Quite honestly, I have never been a fan of Michael Moore films, but Sicko was incredible! I must give Mr. Moore a great deal of credit because, if given enough time, he could modify anyone’s opinion on a given topic. If he couldn’t successfully modify our view, he would certainly make you look at the situation from a different angle.
It is kind of eerie that we watched a film on socialistic values in class last Wednesday because I had just written a long term paper for my Investments course on the terrible consequences of taking on socialistic traits and how they would impact the United States’ society. I wish now that I would have seen this film a few hours earlier, as it definitely would have challenged my perception of the topics I focused on; education, business, and healthcare.
It is quite impressive how well doctors in other parts of the world do financially considering they are part of a socialistic healthcare program. It seems almost too perfect for Canada, France, and England to all have “flawless” healthcare systems – in fact it is. Although Mr. Moore did an excellent job of portraying only one side of the worldwide healthcare situation, he lost some credibility when he neglected to touch on the negative areas of socialistic programs. He also made a mistake of not truthfully acknowledging the benefits of that the American people have – or so the media tells us there are benefits. I do understand that it would have defeated the purpose of Sicko to examine the positive and negatives of each system, as Mr. Moore was obviously shooting a “persuasive” style documentary.
After watching this film and focusing on how media twists society’s minds to believe what it tells the public, I had to stop and examine the types of media that I focus a great deal of my attention on everyday. Every morning I have to get my CNN and MSNBC fix, both of which tell the story from the US point of view. Then I head off to work where I serve as a research analyst in the government affairs division of a local firm – there I also focus on the US point of view through countless hours of legislative research and justifying what I find to the general public. As I disseminate the information to the public, it is clear to me that I am essentially trying to get our audience to either wholly support or oppose the piece of legislation I am working on. At school the only class, the only hour of my day where US theories are challenged, is in my Latin-American Culture course. It is sad to say, and very hard for me to accept, that I have fallen victim to the US media! As much as this thought frustrates me, it upsets me even more because I spent an entire semester studying all around the world in attempt to escape the US media plague. As I was wrapping up my semester of world studies I had one professor tell me (and the rest of the class) to watch our actions and reactions carefully or we would soon slip back into the US mainstream – well he was absolutely right. I have started to turn to other sources that I followed during my semester abroad for news sources such as BBC various leading newspapers from around the world. I especially love to compare the US headlines with that of China or Turkey, because they often differ greatly. This is my step to comfort my fears of becoming another “dumb American.” There is a reason why the dumb American jokes exist; they exist partially because we forget how to and lose the ability to think for ourselves.
Although Mr. Moore generally doesn’t appeal to me, it is probably very evident that he hid a soft spot with me in the film Sicko. It made me step back and think about just how much I do buy into American media and how much I actually should buy into it. It wasn’t so much that Sicko was related to a major concern of mine, even though the healthcare dilemma should be a priority for my generation, it was more just the way the film really provoked my thoughts.
Thank you Mr. Moore for challenging my media digestion process – someday I will partially blame him for turning me into a cynical old lady at a very young age!
Monday, April 13, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
The Matrix is filled with dynamics from beginning to end. This is what helps create the mystery and raise the question, “is their some thing more?” The whole film is centered around the theme; which also happens to be the first step in the analysis of the film. The theme in the Matrix if based upon a central idea; the idea that there is another realm to our world and that we are a mere piece of the game in the scheme of it all.
As we begin the objective evaluation of the film we must take into consideration the theme and level of ambition. Clearly the level of ambition for the Matrix was quite high and it appears that in this film the director did indeed succeed at what it was designed to do. Although I personally love this movie, I need to remember to keep a neutral outlook when analyzing this movie. It is important to ask what are the strengths and weaknesses of the film, why are they there, and what caused them to be there? No matter how good a movie is, it is bound to have strengths and weaknesses; it is almost as though we must conduct an internal factor evaluation on the movie, just as we would do when analyzing a business. When evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the film we must be cautious and weigh each strength and weakness in terms of its overall effect on the film, avoiding petty nitpicking on slight flaws. One clear strength for the Matrix is, that prior to this film, there really wasn’t another hit movie that closely resembled its exact theme or at least the way the theme was presented. I am aware of other films such as the Wizard of Oz, which are similar in thought, but not presented in a similar way.A weakness, although subjective, is having Keanu Reeves star in the leading role. He is not the strongest actor in the industry and it makes me wonder why he was selected for this role; was it simply because of his good looks? Along with the objective evaluation, there is also subjective evaluation that needs to take place too. Because of our inherent human characteristics, it is impossible to be completely objective when analyzing a film. The subjective analysis is based off of our intuition, emotion, and personal biases. Our interpretation of film is flavored by our personal life experiences.
