Oscar, I'm going to make you try to figure it out or watch for yourself. (Of course, you could just go to IMDB and search it very simply, but that ruins all the fun now doesn't it.) So, if you get the chance, try to take a look at them, or at least find them online.
I only saw four out of the five nominated films, but they were each terrific in their own way. The films were:
Cashback (United Kingdom, 19 minutes) directed by Sean Ellis
Sidasti Baerinn (The Last Farm), (Iceland, 15 minutes)directed by Runar Runarsson
Our Time is Up (USA, 14 minutes) directed by Rob Pearlstein
Six Shooter (Ireland, 27 minutes) directed by Martin McDonagh, director of In Bruges
Each of these films were absolutely incredibly, in their own way, and although I don't know much about short films, they seemed to be the best of the best. I believe that my brothers' friend got the DVD of all 5 from Blockbuster so I'm sure it might be available through Netflix or something.
I must say, it was very interesting, how each movie how its own technique of brilliance, but none of them had all of the perfect characteristics. In terms of the filmmaking, the most original and ambitious film in terms of story was Cashback which told the story of a night shift supermarket worker who survives the boredom of the day through his daydreams, but I won't give away what those are.
The 2nd film, The Last Farm, was honestly the most beautifully shot movie that I have ever seen. The cinematography was simply outstanding and although it was a slow, also silent film, it worked better that way because the actors' emotions and the way the story was told, through the filming, was far more effective and truly beautiful. It was very interesting however, and I wonder if it was conscious but one of the first shots of this film reminded me almost exactly of the first shot of The Seventh Seal when Antonius Block is on the rocks of the beach. Here, once again, the shot begins in the ocean and slowly pans to a rocky beach, just like in the Seventh Seal. Immediately, when I saw the shot, I said, "It's the Seventh Seal in color" and the shot was done just as effectively although the character of Death specifically was not standing there. This film also had a very good story, in which it told the story of an older man, who had the last remaining farm, the rest were abandoned, and how he spent his time. It was a vivid, emotional story.
The 3rd movie, was an American comedy, called Our Time Is Up. This movie was brilliantly hilarious and just cleverly written. The entire film, almost a satire but with more obvious humor, had me laughing nearly the entire film. The cast of characters were absolutely terrific actors and the editing of the film was its other great strong point. The way the movie was shot and how scenes were edited together, and repeated with variations, was impressively done, and the comedy was first-rate. This film, tells the story of a psycharitrist who treats his patients much like a normal, detached psycharitrist, and the events that ensue. The length of it and the comic timing just worked perfectly, and I thought that its acting stole the movie.
The final film, Six Shooter, as I mentioned, was directed By Martin McDonagh, director of In Bruges. (Ok, so now I have forced Benny to go out and see this movie, and make him watch all of them in the process.) Interestingly enough, it also started Brandon Gleeson, the fat Irish friend of Colin Farrell (He also plays Mad-Eye Moody in Harry Potter) and who had the main role in In Bruges. This film had the most compelling story, as it told the story of a man dealing with the loss of his wife and his trip back home, dealing with the grief. The strongest point of this film was the deep, complex story as well as the vivid interaction between the different characters. It was filmed much like In Bruges, and because McDonagh also wrote the film, it of course, had incredibly witty and hilarious dialogue, and the writing was clever as always. This was the longest film, and certainly had the most substance, because of its length. The way McDonagh filmed many of the scenes, the character interaction, mimicked or even mirrored much of the action in In Bruges, which isn't a bad thing necessarily. As well, much of the morally ambiguous points of In Bruges are present in this film.
All of these films were terrific, told compelling stories, were beautifully shot, and I enjoyed each of them immensely for their own reasons, except Cashback which was my least favorite, but it was certainly creative. I would suggest each of you, or at least anyone interested, should try to get a copy of it, because it opened my eyes to the world of shorts, and showed me four terrific films. Although I want tell you which movie won the Oscar, I'm going to make you try to figure it out or watch for yourself. (Of course, you could just go to IMDB and search it very simply, but that ruins all the fun now doesn't it.) So, if you get the chance, try to take a look at them, or at least find them online.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
The First 12 Minutes of Dr. Strangelove
It is probably abnormal and inappropriate for me to be posting about a film that we have seen so little of, and therefore it is impossible for me to make any actual informed comments on the film because we have seen less than 15% of it, but there were a couple of things that I noticed and I figure I should post them before I forget them, and before they become irrelevant and fade into oblivion.
The first thing, I noticed most about the movie so far were the opening credits. First, the statement by the Air Force which set the tone of the movie because of its seriousness but also ridiculousness at the same time. But the thing that was most pressing about the opening credits, was the title sequence, first that it said that it was a fictional story not based on true events at least 3 or 4 times. Also, the way the title sequence was arranged was very interesting and inventive and I know that it has received notice in the past. The way that certain things were very large, like last names, the letters DR., and a few other random things were thrown in there and it was quite interesting how certain things were very small, like the subtitle of the movie: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, was very small.
The reason this title sequence struck me was two fold, one was because of its original nature and it is something that you rarely take note of to this extent, and second, because I know that this title sequence is famous. The graphic title designer is Pablo Ferro, and although he is famous for doing some of the greatest title sequences of all time, you may not have heard his name. I probably would not have either, but last year I just happened to be watching ReelzChannel and they had a short piece on Pablo Ferro because two men have created a quasi-animated documentary that uses interviews, animation, and other things to tell about the life of Pablo Ferro, as a animator, director, and actor. Having seen this, and in the clip, Dr. Strangelove was mentioned, I paid careful attention to the sequence.
If you can think of other famous title sequences, I wouldn't be surprised if you found that he did them as well, as for example, he did A Clockwork Orange and Beetlejuice, as well as hundreds more. Now, this may not interest any of you and bore you all to death, but I just found it interesting because I had seen the story about him and heard of the forthcoming documentary. I found the link to the video and the movie website and I will post them below, hopefully they both work.
Video:
I know last time Mr. Bennett had trouble watching the video so here is the link to the ReelzChannel clip so you can watch it from their website directly. (Hint: I don't think it will play on school computers, only at home.)
ReelzChannel Clip Link: http://www.reelzchannel.com/trailer-clips/38215/whats-your-title
Movie Website: http://www.pablothemovie.com/
Also, I mentioned that their were two things that I found interesting beyond just the story of the film because the story has not been expanded enough beyond that Plan R is really bad and people can't believe that it will be used unless "Washington has already been bombed." The way that movie has started, and the way it seems to be progressing, reminds me of the book Catch-22 by Joseph Heller, which I thought was brilliant and if you haven't read I would suggest it, but the situations and the satire of the movie, seem to somewhat match Heller's style. But I could be wrong because we haven't seen enough, but in Catch-22 there were similar circumstances where the characters went along with utterly ridiculous things, in ridiculous ways.
But back to my original point, the one thing that I found of note in the movie. I'm not sure if everyone caught it but the General sitting behind the desk at the beginning of the film (the guy the played Dix in Asphalt Jungle), his name was Jack D. Ripper, not exactly the most subtle name.
Now this could have just been make a joke but when a character's name is Jack D. Ripper or Jack the Ripper, modeled after an infamous killer, you would probably assume that it was done on purpose and that it is possible that this character could be a sadist, unfeeling human being, like the killer who shares his name.
I saw the movie Red Eye which was released in 2005 starring Cillian Murphy and Rachel McAdams, before Dr. Strangelove, but in that film, a good but not great film, the main character's name, who was a killer was named Jack Rippner, again a very symbolic name. Also, much of that action took place on a place so maybe their is a correlation between a 1964 satire and a 2005 action-horror movie. (Sarcasm)
But in that film, and I assume in this, when a character is named something symbolic and obvious it probably plays into the character's personality and their ideas about life and possibly in this case about killing and dehumanization. Who knows? But I can already tell that I will like this movie despite seeing so little.
The first thing, I noticed most about the movie so far were the opening credits. First, the statement by the Air Force which set the tone of the movie because of its seriousness but also ridiculousness at the same time. But the thing that was most pressing about the opening credits, was the title sequence, first that it said that it was a fictional story not based on true events at least 3 or 4 times. Also, the way the title sequence was arranged was very interesting and inventive and I know that it has received notice in the past. The way that certain things were very large, like last names, the letters DR., and a few other random things were thrown in there and it was quite interesting how certain things were very small, like the subtitle of the movie: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, was very small.
The reason this title sequence struck me was two fold, one was because of its original nature and it is something that you rarely take note of to this extent, and second, because I know that this title sequence is famous. The graphic title designer is Pablo Ferro, and although he is famous for doing some of the greatest title sequences of all time, you may not have heard his name. I probably would not have either, but last year I just happened to be watching ReelzChannel and they had a short piece on Pablo Ferro because two men have created a quasi-animated documentary that uses interviews, animation, and other things to tell about the life of Pablo Ferro, as a animator, director, and actor. Having seen this, and in the clip, Dr. Strangelove was mentioned, I paid careful attention to the sequence.
If you can think of other famous title sequences, I wouldn't be surprised if you found that he did them as well, as for example, he did A Clockwork Orange and Beetlejuice, as well as hundreds more. Now, this may not interest any of you and bore you all to death, but I just found it interesting because I had seen the story about him and heard of the forthcoming documentary. I found the link to the video and the movie website and I will post them below, hopefully they both work.
Video:
I know last time Mr. Bennett had trouble watching the video so here is the link to the ReelzChannel clip so you can watch it from their website directly. (Hint: I don't think it will play on school computers, only at home.)
ReelzChannel Clip Link: http://www.reelzchannel.com/trailer-clips/38215/whats-your-title
Movie Website: http://www.pablothemovie.com/
Also, I mentioned that their were two things that I found interesting beyond just the story of the film because the story has not been expanded enough beyond that Plan R is really bad and people can't believe that it will be used unless "Washington has already been bombed." The way that movie has started, and the way it seems to be progressing, reminds me of the book Catch-22 by Joseph Heller, which I thought was brilliant and if you haven't read I would suggest it, but the situations and the satire of the movie, seem to somewhat match Heller's style. But I could be wrong because we haven't seen enough, but in Catch-22 there were similar circumstances where the characters went along with utterly ridiculous things, in ridiculous ways.
But back to my original point, the one thing that I found of note in the movie. I'm not sure if everyone caught it but the General sitting behind the desk at the beginning of the film (the guy the played Dix in Asphalt Jungle), his name was Jack D. Ripper, not exactly the most subtle name.
Now this could have just been make a joke but when a character's name is Jack D. Ripper or Jack the Ripper, modeled after an infamous killer, you would probably assume that it was done on purpose and that it is possible that this character could be a sadist, unfeeling human being, like the killer who shares his name.
I saw the movie Red Eye which was released in 2005 starring Cillian Murphy and Rachel McAdams, before Dr. Strangelove, but in that film, a good but not great film, the main character's name, who was a killer was named Jack Rippner, again a very symbolic name. Also, much of that action took place on a place so maybe their is a correlation between a 1964 satire and a 2005 action-horror movie. (Sarcasm)
But in that film, and I assume in this, when a character is named something symbolic and obvious it probably plays into the character's personality and their ideas about life and possibly in this case about killing and dehumanization. Who knows? But I can already tell that I will like this movie despite seeing so little.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
((Fargo vs. A Simple Plan) vs. In Bruges)
I figured I would have some fun with the title of my post and make all three of the movies that are currently debated and pit them against each other in a fight to the death, literally and figuratively, since that is an expression to see who comes out superior, and also because there was so much death in each of these movies.
To begin, let me first make some comments on our most recent film: Fargo.
My first comment is directed at Billy and his comment that there were "too many loose ends left at the end of the movie." I personally don't mind loose ends at a movie, and that often times happens at the end of most the Coen Brothers movies, in fact all that I've seen. Personally, I believe that they do this because in life, there are more loose ends, no one ever knows what happens to everyone else at the end of something, people just disappear into oblivion. I know that as much I would like what happens to all of my classmates after they graduate, I know that I will never see every single person and therefore loose ends form and you forced to imagine what happens because you can't be sure.
