The Battle of Algiers

While watching The Battle of Algiers in class, I was both moved by the message of the film and deeply saddened by the class's reaction to it. Seeing the Algerian people's struggle for freedom really struck a chord for me. All I could think about while watching the film was the war in Iraq, in my mind we were no better than the French. It is my humble opinion that every American citizen should see this film and then reevaluate their feelings about our quagmire (my favorite word for it is definitely not school appropriate) in Iraq. Since this film resonated so strongly with me, it really pissed me off to see the class react so vehemently against it. Who gives a damn if the film is in black and white??? Does it really change anything about this film??? And so what if it has subtitles??? How can you people expect the rest of the world to speak English??? You're all a bunch of metathesiophobes! Pardon my French, but... A mon avis, vous etes tous des salles idiots qui ne pourrait pas reconnetre la culture meme si c'était devant tes yeux!! Vos idées d'une bonne filme sont a peu près égal au merde!

I Have This Condition...

First off, I'd just like to say that I LOVED the movie Memento. I'm a huge fan of director Christopher Nolan's work, particularly his latest film, The Prestige. I've always wanted to see Memento, but never got my act together to watch it. So, when I saw that we were going to be watching it in class, I was happy. Too many movies nowadays are made with the average culture less brain dead American citizen in mind. It seems like most of the films coming out of Hollywood are so dumbed down that it's painful; luckily, Memento doesn't stoop to that level. I enjoyed having to think while watching the movie. Making the audience work to figure out Leonard's story is an ingenious tool to keep viewers engaged in the film. I admit that without the mixed up chronology, the film would have no substance, as the plot is that of a garden-variety thriller. Even so, the film manages to be extremely captivating, and if that's accomplished only by cinematic tricks, that's fine by me.

The Kiss of Death

Often it is possible for a film to be made on a small budget and turn out very well. Take Clerks, or even the first Star Wars as examples. Most of the time, though, the film reeks of its low budget. Kiss Me Deadly is one such example. Kiss Me Deadly is a classic example of film noire, the movie was filmed in a month on a very low budget, with fairly unknown actors. Sure, the effects were cheesy and some of the set pieces were questionable, but all in all this just added to it effect. In my mind, none of these things detracted from the quality of the film. The one thing that I disliked in the film was nothing inconsequential, I hated the script. It seemed to me that the film was completely mindless (and not in a good way). Mike Hammer was a self-absorbed sadist and didn't really do any thinking in the entire movie. Everything happened to fall into his hands while he was trying to figure the mystery. The only real thinking he did was horribly contrived: somehow looking at the first lines of a poem helped put everything into place. As much as I love a mindless film every once and a while, Kiss Me Deadly just plain bugged me. I can't help but notice all the logical fallacies in films like this, and eventually I just start to focus on the loopholes, which tarnishes my memory of the film.

Shut Up, Baby

I have to say that I was a little surprised when we were watching Double Indemnity in class. I'm not sure exactly what I was expecting from the film, because I'm not very well-versed in film noir. When I first saw that we were to watch a film noir, I had low expectations; I anticipated watching a B-movie with low production values. When I read about the film and found out that it was highly acclaimed, and was nominated for seven Oscars, my expectations went up considerably. After having seen the film, I feel that it fits somewhere in the between. It is a very well made movie, but I can't see how it could be in the running for Academy Awards. That being said, this film shows off all the hallmarks of film noir. The film uses visual tricks such as low-key lighting and shadows from venetian blinds to make it appealing to the eyes. The storyline is also classic noir. From the beginning of the film, it's obvious how the story will end. Neff is doomed. Period. With that piece of plot out of the way, the focus is shifted to how the events unfolded, not the endgame. This, along with the voice-over narration, make this film a compelling example of film noir.

Suicide Montage? Classic.

When I heard that we were watching Groundhog Day in class, I have to say that I wasn't all that thrilled. I had seen the film a couple of years ago, and remembered it as being overrated and too repetitious. I bears mentioning that I was pleasantly surprised when we actually got to watching the film in class.

Even though the film is exceedingly repetitious, I discovered that this only enhanced the film. The point of the movie is to show the repetition as Bill Murray's character, Phil, lives through Groundhog Day over and over again. The similar camera angles and movements used subconsciously let the audience know that the day is repeating itself. After learning about the back story of the film, and learning about its adoption by different religions, I found the film to be much more interesting.

Knowing about the religious undertones gives a better understanding of the film. While looking at the film with this knowledge, its easy to see the positive messages about how to live fully. Though I am not a subscriber to organized religion, I found many good ideas about Karma and about being a good person.