Although objective and subjective analysis are the most common forms of film analysis, there are several other approaches: film as a technical achievement, film as a showcase or the actor, film as product of a single creative mind, film as moral/philosophical/or social statement, film as emotional or sensual experience, film as repeated form, film as a political statement, film as a gender statement, film as insight to the mid, and the eclectic approach. Personally, I feel that I follow the eclectic approach by drawing pieces from the above mentioned approaches and combining them into my final analysis.
Toward the end of the chapter the topic of movie reviews is addressed. An important point that is brought out is that when reading a review, you and the review writer could use the same approach to analyzing the film and come up with completely different opinions on areas. It is all based off of your personal views and past experiences.
In the article posted for this movie, the topics of Buddhism and Christianity in the Matrix are addressed. I believe that the parallels between the Matrix and Christianity are pretty evident. The well-known tale of Jesus’ second coming to save the world from destruction the Apocalypse is clearly depicted in this film. Neo (“the One”) is the Christ-like figure in the film. Another close relation to Christianity is the fact that Trinity is the name of key character in the movie – obviously signifying the Holy Trinity of God, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Buddhist traits of the movie are more commonly over looked, but once focusing, they become clear. According to Buddhism as well as the character Morpheous in the movie, the most significant problem according to Buddhism is our ignorance of existential reality. In the article it states, “If we could perceive the true nature of reality and the path to enlightenment, condensed in Sakyamuni teaching of the three marks of existence and the Four Noble Truths, then we could overcome our ignorant state and achieve the insight of a Buddha.” This theme is evident throughout the film, but is most clearly depicted in the scene where Morpheous is teaching Neo how to fight and telling him he is only bound in his abilities by his mind.
The Matrix has been a long time favorite of mine, but after reading the article for this film, I have taken a new insight into the background data that went into creating this film. The religious parallels, outside of Christianity, are extremely interesting and clear to see once the point is brought to the front of your mind.
As we begin the objective evaluation of the film we must take into consideration the theme and level of ambition. Clearly the level of ambition for the Matrix was quite high and it appears that in this film the director did indeed succeed at what it was designed to do. Although I personally love this movie, I need to remember to keep a neutral outlook when analyzing this movie. It is important to ask what are the strengths and weaknesses of the film, why are they there, and what caused them to be there? No matter how good a movie is, it is bound to have strengths and weaknesses; it is almost as though we must conduct an internal factor evaluation on the movie, just as we would do when analyzing a business. When evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the film we must be cautious and weigh each strength and weakness in terms of its overall effect on the film, avoiding petty nitpicking on slight flaws. One clear strength for the Matrix is, that prior to this film, there really wasn’t another hit movie that closely resembled its exact theme or at least the way the theme was presented. I am aware of other films such as the Wizard of Oz, which are similar in thought, but not presented in a similar way.A weakness, although subjective, is having Keanu Reeves star in the leading role. He is not the strongest actor in the industry and it makes me wonder why he was selected for this role; was it simply because of his good looks? Along with the objective evaluation, there is also subjective evaluation that needs to take place too. Because of our inherent human characteristics, it is impossible to be completely objective when analyzing a film. The subjective analysis is based off of our intuition, emotion, and personal biases. Our interpretation of film is flavored by our personal life experiences.
Although objective and subjective analysis are the most common forms of film analysis, there are several other approaches: film as a technical achievement, film as a showcase or the actor, film as product of a single creative mind, film as moral/philosophical/or social statement, film as emotional or sensual experience, film as repeated form, film as a political statement, film as a gender statement, film as insight to the mid, and the eclectic approach. Personally, I feel that I follow the eclectic approach by drawing pieces from the above mentioned approaches and combining them into my final analysis.