In this way, they introduce characters that may seem useless, but it just adds to the point that we can't know the truth about anything and we will not find out how every character lives the rest of their lives, you can only wonder.
Secondly, one of the things I definitely noticed about the film was the similarity in one of their shots in both Fargo and another one of their movies, No Country For Old Men. The scene in Fargo where Shep Proudfoot is choking Carl with the belt and the two fall to the ground and Carl's foot hit the ground and even the way he was choked was nearly identical, when at the opening of No Country, Anton is choking the police and he does so with the handcuffs and the two fall to the ground, almost the same set of shots are used. They aren't identical but definitely similar and it came to mind when I saw the scene in Fargo today.
I actually just watched the two and they aren't that similar, I guess in my "unreliable" memory that struck me as more similar but I included the videos anyway. You can decide for yourself.
Here is the video from No Country For Old Men:
And Fargo:
Now, onto the comparison of the three films. I'll simplify these with categories so this post doesn't get too long.
Best Directing: Fargo
Best Acting: In Bruges
Most Realistic: A Simple Plan
Funniest: In Bruges
Best Writing: Fargo/In Bruges
Darkest Picture of Reality: Fargo
Most Exciting Landscape: This is a tough one because one was in Bruges, and as Ray put it "Maybe that's what hell is, the entire rest of eternity spent in bleeping Bruges." Whereas the other two were stark, barren Midwestern Landscapes. So this category would have to go to Bruges because of the art, as Mr. Bennett has mentioned.
Most Insulting to Other Groups: In Bruges
Best Cinematography: Fargo (Roger Deakins is the best there is)
Best Executed: In Bruges/A Simple Plan
Most Painful to Watch: Fargo (not a good thing, because it was slow)
Bloodiest: A Tie
I split it up into those categories but that still may not matter, because if I were to rank them in which order I liked them the most, in 1st place would be In Bruges because it was the most well-executed, the funniest, and just the most enjoyable and satisfying to watch. It was also clever and memorable.
Maybe it is because I am usually a happy person, but I found something missing in both A Simple Plan and Fargo. I always feel that sometimes the Coen Brothers try too hard to be original and go too far and miss the point and go beyond the realm of realism, but then again, A Simple Plan did that too. I found both movies to be somewhat funny because of its violence but Fargo was going for that, and A Simple Plan was not.
I found that both were depressing and missed the mark on suspense or plot turns. I expected almost all of the events in both films to happen ahead of time and I didn't feel particularly connected to any character, except maybe Marge but still she seemed foreign. I was just looking for something more from them. They each just missed the mark with me on trying to create a place and characters I could believe.
But I have to have an opinion so I will give edge to Fargo but barely just because the acting, cinematography, and story was slightly more clever and better executed in it, especially William H. Macy, Frances McCormand, and Steve Buscemi, and creepy guy were better than Bridget Fonda, Bill Paxton, and Billy Bob Thornton, and fat drunk guy. And the filming was just better in Fargo then A Simple Plan, it was filmed cleaner and more beautiful and clear, but as I said, Roger Deakins is the greatest.
So final grades in the showdown (out of 100)
7 Categories: Directing, Screenwriting, Acting, Cinematography, Story, Realism, Underlying Message (each category out of 10 x 1.4285714) For detailed results in each category you can ask me tomorrow, I can't make this any longer, it is bordering on ridiculous)
In Bruges: 86/100
Fargo: 73/100
A Simple Plan 71/100
To begin, let me first make some comments on our most recent film: Fargo.
My first comment is directed at Billy and his comment that there were "too many loose ends left at the end of the movie." I personally don't mind loose ends at a movie, and that often times happens at the end of most the Coen Brothers movies, in fact all that I've seen. Personally, I believe that they do this because in life, there are more loose ends, no one ever knows what happens to everyone else at the end of something, people just disappear into oblivion. I know that as much I would like what happens to all of my classmates after they graduate, I know that I will never see every single person and therefore loose ends form and you forced to imagine what happens because you can't be sure.
In this way, they introduce characters that may seem useless, but it just adds to the point that we can't know the truth about anything and we will not find out how every character lives the rest of their lives, you can only wonder.
Secondly, one of the things I definitely noticed about the film was the similarity in one of their shots in both Fargo and another one of their movies, No Country For Old Men. The scene in Fargo where Shep Proudfoot is choking Carl with the belt and the two fall to the ground and Carl's foot hit the ground and even the way he was choked was nearly identical, when at the opening of No Country, Anton is choking the police and he does so with the handcuffs and the two fall to the ground, almost the same set of shots are used. They aren't identical but definitely similar and it came to mind when I saw the scene in Fargo today.
I actually just watched the two and they aren't that similar, I guess in my "unreliable" memory that struck me as more similar but I included the videos anyway. You can decide for yourself.
Here is the video from No Country For Old Men:
And Fargo:
Now, onto the comparison of the three films. I'll simplify these with categories so this post doesn't get too long.
Best Directing: Fargo
Best Acting: In Bruges
Most Realistic: A Simple Plan
Funniest: In Bruges
Best Writing: Fargo/In Bruges
Darkest Picture of Reality: Fargo
Most Exciting Landscape: This is a tough one because one was in Bruges, and as Ray put it "Maybe that's what hell is, the entire rest of eternity spent in bleeping Bruges." Whereas the other two were stark, barren Midwestern Landscapes. So this category would have to go to Bruges because of the art, as Mr. Bennett has mentioned.
Most Insulting to Other Groups: In Bruges
Best Cinematography: Fargo (Roger Deakins is the best there is)
Best Executed: In Bruges/A Simple Plan
Most Painful to Watch: Fargo (not a good thing, because it was slow)
Bloodiest: A Tie
I split it up into those categories but that still may not matter, because if I were to rank them in which order I liked them the most, in 1st place would be In Bruges because it was the most well-executed, the funniest, and just the most enjoyable and satisfying to watch. It was also clever and memorable.
Maybe it is because I am usually a happy person, but I found something missing in both A Simple Plan and Fargo. I always feel that sometimes the Coen Brothers try too hard to be original and go too far and miss the point and go beyond the realm of realism, but then again, A Simple Plan did that too. I found both movies to be somewhat funny because of its violence but Fargo was going for that, and A Simple Plan was not.
I found that both were depressing and missed the mark on suspense or plot turns. I expected almost all of the events in both films to happen ahead of time and I didn't feel particularly connected to any character, except maybe Marge but still she seemed foreign. I was just looking for something more from them. They each just missed the mark with me on trying to create a place and characters I could believe.
But I have to have an opinion so I will give edge to Fargo but barely just because the acting, cinematography, and story was slightly more clever and better executed in it, especially William H. Macy, Frances McCormand, and Steve Buscemi, and creepy guy were better than Bridget Fonda, Bill Paxton, and Billy Bob Thornton, and fat drunk guy. And the filming was just better in Fargo then A Simple Plan, it was filmed cleaner and more beautiful and clear, but as I said, Roger Deakins is the greatest.
So final grades in the showdown (out of 100)
7 Categories: Directing, Screenwriting, Acting, Cinematography, Story, Realism, Underlying Message (each category out of 10 x 1.4285714) For detailed results in each category you can ask me tomorrow, I can't make this any longer, it is bordering on ridiculous)
In Bruges: 86/100
Fargo: 73/100
A Simple Plan 71/100
Angels and Demons
I know that Mr. Bennett has stated and I have been told by many other sources that you have to judge a movie and a book seperately, because they are two seperate entities and should not be compared. However, when watching Angels and Demons recently, I could just not do this.
Because of Julia's post on the film, I figured it wasn't great, but not only was it not great, I found it annoying and I found myself distracted because I knew what was going to happen and I felt no sense of urgency or suspense despite what the characters were trying to portray.
I usually try to judge the movie and book seperately because it is not possible to make a 700 page book into a movie that isn't 8 hours long and get all the essential elements of the book. But personally, they left out the greatest part of the book, out of the entire movie, something that shocked me, because it was really the point of the book. How it was left out still dumbfounds me? (Unless of course, my memory fails me)
So in the end, I will say that if you read the book, don't bother seeing the movie, it will only dilute your thoughts. Just a couple of days after seeing the movie, I can barely remember it and instead am relying upon the memories of the book. So, I will be honest, I failed in trying to objectively judge this movie, so people that have not read the book may very much enjoy it, in fact, I have heard several people who liked the movie, and others who did not but I will say, that the movie fell flat.
I barely recommend it and that is only because I hope that Dan Brown, the author, will make money off of it and if it makes a bigger profit, he will make more money. But the movie just didn't work, and I liked the DaVinci Code, so maybe it is just a skewed view on my part, because in that instance I believe that I saw the movie first. So maybe if I had seen the movie before reading it I would have liked it more. I don't know.
Because of Julia's post on the film, I figured it wasn't great, but not only was it not great, I found it annoying and I found myself distracted because I knew what was going to happen and I felt no sense of urgency or suspense despite what the characters were trying to portray.
I usually try to judge the movie and book seperately because it is not possible to make a 700 page book into a movie that isn't 8 hours long and get all the essential elements of the book. But personally, they left out the greatest part of the book, out of the entire movie, something that shocked me, because it was really the point of the book. How it was left out still dumbfounds me? (Unless of course, my memory fails me)
So in the end, I will say that if you read the book, don't bother seeing the movie, it will only dilute your thoughts. Just a couple of days after seeing the movie, I can barely remember it and instead am relying upon the memories of the book. So, I will be honest, I failed in trying to objectively judge this movie, so people that have not read the book may very much enjoy it, in fact, I have heard several people who liked the movie, and others who did not but I will say, that the movie fell flat.
I barely recommend it and that is only because I hope that Dan Brown, the author, will make money off of it and if it makes a bigger profit, he will make more money. But the movie just didn't work, and I liked the DaVinci Code, so maybe it is just a skewed view on my part, because in that instance I believe that I saw the movie first. So maybe if I had seen the movie before reading it I would have liked it more. I don't know.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Some Videos
A few weeks ago, Shiran posted a Family Guy clip about film noir. Here are a couple more clips that people might enjoy, about different movies that people may know or love. I apologize that the first one isn't better quality but you can blame the FCC for Copyright Laws on that one.
Hopefully they work. If they don't let me know, and I will try to do them over again.
Hopefully they work. If they don't let me know, and I will try to do them over again.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
I Have Changed My Mind
So we finished watching A Simple Plan today, and yesterday I made a post criticizing some of the film. But I must admit that in part, I was wrong. This movie is still not my favorite of the year but I will go from degrading it to praising it, to a point.
The most powerful scene in the movie is undoubtedly to me when Hank and Jacob are talking after the fake FBI Agent and Carl were killed. Hank is still trying to figure out a plan, a simple plan, that will get them in the clear for good (again) but Jacob tells him that he is done trying to do this, it's not worth it, he won't be able to sleep at night with all these burdens upon his head.
Hank's response may sum up the movie, he says, "This is what happiness costs!"
Now, I don't know if anyone is able to think back to one of the first scenes of the movie, and I apologize if I'm being redundant from someone's else post, but it is a voiceover by Hank about all that it takes to be happy, Hank said that according to his father, "It was just a few simple things, for example, a family, a good job, friends and neighbors who like and respect you." (I am paraphrasing because I was unable to write down all of the things he said in the speech, as he was talking too fast.)
But just think about the irony of that. At the beginning of the movie, all it took to be happy was a family, which Hank had, a good job, Hank didn't have a great job but he could survive and be happy, and finally "friends and neighbors who like and respect him," he certainly had all of those things and in the end all of his friends and neighbors end up dead, killed, gone, and his life becomes an empty and void nightmare.
