Do The Right Thing blog post

The movie Do The Right Thing was an interesting movie. One of the main points in the movie was racism. There were very few scenes in the movie that didn't talk about racism in one way or another. Normally racism is only shown between whites and blacks, however this movie showed how almost any racial group has issues with another racial group. This was best shown during the racial slur montage. It showed every racial group in the film totally dissing other racial groups. The things they said were very hurtful, and offensive. Then again that is why it is called a racial slur montage. The things said during that part of the film made me feel somewhat sad to know there is so much hate in the world, but it got the point across. I suppose the fact that it got the point across is all that matters.

Battle of Algiers Blog

The Article I read was interesting. It pretty much said that the movie The Battle of Algiers is thought to be helpful in solving the war in Iraq. It talked about how a screening of the film was held at the Pentagon, to figure out how to get information. This shows that the battle of Algiers, and the war in Iraq are very similar. The article talked about how terrorist tactics were used back then, and how they are used now. I agree that the two wars are very similar. Both of them had the use of terrorist tactics, and the use of torture to get information. In the film The Battle of Algiers torture was used to get information and slightly covered up. Previously concerning the war in Iraq torture was used, and attempted to be covered up. It seems that now America is getting desperate for other ways to get information, so that we are looking at a movie made a long time ago for answers. Personally I think that the film depicted the ugliness of war, and how not to handle situations, rather than a film to be looked upon for advice of how to handle the war at hand.

Memento Blog

Memento was a very interesting film. One of the things it talked about was the nature of memory. Obviously memory was a huge part of the film because of Leonard's condition of short term memory loss, but it was a more important part of the film than that. It is said in the film that memories are easily distorted, and manipulated. They aren't records, but impressions. It seems as if Leonard is able to distort, or block some of his own memories. He was able to block out that he really accidentally killed his wife, and that she really had diabetes, because of the guilt he had. In order to do so he distorted his real memory of giving his wife an injection so that he remembered pinching her in the thigh instead. I think he really can't remember most things, but with some things he just pushes them aside. In the end he decided to manipulate himself into thinking that Teddy was the one who killed his wife, just so he would have someone to chase. Just like Teddy said he is lying to himself to keep himself happy. Just like that he has built up his own reality, and nobody else can be let in. This is not really related to the blog at all, but I just thought I would put it out there that Memento was one of my favorite movies that we watched so far.

Kiss Me Deadly Blog

Kiss Me Deadly was a very interesting movie, with a very bizarre ending. The box with nuclear stuff in it was odd, and very unrealistic. I feel as if the thing Mike Hammer was hunting should have been something more realistic. It would have made much more sense for that time period, and the movie would have been a little bit more clear. I also found it annoying that you didn't find out what Mike was searching for until the end. I think there should have been at least a vague notion of what he was looking for. I guess the point of that was for mystery though, which I will admit made the movie interesting. I liked Kiss Me Deadly way more than Double Indemnity. It was way more interesting to watch, and the characters showed way more emotion. I think the film was a good choice to watch for the film noir unit.

Double Indemnity Blog

The first movie I watched from the film noir unit was Double Indemnity. The movie revolved around plots, and scandal. I would say that this film is a good example of film noir. One of the tell tail signs was the low key lighting. Very seldom in the movie was there high key lighting. The scenes were shadowy, and there was contrast between light and dark. The contrast I saw was minimal, but it was still there. Lighting had a big effect on the movie. The darkness helped show how dismal and dark the plot was. There was also use of venetian blinds, which made the movie seem more mysterious. It also made the scene more interesting to pay attention to. Another way this film was a good example of film noir was the fact that the characters were corrupt, there was a very negative tone, and in the end the main characters are doomed. I found it interesting that the movie focused mostly on the bad guys. The exceptions to this rule being Keyes, and Lola. They were good in the movie, and they were included to develop the plot. Most of the other good people such as the guy seen on the train were only featured in the movie twice. Another key element present of film noir in the film was the voice over narration. Throughout the whole movie Walter is heard narrorating. It is made known from the beginning of the film that Walter confesses. This is done so he is able to do the voice over narration, thus being able to explain everything about the movie more. Because of this, the movie goes in depth more about the emotions Walter feels. It builds more on him as a character, so the audience can understand him better. Personally I wasn't very fond of this movie, but that doesn't make it any less of a good example of what film noir really is.

