Crash

For the last movie of the Introduction to Film course I chose to analysis the film Crash. This was an extremely intense and emotional film that had an overall theme of racism. While watching this movie I was paying close attention to other possible themes hidden within the context of the film. One such them I felt may have some pull was that people are much more similar than they think that are. Sometimes it takes a life changing event for people to realize that they are not so different from one another. I also noticed that once the characters in the film realized that they are no different from others that they sought redemption in order to give back to society. Another thing that I noticed was that it didn't matter the race, age, nor education of the individuals they all believed themselves to be better than others and they had some form of racism.

I felt when watching this film that communication was a huge barrier between the characters in the film. The characters rushed to quick judgments and stopped listening. Once they stopped listening they could no longer understand the other character nor the happenings of the situation. They only saw blind ignorance and intolerance.

The impact this movie has on society is huge. If people would follow the life lessons of those in the film they would be less likely to be ignorant to the feelings of others. They would see that the people around them no matter what they have been raised to think about the people nor what they have encountered with random situations it doesn't mean that those types of people are all the same.

I think that the acting together with the director and script really brought this movie to life. The setting and situations also made the movie so real that just about anyone could connect with it. Most people have heard derogatory remarks made toward one race or sex at some point and this film address's many of those. I feel that various things people are introduced to through society and family shape what they have learned regarding people of various races. In one part of the movie when the character who was a director on a television set didn't want the black character to speak with a slang to his dialog had his idea put down by the white co-director. The co-director claimed that the audience doesn't want to see the actor speak in an intelligent manner and that the actor was losing his black. This part of the movie addressed media's influence on racism. If television shows only show black people speaking with Ebonics and being unintelligent then eventually the public will think that all black people must be that way.

Overall this movie was amazing and very intense. It summarized generations worth of racism. It also faced some various reasons that the racism may occur and how it has continued on. I think that anyone who sees this movie will think about their own racial or sexist thoughts and possibly come up with new feelings.

Cider House Rules

In session 5 of the introduction to film course I watched Cider House Rules. This was a wonderful movie that really makes the audience think. Some of the major parts of session 5 that relate to this film are is the theme of the film, the relationships of parts to the whole, the film as moral and social statement, and the film as an emotional experience.

I would classify this film as being a moral and social statement piece. The overall theme of the film is whether or not it is okay to break rules to better the lives of people. Some of the rules or laws that are broken during the film are abortions being performed, Candy cheating on Wally with Homer while Wally is away at war, Mr. Rose raping and impregnating his own daughter, Dr. Larch lying to the children about Fuzzy's death, Dr. Larch falsifying Homer's medical degree, Dr. Larch abusing ether, and the Cider House Rules being broken.

The period of time the film was set in abortions were illegal. The film made the statement that it was better to help women who were pregnant and did not want to be or shouldn't be by giving them the abortion. This broken the laws of the time but it saved lives. A scene in the film proved this point when a very young girl was found outside. The girl was obviously to young to be having children and she had gone to someone to get help and was seriously injured as a result. Dr. Larch made the point to Homer that the girl had taken extreme measures to get help and as a result of the law she died.

A moral statement that was made in the film was when Candy was left alone while her boyfriend Wally volunteered for a dangerous assignment in the war. Candy stated several times that she did not do well by herself and that she needed someone with her. Candy was lonely and Homer thought she was kind and beautiful. They eventually ended up being in an intimate relationship. Homer made the comment to Candy in the film that it was neither of their faults. She doesn't do well alone and Wally knew it and Homer had never been with a woman before. This situations brings up the question whether it was right or wrong for them to be together. Ultimately Wally returned from war crippled and Homer went back to the orphanage.

Another moral dilemma was when it became apparent the Ms. Rose was pregnant and she informed Candy that it was her fathers baby. Mr. Rose claimed that he would never hurt his own daughter and that he loved her. Homer performed an abortion on Ms. Rose and in the end she stabbed her father when he tried to say goodbye to her when she left. Mr. Rose committed suicide by further stabbing himself after she left. The question was not whether it was wrong for Mr. Rose to sexually assault his daughter and impregnate her. It is obvious that it was wrong. The question was is it okay for Homer to lie to the police about how Mr. Rose died. Homer would be saving Ms. Rose and Mr. Rose could rest in piece. At the same time Mr. Rose would not be held accountable for what he did and Ms. Rose would not be held accountable either. The secret was in Homer's hands due to Ms. Rose being gone and Mr. Rose dying.