Hank had all he needed to be happy and together with his wife, they destroyed it all, and the life they once enjoyed would never be the same. This may be going to far with the film but I don't think Hank and Sarah will stay married.
His father was right when he talked about the simple things that made you happy, and maybe Hank was just a victim but he let the web get so expanded, that it destroyed everything in its path. The final image of the film can show the dark abyss of all the friends he lost and I felt that in the past, that may have been where Jacob sat sometimes and that Hank was coming to the realization that Jacob was never coming back.
But back to my original point, why I have rescinded some of my criticism of the movie. I still have the same problems about his wife knowing everything, the FBI, and the Lou's wife getting blown away so ridiclously, but I felt that the movie tied together well and the way that happiness was referenced at the beginning and end so subtlety and I felt it tied together the movie of how everyone changed from beginning and end and the destruction that was left in its wake.
The movie also became more and more relatable and I felt like I could be as helpless and confused, and trying to grasp on to all of life, like Hank. But the movie certainly portrayed realism very well and despite all the horrible things the characters had done, I still sympathized with all of them and felt bad for them and the events they were thrown into.
Finally, I guarantee if Hank had never found the money, Sarah would never had realized that she was upset and that she was probably perfectly happy living how she did. But once she realized that she could have more, her vices took over and she became greedy and sought bigger and better things and felt like she needed and deserved the money.
On the year, this movie, like Sanbeg alluded to, will end up in the middle of the pack.
The most powerful scene in the movie is undoubtedly to me when Hank and Jacob are talking after the fake FBI Agent and Carl were killed. Hank is still trying to figure out a plan, a simple plan, that will get them in the clear for good (again) but Jacob tells him that he is done trying to do this, it's not worth it, he won't be able to sleep at night with all these burdens upon his head.
Hank's response may sum up the movie, he says, "This is what happiness costs!"
Now, I don't know if anyone is able to think back to one of the first scenes of the movie, and I apologize if I'm being redundant from someone's else post, but it is a voiceover by Hank about all that it takes to be happy, Hank said that according to his father, "It was just a few simple things, for example, a family, a good job, friends and neighbors who like and respect you." (I am paraphrasing because I was unable to write down all of the things he said in the speech, as he was talking too fast.)
But just think about the irony of that. At the beginning of the movie, all it took to be happy was a family, which Hank had, a good job, Hank didn't have a great job but he could survive and be happy, and finally "friends and neighbors who like and respect him," he certainly had all of those things and in the end all of his friends and neighbors end up dead, killed, gone, and his life becomes an empty and void nightmare.
Hank had all he needed to be happy and together with his wife, they destroyed it all, and the life they once enjoyed would never be the same. This may be going to far with the film but I don't think Hank and Sarah will stay married.
His father was right when he talked about the simple things that made you happy, and maybe Hank was just a victim but he let the web get so expanded, that it destroyed everything in its path. The final image of the film can show the dark abyss of all the friends he lost and I felt that in the past, that may have been where Jacob sat sometimes and that Hank was coming to the realization that Jacob was never coming back.
But back to my original point, why I have rescinded some of my criticism of the movie. I still have the same problems about his wife knowing everything, the FBI, and the Lou's wife getting blown away so ridiclously, but I felt that the movie tied together well and the way that happiness was referenced at the beginning and end so subtlety and I felt it tied together the movie of how everyone changed from beginning and end and the destruction that was left in its wake.
The movie also became more and more relatable and I felt like I could be as helpless and confused, and trying to grasp on to all of life, like Hank. But the movie certainly portrayed realism very well and despite all the horrible things the characters had done, I still sympathized with all of them and felt bad for them and the events they were thrown into.
Finally, I guarantee if Hank had never found the money, Sarah would never had realized that she was upset and that she was probably perfectly happy living how she did. But once she realized that she could have more, her vices took over and she became greedy and sought bigger and better things and felt like she needed and deserved the money.
On the year, this movie, like Sanbeg alluded to, will end up in the middle of the pack.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
A Simple Plan and Various
So, I haven't posted in a while mainly because I was at my brother's graduation since Saturday and I didn't really have the time or ability to post. However, another reason I haven't blogged in a few days is that I really don't feel like I have much to say.
To start, Memento was a great film and had a brilliant twist ending which I must admit completely shocked me, but much like Mr. Bennett said during our "Great Discussion," I just wanted to move on to the next film because I had nothing to really say about it. Beyond a great storyline and twist, and of course the chronlogy, I didn't see much about styling or things like that, which truly impressed me in the film. I'm not sure, but I just didn't get the right feeling from the movie and just felt something was lacking, but that's probably just me.
Maybe it was because Dark City impressed me so much and made me think so deeply, but I just felt like Memento was going for the same message and missed it, and just relied on the storyline but really didn't have any deeper meaning to it. Also, when watching Dark City, I felt like John Murdoch was the every man, trying to figure out what was going on, and just acting like a regular guy who really cannot remember anything. He is going through the same search as us because we are just as confused.
Then, in Memento, I just felt like Leonard Shelby's story was his own, it was a unique story that no one else was going through, so it was a much narrower perspective. In Memento, it was one man's search for revenge of something that didn't even happen. In Dark City, it was one man's quest to discover what has happened to the planet Earth as a whole. It just struck me better and maybe I'm the crazy one.
Now on to A Simple Plan. After class yesterday, I had a short discussion with Mr. Bennett on some of the issues I had with the film, most specifically I wasn't quite sure how Hank's wife was able to figure out every twist and turn in the path and predict everything ahead of time. I felt it was a weak point, but he countered that it was strong because even when a person knows exactly what is going to happen in a situation like this, they still can't stop it, hence the ironic title A Simple Plan, when no plan is truly simple.
My main point to him was that I felt it was unrealistic that she could have known that the FBI Agent could have been false without even knowing about him and just assuming that it was the guy based on a picture where the two looked nothing alike. Also, maybe I'm naive but I really doubt that the FBI would either a) give away information that simply about the names of their agents or b) she would be able to speak to someone from the FBI and even know how to contact them that easily, I mean honestly, it takes 6 months to get a passport but 15 minutes to find out the name of an agent and then to say with complete certainty that it is the guy.
Now, personally when I first saw the FBI agent I did think that he was crooked and knew too much and therefore was a con artist just looking for the money so maybe it was not a difficult thing to figure out if people were able to see it coming, but some of the events in this movie just strike me the wrong way.
I missed the 2nd day of watching the movie, which was Monday so maybe I missed some key points that makes these things rational.
Finally, my last point, I know how we all enjoyed when the Lou's wife got blown apart by Hank and launched into the window, but that point, although hilarious (and she probably deserved it), greatly annoyed me because if a movie is going to take itself seriously, handle the killing of people like you handled the killing of Lou and the guy and the guy on the snowmobile, with class and realism, not with her being blown into a window and looking like a blow-up doll, which it was. It angered me at the stupidity of that murder and how the cut between the two shots of her being launched into the window and then laying on the ground, the continuity was absolutely terrible.
If it was done for laughs, that is a different story.
I still need to catch up on the 2nd day of watching but I hope it ends well because it has piqued my interest, although I feel that it is a slightly flawed movie in my eyes.
To start, Memento was a great film and had a brilliant twist ending which I must admit completely shocked me, but much like Mr. Bennett said during our "Great Discussion," I just wanted to move on to the next film because I had nothing to really say about it. Beyond a great storyline and twist, and of course the chronlogy, I didn't see much about styling or things like that, which truly impressed me in the film. I'm not sure, but I just didn't get the right feeling from the movie and just felt something was lacking, but that's probably just me.
Maybe it was because Dark City impressed me so much and made me think so deeply, but I just felt like Memento was going for the same message and missed it, and just relied on the storyline but really didn't have any deeper meaning to it. Also, when watching Dark City, I felt like John Murdoch was the every man, trying to figure out what was going on, and just acting like a regular guy who really cannot remember anything. He is going through the same search as us because we are just as confused.
Then, in Memento, I just felt like Leonard Shelby's story was his own, it was a unique story that no one else was going through, so it was a much narrower perspective. In Memento, it was one man's search for revenge of something that didn't even happen. In Dark City, it was one man's quest to discover what has happened to the planet Earth as a whole. It just struck me better and maybe I'm the crazy one.
Now on to A Simple Plan. After class yesterday, I had a short discussion with Mr. Bennett on some of the issues I had with the film, most specifically I wasn't quite sure how Hank's wife was able to figure out every twist and turn in the path and predict everything ahead of time. I felt it was a weak point, but he countered that it was strong because even when a person knows exactly what is going to happen in a situation like this, they still can't stop it, hence the ironic title A Simple Plan, when no plan is truly simple.
My main point to him was that I felt it was unrealistic that she could have known that the FBI Agent could have been false without even knowing about him and just assuming that it was the guy based on a picture where the two looked nothing alike. Also, maybe I'm naive but I really doubt that the FBI would either a) give away information that simply about the names of their agents or b) she would be able to speak to someone from the FBI and even know how to contact them that easily, I mean honestly, it takes 6 months to get a passport but 15 minutes to find out the name of an agent and then to say with complete certainty that it is the guy.
Now, personally when I first saw the FBI agent I did think that he was crooked and knew too much and therefore was a con artist just looking for the money so maybe it was not a difficult thing to figure out if people were able to see it coming, but some of the events in this movie just strike me the wrong way.
I missed the 2nd day of watching the movie, which was Monday so maybe I missed some key points that makes these things rational.
Finally, my last point, I know how we all enjoyed when the Lou's wife got blown apart by Hank and launched into the window, but that point, although hilarious (and she probably deserved it), greatly annoyed me because if a movie is going to take itself seriously, handle the killing of people like you handled the killing of Lou and the guy and the guy on the snowmobile, with class and realism, not with her being blown into a window and looking like a blow-up doll, which it was. It angered me at the stupidity of that murder and how the cut between the two shots of her being launched into the window and then laying on the ground, the continuity was absolutely terrible.
If it was done for laughs, that is a different story.
I still need to catch up on the 2nd day of watching but I hope it ends well because it has piqued my interest, although I feel that it is a slightly flawed movie in my eyes.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Production Costs of the Movies We Have Seen
Today Mr. Bennett said that he thought that Memento was probably a "pretty cheap to make," so it prompted me to look up all of the movies we have seen so far, and how they each took to make, so here is the short summary. (Don't forget about inflation of course).
(First Number is Actual Budget, Second is if every movie was released this year, Adjusted for Inflation.)
All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) $1,448,864 $18,515,096
Citizen Kane (1941) $686,033 $9,926,764
Midnight Cowboy (1969) $3,600,000 $20,914,296
Runaway Train (1985) ???
The Seventh Seal (1957) $150,000 $1,134,695
Signs (2002) $72,000,000 $85,712,048
Top Hat (1935) $609,000 $9,458,401
Unforgiven (1992) ???
The Asphalt Jungle (1950) ???
Dark City (1998) $27,000,000 $35,510,581
Memento (2000) $5,000,000 $6,192,600
I am still trying to find the Budgets of Runaway Train, Unforgiven, and The Asphalt Jungle and will add them to this post or comment it when I find them. Much of this may seem irrelevant, but as a numbers guy myself, I decided to look it up, just to see how each movie stacked up.
(First Number is Actual Budget, Second is if every movie was released this year, Adjusted for Inflation.)
All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) $1,448,864 $18,515,096
Citizen Kane (1941) $686,033 $9,926,764
Midnight Cowboy (1969) $3,600,000 $20,914,296
Runaway Train (1985) ???
The Seventh Seal (1957) $150,000 $1,134,695
Signs (2002) $72,000,000 $85,712,048
Top Hat (1935) $609,000 $9,458,401
Unforgiven (1992) ???
The Asphalt Jungle (1950) ???