Groundhog Day Blog

Something I noticed in the movie Groundhog Day that differs from other comedies was the character of Rita. She differs greatly from other comedy heroins. She was way more complex, and I think that added quite a bit to the film. One way she differed was that she was smart. She actually used her head, and didn't go running around like a bimbo like Susan from Bringing up Baby. Rita was focused on the job at hand throughout most of the movie. Her main goal seemed to be getting the broadcast done and to enjoy some of the festivities of the festival. At first she had absolutely no interest in Phil romantically, but in the end he won her over. A lot of times in other romantic comedies it is the woman that is chasing the man. She also was calm most of the time. In many other romantic comedies the girl is loud, bubbly, and somewhat annoying. I think that the fact that Rita was a more developed character made the movie that much more interesting to watch. Her calmness also made a bigger contrast to everyone else's hyper up beat attitudes.

"Bringing Home Baby" Journal

One of the main comedic methods of the film Bringing Home Baby was physical comedy. Throughout the whole film people were constantly getting hurt. It seems as if Susan's character was falling or causing other people to fall down in almost every shot. She tripped over the phone cord while talking to David, and then a little bit later as David was scrambling to get out of the door he did the same thing. Probably the biggest example is in the end of the movie when she knocked down the brontosaurus skeleton that it took David months to build. Slap-stick was used as a main source of hilarity. The other sources of humor were situational humor, and verbal humor. Susan got David into many predicaments. She made him totally embarrass himself in front of the potential money doner of the museum. She did this in many ways, but I thought the funniest was when he thought David hit him in the head with a rock. The verbal humor was more subtle, but it was none the less there. It was definitely notable when David and Susan's Aunt's friend were having a conversation about game hunting, which is a subject David knew nothing about. Comedy is one of the biggest aspects of this film. It makes sense since this is a romantic comedy. One of the goals of this movie was to make people laugh, and the film really did succeed.

Civilization VS. Wilderness in "Once Upon A Time in the West"

During the course of the Western unit we have been asked the same question, who wins the battle between civilization and wilderness. In the movie Once Upon A Time In The West I would say the fight came out a draw.
On one hand there are the people who represent civilization such as Harmonica, Cheyenne, and Frank. Harmonica wins because he gets what he wants in killing Frank, and he is able to run back into the wild and be free. An example of civilization losing is the fact that Mr. Morton died. He was the main person responsible for the rail road which was the main source of civilization.
On the other hand civilization also came out on top. First of all Jill came from civilization, strayed away from it when she met Cheyenne, Harmonica, and Frank, but in the end went back to civilization when the railroad and town were being built by her house. It is also apparent that civilization won because even after a long struggle the rail road and town were built, and the people settled down. It could also be argued that the wilderness died because Frank was killed. Frank was the picture of wilderness. He didn't have a set home, he went wherever he wanted, he killed many people with no consequences, and he was a horrible business man. His death shows us that if you live like a ruffian you will get burned.
In the battle between wilderness VS. civilization you could argue in some way that each side won. In my opinion since you can argue both sides, both civilization and wilderness win in a way.

"Oh no, it wasn't the airplanes. It was beauty killed the beast."