All of these lies and broken rules are benefiting the people involved. A statement was made by one of the field workers toward the end of the film. He stated that the cider house rules were made by someone who had never lived in the cider house and therefore the rules did not apply to the men living in the house. This statement summed up the theme of the film in saying that rules that are made by someone who has never been in the circumstance does not have the authority to decide what is right or wrong.

Jurassic Park

The second film that I watched for session 4 of my class was Jurassic Park which was released in 1993. I remember when I was young loving this movie when it came out. In high school band we played the famous musical score from the film. This movie was directed by Steven Spielberg and the score was composed by John Williams. While I watched the movie I payed close attention the the sound effects and the musical score. Throughout the movie the music followed the action and scenes. The music reminded me of adventure. When I have adventurous movies in the past such as Star Trek and Indiana Jones they had a similar feel to the music. During some research I discovered that Steven Spielberg and John Williams have worked on over 12 films together and that may be the reason for the similar feel to the music. In Jurassic Park the composer used an orchestra and band to fill the composition. I feel that any other type of music would not have filled the largeness of the film. Scientifically speaking the film is lacking and somewhat unrealistic but the idea of it was amazing. The musical score fit this perfectly and was catchy enough to become well known. Even if someone had never seen the movie they would recognize the score. My favorite instrument which is used extensively to obtain the large sound is the french horn. I may be partial to it being I played the instrument for 5 years but the clear cut and large sound fill any room and musical work. During more grandiose scenes this was used along with other wind instruments while more minor moments needed a subtle touch with using string instruments and the piano.

While watching the movie from a critics views I realized how much work went into every little detail. Some of the sounds that were added in are jungle sounds for when in jungle scenes, sand and dirt blowing over bones to create a hollowish sound when a helicopter approached a dig site, flapping of clothes in the wind when the helicopter approached, a cork on a bottle popping, chickens clucking and roosters crowing at a South American restaurant. The think that stunned me the most was that many of these sounds lasted less than one second and were almost insignificant moments in the film. Without these small sounds however the movie would lack in realism. I wondered what was used and why the sound directors chose certain sounds for the dinosaurs. We have never come into contact with real dinosaurs and the sound directors had to fabricate what they thought would sound like a dinosaur.

Special effects obviously were a big part of this movie. Things blowing up in other action movies was not the challenge for this movie but rather robotics and electronics. I remember in 1993 watching this movie and thinking that it looked so real and know today with the more advanced software and robotics the dinosaurs looked less real. It didn't bother me to much though because they really did a good job in making them look as realistic as possible.

I love this movie. I have seen it many many times and I will most likely see it again at some point. The music, adventure, and idea keep bringing me back to it. It is a beautiful film no matter how scientifically flawed it may be.

The Dark Knight

One of the movies that I choose for session 4 is The Dark Knight. This film's leading actors are Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, and Aaron Eckhart. Some of the supporting cast are Maggie Gyllenhaal, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman. Some things that stuck out to me in the movie were acting, special effects, color, and the score.

The acting in this movie was amazing. Particularly the acting from Heath Ledger. He really put himself into the character and became in essence the Joker. It was almost scary how well he portrayed the character. When I watched him as the Joker every word and every movement he made seemed to be so focused and concentrated. He had an intensity that he maintained throughout the entire movie. Within the movements he made what made them appear to be so focused and concentrated was the fact that everything looked as though it just flowed without seeing the actor. He had such strength in his motion when he would twitch or do some other tick. I did some background research on Heath Ledger and how he played this role. I discovered that he became somewhat mentally unstable playing this role and that it made him depressed because he felt the Joker and the Jokers mindset so deeply. Watching him in this movie makes me think that anyone that can play the Joker to the full extent as Heath Ledger did has got to be unstable in some way. In order to feel the rampage and disconnect from other people in that way must feel that way themselves at some time in their lives. I feel that Heath Ledger was chosen for this role based on his personality. Just looking at some of his cover shots you can see that there is a deep side to him.