Dark City (1998) $27,000,000 $35,510,581
Memento (2000) $5,000,000 $6,192,600
I am still trying to find the Budgets of Runaway Train, Unforgiven, and The Asphalt Jungle and will add them to this post or comment it when I find them. Much of this may seem irrelevant, but as a numbers guy myself, I decided to look it up, just to see how each movie stacked up.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Memento - Day 1
So, we started Memento today, an interesting, intricately woven story that leaves the viewer in the dark the entire time and yet at the same time, completely aware of everything that has a will happen a true testament to a great film. Now, I have never seen Memento in its entirety, I only watched about 25 or 30 minutes once with my brother but then he went back to school so I never saw the end. (It was several years ago).
Before I begin my comments on the film itself, I will pull a Danny White, namely define a word that people didn't know today, and today that word is "Quorum."
A quorum is the number of members of a group or organization required to be present to transact business legally, usually a majority; a particularly chosen group.
Now, on to the more important purpose for this post. The movie Memento itself. I must admit, I am slightly confused as to where the movie is going, so if I make mistakes I apologize, but still I am quite intrigued and will try to make some intelligent comments on the film.
I will start with the most meaningful lines from the film that I have found so far:
"It's like waking. Like you just woke up." This reminded me very deeply of Dark City and the tuning and how memory is adjusted. Much of this film reminded me of Dark City, as odd as that may sound.
"Memory is unreliable, it's not perfect, it's not even that good. Memory can change the shape of a room, the color of a car, it can distort things. It is only a record." Again, much like Dark City.
Third, an anti-existentialist quote: "The action isn't just meaningless. The world doesn't disappear because you close your eyes."
"We are both survivors."
"At least you are living." "Yea for revenge."
A couple other things of note. And this first thing could just be my eyes playing tricks on me, but when Leonard (Lennie) re-enters the restaurant, I saw a sign on the door that said "Carte Blanche" which means that someone has free rein or a blank slate to do whatever they want and I thought that was an interesting phrase to have, maybe suggesting a theme of the film.
Also, when Leonard opens the Gideon Bible which he states that "he reads religiously," he opens to the page in the index the says "Help in the Time of Need" (I believe that he then opened to Ecclesiastes, but I'm not positive and I also don't know the significance of that book of the Bible but I will plan to look it up) the and this is very interesting because later on, Natalie says, "I'm helping you because you helped me."
And of course, the opening shot when the Polaroid picture fades instead of becoming more clear when it is shook. I think that this is to show that everything fades, especially memory, but I think that one is probably pretty clear.
Finally, I think I have stated all of my comments thus far but I will make one more thing known although I am sure someone has brought this up to Mr. Bennett but I just wanted to make it known that the director, Christopher Nolan, screenwriter, Christopher and Jonathan Nolan, and the D.P. (director of Photography) Wally Pfister, all worked in the same position on the Dark Knight. (A film I know Mr. Bennett loved.)
Before I begin my comments on the film itself, I will pull a Danny White, namely define a word that people didn't know today, and today that word is "Quorum."
A quorum is the number of members of a group or organization required to be present to transact business legally, usually a majority; a particularly chosen group.
Now, on to the more important purpose for this post. The movie Memento itself. I must admit, I am slightly confused as to where the movie is going, so if I make mistakes I apologize, but still I am quite intrigued and will try to make some intelligent comments on the film.
I will start with the most meaningful lines from the film that I have found so far:
"It's like waking. Like you just woke up." This reminded me very deeply of Dark City and the tuning and how memory is adjusted. Much of this film reminded me of Dark City, as odd as that may sound.
"Memory is unreliable, it's not perfect, it's not even that good. Memory can change the shape of a room, the color of a car, it can distort things. It is only a record." Again, much like Dark City.
Third, an anti-existentialist quote: "The action isn't just meaningless. The world doesn't disappear because you close your eyes."
"We are both survivors."
"At least you are living." "Yea for revenge."
A couple other things of note. And this first thing could just be my eyes playing tricks on me, but when Leonard (Lennie) re-enters the restaurant, I saw a sign on the door that said "Carte Blanche" which means that someone has free rein or a blank slate to do whatever they want and I thought that was an interesting phrase to have, maybe suggesting a theme of the film.
Also, when Leonard opens the Gideon Bible which he states that "he reads religiously," he opens to the page in the index the says "Help in the Time of Need" (I believe that he then opened to Ecclesiastes, but I'm not positive and I also don't know the significance of that book of the Bible but I will plan to look it up) the and this is very interesting because later on, Natalie says, "I'm helping you because you helped me."
And of course, the opening shot when the Polaroid picture fades instead of becoming more clear when it is shook. I think that this is to show that everything fades, especially memory, but I think that one is probably pretty clear.
Finally, I think I have stated all of my comments thus far but I will make one more thing known although I am sure someone has brought this up to Mr. Bennett but I just wanted to make it known that the director, Christopher Nolan, screenwriter, Christopher and Jonathan Nolan, and the D.P. (director of Photography) Wally Pfister, all worked in the same position on the Dark Knight. (A film I know Mr. Bennett loved.)
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Something to Think About
Well, I was just re-reading Mr. Bennett's absurdly arrogant comment that he made about his film choices compared to our classes' knowledge, in which he stated:
"Mr. Bennett, You have shown one sublime film after another. Obviously, You possess powers of discrimination far exceeding our own. And who is better able than You to reconcile the objective appreciation of truly great films with the subjective and inscrutable nature of the 17-year-old mind, twisted as it is within a tangled matrix of tightly wound springs . Is there the remotest possibility that we, in our fathomless ignorance, could possibly choose a film that is superior to one of Your choosing? We humbly thank You for offering us the opportunity to choose for ourselves. But, the choice between us choosing, and You choosing, is, frankly, no choice at all. Rather it is a strategy steeped in folly, bound to result in bitter disappointment. We defer to You. Choose a film that we've never seen and never heard of, but will leave us once again speechless, shaking our heads silently in awe at the transcendent power of art."
Now, normally I would somewhat agree with this statement because although I enjoy watching movies, I personally don't think that I am a great movie reviewer because most films I watch, I like. That could be a product of me being too kind to movies, or the fact that I don't like watching bad movies, so therefore most of them are actually good. In this way, I normally would not question Mr. Bennett's film choices because he does have the knowledge of more than 20 years of watching films critically.
But
I have just realized that we have all been manipulated and imprinted with memories of Mr. Bennett being a great film teacher and global teacher who has been doing it for more than 2 decades, and that in reality Mr. Bennett has only been a film teacher for about 4 days, maybe as long as a week, but certainly no more than that.
He has no recollection of a previous life, and has only been imprinted with these memories of knowing all of these films, even though he has only just been given this job. However, we can all recognize his personality, because instead of being just the sum total of his memories, he does have an underlying personality that remains, no matter what he is imprinted with. Now, we all have this ingrained personality, but in Mr. Bennett's case, it is a personality filled with absurd and ridiculous amount of arrogance, a sense of superiority, and of course a love of profanity.
So, to sum up my ideas (not sum up my memories) I have concluded after watching our most recent film, Dark City, I have realized that Mr. Bennett has just recently been imprinted with the memories that he is a film teacher and a global teacher, and has been the given the ideas that he has been doing this job for 20+ years and that he has watched all of our films, like All Quiet..., Citizen Kane, and Unforgiven 30 or 40 times each when, it fact he has never actually seen any of these movies.
Therefore, only his arrogance and sense of superiority makes him believed that he is more qualified to pick our next movie, even though it is quite possible that he has never seen a movie in his life. Because of this line of logic, I believe that each of us in the class are more qualified than our "Leader" Mr. Bennett to choose a film. So, I think that we are all better able to pick a good film than Mr. Bennett is, despite what he believes.
Think about that everyone....
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Lawrence of Arabia
So after several days of trying to get through this 3:30 + film from 1962, I finally finished Lawrence of Arabia, the film that introduced Peter O' Toole to the world as an actor, and told the story of a British officer, T.E. Lawrence, and his commanding of the Arab army against the Turks. It could have been because I have a short attention span so I could not watch the whole film in one or two or even three sittings, but I found an issue in the continuity of the film, and felt like either I missed something in the film, or the film was lacking an ingredient. This is probably blasphemy because I know that this is considered one of the greatest films of all time on many lists.
And it was very good, but as a 17 year old, I am not used to sitting through long epic 3+ hours film in which some of the scenes are 10 minutes straight of watching people trudge through a desert with very little dialogue and action. I just found myself bored, and I found Peter O'Toole to be overacting many times (and having creepy eyes) but I qualified this because I figured that it was the acting of the time, and he is a product of the era of the filmmaking because he has been a very good actor in several other films, even up until last year.
The movie had many action sequences and much of the film was an interesting commentary on the time and how the British viewed other groups like the Arabs or the Turks, what happens when one person has a dream and inspires his people, and also how war can corrupt a naive and idealistic person. It had some similar themes to All Quiet on the Western Front in terms of the corruption of innocence and how someone can never live without war and how war affects your life and your perceptions on the world and your pleasures.
I feel like this is a classic that everyone must watch because I have to say that it was beautifully filmed and the way that the director set up all of the scenes by making you feel like you were part of it, it was very well done. Unfortunately, when a director tries to portray everything and make you feel like a character in the film, when there is very little action going on, it can get very boring and can make the film difficult to watch. So, I will say that this film deserves a recommendation to watch because it is a classic film and it is beautifully done, but its length at certain points will make you squirm in your seat and wonder when it will end, but I am glad that I saw the movie.
And it was very good, but as a 17 year old, I am not used to sitting through long epic 3+ hours film in which some of the scenes are 10 minutes straight of watching people trudge through a desert with very little dialogue and action. I just found myself bored, and I found Peter O'Toole to be overacting many times (and having creepy eyes) but I qualified this because I figured that it was the acting of the time, and he is a product of the era of the filmmaking because he has been a very good actor in several other films, even up until last year.
The movie had many action sequences and much of the film was an interesting commentary on the time and how the British viewed other groups like the Arabs or the Turks, what happens when one person has a dream and inspires his people, and also how war can corrupt a naive and idealistic person. It had some similar themes to All Quiet on the Western Front in terms of the corruption of innocence and how someone can never live without war and how war affects your life and your perceptions on the world and your pleasures.
I feel like this is a classic that everyone must watch because I have to say that it was beautifully filmed and the way that the director set up all of the scenes by making you feel like you were part of it, it was very well done. Unfortunately, when a director tries to portray everything and make you feel like a character in the film, when there is very little action going on, it can get very boring and can make the film difficult to watch. So, I will say that this film deserves a recommendation to watch because it is a classic film and it is beautifully done, but its length at certain points will make you squirm in your seat and wonder when it will end, but I am glad that I saw the movie.
Dark City - Part 2
First, a quick note for anyone who either a) falls in love with this film, b) wants to watch it again because they missed something, or c) any other reason, but I just wanted to let people know that our current film, Dark City, will be on the channel FX on Monday, May 11th at 11:30pm and again on Tuesday, May 12th at 8:00am. So if you love the film or feel like you missed something, you can get a 2nd chance to watch the film.
But now on to my thoughts about the film on Day 2. My first thought is about Murdoch and the extent of his powers and the knowledge that the aliens (I don't know what to call them) have of him. For example, the lines of dialogue, that are "We can know nothing, until we possess him. We must have him!" This clearly illustrates that they realize that their is a hole in their plan or in their control. Also, Doctor Schreber says that the creatures "need a human soul." That is the reason they are "chasing people every night.
Then, they decide that they "must become like him (Murdoch.)" After they do, I believe the dialogue is very important. The man who takes Murdoch's memories says "I have John Murdoch in mind." He does not say I have John Murdoch in my mind or I have John Murdoch's memories or I have John Murdoch's mind, but he definitely says, "I have John Murdoch in mind", something I believe is relevant. Also, a few minutes later, he says "If I were Murdoch."