Well, it looks as if this is my last journal for this class. *tear* For my last journal I thought I would watch something on the list that I used to love in my childhood. I chose to watch the 1933 version of King Kong.
King Kong had multiple creators. The story was created by Merian C. Cooper and Edgar Wallace (even though Mr. Wallace died before he was able to write any of it). The screenplay was written by Ashmore Creelman and Ruth Rose. One thing about the dialogue was that it was a little sexist. The movie seemed to view women as fragile creatures. I suppose that is because that is how women were viewed at the time, but it is still nonetheless sexist. Some lines were very cheesy as well. An example is when one of the main protagonists Jack Driscoll says to Ann "Hey... I guess I love you. " I mean who says that stuff? Silly people from the 1930's apparently.
The film did not just pop up out of thin air. The ideas of the writer's had to be inspired by something. For this particular crew their inspiration came from the "Lost World" literary genre. The lost world genre is a science fiction narrative that involves the discovery of a new world that is out of time or place. There were two particular books that were the key inspirations of King Kong. The books were The Lost World by Arthur Conan Doyle, and The Land That Time Forgot by Edgar Rice Burroughs. The Lost World is about a group of people journeying to a plateau in South America where dinosaurs and other creatures still live. Most of that story however focuses on a tribe of ape-like people. The Land That Time Forgot also involves people discovering a place that harbors dinosaurs and other now extinct creatures. It is obvious in the film King Kong has been influenced by these novels. Since the main creature of the story is a gigantic ape it is assumed that there was some influence from the ape-like people. A contributor from both books are the use of dinosaurs. On Skull Island other than Kong there are many dinosaurs. It seems that whenever the characters are on the island there is a dinosaur or other extinct creature around. I would say that King Kong would be a part of the lost world genre, because it fits the description of the genre to a T.
When the film first came out it was very highly revered. According to Wikipedia it was an immediate hit and made over four million dollars in the box office. At the time it was most noted for Willis O'Brien's groundbreaking stop-motion animation work. The monsters that were created for the movie were clay-mation. Personally I was not all that impressed with the animation. It was so fake, that it was just plain laughable. I will say though that the reason is because it was the 1930's, and lets face it the stop-motion animation seen in the film was very state of the art, high tech stuff in that time period. Another thing I didn't like is how the film didn't get very deep into the personal aspects of the emotions, and there was little character growth. The main emotion was the monkey loves the girl, and everyone else is afraid. In the beginning Ann was scared to death of the monkey, and even though Kong saved her life on countless occasions her opinion of him never changed. I liked the fact that in the contemporary version of this movie Ann was at first afraid of Kong, but gradually realized that he had feelings too, and even in the end really cared about him. I also liked how in the contemporary version they went way more in depth on the characters, and you were able to better connect with them. One thing I will note that was the same in both movies is the music. They used pretty some of the same music in both. I also liked how the ending was the same in both films. In both of the movies after Kong fell from the Empire State Building and the press was crowded around the body, a police officer says "Well, Denham, the airplanes got him." and Denham says "Oh no, it wasn't the airplanes. It was beauty killed the beast." That is one of my favorite lines from that movie. King Kong was a very interesting movie to say the least. The old version is alright, but I still would say that the more recent version is one of my favorite movies.
If you would like a link to where I got most of my information click here.

My Darling Clementine Blog

One key aspect to a western film is having a typical western hero. In the movie My Darling Clementine, The main character Wyatt Earp is a good example of a typical western hero. He has a reputation for whipping towns into shape. That is apparent in the beginning when a guy recognizes him as the previous marshal of another previously rowdy town. Wyatt also has high morals. He becomes town marshal in order to restore peace in Tombstone. He fights off the Clantons, but even then he tries to bring them to justice in a calm nonviolent manner. Probably the best indicator of how Wyatt is a typical western hero is the fact that he is reluctant at first to even be a hero. The only reason he takes the marshal job in the first place is because of the death of his youngest brother, and the stealing of his cattle. The film My Darling Clementine is a good example of a western movie. The movie however would not be quite as a good example had it not been for the western hero Wyatt Earp.