Toward the end of the chapter the topic of movie reviews is addressed. An important point that is brought out is that when reading a review, you and the review writer could use the same approach to analyzing the film and come up with completely different opinions on areas. It is all based off of your personal views and past experiences.
In the article posted for this movie, the topics of Buddhism and Christianity in the Matrix are addressed. I believe that the parallels between the Matrix and Christianity are pretty evident. The well-known tale of Jesus’ second coming to save the world from destruction the Apocalypse is clearly depicted in this film. Neo (“the One”) is the Christ-like figure in the film. Another close relation to Christianity is the fact that Trinity is the name of key character in the movie – obviously signifying the Holy Trinity of God, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Buddhist traits of the movie are more commonly over looked, but once focusing, they become clear. According to Buddhism as well as the character Morpheous in the movie, the most significant problem according to Buddhism is our ignorance of existential reality. In the article it states, “If we could perceive the true nature of reality and the path to enlightenment, condensed in Sakyamuni teaching of the three marks of existence and the Four Noble Truths, then we could overcome our ignorant state and achieve the insight of a Buddha.” This theme is evident throughout the film, but is most clearly depicted in the scene where Morpheous is teaching Neo how to fight and telling him he is only bound in his abilities by his mind.
The Matrix has been a long time favorite of mine, but after reading the article for this film, I have taken a new insight into the background data that went into creating this film. The religious parallels, outside of Christianity, are extremely interesting and clear to see once the point is brought to the front of your mind.
Monday, March 23, 2009
The Dark Knight was and is a great movie. I have never been a fan of “super hero” movies, but I do enjoy batman films; I think it is all of the high-tech gadgets he uses. This movie is filled with great action scenes and a classic superhero vs. villain storyline, but the best asset this film has is the high quality acting by multiple characters, but most notably Heath Ledger.
As read in chapter 10, “the ultimate goal of any actor should be to make us believe completely in the reality of the character.” This is one goal that Ledger hit dead on. In fact he focused on “becoming” the Joker so intensely, that that is what is believed to have been a catalyst for is abrupt and unexpected death. When striving to become the character, actors typically use one of two methods: the inside approach or the outside approach. I cannot be 100% sure which method Ledger used, but it seems to me that it would be appropriate to assume that he used the inside method since he was so deeply inside the Jokers mind. The character of the Joker appears to come so naturally to Ledger through mind and body. The facial expressions and sustained looks that the Joker has seem to be so everyday for Ledger. When analyzing the type of acting used by Ledger in the Dark Knight, it seems as though he used a combination of action and dramatic acting. I say this because he uses a great deal art in his reactions, body language, and physical exertion while at the same time drawing in the dramatic acting through his dialogue, phycological depth, and the ability to fell and communicate his thoughts and emotions. It is pretty evident that Ledger was an impersonator style actor. He left his own reality and personality behind to melt into the mold of the Joker’s world.
Although Ledger did an incredible job in becoming the Joker, if it weren’t for the strong, talented supporting crew, the movie would have been lifeless. Although the supporting plays are put in motion to “support” the lead actors, but they also must fully develop their characters to become brilliant in their own respects.
Since the actors are the ones who have to “become” the characters, it is important for them to have the ability to contribute their creative elements to the character development. In the past it was not as popular to allow the actors to contribute too heavily to the character development, but as the film industry progresses, it is becoming more and more popular to allow the actors to contribute more heavily.
In the first movie review, Movie review: 'Dark Knight': Ledger terrific, from SFGate.com, the author talks about the incredible performance that Ledger gives in the Dark Knight and how it surpasses Ledger’s performance in Broke Back Mountain. The author also goes in to saying that the other key characters become marginalized characters to Ledger’s stellar performance. Despite the deep affection for Ledger’s acting, the author is sure to point out that this film is not a full success, but very dark disturbing detail takes it a step closer.
The second movie review is from amctv.com and is titled, The Dark Knight Review - Heath Ledger's Performance Is Worth Hyperventilating About. Clearly from the title of this review we can tell that this author too is enthralled by Ledger’s performance. It is pointed out that every element that Batman Begins got wrong, The Dark Knight got right. The author points out that although traditional “Batman” movies focus on Batman, in the Dark Knight the Joker gets the most screen time, followed by Harvey Dent, which leaves Batman with the least screen time of all three characters. This is a well received breakdown for this authors as he feels the movie isn’t really about the “Batman” anymore, rather it is about the darkness that is taking over.