Secondly, I will comment on the Detective and his interaction with the man named Eddie. First, I assume that the Detective either understands what is going on, or at least knows some information. I believe when he says "No one ever listens to me" it is more meaningful than it may seem. Also, his interaction with Eddie was clearly very mysterious and existenial. First, the most obvious thing, which I mentioned it a previous was able all of the circles or mazes that the guy was drawing and I believe that he will become relevant later in the movie when he reappears but I think that there was another more important part for the theme of the movie.
This involves the dialogue spoken by Eddie. Eddie asserts that much like the drawings he made, he began "riding in circles and thinking in circles." The only way you can do it. Therefore, these circles must certainly have a big significance to the rest of the film. Also, he next says "I don't know her. I don't know who any of us are," clearly showing that we can't truly know anyone (theme from Citizen Kane) and also that as the existienialist philosophy states, "we can never speak to any other person on a meaningful level," Eddie expresses this idea. As well, Eddie says that he thoughts began to "unravel" so maybe the spirals of the circle inside his mind began to come apart and he lost his mind.He also states, and this could be construed in an existenial fashion is that "There is no case! There never was! It was all just a big joke!" Now I could be wrong but I thought he was referring to his belief of the existence of God, and he came to the conclusion that it never was even a question, the idea of a God is just a big joke. (Not that I agree) but this is how I thought it was meant.
Next, I found it quite interesting that the clock for these people was housed inside a human head so it may not have a deeper meaning but I found that to be interesting in itself. Also, another interesting, possibly important point occurs when Murdoch is fighting with Doc Schreber and he knocks him down with the powers. Schreber says "My glasses" as they go flying off of him and also when he was swimming in the pool and talking to the leader of the people, he did not have his glasses on but immediately when he sees the man he puts his glasses on, so I feel that his glasses may have significance in the reason that he can either see these people, or interact with them, or involve some of the reason that he was chosen but I'm not sure exactly how.
As well, a very key line of dialogue involves when Murdoch is reading the postcard from Shell Beach, the line he reads out loud is, "Brings back memories, doesn't it," clearly a very ironic statement for the film. Also, another line about memories is the line by one of the men, who said, "As he follows the clues, we follow the memories," certainly a relevant statement I believe but I have not been able to connect it yet. Also, a newspaper headline I noticed when Murdoch is on the train, says "Killer's Latest Spree" and we have not seen Murdoch kill anyone so it would be interesting to know what the newspaper article stated because that headline is certainly referencing something in the past or that happened at some point.
Another important line that I don't know where it fits into the film was the quote, "Instincts are irrational," which may just be a commentary on life and how we act and our stupidity but it may have a deeper meaning or it may just state the fact that we act irrationally on our instincts.
Finally, I wonder about the aliens names. They seem to be very odd, short and possibly relevant to the jobs, they do. These include Mr. Hand, Mr. Wall, Mr. Book, Mr. Rain, Mr. Sleep, and Mr. Quick so far. I wonder the significance of these because I haven't figured one out yet.
I believe these are all of the thoughts I have right now. I hope I didn't leave anything out, and I compliment anyone who can get through this entire post.
But now on to my thoughts about the film on Day 2. My first thought is about Murdoch and the extent of his powers and the knowledge that the aliens (I don't know what to call them) have of him. For example, the lines of dialogue, that are "We can know nothing, until we possess him. We must have him!" This clearly illustrates that they realize that their is a hole in their plan or in their control. Also, Doctor Schreber says that the creatures "need a human soul." That is the reason they are "chasing people every night.
Then, they decide that they "must become like him (Murdoch.)" After they do, I believe the dialogue is very important. The man who takes Murdoch's memories says "I have John Murdoch in mind." He does not say I have John Murdoch in my mind or I have John Murdoch's memories or I have John Murdoch's mind, but he definitely says, "I have John Murdoch in mind", something I believe is relevant. Also, a few minutes later, he says "If I were Murdoch."
Secondly, I will comment on the Detective and his interaction with the man named Eddie. First, I assume that the Detective either understands what is going on, or at least knows some information. I believe when he says "No one ever listens to me" it is more meaningful than it may seem. Also, his interaction with Eddie was clearly very mysterious and existenial. First, the most obvious thing, which I mentioned it a previous was able all of the circles or mazes that the guy was drawing and I believe that he will become relevant later in the movie when he reappears but I think that there was another more important part for the theme of the movie.
This involves the dialogue spoken by Eddie. Eddie asserts that much like the drawings he made, he began "riding in circles and thinking in circles." The only way you can do it. Therefore, these circles must certainly have a big significance to the rest of the film. Also, he next says "I don't know her. I don't know who any of us are," clearly showing that we can't truly know anyone (theme from Citizen Kane) and also that as the existienialist philosophy states, "we can never speak to any other person on a meaningful level," Eddie expresses this idea. As well, Eddie says that he thoughts began to "unravel" so maybe the spirals of the circle inside his mind began to come apart and he lost his mind.He also states, and this could be construed in an existenial fashion is that "There is no case! There never was! It was all just a big joke!" Now I could be wrong but I thought he was referring to his belief of the existence of God, and he came to the conclusion that it never was even a question, the idea of a God is just a big joke. (Not that I agree) but this is how I thought it was meant.
Next, I found it quite interesting that the clock for these people was housed inside a human head so it may not have a deeper meaning but I found that to be interesting in itself. Also, another interesting, possibly important point occurs when Murdoch is fighting with Doc Schreber and he knocks him down with the powers. Schreber says "My glasses" as they go flying off of him and also when he was swimming in the pool and talking to the leader of the people, he did not have his glasses on but immediately when he sees the man he puts his glasses on, so I feel that his glasses may have significance in the reason that he can either see these people, or interact with them, or involve some of the reason that he was chosen but I'm not sure exactly how.
As well, a very key line of dialogue involves when Murdoch is reading the postcard from Shell Beach, the line he reads out loud is, "Brings back memories, doesn't it," clearly a very ironic statement for the film. Also, another line about memories is the line by one of the men, who said, "As he follows the clues, we follow the memories," certainly a relevant statement I believe but I have not been able to connect it yet. Also, a newspaper headline I noticed when Murdoch is on the train, says "Killer's Latest Spree" and we have not seen Murdoch kill anyone so it would be interesting to know what the newspaper article stated because that headline is certainly referencing something in the past or that happened at some point.
Another important line that I don't know where it fits into the film was the quote, "Instincts are irrational," which may just be a commentary on life and how we act and our stupidity but it may have a deeper meaning or it may just state the fact that we act irrationally on our instincts.
Finally, I wonder about the aliens names. They seem to be very odd, short and possibly relevant to the jobs, they do. These include Mr. Hand, Mr. Wall, Mr. Book, Mr. Rain, Mr. Sleep, and Mr. Quick so far. I wonder the significance of these because I haven't figured one out yet.
I believe these are all of the thoughts I have right now. I hope I didn't leave anything out, and I compliment anyone who can get through this entire post.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Dark City - Part 1
We have only watched the first 15 or 16 minutes of the Dark City but because of the oddity and confusion of the film so far, I figure I should try to use my notes to make some sense out of the film so far, if possible.
The first image I noticed, besides the opening, which showed the sky and stars, was the flashing Neon sign (and there are many of these) which said "Now showing: The Evil" I assume this has some meaning as to the ideas of the film but I can't decide exactly what it is yet.
Secondly, I noticed the prevalence of water throughout the film so far, as it opens with the main character, John Murdoch, in a bathtub and then the fish tank crashes on the floor, as well as the rain-slickened streets of the film noir styling. What is the significance of this?
Also, the fact that the clock stayed at 12 o'clock for a long time, while the creatures began their experiments, but you wonder exactly what happened during that time and what the actual time lapse was, since Murdoch seems to be jumping in times from the 30's or 40's and then to the Automat (another flashing Neon sign) to the 50's. So what is the deal with all of the different time periods and time jumps. (Slaughterhouse Five-esque?)
Also, I know that the resurrection of characters is always done in 3 days as per Jesus' death and resurrection, but in this film it opens with a 3 week lapse when he wakes up from his slumber so is a far-reaching allusion. Also, a meaningful line of dialogue by the detective I believe (or one of the characters) "I'm being punished for my sins." This is clearly an allusion to some sort of religious being in a world that appears to be sunless, godless, and obviously completely chaotic so far.
Finally, and most significant, what is the meaning behind the mazes, enigmas, or labyrinths, that are shown numerously throughout the film. We first see it upon the naked women who is lying dead in Murdoch's hotel room, and then again these spirals or mazes are shown in the opening credits. Thirdly, when we see the interaction between Mrs. Murdoch and the psychiatrist, the psychiatrist is placing the rats and mice into a labyrinth or spiral shaped maze. In the past, these spirals are used for mind control or hypnotism of the past but I wonder what the significance is in this film.
Just the thoughts so far and many of these things may be irrevelant in the scope of this film becuase it is so confusing and purposefully tricky that all of the images so far may not have anything to do with the plot of the film. The rest of the film should be very interesting.
The first image I noticed, besides the opening, which showed the sky and stars, was the flashing Neon sign (and there are many of these) which said "Now showing: The Evil" I assume this has some meaning as to the ideas of the film but I can't decide exactly what it is yet.
Secondly, I noticed the prevalence of water throughout the film so far, as it opens with the main character, John Murdoch, in a bathtub and then the fish tank crashes on the floor, as well as the rain-slickened streets of the film noir styling. What is the significance of this?
Also, the fact that the clock stayed at 12 o'clock for a long time, while the creatures began their experiments, but you wonder exactly what happened during that time and what the actual time lapse was, since Murdoch seems to be jumping in times from the 30's or 40's and then to the Automat (another flashing Neon sign) to the 50's. So what is the deal with all of the different time periods and time jumps. (Slaughterhouse Five-esque?)
Also, I know that the resurrection of characters is always done in 3 days as per Jesus' death and resurrection, but in this film it opens with a 3 week lapse when he wakes up from his slumber so is a far-reaching allusion. Also, a meaningful line of dialogue by the detective I believe (or one of the characters) "I'm being punished for my sins." This is clearly an allusion to some sort of religious being in a world that appears to be sunless, godless, and obviously completely chaotic so far.
Finally, and most significant, what is the meaning behind the mazes, enigmas, or labyrinths, that are shown numerously throughout the film. We first see it upon the naked women who is lying dead in Murdoch's hotel room, and then again these spirals or mazes are shown in the opening credits. Thirdly, when we see the interaction between Mrs. Murdoch and the psychiatrist, the psychiatrist is placing the rats and mice into a labyrinth or spiral shaped maze. In the past, these spirals are used for mind control or hypnotism of the past but I wonder what the significance is in this film.
Just the thoughts so far and many of these things may be irrevelant in the scope of this film becuase it is so confusing and purposefully tricky that all of the images so far may not have anything to do with the plot of the film. The rest of the film should be very interesting.
The Soloist
This weekend I saw the film The Soloist, based on the true story of the life of Nathaniel Ayers, a Julliard dropout, and LA Times reporter Steve Lopez. The story is mainly based around the two characters' interactions who are played by Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey Jr. The film as a whole was good, but it lacked one essential element which I can't decide exactly what it was, but it made me decide that this movie was only a mediocre or good movie and not a great movie. The storyline was intriguing, interesting, and emotional, but much of the story beyond Downey and Foxx's interaction was lacking substance and excitement.
This film was moved back three times for release and was originally slated for release in December 08, then March 09, and finally April 09, and during that time, I feel that it kept going through changes and ended up with a relatively ineffective film. Some of the emotional elements of streetlife in Los Angeles, was beautiful and depressing and very well done, and the people who played the homeless people were likely homeless people in reality or portrayed it very effectively.
However, the story and the acting of the other characters lacked substance and meaning and the storylines were poorly developed. The supporting actors who often interacted with Robert Downey Jr. were ineffective and slowed the movie down terribly.