I Wish I Had A Leopard

In my opinion, Bringing Up Baby is getting a bad rap from the students in my Art of Film Class. I'm probably biased because that film happens to be one of my dad's favorites. I've seen the film at the very least 4 times, and have it on DVD. But still...
Observing the class's reaction to the film was both disconcerting and saddening. Mr. Klobuchar, you were sure right when you said that they don't make films like this anymore. What is wrong with our society when such a simple film like Bringing Up Baby can't be appreciated. Sure, I find some aspects of the film irritating (who doesn't want to kill that stupid dog?), but overall, I still enjoy the film.
What saddened me even more than the reaction to the movie (hey, everyone's entitled to their own opinion), was the suggestions that some of my fellow students made as to other films to watch in class. Face it, people, neither 'Blue Streak' nor 'Billy Madison' are quality films, sure they may be funny, but they have no brain. I mean... I'm partial to a good mindless comedy, but when I watch one, I pick something like 'Blazing Saddles'. It has both a brain and good laughs. How diluted is our culture when we can't appreciate something simple, without gross-out laughs or nudity?
Bringing Up Baby is a perfect example of a good, wholesome film. It has a genuine heart without pulling any stunts. I know its pretty much impossible for a film like this to be made nowadays, which works only to fuel my pessimism about today's society. But we can still appreciate those simpler films, with the hope that our culture doesn't go farther down the metaphorical toilet.

weeeeennnh - - unnnnnnhhh - - ennnnh [its supposed to be a harmonica]

One of the things that struck me about Sergio Leone's western Once Upon A Time In The West was the masterful score by Ennio Morricone. His score literally made the movie. Something about the score just created an immense 'cool' factor to the film. The motifs he used throughout the film, both Harmonica's and the general theme for the film, gave me goosebumps every time I heard them. This film made me realize how much the score affects the feel of a film, in my mind its almost as important as staples like cinematography. It creates a feeling that cannot be duplicated in any other way.
In fact, I was so impacted by the score of Once Upon A Time In The West that when I got home after watching viewing guide #1, I promptly looked for music by Morricone. To my surprise, I found that I had some of his music in my iTunes, from the Kill Bill v.2 soundtrack. As I listened to the four songs on my computer, I found that I could perfectly envision the film from those short songs, giving a feeling that only music can.

Brutal violence, the Spanish civil war, and one cuddly faun...

The Spanish civil war was a dark time in Spain's history. The fascist general Franco's rise to power beckoned the needless deaths of countless innocent people. The atrocities of this war were captured in such famous works as Picasso's Guernica. Guillermo del Toro's film Pan's Labyrinth shows a child's perspective of the war's aftermath.

In Pan's Labyrinth, the main character, Ofelia, is taken to a cottage in the country with her pregnant mother to live with her new stepfather. Her stepfather is a captain in Franco's army, working to destroy the straggling resistance forces. While living in the cottage, Ofelia is exposed to the brutal violence of the war and creates her own fantasy world to help her cope.

In her fantasy world, she is the princess Moanna, who must complete a quest to return to her father's kingdom in the underworld. She is aided in her quest by the faun Pan and his fairies, and must face monsters such as the Pale Man and a giant toad.

The characters of Pan and the Pale Man were both played by actor Doug Jones (the only American who worked on the film). Jones is a character actor known for playing costumed and computer generated characters. His latest role was the body of the Silver Surfer (not the voice) in the most recent (and awful) Fantastic Four film.

Jones' character of the faun is a prominent part of the film. Pan acts as a guide to Ofelia on her journey to return to her kingdom. Pan is a massive, seven foot tall, faun with goat legs and a very expressive face. The Pan costume attached to Jones' body in several pieces, giving Jones a remarkable range of motion. The shoulder and stomach sections were separate, allowing Pan to move in a very fluid manner. The leg sections connected to his hips and were controlled partially by puppeteers and cgi to give make Pan's legs move in a more faun-like manner. Pan's facial movements were controlled partially by remote controlled servo motors. There was a servo controlling every facial feature, from the faun's eyebrows to it's lips. Getting into the Pan costume was a five-hour affair for Jones, as he recalls in this interview. Though the costume was fairly simple, make-up wise, because of its mechanical components, Jones had to sit and wait while the costume was plugged in and calibrated every morning.

Jones' other character in the film was the Pale Man, a monster who tries to attack Ofelia on one of her missions. The Pale man is a tall and bony bloodthirsty monster with skin sagging from his body. Oh yeah... he also has eyes in his hands. Though this character is only in one scene, Jones had to undergo about five hours of make-up every time this character was needed. The Pale Man costume was much more conventional than Pan's. It was mostly made up of prosthetics and body suits that were glued on. To keep the parts from sticking to Jones' body, the actor was covered in saran wrap over his torso, and the prosthetics were glued onto that. Once he got the mask on, Jones had to look out through the mask's nostrils, because the Pale Man's eyes were in his hands (of course...).