Bibliography
La Salle, Mick. “Movie Review: ‘Dark Knight’: Ledger Terrific.” 17 July 2008. www.sfgate.com
The Dark Knight Review – Heath Ledger’s Performance Is Worth Hyperventilating About.” www.amctv.com
As read in chapter 10, “the ultimate goal of any actor should be to make us believe completely in the reality of the character.” This is one goal that Ledger hit dead on. In fact he focused on “becoming” the Joker so intensely, that that is what is believed to have been a catalyst for is abrupt and unexpected death. When striving to become the character, actors typically use one of two methods: the inside approach or the outside approach. I cannot be 100% sure which method Ledger used, but it seems to me that it would be appropriate to assume that he used the inside method since he was so deeply inside the Jokers mind. The character of the Joker appears to come so naturally to Ledger through mind and body. The facial expressions and sustained looks that the Joker has seem to be so everyday for Ledger. When analyzing the type of acting used by Ledger in the Dark Knight, it seems as though he used a combination of action and dramatic acting. I say this because he uses a great deal art in his reactions, body language, and physical exertion while at the same time drawing in the dramatic acting through his dialogue, phycological depth, and the ability to fell and communicate his thoughts and emotions. It is pretty evident that Ledger was an impersonator style actor. He left his own reality and personality behind to melt into the mold of the Joker’s world.
Although Ledger did an incredible job in becoming the Joker, if it weren’t for the strong, talented supporting crew, the movie would have been lifeless. Although the supporting plays are put in motion to “support” the lead actors, but they also must fully develop their characters to become brilliant in their own respects.
Since the actors are the ones who have to “become” the characters, it is important for them to have the ability to contribute their creative elements to the character development. In the past it was not as popular to allow the actors to contribute too heavily to the character development, but as the film industry progresses, it is becoming more and more popular to allow the actors to contribute more heavily.
In the first movie review, Movie review: 'Dark Knight': Ledger terrific, from SFGate.com, the author talks about the incredible performance that Ledger gives in the Dark Knight and how it surpasses Ledger’s performance in Broke Back Mountain. The author also goes in to saying that the other key characters become marginalized characters to Ledger’s stellar performance. Despite the deep affection for Ledger’s acting, the author is sure to point out that this film is not a full success, but very dark disturbing detail takes it a step closer.
The second movie review is from amctv.com and is titled, The Dark Knight Review - Heath Ledger's Performance Is Worth Hyperventilating About. Clearly from the title of this review we can tell that this author too is enthralled by Ledger’s performance. It is pointed out that every element that Batman Begins got wrong, The Dark Knight got right. The author points out that although traditional “Batman” movies focus on Batman, in the Dark Knight the Joker gets the most screen time, followed by Harvey Dent, which leaves Batman with the least screen time of all three characters. This is a well received breakdown for this authors as he feels the movie isn’t really about the “Batman” anymore, rather it is about the darkness that is taking over.
Bibliography
La Salle, Mick. “Movie Review: ‘Dark Knight’: Ledger Terrific.” 17 July 2008. www.sfgate.com
The Dark Knight Review – Heath Ledger’s Performance Is Worth Hyperventilating About.” www.amctv.com
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Slumdog Millionaire
Slumdog Millionaire was more than just a great movie; it was a slice out of Indian reality. After spending time volunteering in the slums of India last year the reality of this movie pulled strongly on my heart strings. I was very impressed with the plot of the movie, how the characters developed as they grew up, and how the directors incorporated the “Bollywood” film industry characteristics; most clearly scene at the end of the film when the actors did the traditional Bollywood dance style. I found it interesting through the readings that actual children from the slum were cast for half of the parts. It is also evident that the directors did a very thorough job of researching the Indian slum lifestyle. It was very helpful that one director was trained to do documentaries; very useful skills in this situation.
An interesting side note: India claims not to have a “class” or “cast” system, but this movie showed just how untrue that statement is. If it would have been an upper cast person to win the million dollars, no one would have thrown a fuss about “how” he attained all of the knowledge needed to answer the questions. Since Jamal was of the lowest cast, the government did not want him to have the lifestyle of an upper cast man. I learned that the cast system is so deeply intertwined into the Indian culture that unless every one completely dropped their last names, the “cast” system will never leave India. I say that because you can tell which cast a person is in by their last name and how it begins and ends. It is very interesting, but also poses quiet a challenge to society and those trying to instigate change.