The best part of the film was unquestionably the interaction between Downey and Foxx, and especially the acting of Jamie Foxx which was absolutely outstanding, and probably a reason to see the film solely (I accidentally made a pun) for that. Although he will not be recognized by anyone because the film came out in April and not November or December like all of the Oscar nominated performances, he will not be remembered come awards season, but to me, he was fantastic. The way he acted and spoke flawlessly really captured the essence of the character and made the film.
Unfortunately, I was disappointed in this film, not because it was bad, because it was not terrible, but because it could have been more. It could have delved deeper and the characters could have been better developed. It was also surprising because the director of the Soloist was Joe Wright who directed Atonement which was Oscar nominated. The film either tried too hard or just walked you through the journey without allowing you to figure anything out by yourself.
So in the end, the Soloist was a good film, but nothing special or memorable except for Foxx and Downey, and it is possible that it was difficult to tell a good story since it was based on true events, but in large part the story falls flat. Therefore, I will recommend this film for the acting of the stars but not for the storyline or any meaningful moviegoing experience.
This film was moved back three times for release and was originally slated for release in December 08, then March 09, and finally April 09, and during that time, I feel that it kept going through changes and ended up with a relatively ineffective film. Some of the emotional elements of streetlife in Los Angeles, was beautiful and depressing and very well done, and the people who played the homeless people were likely homeless people in reality or portrayed it very effectively.
However, the story and the acting of the other characters lacked substance and meaning and the storylines were poorly developed. The supporting actors who often interacted with Robert Downey Jr. were ineffective and slowed the movie down terribly.
The best part of the film was unquestionably the interaction between Downey and Foxx, and especially the acting of Jamie Foxx which was absolutely outstanding, and probably a reason to see the film solely (I accidentally made a pun) for that. Although he will not be recognized by anyone because the film came out in April and not November or December like all of the Oscar nominated performances, he will not be remembered come awards season, but to me, he was fantastic. The way he acted and spoke flawlessly really captured the essence of the character and made the film.
Unfortunately, I was disappointed in this film, not because it was bad, because it was not terrible, but because it could have been more. It could have delved deeper and the characters could have been better developed. It was also surprising because the director of the Soloist was Joe Wright who directed Atonement which was Oscar nominated. The film either tried too hard or just walked you through the journey without allowing you to figure anything out by yourself.
So in the end, the Soloist was a good film, but nothing special or memorable except for Foxx and Downey, and it is possible that it was difficult to tell a good story since it was based on true events, but in large part the story falls flat. Therefore, I will recommend this film for the acting of the stars but not for the storyline or any meaningful moviegoing experience.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Third Thoughts on the Asphalt Jungle
These may be a bit late so I apologize if the time for Asphalt Jungle posts has passed but there were a couple of things on posts that I didn't see that I felt were still worthy of mentioning.
First, was the scene in which Doc Riedenscheinder (however you spell it) get arrested. I thought the period where the girl is dancing is quite interesting and of course his quote "Plenty of time" which we have already discussed. But the part of the scene that I found more powerful was when he asked the police officer, "How long have you been waiting outside?"
The police officer responds "About two or three minutes."
Riedenschneider then thinks aloud "About how long it takes to play a phonograph record isn't it."
The police officers tells him to stop babbling but we, the audience understands what it means.
I believe this scene perfectly personifies that each character got caught up in their own vice. If Doc Riedenschneider had decided to leave and not give the girl the nickels to dance, he could have escaped. Now, being the existienalist that he was, he probably felt that he have lived for pleasure so the fact that he got caught was worth it because he enjoyed himself to the last minute, just like Jons from the Seventh Seal.
However, I personally would have been kicking myself, if I would have escaped if it wasn't for my own selfishness and vice. Doc did not seem too upset but I would have been very angry if I had only missed escaping by a couple of minutes because I thought I had "plenty of time" and just wanted to watch this girl dance.
And finally, and this will be a very short thought. Stupid Hays Code! I wanted Dix to escape and the fact that he died, although it brought closure to the film, I was hoping that he did not get caught or killed, but I knew he had to. But of all of the characters, I was rooting the most for him and his death was the most upsetting to me.
First, was the scene in which Doc Riedenscheinder (however you spell it) get arrested. I thought the period where the girl is dancing is quite interesting and of course his quote "Plenty of time" which we have already discussed. But the part of the scene that I found more powerful was when he asked the police officer, "How long have you been waiting outside?"
The police officer responds "About two or three minutes."
Riedenschneider then thinks aloud "About how long it takes to play a phonograph record isn't it."
The police officers tells him to stop babbling but we, the audience understands what it means.
I believe this scene perfectly personifies that each character got caught up in their own vice. If Doc Riedenschneider had decided to leave and not give the girl the nickels to dance, he could have escaped. Now, being the existienalist that he was, he probably felt that he have lived for pleasure so the fact that he got caught was worth it because he enjoyed himself to the last minute, just like Jons from the Seventh Seal.
However, I personally would have been kicking myself, if I would have escaped if it wasn't for my own selfishness and vice. Doc did not seem too upset but I would have been very angry if I had only missed escaping by a couple of minutes because I thought I had "plenty of time" and just wanted to watch this girl dance.
And finally, and this will be a very short thought. Stupid Hays Code! I wanted Dix to escape and the fact that he died, although it brought closure to the film, I was hoping that he did not get caught or killed, but I knew he had to. But of all of the characters, I was rooting the most for him and his death was the most upsetting to me.
Top Hat
So I made a post a few weeks ago about how Top Hat was going to on TV for anyone who wanted to see it to its completion. So, at that time, I decided to DVR it for a later date and watch it if I chose to. Well yesterday afternoon, the choice came down to watch a movie (and Top Hat was short in a limited period of time) or study for AP Gov. (I bet you can guess which one I picked.)
Well I must admit, that I was not overly impressed with Top Hat as I was with the Asphalt Jungle, Unforgiven, or some of the other great films that we have seen this year -- but surprisingly, it was pretty good and the ending was somewhat clever and unexpected.
I don't know if anyone will actually watch the end of the movie, but I must admit that the 3 best double entredres of the film occur in the last 20 minutes of the film. They are really hilarious and actually made the movie quite enjoyable. I won't post them here yet, but if I get a consensus to post them, I will because they are honestly quite funny.
I must admit that the ending was pretty shocking, as a musical of this time and type can be and I actually found the ending to be stronger than expected. So in the end, although Top Hat will not go down as my favorite film of the year, on a whole the film was pretty good, and as someone who does not like musicals, I actually didn't mind this as a film. It is probably the best example of a good musical I have seen, although the number of musicals I have seen to best that off is not very high.
My final verdict on the film is that I feel that we were too harsh and unwelcoming to Dale and Jerry, and we should have not given it "the sword" like Beddini often wanted to do. This will probably not happen but I would suggest that anyone who had any shred of interest when we watched it the first time should try to seek it out and watch it because I found the last 30 minutes, stronger than the rest of the film, and came away from it glad that I had seen its conclusion.
Well I must admit, that I was not overly impressed with Top Hat as I was with the Asphalt Jungle, Unforgiven, or some of the other great films that we have seen this year -- but surprisingly, it was pretty good and the ending was somewhat clever and unexpected.
I don't know if anyone will actually watch the end of the movie, but I must admit that the 3 best double entredres of the film occur in the last 20 minutes of the film. They are really hilarious and actually made the movie quite enjoyable. I won't post them here yet, but if I get a consensus to post them, I will because they are honestly quite funny.
I must admit that the ending was pretty shocking, as a musical of this time and type can be and I actually found the ending to be stronger than expected. So in the end, although Top Hat will not go down as my favorite film of the year, on a whole the film was pretty good, and as someone who does not like musicals, I actually didn't mind this as a film. It is probably the best example of a good musical I have seen, although the number of musicals I have seen to best that off is not very high.
My final verdict on the film is that I feel that we were too harsh and unwelcoming to Dale and Jerry, and we should have not given it "the sword" like Beddini often wanted to do. This will probably not happen but I would suggest that anyone who had any shred of interest when we watched it the first time should try to seek it out and watch it because I found the last 30 minutes, stronger than the rest of the film, and came away from it glad that I had seen its conclusion.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Second Thoughts on the Asphalt Jungle
I'm going to do something rare. I'm actually going to keep this post very short.
I must admit the first day and a half or 2 days that we watched the Asphalt Jungle, I didn't feel emotionally connected to the characters and I felt that they were in a way "unforgettable." I was enjoying the film but I found it to be slow, confusing, and I just found something lacking from it.
However, after watching the film yesterday, I am completely convinced. I was drawn into the characters, into the story and my eyes were glued to the screen. I often take notes during the film, but yesterday I took barely any because I was just so caught up in the film itself, that I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. The film has me waiting and watching for me and I hope we finish today because I am honestly looking forward to the conclusion of this film more than any other so far.
I feel that maybe if we watched the film in one sitting, I may have gotten into the film immediately because by 1 hour in, I got into the film, and Huston may have started it slow on purpose to have a more exciting middle and end. (Much like Eastwood did in Unforgiven.)
So yes, I will admit that at first I felt like many of Mr. Bennett's previous students, namely that I found something lacking in the film. But now, it is quite high in my mind, and if the conclusion lives up to the action and excitement of yesterday, this is going to be a great film. I no longer feel lost and all of the characters now are having deep impressions upon me and I feel connected to the story. (even though it is B+W and from 1950, I still feel like I could be there.)
Sorry if it is still too long of a post. I am trying to shorten it as much as possible.
I must admit the first day and a half or 2 days that we watched the Asphalt Jungle, I didn't feel emotionally connected to the characters and I felt that they were in a way "unforgettable." I was enjoying the film but I found it to be slow, confusing, and I just found something lacking from it.
However, after watching the film yesterday, I am completely convinced. I was drawn into the characters, into the story and my eyes were glued to the screen. I often take notes during the film, but yesterday I took barely any because I was just so caught up in the film itself, that I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. The film has me waiting and watching for me and I hope we finish today because I am honestly looking forward to the conclusion of this film more than any other so far.
I feel that maybe if we watched the film in one sitting, I may have gotten into the film immediately because by 1 hour in, I got into the film, and Huston may have started it slow on purpose to have a more exciting middle and end. (Much like Eastwood did in Unforgiven.)
So yes, I will admit that at first I felt like many of Mr. Bennett's previous students, namely that I found something lacking in the film. But now, it is quite high in my mind, and if the conclusion lives up to the action and excitement of yesterday, this is going to be a great film. I no longer feel lost and all of the characters now are having deep impressions upon me and I feel connected to the story. (even though it is B+W and from 1950, I still feel like I could be there.)
Sorry if it is still too long of a post. I am trying to shorten it as much as possible.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
First Thoughts on the Asphalt Jungle
I noticed that Mr. Bennett had made a post on the great lines that he found from the Asphalt Jungle. The two lines he noted were terrific lines and I am sure the most significant of the film. However, even though we are only half way through, I believe I have some more good lines and also some thoughts on the film.
First, the lines I have taken note of are:
"I don't want your opinion of the law." - Emmerich
"A drink habit, the only one I got that don't get me in trouble." - Cobby
"I'll make a real killing."
"I gotta get this city dirt off me."
The next one is taken out of context but I believe that Cobby says that "he might have had a little load on" and he wishes that Dix "wasn't so touchy" because Cobby wants to "feel big."
"Money makes me sweat."
"Everyone of those guys has a screw loose somewhere."
"If you want fresh air, don't look for it in this town."
These are the quotes I had for now. However, in terms of the content of the film itself, there are some things to discuss.
First, the way the film has been structured so far, I have gotten quite intrigued by the numerous double-crossings and other things planned in the heist. It seems like a story where all of the characters seperate stories are going to collide in one big scene. I could be wrong, but it seems like each character seems to be weaving their story closer and closer together.