All in all, the combination of Jones' and his make-up team's work help create two truly memorable characters; one for being horrifying and the other for being expressive. These characters turn Pan's Labyrinth into a sort of shocking, yet human fairy tale.

Westerns...

Truth be told... I had never really seen a western film before watching My Darling Clementine in Art of Film this past week. That's not to say that I was never exposed to the western mythology. I've read countless western novels, including Lonesome Dove, The Virginian, and The Dark Tower Series (yes... this is a western of sorts... think of it as a fantasy / spaghetti western / horror series). Anyways, besides watching old episodes of Bonanza and Gunsmoke, I had never really watched a western (Blazing Saddles doesn't count).
That being said, watching My Darling Clementine in class has really made me remember what it was that i loved about westerns. I really identify with the classic western hero: the strong, silent loner who has to come to terms with the changing world around him. I also love watching the conflict between the frontier and civilization. In my humble opinion, I think that this conflict is far from being resolved, even in modern society.
The other thing i loved about westerns is simply that they're beautiful to watch. When shot well, westerns have a sort of unstated beauty. The scenery can overshadow the actors and whatever conflicts there are in the story, and for a moment the focus of the film is the silent beauty of the setting.

Citizen Kane Reflection

Orson Wells' 1941 film Citizen Kane is hailed by critics as the greatest film ever made. It gained this title not only because of its deep story, but also because it used many groundbreaking storytelling techniques. The majority of the story is told in restricted narration, with the viewer seeing only what the reporter, Mr. Thompson sees, or is told. Kane's story is not told in a more thematic order instead of a sequential one. Each of the people Thompson interviews tells Kane's story from a slightly different perspective, and focuses on different things. This allows the viewers to see the same events multiple times but get different information each time. This unconventional form of narration has been duplicated many times in films such as Pulp Fiction, among many others. The only time that the narration breaks from being restricted is the very end, when the camera reveals the true meaning of rosebud to the viewers, but not Thompson. This sudden break in the flow of the narrative gives the viewers more insight about Kane's life, but also emphasizes the restricted feel of the rest of the movie.

'Goodfellas' film review

'Goodfellas', Martin Scorsese's 1991 film about the life of mobster Henry Hill, opens quite simply; Hill, along with his partners in crime, Jimmy Conway and Tommy DeVito are driving out into the country to dispose of a body. Upon opening the trunk, the three are surprised to find their cargo is still living, prompting DeVito to stab him repeatedly with a butcher knife, and Conway shoots him. This scene, though startling in its harsh violence, sets the tone for the film perfectly.

Scorsese's film is based on the book Wiseguy by Nicholas Pileggi, and tells the true story of the rise and fall of Irish-Italian mobster Henry Hill (Ray Liotta). When Hill is describing his childhood in an Italian neighborhood of New York City, he states bluntly, "As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster. To me, being a gangster was better than being President of the United States." Hill's wish to become a gangster was very easily realized because of the fact that his family lived right across the street from a front for a crime family. He soon starts working for the local Lucchese crime family, and quickly gains prominence.

Henry soon meets Jimmy Conway (Robert DeNiro) and Tommy DeVito (Joe Pesci), and the three quickly become friends and partners in crime. Together the three gain more and more power within the family. They pull off larger and larger crimes and live lavish lifestyles fitting of their wealth.

Things soon begin to fall apart, after a stint in jail, Hill begins to deal drugs to stay afloat, and Conway becomes more and more unstable. Things come to a head when Hill is arrested by the DEA for trafficking cocaine. His possible conviction creates tensions in the family, forcing Henry to turn his back on them.

In 'Goodfellas', Scorsese puts a twist on the trite gangster tale by telling a story that's surprisingly human, despite its brutal violence. At its core, 'Goodfellas' is just a story about a kid trying to make it in the world. Scorsese guides us through the great moments in Hill's life (such as his wedding) and the not-so-great moments (his arrest by the DEA).

For the most part, this film is made by the superb performances by its lead actors. Liotta does a great job of showing the shift in Hill's personality over his years as a gangster. Hill goes from an idealistic kid in love with the notion of being a gangster to a jaded paranoid drug addict doing anything he can to make money. Henry would have been nowhere, though, without his friends Tommy and Jimmy. Joe Pesci's performance as Tommy DeVito brought him home an Academy Award, and rightfully so. Pesci plays Tommy as an over the top character who you absolutely do NOT want to mess with. DeNiro's character, Tommy Conway, is much more subtle. Tommy is a high roller, but more soft-spoken than Tommy; he does not get himself into undue trouble, which eventually saves him.