Throughout our lives we always hear that our life experiences make us into the people we are. This was very true for Jamal in Slumdog Millionaire. In the Indian version of “Who Wants to be a Millionaire” Jamal did not correctly answer the questions that eventually earned him a fortune because of a fancy high class education or some gift of genius he had been blessed with at birth; he knew the answers because of series of unfortunate life events that he was forced to endure as an orphan in the ghettos of India. From Jamal’s point of view it honestly made me stop and ask, “what is a million dollars worth?” Is it worth losing your mother to a religious outburst? Is it worth living in landfills and digging through other’s fecal matter to find scraps of food to nourish you as a growing child? Is it worth the violence that you were forced to witness and watching your brother fall captive to the mob’s world? I would say no amount of money could ever justify that horrific childhood. The injustices that youth around the world face are so unnecessary as there are countless organizations worldwide that are more than willing and eager to help these children to build a good life. As we look at the world today, the reasons that these organizations aren’t allowed into the countries are ridiculous and it becomes a way of a ruler showing that they still control the people. For example look at the current situation in Darfur. Just this past week the leader of the country forced all NGO’s out and has suspended all foreign humanitarian efforts. Why: simply to prove a point, while at the same time completely disregarding the actual needs of the people. This too is seen in India and other developing countries and it is a shame.
It is shocking that this incredible film was almost not showed in theaters in the US. To be completely honest, I didn’t even realize that I had to read subtitles for a portion of the film; the movie as a whole tells an incredible story that engulfs you in the moment. I have attached some pictures from my trip to India, just a look at how realistic the movie truly is.
An interesting side note: India claims not to have a “class” or “cast” system, but this movie showed just how untrue that statement is. If it would have been an upper cast person to win the million dollars, no one would have thrown a fuss about “how” he attained all of the knowledge needed to answer the questions. Since Jamal was of the lowest cast, the government did not want him to have the lifestyle of an upper cast man. I learned that the cast system is so deeply intertwined into the Indian culture that unless every one completely dropped their last names, the “cast” system will never leave India. I say that because you can tell which cast a person is in by their last name and how it begins and ends. It is very interesting, but also poses quiet a challenge to society and those trying to instigate change.
Throughout our lives we always hear that our life experiences make us into the people we are. This was very true for Jamal in Slumdog Millionaire. In the Indian version of “Who Wants to be a Millionaire” Jamal did not correctly answer the questions that eventually earned him a fortune because of a fancy high class education or some gift of genius he had been blessed with at birth; he knew the answers because of series of unfortunate life events that he was forced to endure as an orphan in the ghettos of India. From Jamal’s point of view it honestly made me stop and ask, “what is a million dollars worth?” Is it worth losing your mother to a religious outburst? Is it worth living in landfills and digging through other’s fecal matter to find scraps of food to nourish you as a growing child? Is it worth the violence that you were forced to witness and watching your brother fall captive to the mob’s world? I would say no amount of money could ever justify that horrific childhood. The injustices that youth around the world face are so unnecessary as there are countless organizations worldwide that are more than willing and eager to help these children to build a good life. As we look at the world today, the reasons that these organizations aren’t allowed into the countries are ridiculous and it becomes a way of a ruler showing that they still control the people. For example look at the current situation in Darfur. Just this past week the leader of the country forced all NGO’s out and has suspended all foreign humanitarian efforts. Why: simply to prove a point, while at the same time completely disregarding the actual needs of the people. This too is seen in India and other developing countries and it is a shame.
It is shocking that this incredible film was almost not showed in theaters in the US. To be completely honest, I didn’t even realize that I had to read subtitles for a portion of the film; the movie as a whole tells an incredible story that engulfs you in the moment. I have attached some pictures from my trip to India, just a look at how realistic the movie truly is.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Amelie
Amelie was a very unique film. I say that not because it was a French film, but because the way it was filmed. The angles and montages were bizarre, yet a great visual element to showcase the movie. The way that the cinematographer’s “collage” art played off of Amelie’s “crush’s” scrapbook/collage art was very interesting. I like how the montages were used to showcase each main character as they were introduced and to highlight key parts of the movie or significant changes that took place in the storyline. The collage that started it all, the boy’s time capsule, began to cause the film itself to become one long montage where people’s lives were layered and meshed together to form a full picture.