I am also very interested in the way that Emmerich is bankrupt and trying to double cross his own men to get rich. This seems like it is heading for disaster for him and several other characters but it is hard to tell. All of the characters I think I can understand relatively well and understand their motives and their personality, except for Dix Handley. He still seems like a man of mystery and I can't understand his motives as a petty thief or the rationale behind getting involved in this heist. He is the one character I haven't grasped yet, and that could be the intent of the film.
Finally, and this is an irrelevant thought but one that I keep being reminded of. This is that everytime I hear the name Emmerich, I always think of Franz Kemmerich from All Quiet on the Western Front. Now obviously I am not trying to draw a connection between the two because none exists but every time I hear the name, I think of Paul frantically yelling, "Doctor, Franz Kemmerich is dying." Then of course, the doctor has no response because he does not know Franz as anything other than Bed 26 and one of his 12 leg amputations today.
But I digress, that last point had nothing to do with the Asphalt Jungle beyond the fact that the name and the scene from All Quiet on the Western Front stick out to me everytime that Emmerich is on screen because the name similiarity.
First, the lines I have taken note of are:
"I don't want your opinion of the law." - Emmerich
"A drink habit, the only one I got that don't get me in trouble." - Cobby
"I'll make a real killing."
"I gotta get this city dirt off me."
The next one is taken out of context but I believe that Cobby says that "he might have had a little load on" and he wishes that Dix "wasn't so touchy" because Cobby wants to "feel big."
"Money makes me sweat."
"Everyone of those guys has a screw loose somewhere."
"If you want fresh air, don't look for it in this town."
These are the quotes I had for now. However, in terms of the content of the film itself, there are some things to discuss.
First, the way the film has been structured so far, I have gotten quite intrigued by the numerous double-crossings and other things planned in the heist. It seems like a story where all of the characters seperate stories are going to collide in one big scene. I could be wrong, but it seems like each character seems to be weaving their story closer and closer together.
I am also very interested in the way that Emmerich is bankrupt and trying to double cross his own men to get rich. This seems like it is heading for disaster for him and several other characters but it is hard to tell. All of the characters I think I can understand relatively well and understand their motives and their personality, except for Dix Handley. He still seems like a man of mystery and I can't understand his motives as a petty thief or the rationale behind getting involved in this heist. He is the one character I haven't grasped yet, and that could be the intent of the film.
Finally, and this is an irrelevant thought but one that I keep being reminded of. This is that everytime I hear the name Emmerich, I always think of Franz Kemmerich from All Quiet on the Western Front. Now obviously I am not trying to draw a connection between the two because none exists but every time I hear the name, I think of Paul frantically yelling, "Doctor, Franz Kemmerich is dying." Then of course, the doctor has no response because he does not know Franz as anything other than Bed 26 and one of his 12 leg amputations today.
But I digress, that last point had nothing to do with the Asphalt Jungle beyond the fact that the name and the scene from All Quiet on the Western Front stick out to me everytime that Emmerich is on screen because the name similiarity.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Unforgiven
So, I was able to finish Unforgiven this weekend on my own, since I wasn't in class on Friday. And I don't know if there was any time for discussion but all I can say is that the ending to Unforgiven was incredible. In reading one of Mr. Bennett's comments on the film, I completely agree that the image of Clint Eastwood standing after killing everyone, is as iconic an image as any in film, and may be as powerful in film as say a word of dialogue like "Rosebud" in Citizen Kane. On a whole, the film was just amazing and the ending added to it. Even the image of Morgan Freeman standing in that coffin, is an enduring image that may never leave my mind.
I didn't get a chance to write a post during the movie like I usually do but there were some things about the film that I noticed while watching.
For one, when Will Munny is speaking to Morgan Freeman about his motives for coming out of "retirement" he says that he is only doing it for the "money". He really just needs the money for his family and for himself and he is not doing it to go back to the way he was before. "I need the money." However, I took this to mean that he needs the "Munny," meaning that he had lost his true personality when he got married and he needed to get it back. He wanted to rediscover his "Munny" once again. Now, he also needed the literal money but I also feel that he needed to find himself and go back to the man he used to be.
The scene that also speaks to this is when he is unable to get on his horse the first time, showing how out of practice he was and how in order for his life to be fulfilled, he needed to go on this mission and kill the two cowboys. "I used to be a great rider before your mother came. I used to be a great rider."
He even says that he isn't like that anymore. "I'm just a fella now. I ain't no different than anyone else no more."
Also, as Mr. Bennett stated, there were several instances where the people spoke of stories and exaggerations and different things that they saw. These include:
(early in the film, when the first man comes to visit Will)
"You are the one that killed Charlie Peppers and the other men aren't you?"
"You robbed the train, didn't you?"
"You don't look like a killer. Well Pete said you were the worst one if I ever wanted a killer."
"Pete said that, yea he did."
Next, the next scenes where they speak about how badly the women got cut up, beyond her actual wounds and the way that each person who tells of the story, expands and the exaggerates the story even further.
"I hear you been talking about the Queen here."
The shooting of the bird scene on the train and how the man tells English Bob how good of a shot he is, even though he is in face a very poor shot and could only hit one bird.
The entire story about the Duke/Duck of Death was exaggerated at that even the picture and that entire time was completely over blown.
When the Schofield kid claims to have killed 5 men, and then later admits that he had never killed anyone and would never kill anyone again. He wasn't cut out for this.
The scene where the Schofield kid and Will Munny speak about what it is like to kill somebody was also one of the most powerful scenes I have ever seen. It spoke to the value of one human life and how difficult it can be for some people to actual kill people. That, as a matter of fact, the difference between life and death is controlled by the "pull of a trigger." The way that this scene shows the emotion of how much of an effect, truly taking the life of another person can be.
I hope to have more thoughts on this film, but I am too tired at this point to make any more intelligent comments. (It is quite likely that I have not made any intelligent comments but I don't want to bore people any further.) But if I get any flashes of brilliance (very doubtful) I will be sure to write them, but I was very happy to see the conclusion of this film because it was completely brilliant and an ending that truly culminated a film, something that is very rare in film.
I didn't get a chance to write a post during the movie like I usually do but there were some things about the film that I noticed while watching.
For one, when Will Munny is speaking to Morgan Freeman about his motives for coming out of "retirement" he says that he is only doing it for the "money". He really just needs the money for his family and for himself and he is not doing it to go back to the way he was before. "I need the money." However, I took this to mean that he needs the "Munny," meaning that he had lost his true personality when he got married and he needed to get it back. He wanted to rediscover his "Munny" once again. Now, he also needed the literal money but I also feel that he needed to find himself and go back to the man he used to be.
The scene that also speaks to this is when he is unable to get on his horse the first time, showing how out of practice he was and how in order for his life to be fulfilled, he needed to go on this mission and kill the two cowboys. "I used to be a great rider before your mother came. I used to be a great rider."
He even says that he isn't like that anymore. "I'm just a fella now. I ain't no different than anyone else no more."
Also, as Mr. Bennett stated, there were several instances where the people spoke of stories and exaggerations and different things that they saw. These include:
(early in the film, when the first man comes to visit Will)
"You are the one that killed Charlie Peppers and the other men aren't you?"
"You robbed the train, didn't you?"
"You don't look like a killer. Well Pete said you were the worst one if I ever wanted a killer."
"Pete said that, yea he did."
Next, the next scenes where they speak about how badly the women got cut up, beyond her actual wounds and the way that each person who tells of the story, expands and the exaggerates the story even further.
"I hear you been talking about the Queen here."
The shooting of the bird scene on the train and how the man tells English Bob how good of a shot he is, even though he is in face a very poor shot and could only hit one bird.
The entire story about the Duke/Duck of Death was exaggerated at that even the picture and that entire time was completely over blown.
When the Schofield kid claims to have killed 5 men, and then later admits that he had never killed anyone and would never kill anyone again. He wasn't cut out for this.
The scene where the Schofield kid and Will Munny speak about what it is like to kill somebody was also one of the most powerful scenes I have ever seen. It spoke to the value of one human life and how difficult it can be for some people to actual kill people. That, as a matter of fact, the difference between life and death is controlled by the "pull of a trigger." The way that this scene shows the emotion of how much of an effect, truly taking the life of another person can be.
I hope to have more thoughts on this film, but I am too tired at this point to make any more intelligent comments. (It is quite likely that I have not made any intelligent comments but I don't want to bore people any further.) But if I get any flashes of brilliance (very doubtful) I will be sure to write them, but I was very happy to see the conclusion of this film because it was completely brilliant and an ending that truly culminated a film, something that is very rare in film.
Friday, April 17, 2009
A Quick Note -- FYI
For anyone interested, the film Top Hat will be on Turner Classic Movies, (Directv Channel 256) on Monday, April 20th, at 11:00 pm. I know that this film was not very popular with the class but I also know that some people did enjoy it so they may want to see the end of the movie. Just wanted to let people know if they want to see some more Fred Astaire tap dancing.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Quiz Show
Today, I saw the Oscar-nominated 1994 film, Quiz Show, directed by Robert Redford, starring John Turturro, Paul Scofield, Ralph Fiennes (again), Rob Morrow and Martin Scorsese (surprising). Now, this is the 3rd film in the last week that I've seen that was nominated for Best Picture for 1995 in the last week, and let me point out that that was a complete accident but I will be doing a side-by-side comparison of these three and which I believed deserved the Best Picture.
This film revolved around an Congressional probe into fraud in the 1950's Game Shows. This was based on a true story, and actual investigation that followed in the 1950's. This film was technically sound, very well acted, with an engrossing storyline that made it difficult to look away from. I was absolutely entranced in the film from start to finish and I was even more interested because it was a true story.
Fiennes and Turturro were exceptional, as was the rest of the ensemble cast. (Scofield received an Academy Award nod, as did Redford and the screenwriter.) I thought this movie was executed very well, and the mix of suspense, surprise, and the constant plot twists and character juxtaposition, told the story from a few different angles and did it very impressively. I thought that the movie was very good. I was certainly recommend it and have people watch it for themselves because of its storyline, acting, and historical implications.
I realize that this post is short but I realize that people are probably less familiar with this than Forrest Gump or Shawshank, so I will give more comments when I compare the three of them and will analyze all of them more deeply, and this one especially so I will hold some of my comments for now.
But I would definitely suggest that people watch this, because the story had me hooked and I was deeply interested in the characters and their stories.
This film revolved around an Congressional probe into fraud in the 1950's Game Shows. This was based on a true story, and actual investigation that followed in the 1950's. This film was technically sound, very well acted, with an engrossing storyline that made it difficult to look away from. I was absolutely entranced in the film from start to finish and I was even more interested because it was a true story.
Fiennes and Turturro were exceptional, as was the rest of the ensemble cast. (Scofield received an Academy Award nod, as did Redford and the screenwriter.) I thought this movie was executed very well, and the mix of suspense, surprise, and the constant plot twists and character juxtaposition, told the story from a few different angles and did it very impressively. I thought that the movie was very good. I was certainly recommend it and have people watch it for themselves because of its storyline, acting, and historical implications.
I realize that this post is short but I realize that people are probably less familiar with this than Forrest Gump or Shawshank, so I will give more comments when I compare the three of them and will analyze all of them more deeply, and this one especially so I will hold some of my comments for now.
But I would definitely suggest that people watch this, because the story had me hooked and I was deeply interested in the characters and their stories.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Forrest Gump
Today, I watched Forrest Gump, the 2nd time I've seen it but the first time I was on a bus, so that doesn't really count. This Best Picture winner from 1995 (post about this coming soon), starring Tom Hanks (Oscar-winner) and Sally Field told the story of a man with an IQ of 75 and his interaction in history in the 1960s and 1970s (but I'm sure people know this movie well.)