Citizen Kane Blog

In the film Citizen kane a prominent aspect of film I noticed was mise-en-scene. One of the aspects of mise-en-scene I saw was the influence of costume. The clothes the people wore seemed authentic for the time period. I think the creators of the film did this to reinforce the time period to which the movie was set, and the social class the characters were in. The costumes I saw were generally fancy. I saw a lot of suits and dresses. Kane was pretty much wearing a suit of some form throughout the whole movie. One of the more stylized costumes I noticed were in the beginning when Kane hired dancers to celebrate the new coming reporters to the Inquirer, and when Susan was singing in the opera. The costumes there were very flashy, and showed off the body.
Another piece I noticed was the setting. I found it very interesting that in some of the scenes that would have required an enormous set, were really paintings. Examples of this were the shots of Kane's house, and his big election speech. I believe this was done to conserve time and money. If they would have built a whole house set, or filled a huge room full of extras it would have taken months more and probably thousands of extra dollars on the film. The set of the film probably accurately depicted the time period. Everything seemed to be old fashioned, and fit in well with the happenings in the film. Nothing in the film seemed overly modern, but then again I'm not overly sure of what the time period of the film is. I wouldn't say that I overly enjoyed the film, but it was a good choice to depict the aspects of film that we recently learned about.

"Silence of the Lambs" Review

Some people only enjoy movies about fluffy puppies that run around and get into trouble, if you are one of those people do not and I repeat DO NOT see Silence of the Lambs. This movie is quite the opposite. If you enjoy a good movie about a psychopathic killer, a story that will involve the mind, and will shake you to your core this movie is a must see! I myself fall under the psychopathic killer rampage enjoying category.
The story begins with the F.B.I. trying to stop the notorious "Buffalo Bill" killer. He is a crazy man who shoots and then skins the women he captures. Thinking that it takes one to know one they seek the help of a jailed cannibal Dr. Hannibal Lecter(Anthony Hopkins). They send every one of their top agents to talk to him only to send in student Clarice Starling(Jodie Foster) as a last resort. Clarice is sent to get clues on how to solve the crime from Dr. Lecter. Upon meeting Clarice Hannibal develops a morbid fascination with Clarice's personal life, and the only way Hannibal divulges information to her is by her telling him all he wants to know about her. The hopes of the F.B.I. is to only get exactly what they want which is to catch "Buffalo Bill", but unintentionally Dr. Lecter gets exactly what he wants.
The acting in this movie is sensational! The high quality really makes an impact on the film. Anthony Hopkins really delivers. He is so into his character that even you are afraid of him. His character has a way of taking everything in, but letting nothing out. The only emotions you can detect are deep desire, and utter satisfaction. It takes a real pro and a man of great intelligence to put himself in the mind of a psychopath, where even scientists have trouble getting in. Jodie Foster was also really good. I don't usually like her much, but she was amazing in this movie. Clarice is a trainee F.B.I agent, who is a bright student and shows promise, but is also a little green. She really shows this when during her first interview with Dr. Lecter. He looks deep into her mind and brings up insecurities within herself. It is obvious that she is bothered by what he said, but she tries to keep her cool. Even when trying to stay calm Clarice is shaking and is very flustered. The whole act is very convincing. You really believe that she is an inexperienced but none the less talented agent.
Other aspects of the film worth mentioning are the cinematic aspects. I noticed that during the two flash back sequences of the film they flashed back and fourth from Clarice in real life to the memory she is remembering. I think the director Jonathan Demme did this for the audience to make connections between the event remembered, and the recent events in the film. I think the reason he flip-flopped between the two events, rather than just cutting right to the flash back was to ensure that the audience drew connections. During the film there were also many close ups. There was a close up on a decaying head in the beginning, and that was used to show that the head was going to be discussed later on and the significance made clear. There were also many closeups on the character's faces. The reason for that I think was to put emphasis on what the character was feeling, and that their faces were what really gave those feelings away. It seemed to me that the movie had quite a few low-angle shots. They were generally used to show the power of the individual, but it was done very well. It got the point across without being too obvious.
I really liked the dramatic aspects as well. I noticed was that there was a lot of low-key lighting. The lighting seemed to be used to make the film seem more sinister and dark. There was high-key lighting as well. It was sometimes used to give a calming effect, but also simply used to light up a scene. I find it amazing that lighting can have so much of an effect. The creators of this movie did it just right.
This movie really hit me the right way. You can get an idea of the impact a single aspect of film has on this movie to make it amazing, but it is really everything put together that makes this film such a terrifying treat. This film had me on the edge of my seat the whole time, and because of this film I now must see the other films in the series. I give The Silence of the Lambs two thumbs way way up.