The storyline behind Amelie was not all that interesting, but the way the film was pieced together made it intriguing to watch. In away this film has a tie to Pay It Forward beause in both movies, one person made it their goal to better the lives of others. Clearly Amelie’s motive was not a school project as was the case in Pay It Forward, but there are other similarities that can be seen. My favorite character from the movie was the old man with the brittle bones. He had an interesting personality and forced Amelie to take on the risks in her life.
At some point during the movie, all of the four cinematic points of view were used: objective, subjective, indirect-subjective and director’s interpretive. By using all points of view, the movie was more dramatic and visually interesting. In Amelie, the size and closeness of the object, the movement, extreme close-ups, lighting and color, and the arrangement of people and objects were the most regularly used methods of directing attention to the main object, especially during the montage scenes. This film was constantly in motion; tilting and panning were constantly. Extremely high and low camera angles were other heavily used techniques.
I know that you said that if people complained about having to watch another foreign film then we would have to watch another one; well I think we should just watch another one just because. There is something about a foreign film and not fully understanding everything that is said and having to rely on your other senses to piece together and understand the various elements of the film. Personally, I enjoy watching foreign films for the experience of heightened senses that come from them.
The storyline behind Amelie was not all that interesting, but the way the film was pieced together made it intriguing to watch. In away this film has a tie to Pay It Forward beause in both movies, one person made it their goal to better the lives of others. Clearly Amelie’s motive was not a school project as was the case in Pay It Forward, but there are other similarities that can be seen. My favorite character from the movie was the old man with the brittle bones. He had an interesting personality and forced Amelie to take on the risks in her life.
At some point during the movie, all of the four cinematic points of view were used: objective, subjective, indirect-subjective and director’s interpretive. By using all points of view, the movie was more dramatic and visually interesting. In Amelie, the size and closeness of the object, the movement, extreme close-ups, lighting and color, and the arrangement of people and objects were the most regularly used methods of directing attention to the main object, especially during the montage scenes. This film was constantly in motion; tilting and panning were constantly. Extremely high and low camera angles were other heavily used techniques.
I know that you said that if people complained about having to watch another foreign film then we would have to watch another one; well I think we should just watch another one just because. There is something about a foreign film and not fully understanding everything that is said and having to rely on your other senses to piece together and understand the various elements of the film. Personally, I enjoy watching foreign films for the experience of heightened senses that come from them.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
American Beauty/Shallow Hal
1. How important is the set or location to the overall effect of the film?
The set/location of the film is a very important element of the film. It is the set that truly helps viewers take themselves out of their world and enter into the realm that the film is in. For example, if Forest Gump would have been set in the middle of NYC, the entire film would have been changed drastically. In Forest Gump, the creators of the set built a special little “Forest Gump” world. A person of the same caliber growing up in NYC would have never turned out the same as small town Forest did. The setting of a film has four main effect factors: temporal factors (time frame of the film), geographic factors, social structures and economic factors, and customs, moral attitudes, and codes of behavior. As read in chapter four, it is the interpretation of the setting that confirms the belief that our character, destiny, and fate are all determined by elements outside of ourselves; we are solely products of our heredity and environment. The setting also creates the emotional atmosphere and supplies much of the symbolism seen in films.
2. Why do you think this film is shot on this set or at this location? (many movies have one central set and other minor ones. Focus on the main set. If there are many locations, choose one or two of those locations and focus on them.)
The film is shot in one main location because it allows the directors to keep so many naturally varying elements constant (light, sound, color, etc.). For low budget films it is much cheaper to produce a film in a centralized setting. Directors also admire the way that films from the 1930’s and 40’s shot, and a main studio location helps them to replicate this effect. Films, such as American Beauty, that required prolonged filming in residential areas can become very disruptive and movie crews become the target of much neighborhood hostility. If a script justifies/mandates an on-location shoot, then the crew must do so.