As for the other main actors I believe Christian Bale was chosen based on his strong personality and looks. He comes off as a powerful person which embodies the Batman and Bruce Wayne characters. He is also physically a very fit person whose body type can pack on muscle in a bulky yet lean way. As for Aaron Eckhart he is a good looking actor with the classic hero dimple chin. In the movie he does become a more sinister character but his overall character and goal of the character was that of the cities unmasked hero. He fits the clean shaven good guy role. As for the supporting cast Gary Oldman can play just about any role he wants. He definitely is not type cast. In half the movies he is in I can barely recognize him. He doesn't have a set look or face. He can change so easily and embody a character in every role that you can't see him through the character. I think that he was chosen simply because he is a great actor that can fit any role. As for Maggie Gyllenhaal he is a strong and independent woman. She has a great acting style, the girl next door looks, is pretty, and can be glamorous. The other supporting actors Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman they are great actors as well and are celebrity names which adds to the list of celebrities in this movie. The roles that they filled are for older men who work with Bruce Wayne. They both fit this role well.

Some of the special effects were things blowing up, cars crashing, helicopters crashing, Batman attaching himself to a flying plane, Batman flying through the air, and guns. The movie is packed full of action and realistic scenes. The colors that were chosen for the Joker and his accomplices were gritty yet vibrant. The face paint was bright enough to stand out dramatically but dull enough to not seem to circus clown and more sinister. The red was enhanced and balanced by the black eyes while the white face was smeared and grayish. Throughout the movie the musical score set the tone for the scenes and in many circumstances the music was louder than the dialog. In these times I feel that it was an attempt to take away from the characters and focus more on the situation in the scene and movie overall.

I liked this movie. This was my second time watching it and with the tools of the text and chapters I noticed much more about the movie than I did the first time I saw it. I remember hearing so much about Heath Ledger's acting before I saw it the first time and I didn't see what others saw. This time watching the movie I really noticed just how much he was the Joker and became the character. This was a great movie. I am glad that Heath Ledger played this role I feel that it was the best of his life.

Slumdog Millionaire

I watched Slumdog Millionaire during session 3 of my class. This film had many points in it that were defined by the text. Some of these are the location vs studio, setting and its effects, costume and makeup design, keeping the image in motion, and the use of lighting.

The starting point of the script was Mumbai 2006 and a young man was bing interrogated. The script then jumps back and forth between a game show stage during a live broadcast and the interrogation. In both circumstances the same young man was depicted. This sets the mood for the film and gives a peek to the viewers as to what the film may entail. The location being for the most part not in studio really gives the reality of the place to the viewers. I have been to India and I don't think that any studio could give the reality quite the way to real place does. The effect would be completely lost if the shooting of the film had not been on location.

Some extra visual effects that I noticed were some side ways angles of the camera in contrast to the setting. I think that this was to focus the audience on the subject rather than the background. Other ways in which the focus was kept on the subject was by keeping the focus on the subject in motion. When the main characters were children running through the slum the camera kept right along side the boys as they ran. This kept the focus on the children.

Having been to India I think that not to much really had to be done makeup wise. The country is so colorful on its own that having a boy painted as a God or having a beautiful henna design on the girls arms is not to far fetched nor difficult to come across in daily life in India. One time during the film that the makeup must have been somewhat difficult was when the main character as a child jumped into an open latrine in order to obtain an autograph from a famous Indian actor. The costuming throughout really stated who was who. The game show host was well dressed in a sparkling suit while in the slum people walked around with worn out torn clothing.

Some of the lighting used was when as children the kids were escaping their captures and running through the forest. The flashlights in the background heightened the excitement and nervousness of the situation. Also when the boys were pulled from the top of the train in New Delhi soft focus was used with a bright sunlight behind it to create a dust type image. This I felt was representing a new chapter in the boys lives. When the boys went back to look for the young girl they entered a sex trade part of the city. When they were in this part of town a yellow lens was used to intensify the feel of the place. The yellow helped to give a feel of dirtiness and filth.

Some slow motion was used toward the end of the film. When Jamal the and Latika found each other at the train station the slow motion was used to intensify the connection between the two. It also represented how nothing around them mattered to them only each other. During this time a flashback of the childhood experiences that brought the two to the train station played. This flashback was played in slow motion to give the audience the feel of the struggles that were overcome throughout their lives.