The movie was an interesting take on the events of the 1960's and 70's and how one man, and a man like Forrest Gump can effect and comment on these traumatic and exciting times. Forrest Gump is an incredibly memorable character and Tom Hanks portrays him beautifully and amazingly, showing the range of emotions on these man, who although he may have been clinically slow, his insight into the world was quite deep.
The film was very good but not groundbreaking or incredible in any aspect. The most interesting aspects of the film in my opinion were the interaction with the great historic events of the time, and also the similarities that could be drawn between this movie and Benjamin Button (I'm not saying it's a good thing but it was interesting to note.) For those who don't know, Benjamin Button and Gump, the screenwriter for both films was the same so therefore the similarities are not shocking. (Nick mentioned this at one point if people read his comments) In my opinion, it diminshed the stature of Benjamin Button just because Forrest Gump came first and it was a better put together movie but both movie certain had independent ideas and characteristics.
Another interesting thing that came to mind during the film were the allusions to other films, watching the film, I felt like some of the shots were very similar to films I had seen, either before this movie or after it. (The ones that came after were obviously homages to this film). The most glaring and obvious example of this was the clear homage to Midnight Cowboy in one of the scenes with the song "Everybody's Talking" and the famous and ironic line "I'm walking here." Also, a film that came to mind at one point was that one of the shots looked very similar to the shot in All Quiet on the Western Front when Paul is carrying Kat back to base after getting shot. This could very easily be made up on my part but it felt very similar and brought that image to my mind.
On the other hand, like I said, some of the shots of Benjamin Button were like this movie and also one of the shots reminded me exactly of a shot of Tropic Thunder, which also probably wasn't done on purpose but then again it is possible. There were other shots that struck me in this way but I could not figure out exactly where these were from.
The final element of the film that also was placed in the film very subtlety was a discussion on existientialism versus anti-existienialism. Forrest says "I don't know if we each have a destiny, or if we're all just floating around accidental-like on a breeze," plainly stating the two arguments of the ideologies, and in this case, the ideology between his mother's ideals and his friend's thoughts. Finally Forrest comes to the conclusion that, " I think maybe it's both. Maybe both is happening at the same time." And who knows, maybe Forrest is right, but regardless it seemed very interesting that in this film that discussion came up when I was not expecting it.
This is a rather long review, and I apologize but in the end, I have come to the conclusion that people should watch this movie, mainly because it was a multiple Oscar-winner, it had several clever elements, a good story, strong acting, and was overall a very good movie. I do recommend people watch it although, in my opinion it was not a perfect movie. I would like to hear people opinions on this movie though because I know that many people have seen this.
The movie was an interesting take on the events of the 1960's and 70's and how one man, and a man like Forrest Gump can effect and comment on these traumatic and exciting times. Forrest Gump is an incredibly memorable character and Tom Hanks portrays him beautifully and amazingly, showing the range of emotions on these man, who although he may have been clinically slow, his insight into the world was quite deep.
The film was very good but not groundbreaking or incredible in any aspect. The most interesting aspects of the film in my opinion were the interaction with the great historic events of the time, and also the similarities that could be drawn between this movie and Benjamin Button (I'm not saying it's a good thing but it was interesting to note.) For those who don't know, Benjamin Button and Gump, the screenwriter for both films was the same so therefore the similarities are not shocking. (Nick mentioned this at one point if people read his comments) In my opinion, it diminshed the stature of Benjamin Button just because Forrest Gump came first and it was a better put together movie but both movie certain had independent ideas and characteristics.
Another interesting thing that came to mind during the film were the allusions to other films, watching the film, I felt like some of the shots were very similar to films I had seen, either before this movie or after it. (The ones that came after were obviously homages to this film). The most glaring and obvious example of this was the clear homage to Midnight Cowboy in one of the scenes with the song "Everybody's Talking" and the famous and ironic line "I'm walking here." Also, a film that came to mind at one point was that one of the shots looked very similar to the shot in All Quiet on the Western Front when Paul is carrying Kat back to base after getting shot. This could very easily be made up on my part but it felt very similar and brought that image to my mind.
On the other hand, like I said, some of the shots of Benjamin Button were like this movie and also one of the shots reminded me exactly of a shot of Tropic Thunder, which also probably wasn't done on purpose but then again it is possible. There were other shots that struck me in this way but I could not figure out exactly where these were from.
The final element of the film that also was placed in the film very subtlety was a discussion on existientialism versus anti-existienialism. Forrest says "I don't know if we each have a destiny, or if we're all just floating around accidental-like on a breeze," plainly stating the two arguments of the ideologies, and in this case, the ideology between his mother's ideals and his friend's thoughts. Finally Forrest comes to the conclusion that, " I think maybe it's both. Maybe both is happening at the same time." And who knows, maybe Forrest is right, but regardless it seemed very interesting that in this film that discussion came up when I was not expecting it.
This is a rather long review, and I apologize but in the end, I have come to the conclusion that people should watch this movie, mainly because it was a multiple Oscar-winner, it had several clever elements, a good story, strong acting, and was overall a very good movie. I do recommend people watch it although, in my opinion it was not a perfect movie. I would like to hear people opinions on this movie though because I know that many people have seen this.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
12 Angry Men
Today, I watched the 1957 classic starring Henry Fonda and Ed Begley, and directed by Sidney Lumet. (Yes Nick, I have now seen it so you can't yell at me anymore). Maybe it is because I am very interested in the legal system or maybe it is because it is just that good, but I found the movie to be absolutely extraordinary. I fear to make a claim that is too difficult to back up but this may very well be the best movie/my favorite movie. Now obviously I am very young and have not seen enough films but I believe that it is my favorite movie, so far in my life.
Once again, I am sure that alot of you have seen this film but to give a quick background, the movie centers around a jury room and a murder trial, and the deliberation of the 12 jurors. One of the incredible parts of this movie was that so much action could take place in a courtroom where in fact not much action could actually take place. The acting by all of the jurors was outstanding and the logic of the case and everything that was involved in it kept my eyes completely hooked to the screen and I really could never take my eyes off it. If anything this movie was far too short and I didn't want it to end, although I am sure that if it were longer, it would lose some of its effectiveness.
Now I know that people many times feel that they are detached from Black and White because they do not live in a black and white world but I never felt at all detached from the film and I felt that Lumet kept me completely in the film and I often felt like I was sitting in the room myself, part of the deliberations.
The movie was not perfect, but it was close in my opinion, and the cinematography, done by Boris Kaufman, who also filmed On the Waterfront ,was incredible. The decision to use certain long, continuous shots and also certain close-ups were almost always done flawlessly, with the exception of a couple. But it was truly beautifully filmed.
The entire movie from beginning to end had me hooked and locked in and I was addicted to the entire movie. Whether it was the great acting, the brilliant story, the terrific camera work, or all of the above (I lean towards that), the film was terrific.
I completely recommend this film to everyone and more than Shawshank which I just reviewed but definitely watch both of them. This movie was a near masterpiece.
Once again, I am sure that alot of you have seen this film but to give a quick background, the movie centers around a jury room and a murder trial, and the deliberation of the 12 jurors. One of the incredible parts of this movie was that so much action could take place in a courtroom where in fact not much action could actually take place. The acting by all of the jurors was outstanding and the logic of the case and everything that was involved in it kept my eyes completely hooked to the screen and I really could never take my eyes off it. If anything this movie was far too short and I didn't want it to end, although I am sure that if it were longer, it would lose some of its effectiveness.
Now I know that people many times feel that they are detached from Black and White because they do not live in a black and white world but I never felt at all detached from the film and I felt that Lumet kept me completely in the film and I often felt like I was sitting in the room myself, part of the deliberations.
The movie was not perfect, but it was close in my opinion, and the cinematography, done by Boris Kaufman, who also filmed On the Waterfront ,was incredible. The decision to use certain long, continuous shots and also certain close-ups were almost always done flawlessly, with the exception of a couple. But it was truly beautifully filmed.
The entire movie from beginning to end had me hooked and locked in and I was addicted to the entire movie. Whether it was the great acting, the brilliant story, the terrific camera work, or all of the above (I lean towards that), the film was terrific.
I completely recommend this film to everyone and more than Shawshank which I just reviewed but definitely watch both of them. This movie was a near masterpiece.
The Shawshank Redemption
I finished watching the 1994 classic, The Shawshank Redemption the other day. (Please don't judge me for never seeing this film before but I guess I just never got around to it.)
Although most of you have probably seen it, the film was set in 1947, and starred Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins, as two murderers in a Maine prison. The movie was directed by Frank Darabont, and the cinematographer was Roger Deakins, the man who films all of the Coen Brothers movies, for those of you who love the Coen Brothers. (Sorry Benny.)
The film was very beautifully done, and the story was quite an emotional journey that showed the passage of time quite interestingly. The acting was terrific, as would be expected from these stars, and the hardness of prison life was very well portrayed throughout the film, whether it was the corruption, the illegal manuevers, or the violence, the movie seemed to portray prison life very true to life.
The movie, based off a Stephen King short story was an incredible film for the large part in the way that it was able to effectively tell the story of a lifetime, so succinctly and effectively. It is difficult for me to comment too much on the film because I felt wrapped up in the story and can never exactly comment on specific ideas but rather thought that the movie on a whole was exceptional and crafted in such a way that you felt completely engrossed in the characters and in their stories the entire time.
However, and I know that this movie is heralded by all but I personally found some problems with the resolution and last 40 minutes of the film, whereas I felt that for the large part, the first 2 hours or so were nearly flawless. I will not give away any details of the end of the film but I just had a couple of problems with the end, although I did like the ending of the film as a whole, I was not completely contented with all of the pieces of the ending. (Feel free to disagree with me heartily and I will explain myself, but I just was not fully happy with how the movie ended, but that is only a personal opinion.)
The Shawshank Redemption is a terrific film and I know that I am probably among the last people in the class to see the movie but if you haven't, I completely suggest that you do see the movie, because it is terrific and you can feel free to ignore my discontent towards the movie because I did think that it was great, just not perfect like some people may think. I do believe that everyone should see the Shawshank Redemption because of its terrific adapted story, great acting, and "beautiful" (beautiful in its ugliness) portrayal of prison life.
Although most of you have probably seen it, the film was set in 1947, and starred Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins, as two murderers in a Maine prison. The movie was directed by Frank Darabont, and the cinematographer was Roger Deakins, the man who films all of the Coen Brothers movies, for those of you who love the Coen Brothers. (Sorry Benny.)
The film was very beautifully done, and the story was quite an emotional journey that showed the passage of time quite interestingly. The acting was terrific, as would be expected from these stars, and the hardness of prison life was very well portrayed throughout the film, whether it was the corruption, the illegal manuevers, or the violence, the movie seemed to portray prison life very true to life.
The movie, based off a Stephen King short story was an incredible film for the large part in the way that it was able to effectively tell the story of a lifetime, so succinctly and effectively. It is difficult for me to comment too much on the film because I felt wrapped up in the story and can never exactly comment on specific ideas but rather thought that the movie on a whole was exceptional and crafted in such a way that you felt completely engrossed in the characters and in their stories the entire time.
However, and I know that this movie is heralded by all but I personally found some problems with the resolution and last 40 minutes of the film, whereas I felt that for the large part, the first 2 hours or so were nearly flawless. I will not give away any details of the end of the film but I just had a couple of problems with the end, although I did like the ending of the film as a whole, I was not completely contented with all of the pieces of the ending. (Feel free to disagree with me heartily and I will explain myself, but I just was not fully happy with how the movie ended, but that is only a personal opinion.)
The Shawshank Redemption is a terrific film and I know that I am probably among the last people in the class to see the movie but if you haven't, I completely suggest that you do see the movie, because it is terrific and you can feel free to ignore my discontent towards the movie because I did think that it was great, just not perfect like some people may think. I do believe that everyone should see the Shawshank Redemption because of its terrific adapted story, great acting, and "beautiful" (beautiful in its ugliness) portrayal of prison life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)