3. What is the art director trying to tell you with the costumes chosen for the characters?
Costumes can tell us a lot about when and where the film is taking place and also what is happening during that time period. The art director can display emotion through the costume that the actor wears. For example, if a person is in drab clothing accompanied with the apparent body language of someone who is depressed or sad, the clothing makes the emotion much more apparent than if the actor were dressed in hot pink with the same negative expression. Hitchcock states that unless there is a very specific reason for “eye-catchers” the actors should be dressed in costumes that match the theme of the set. Costumes (along with the set) play a large part in setting and creating a believable fantasy world. Think of it this way, in the movie Shallow Hal (the second movie that I watched for the week), it was the talent of the art director (along with many others) who somehow transformed the beautiful, physically flawless Gwyneth Paltrow into an over-weight, target of societal disappointment. Through it all, Gwyneth’s character still displayed some of Gwyneth’s natural physical attributes. It was incredible to see how realistic Gwyneth's costume was.
4. Is the lighting for the film appropriate? Why/why not? Is it harsh and direct or is it soft and diffused (or somewhere in the middle)? Explain the lighting.
Yes, the lighting for both American Beauty and Shallow Hal were appropriate. In American Beauty, the lighting is a mix between low- and high-key lighting. Over all the lighting tends to be more direct than diffused. In Shallow Hal, the lighting is high-key since it is a comedy (thus that would be the appropriate light setting). For the most part, the character of the light is a cross between harsh and balanced.
5. What is the director trying to tell you with the style of lighting chosen?
The style of lighting used is very important in setting the mood for the film as well as helping to depict the actor’s inner character. The lighting used in American Beauty is very dramatic and paints the intimacy and dramatic intensity of the film. The lighting intensifies the disturbing atmosphere of the film and emphasizes how bizarre the entire situation of the film really is. In Shallow Hal the lighting is intended to be more natural and much less dramatic. By focusing on high-key lighting in this film, there is more complete visual information about the scene and the setting. The lighting depicts Shallow Hal as a very happy, comical film.
6. What colors are prominent? Why? What message is being sent?
In American Beauty the color red is definitely a very prominent and symbolic color used by the screenwriter. According to Why American Beauty Works: Focus on the Use of Symbols by David Freeman, “[the color red] refers to a concept: the life force, which, by nature, tries to defy the suppressiveness of suburban life. That's why, the first time we meet Annette Bening, she's cutting red roses. She's cutting the life force.” For Lester, the color red symbolizes is irrepressible force for sex and his infatuation with Angela. Every time he daydreams of Angela, she is floating in rose petals or in a tub filled with rose petals. Throughout the movie, a vase of red roses is nearly always evident in Lester’s house. The color red is also a symbol for the characters’ individuality and the measures that they will go to to fulfill their individual desires (ex: Lester’s red car). The color red symbolizes a similar element for all the key characters in the film. In general, the color is depicting sex, the declaration of individuality, the soul, and/or transcendence; all examples of the life force.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Good Will Hunting
Good Will Hunting is one of my top ten favorite movies and it was very interesting to watch this film in a new, more analytical light. This movie has so many different elements going on at the same time. The movie is about the individual internal struggles of the characters and how those struggles all play off of each other. Something to be learned from the movie is that just because you have a God given talent that you truly have no passion for, doesn’t mean that you have to move forward in that talent; it is more important to be happy in life. This story is very realistic for me because I can completely understand the struggles that the various characters are going through; this makes it credible. The storyline is also very interesting in that it is amazing to me how a man could go twenty years of his life without having his incredible amount of knowledge noticed or acknowledged by those around him. It is also interesting that the professor, who is highly intelligent as well, is pushing so hard for Will to pursue his talent and achieve all that the Professor did not. The film is simple in that anyone can watch and appreciate the overall meaning, but it is extremely complex at the same time. The complexity is built deeply in to all areas and all characters of this film. I find it quite impressive that this was written by Ben Affleck and Matt Damon as college students. I know that in order for a story to be a “good” story, it must be surprising, but I didn’t feel that this was a surprising movie. Maybe I didn’t feel surprised because I have seen the video multiple times. I must admit that the first time I saw the movie I was surprised at the end when Will leaves his new job for the woman he loves.