Overall I like this movie. This was not the first time I had watched it. This was probably my third time watching the film. I think that in itself shows how much I like the film.

Session 3 Raging Bull

I watched Raging Bull for my session 3 text book selection. This film was directed by Martin Scorsese in 1980. It is a period piece reflecting the boxing world and a prize fighter Jake LaMotta in the 1940's. I really loved this film. You can watch a movie and it is just a movie but, this was art. It was filled with artistry created by still shots, slow motion detail, hand held camera snippets, and black and white film to better represent the time.

It is very hard to sum up this movie and even to decide on which things to pick out and evaluate. I have written many things of which to comment but, I am left feeling as though I can't put into words what everything meant. Martin Scorsese is one of the best producers and arguably the best. This film is proof of that.

I didn't feel that the costuming in this film was so important but, it did reflect the time period of the film. The starting point of the script was 1964 in New York City. The main character Jake LaMotta was alone in a room preparing for something which was not specified. He wore a tux and was rehearsing a line from Shakespeare. Previous to showing this during the opening credits the focus was on a boxer warming up in a boxing ring. The scene was in slow motion and you couldn't identify the man nor the audience. I felt that this moment was a signature Scorsese moment. The setting set the mood for the film. Starting out with a trim boxer in the ring and then showing an out of shape man. It was a foreshadow of what was to become of the boxer.

Another indicator of the time period was a reference made to a film that would have been premiering around the late 1950's. This reference was made at the end of the film which was supposed to be 1960. The referenced film was On the Waterfront and the material was the main character and his brother. When this reference was made it was indicating LaMotta's point of view from a cinematic objective point of view. The movie was filmed in this cinematic objective point of view. I feel like the home video snippets really depict the objectiveness of the film.

Session 2 film Good Will Hunting

I watched Good Will Hunting during session 2 of the course. This movie was pretty good. It has a complex story line with many different things going on. With that said there are some very simple parts of the story line as well. The movie also had good use of handling emotional material with restraint. In some dramatic moments dealing with Will Hunting (Matt Damon) and his psychiatrist (Robin Williams) the story line was a bit cheesy but, I can see the importance of the moment. Symbolism was obvious throughout the film in various scenes. A touch of irony is also present.

The titles significance is hard to pin point. I thought that it could possibly be referring to the search the Will Hunting had to find good will in others. The title could also just be referring to the characters name Will Hunting. I know that there is something behind the title but it was hard to pin point.

The story was made complex by the multitude of things going on and the connectedness of all of those things. I am referring to Matt Damon's character not just being a genius but, his tormented past, his rough friends, his fear of intimacy, and his relationship with his new girlfriend. Other characters have somewhat equal amounts of complexity as well such as Will Huntings psychiatrist played by Robin Williams. Robin was a promising young student who took a different path than his old classmate the mathematician. As a result there is some hostility between the two. Robin's character also is grieving over a lost love. His wife had dies from cancer and he had yet to fully move on.

Some of the simplicity of the film was the reasoning behind Will Huntings behaviors. He was tormented as a child and abused as a foster child. Once this is uncovered it doesn't even need to be explained by Will is the way he is. The problem and tough part is getting him to move past that. Which he is working on this Robin's character is helped as well in moving past his grief. During the sessions together emotional restraint was used very well. The characters where not sobbing messes they behaved in a manner that would be expected of a masculine man. He kept his emotions under check and didn't go overboard when expressing himself. Yes both men got emotional but, the moment was played well.

The irony I noticed in the film was that this blue collar worker with a rap sheet and disturbing past is more intelligent than the Harvard educated mathematicians. The professors were so aggravated that they couldn't figure out the math problems and it was so easy for Will. I really liked this idea. You don't need a P.h.D to be intelligent. You don't even have to be college educated.

I felt that the movie was credible because situations such as very young people or someone without a formal education are more intelligent than their opposites. I felt that the drama of Matt Damon's character made the film more interesting and also gave a reason for his hostility and unwillingness to commit.

Session 2 film Blood Type

    I watched a film called Blood Work which was directed and produced by Clint Eastwood. He also starred in the film. Currently in the Introduction to Film course we are covering chapter 3 in the required text book. Some of the things referred to in the text I picked out in this film. Some of those things are points of irony, various types of symbolism, the significance of the title, and unity in plot.