From the get-go, 'Goodfellas' sets a frantic pace, packing a lot of information into every frame, culminating in the sequence on May 11th, 1980, the day that Hill is picked up by the DEA. The day has a breakneck pace, with Hill juggling everything from cooking dinner for his crippled brother to getting a shipment of cocaine to Pittsburgh. The editing of this sequence leaves the viewers no room to catch their breath, keeping them on their toes throughout the entire day until the moment late at night when Hill is finally pinched by the police.

All in all, 'Goodfellas' is a gripping, violent, and surprisingly thoughtful story about one man's journey through the crime underworld. Though the film makes no efforts to disguise the violent nature of the film, it pairs it with an equal amount of humor and heart, making 'Goodfellas' into a movie that's entertaining to watch, even after repeat viewings.

Into the Wild

Rarely do I get excited about movie trailers, usually I just get irritated that there's something postponing my movie-going experience. But, a couple of months ago i saw a trailer for Sean Penn's new film, 'Into The Wild'. The trailer struck me as amazing and I began to wait until the movie hit theatres. Tomorrow, September 28, is that day.

Into the Wild tells the story of Christopher McCandless, who leaves college and his nice lifestyle to live off the land in Alaska. I'm not sure exactly what it was about the film, but the moment i saw the trailer, the only two thoughts in my head were "I must see that film" and "I want to be that kid" (only later did i learn that Christopher McCandless starved to death upon reaching Alaska). In my mind it seems that nature's beauty is far too often overlooked, and in the worst cases it gets destroyed. In my mind, humanity's treatment of the planet is nothing short of rape.

So... I find it refreshing to see a film coming out that emphasizes the world's natural beauty. I have high hopes for the film, especially with a man such as Sean Penn at its helm, and I can't wait to see what the film's cinematographer comes up with to flaunt the beautiful setting.

Shoot 'em Up Review Commentary

I usually don't care much for reviews of movies and stuff. Typically if I'm excited for a movie to come out, no review is going to keep me from wanting to see it. With the horrid reviews that come out of the Star Tribune every Friday, I really couldn't care less about what these critics think. That being said, I do religiously read the Onion's A.V. Club every week. It might be because I love the Onion as a 'newspaper', but something about the reviews really works for me.

Moving on to the actual substance of this post... Last weekend I went to go see Michael Davis film, Shoot 'em Up, starring Clive Owen. I went to the movie after having already read Tasha Robinson's review of it from the A.V. Club. I went into the theatre with fairly high hopes, though keeping in mind Robinson's final grade for the film: B-. Robinson cites the film's lack of a coherent plot as one of the reasons she gave it such a sub par score. She states that:

Shoot 'Em Up has a plot, but it's an illogical mess of coincidence and conspiracy, and it takes a distinct back seat to hilariously cartoony sequences.

What she doesn't seem to realize is that the majority of the film's audience (Men aged 17-25) really couldn't care less about the film's plot, which involves an ailing senator, armies of hitmen, and fittingly carries a strong gun-control message. They, on the most part, are just looking for violence, gore, and sex (not necessarily in that order). Let me just say that if you're looking for those three things, this movie is definitely the place to look. From the opening scenes, in which Mr. Smith (Clive Owen) memorably dispatches and enemy with the carrot that had just been his dinner, Shoot 'em Up takes a frantic pace and never slows down. To Robinson's credit, she was able to somewhat accurately describe the action scenes that make up the film. Here she describes the film's tone:

The "Can't stop! Will die!" franticness closely recalls Crank, but the glossy special effects and polished aesthetic bring the action closer to Kung Fu Hustle or Tarantino's Kill Bill. Certainly Shoot 'Em Up has those films' flailing humor and desire to pander simultaneously to action-film fans and to people who mock action-film excess.

Being well-versed in the films of Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill 1&2), this reference gave me high hopes for the film. And I was not disappointed, to say the least. Sure, it couldn't hold a candle to Tarantino's gory masterpieces, but something about the film seemed to fit right in with his movies.

Robinson also comments on Clive Owen's performance in this film. Though I don't want to discount the importance of a good acting performance, this film is not meant to win Oscars for any of the actors involved. The focus of the film is the violence, not the dramatic performances. Robinson notes that Owen seems to be recycling his performance from his last film, Children of Men. Having seen his last film, I really think it does both films a disservice in trying to compare them. Children of Men might possibly be one of the greatest Science Fiction movies I've ever seen, and Shoot 'em Up is, well, a mindless bloodbath.

All that being said, please don't think that I believe Shoot 'em Up to be a gem of modern film making. I just believe that for films like this, conventions such as plot and acting should be discounted in favor of their ability to let the audience turn off their brains and enjoy.

Hello

Hey-
This is my movie blog for my High School Art of Film Class. I'll be commenting on films that i've seen and other fun stuff. So there...

Eric