In Good Will Hunting there are two main heroes in my eyes: Sean and Will. Sean is clearly a hero in this film because he wants what is truly best for Will and wants Will to be happy – disregarding which path he actually chooses. Sean takes action by counseling Will and helping him to see that he has more options that he ever imagined. He meets conflict when the professor resists and insists that Sean pushes will into the life of a professional mathematician. The climax is witnessed when the professor and Sean escape their circle of conflict and find a level of peace with each other. In the end, Sean shines as the hero in the background as Will makes the correct choice for himself and follows love rather than financial security.
Will also played a role as hero in the idea that he wanted Sean to move on with his life and be happy. He pushed Sean to his limit and made him break. Even though this method was a bit unorthodox, Will managed to show Sean that there is so much to life even when you feel that you are at the bottom of life’s pit. Sean saw and learned that he must take action to learn to appreciate the rest of his life.
The significance of Good Will Hunting can be looked at from several different angles. First, Will Hunting is the lead character’s name. Second, Good Will Hunting signifies the pro-bono work that the professor and the counselors did for Will. It shows that not everything in life is about money and that people are continually “hunting” for a way to give back to others.
The characterization for all of the characters is depicted in many different fashions: through dialog, appearance, external action, as well as internal action. These elements were showcased the most with Will and Sean. The characters in Good Will Hunting were very dynamic characters and continually developed and changed throughout the film. Along with dynamically developing characters, Allegory and symbolism played very important roles in this movie. Within each character’s internal struggle was a separate story that related to various situations on a figurative level pulling in the element of allegory. Symbolism is used heavily in Good Will Hunting as well. Will’s drinking for example is a symbol for the constraints of our daily lives that hold us pack from taking on our real goals and desires that we have for our lives.
Although Will is a genius, he is possibly too smart for his own good. He doesn’t necessarily know how to use his vast amount of brain power and keep a normal life at the same time. He did not grow up in an environment that nurtured him in anyway or encouraged him to make something of his life; therefore, it is more important to Will to find someone who truly loves him verses trying to find a well paying job. It is Will’s anger and struggle with his rough childhood are what have overpowered is intellect for his entire life. It is difficult for him to allow some one such as Sean into his life, to truly believe in and encourage him.
In Good Will Hunting there are two main heroes in my eyes: Sean and Will. Sean is clearly a hero in this film because he wants what is truly best for Will and wants Will to be happy – disregarding which path he actually chooses. Sean takes action by counseling Will and helping him to see that he has more options that he ever imagined. He meets conflict when the professor resists and insists that Sean pushes will into the life of a professional mathematician. The climax is witnessed when the professor and Sean escape their circle of conflict and find a level of peace with each other. In the end, Sean shines as the hero in the background as Will makes the correct choice for himself and follows love rather than financial security.
Will also played a role as hero in the idea that he wanted Sean to move on with his life and be happy. He pushed Sean to his limit and made him break. Even though this method was a bit unorthodox, Will managed to show Sean that there is so much to life even when you feel that you are at the bottom of life’s pit. Sean saw and learned that he must take action to learn to appreciate the rest of his life.
The significance of Good Will Hunting can be looked at from several different angles. First, Will Hunting is the lead character’s name. Second, Good Will Hunting signifies the pro-bono work that the professor and the counselors did for Will. It shows that not everything in life is about money and that people are continually “hunting” for a way to give back to others.
The characterization for all of the characters is depicted in many different fashions: through dialog, appearance, external action, as well as internal action. These elements were showcased the most with Will and Sean. The characters in Good Will Hunting were very dynamic characters and continually developed and changed throughout the film. Along with dynamically developing characters, Allegory and symbolism played very important roles in this movie. Within each character’s internal struggle was a separate story that related to various situations on a figurative level pulling in the element of allegory. Symbolism is used heavily in Good Will Hunting as well. Will’s drinking for example is a symbol for the constraints of our daily lives that hold us pack from taking on our real goals and desires that we have for our lives.
Although Will is a genius, he is possibly too smart for his own good. He doesn’t necessarily know how to use his vast amount of brain power and keep a normal life at the same time. He did not grow up in an environment that nurtured him in anyway or encouraged him to make something of his life; therefore, it is more important to Will to find someone who truly loves him verses trying to find a well paying job. It is Will’s anger and struggle with his rough childhood are what have overpowered is intellect for his entire life. It is difficult for him to allow some one such as Sean into his life, to truly believe in and encourage him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