The Captivation of Film

Something that has been on my mind lately is how movies pull in the viewer. What is it about movies that pull you away from reality and into a world created by the minds of others? Don't get me wrong, I love watching movies as much as the next person, but what is it about them that gets viewers completely enthralled? In my opinion there are many factors that contribute to the total captivation of an audience. I think that story is a big part of it. Without a story all a movie is, is just a bunch of moving pictures with sound. An example of a good story would be in the movie The Princess Bride. It is a typical example of Hollywood cinema with a little twist. Girl meets boy, girl loses boy, girl gets engaged to a snooty prince, boy gets taken by pirates, boy breaks free of the pirates and sets off to save girl who gets abducted by evil men. A few differences are that it is set up in the early renaissance, there is a fire swamp, a pit of torture, a giant, and a crazy little man who doesn't know the meaning of the word inconceivable. I'll bet you are intrigued already. The point is that the story is a huge part of what makes that movie amazing. That and the really good music that is put with it.
Another reason why people get so hooked on movies is because of a part of the brain. There is a part of the brain that is stimulated by going through a situation or by watching a similar situation take place. That is the reason why a lot of people cry during movies. The movie stimulates the same part of the brain that is stimulated by sadness thus causing you to cry. The theory is kind of like monkey see monkey do.
As I stated before it is really easy to get sucked into a movie. Everybody has their own reason for being glued onto the screen, but it is a fact nonetheless that movies can absorb your mind.

Critic Critique

For my first blog I read a review by James Berardinelli of REELVIEWS about the movie Waitress. When I saw the movie myself I was intrigued. The movie has sort of a dark humor about it, and that appeals to me quite a bit. The characters are also quite diverse.

When it comes to pies - sweet, savory, or in between - Jenna is a wizard. Her fellow waitresses, outgoing Becky (Cheryl Hines) and mousy Dawn (Adrienne Shelly), are in awe of her culinary expertise but less-than-impressed by her home life. She's married to a Neanderthal of a man, Earl (Jeremy Sisto), who uses fear and intimidation to keep his wife in line.

I would agree with Mr. Berardinelli with his opinions of the characters. The character of Becky is very outgoing and isn't afraid to tell people what she really feels. I also love how he calls her husband Earl a "Neanderthal of a man". It nails him right down to a T.
His review portrays this film as a comedy with good humor but also with some drama thrown in. There were some parts of the review that I didn't agree with though.

The low-key humor offers plenty of chuckles but few belly laughs.

When watching this movie I found myself laughing, not merely chuckling, all the way through. I can't really understand how you could not bust out laughing at this movie. I guess though differences in comedy tastes could be the reason.

There's a freshness to the way Jenna is written and acted that causes us to like her more every minute she's on screen. She charms us in much the same way that she charms crotchety Old Joe, played by Andy Griffith.

I also agree that Jenna is charming. She always has a sunny disposition and can find the silver lining around the edge of any cloud. Jenna's downer of a life often gets in the way of her perspective on things, but she makes use of her talent at pie making as a way to cope.
Her friends constantly tell her she deserves better, but she has somewhat of a low self esteem. One of the people she finds helpful is Joe. He is a very grumpy man but for some reason takes a shine on Jenna. He constantly tells her she deserves better and finally in the end she listens.
In my opinion the review is pretty good. Mr. Berardinelli seems to match my thoughts on the film. I like now he described the characters, and I liked how he described the maker of the film rather than just talking about the film itself. If I had not seen the movie previously reading this review would make me want to see it. Mr. Berardinelli makes it seem like a well rounded film that will easily be enjoyed by many.

End of Class

Hello. I'm Julie and school is almost over so this is my first post. I have no idea what to say and I really want to finish this before school is over so I'm going to quit typing now. Good bye!