    My personal view of the film was mediocre. I had figured out who the killer was within the first 20 minutes of the film. The twist that was supposed to be an element of surprise in the film was fairly obvious to me. When you have one retired FBI profiler, an old serial killer that was never caught, and a new killing spree by a supposedly different killer until otherwise revealed it makes it obvious that the killers are either linked to each other or they are the same killer.

    Some of the acting was not great. The actors that were supposed to be somewhat funny were not very good at acting and their jokes weren't funny at all they were pretty lame. A point of irony was that the main character had become friends with who he thought was his neighbor and it was actually the killer. Another point was that the only reason Clint Eastwood's character was alive was because a woman with matching blood type was murdered. The ironic part was that he found and killer the woman's killer. So he killed the man that was responsible for the murder of the woman whose heart saved his life. Then he got together with that woman sister and the son of that woman and the film implies that he began a life them.

    Some symbolism used in the film was with the words mouthed by the killer in the surveillance cameras. The killer said, “ Happy Valentine's Day”. Right away Clint Eastwood's character didn't understand what that meant. Later it was revealed that it was because Clint Eastwood's character was going to get the heart of the person killed due to him needing a transplant and having a rare blood type. Another point of symbolism was when Clint Eastwood's character was searching the vehicle of the first man who had been killed. The camera made a quick shot of a blood donor flyer on the floor board of the vehicle. This obvious camera shot was symbolizing the connection between the victims. Symbolism was also used in the codes written by the code killer and the name written on a check to Clint Eastwood's character. Clint Eastwood could not figure out what the code meant until he say the name and the woman's son mentioned that the code had no ones. The last name of the neighbor is Noone. If the name is split is forms “no one”. This is the explanation for the codes.

    There were some good points in the movie such as attention to detail. When Clint Eastwood's character was asking his neighbor to drive him around he mentioned that he cannot sit in the front seat if there is an airbag due to the transplant. Another positive thing is that the plot did remain consistent throughout the entire film. Every point was connected and brought together. The title has meaning for the film because the reason the woman was chosen and the first man was chosen by the killer was because of their blood type.

On the Waterfront

  I watched On the Waterfront which was setting in the period of the 1950's.  I feel that this movie is relevant today even with the time gap.  The main plot of this movie was about corruption within the union.  Today there is still much controversy regarding unionization.  In this particular film the result was the mob had taken control of the work force and wages.  As a result of many killings the main character Terry (Marlon Brando) reluctantly decided to fight back.  In today's world less killing and more picketing is seen and heard about. 
  Overall I did like the movie.  I felt that it had great acting and it was sincere.  Some times you can be watching a great movie that you are really enjoying until one actor or actress plays their role poorly and I just about ruins the entire experience of watching the movie.  I was glad to see that that was not the case in this movie.  Not one single actor or actress played their part poorly.  I believed that what was happening to them in the movie was real and not just someone acting as though it was.  It is a refreshing thing to watch.
  Another thing that I liked was the grit of the movie.  In my last blog I wrote about how enjoyed the glamour of Casablanca but, sometimes you really need to get down to the nitty gritty to feel the full effects of the story.  What I thought was interesting about the stark differences between the two films was how different they were and yet they were made so close together.  The difference between the movies is roughly 10 years.  They may have both been in black and white but the acting was so very different.
  I didn't notice as much intentional shadowing done with the lighting as I had in Casablanca.  I noticed the use of mist being that this was taking place at a harbor.  The movie focused on two classes of people.  It had the workers who had to struggle just to find a days work and it also had the wealthy mobsters that didn't trust anyone.  In many of the scenes I noticed how the workers would be below deck on a ship and the mobsters would be controlling things from on deck looking down upon the workers.  Though it doesn't really make sense to have the mobsters below deck it said something and symbolized the roles each class played.  The mobsters calling the shots from above and the workers doing as they were told and working in the dirt.
  When Terry told Eide what happened with her brother the words were blocked out by the sound of the ship horns blowing.  By the director choosing to do this it really emphasized the emotion of what was happening.  The audience didn't need to hear the words they knew what happened the Eide's brother.  The director wanted the focus of that moment not to be interfered by words.  The audience was waiting for Eide's reaction and that is what they got.  The horns blew loud as the director took close up shots of Eide and Terry's faces as the confrontation ensued.  It was a heart wrenching moment and the feelings could be seen on the actors faces.
  The moment toward the end of the film when Terry had been badly beaten up had to walk to the front of the dock declaring his victory and the imancipation of the workers.  I felt that this moment was one of the strongest of the film.  The workers had been terrified to stand up to the mob for their rights.  Terry had had enough and stood up to Johnny Friendly and won.  Terry would no longer be seen as a canarie for ratting out the mob and he would have the friendship of the workers once again. 
  Overall the movie did not have much in the way of cinematography but I think that it was intentional.  It was a dramatic movie that was focusing on a hot issue among the country.  Fancy lighting and various other decorative settings would have taken the focus away from the key issue.  In fact cinematography was used more to block out the actors in order for the issues in the main story to be even more dramatic such as with the ships horns.  I felt that this was a very cleverly filmed movie that got the point across without discuissing it with fancy things.

Casablanca

   I recently had the pleasure of watching Casablanca.  I have typically shied away from black and white films but in this particular film I was lost in the story, the cinematography, and setting.  I was surprised to find out just how many famous quotes and songs come from this movie.  Although, I could have done without hearing "here's looking at you kid" so many times.  I can see how by having it said a number of times sets the dynamic of the characters but after a certain point it takes away from the romance in the line.
   In this day and age a movie set in Morocco during WWII may lose its effect with an audience, but the passion and love in the writing keeps it fresh and a classic.  I don't know how many times I had heard something or another about this movie and never understood just because the age of the movie kept me from watching it.  I was gladly mistaken in finding the greatness of what this story means in the ultimate sacrifice a person can make for the one they love.  Letting them go in order to save them.  Another thing that stuck me was the glamour of the time.  You don't see the actors dressed casually and the casual moments are still so fancy.  For instance when the 2 main characters where in Paris Ilsa was wearing a robe and the setting was in their hotel room.  Even in a setting as relaxed as that her hair was perfect and the robe was a shiny silk like material.  In movies today I think that this glamour effect has been lost.  It was just so beautiful it makes the audience or at least me what to beautify myself and dress in better than just jeans and a t-shirt.
   One thing about black and white movies that I had never realized is how much it can add to the cinematography.  It creates such great shadowing and can increase the intensity of visual effects with very little effort.  I don't know if its just me but it seemed as though every shot in this film had deliberate and calculated lighting to create the wonderful shading that it has.  I did notice in some of the shots that it was obvious the shading was intentional but in others it left me guessing.  I wasn't sure if the effect of shading was just a benefit of the black and white or if it was intentional with lighting to create those effects.  A particular scene that had obviously intended to use lighting for the shading effect was in the night club and Ricky was getting money from his safe.  The director did not show Ricky himself in the shot just his enlarged shadow on the wall.  I am a bit confused by that scene.  What was the intention of using the shading?  It was not a dramatic scene.  Was it just to add to the moment due to it not being as interesting as others?
    Back to the plot.  I felt that this script and plot can and does relate to the audience today.  As long as the world has war and love this film will relate to many people.  What a great idea!  Ilsa thought her husband was dead and she being lonely and in the mist of an invasion by the Nazi's she sought comfort in the arms of a man she ended up falling in love with only to find out that her husband was not dead and needed her.  How could she tell Ricky it was painful enough to think that she had lost her husband but then to say goodbye and explain the situation to the man she fell in love with after she lost her husband.  WOW!  Such a dramatic story with music that so fits the story line it basically tells it. 
    The acting was wonderful and so dramatic without being overly dramatic.  I think that it really helped the actors feel the emotions of the time being that the film was created soon after WWII.  Emotions around the world were high at the time and just about everyone was feeling it.  So many had lost loved ones that to watch this film with the heart felt acting really hit home with the audience.
   Overall this film was widely accepted by the people of the time and by people still today.  With the combination of a great story line, plot, acting, cinematography, music, and glamour it made for one hell of a movie.

Beginning Introduction to Film

Hi I am a student at the University of Mary and this is my film blog.  Every session I will post a response to a film or films that were required of me to watch.