Wednesday, February 29, 2012

The Last Emperor (1987)





It’s a true story base on the last Chinese Dynasty - Ching’s emperor Pu Yi. Through out his entire life was control by people surrounding him; he was not only simply just a symbolic but also a puppet in a dilemma. The suffer of isolation in the Forbidden City since childhood, and after the dynasty officially collapse was force to leave Forbidden City and being threaten to be kill by the new age’s youngster. His loneliness is well known in the servants’ eye, without able to help due to different class.

Through out the film, who ever showed feeling of loving Pu Yi was taken away from him. He was with the whole country with the ability of desire what ever substance he wish for, also without a soul that are able to help him through all his difficulties from a pure friendship.

Screens capture the glorious of the Forbidden City also the loneliness and cheerless life in it. Walls around the Forbidden City seal the difference between emperor and citizens even have the ability to hear the sound from outside world with gun firing and people screaming. Pu Yi cannot do a thing, because all the courtier around would cover with lies and cut off all his source of information from the outside world.

The Last Emperor has a very precise on the history, but there was a bit of question while looking through the film. Although, mostly are speak in English, there are few dialogue in Mandarin and Japanese. Because I understand the languages and the background isn’t much problem for me, does anyone who watched the movie and was bother by such decision director made?

Monday, February 27, 2012

DECASIA


Bill Morrison’s Decasia (2002) is composed of deteriorated black and white found footage.   The form and the content of the film are perfectly married—the actual images shown depict dark decaying subjects while the film itself is in a state of decomposition. It opens with a scene showing a lab where film is processed.  

The room takes on the feeling of a morgue; the film developer’s gloved hand reaches into the tank to delicately lift a strip of film as if he is performing an autopsy on an operating table.  In this piece, the film itself is treated as a decaying body, along with all the others shown.  Visually the film is stunning—the imagery is distorted in a unique and poetic way.  

Much of the imagery has a very painterly quality to it, as if turpentine has been spilled on to the frame, diluting and blurring the image into spots.  Some of the footage could even pass as hand painted.  There is one particular sequence where men in parachutes are falling from the sky, into an ambiguous landscape.  The contrast in the image and the softness of the clouds is reminiscent of ink paintings.  


The darkness of some of the more violent images is heightened by the intensely unsettling soundtrack, which features a cacophony of dissonant un-tuned pianos.  The music is loud through out the film, reaching even louder crescendos at points, with violent and wild violins, pushing the film into the realm of horror at some moments.
http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lijmslPndc1qgwdgbo1_500.gif

Wild Strawberries

Wild Strawberries by Ingmar Bergman is one of the most beautiful films I've ever watched. 

The alluring use of light, shadows and contrast add a further dimension to the melancholy and beauty of the film. The main character Isak Borg reflects on life and death guided by memories and dreams. Bergman leads the viewer to enter the protagonists consciousness and subconsciousness through the use of double-exposure and music. Whenever Borg reflected or even re-lived his dreams, a harp sound would play emphasizing a thematic musical presence. When the character came back to 'reality', many times the director used double exposure to indicate the real dimension. The linearity and non-linearity of time pushed not only cinematic but also philosophic boundaries. The use of cinematic tools served to question humanities conception of time, life, death, consciousness and so on. The re-appearance of the clock with pointers represented the protagonist's personal questions about the passing of time as well as the blur between dreams and so-called reality. Aren't dreams a kind of reality?



"It is as if i'm dead, but i'm alive. Dreams tell me something I dont want to realize on my own."

 

-Samira

Semiotics of the Kitchen (1975)

By Martha Rosler

While this is almost a performance and not exactly cinematic in its filming, it reminded me of our shoot today.



Monty Python (1969-1983)


Not very long ago, Netflix got me to see Monty Python through their suggestions. In the beginning was just simply a British TV show with British humor, however, the editing and angle that was capture for the show was brilliant as well. 




They constantly use actor’s eyes direction to move the show to the next screen, and Monty Python was also very smoothly arrange for their each shot so nothing comes out of the blue without knowing the reason (unless is the joke, of course). Even with a lot of local jokes was not able to understand by me, the mature technique of shooting could easily capture the eyes without bored by it. 
A lot of technique that was thought in our class (Film I) kept showing up in the show, such as shooting each as a picture and combine together as unsmooth moving forwards or the sudden pop up in the film or disappear. The visual for the film itself also change for their location, if is outside of film studio the quality usually is lower, I believe is because of the quality of the material on film.
Even with all the great technique I am able to capture, the jokes are still the main part to learn what’s the humor in it.

CHun
I saw The Artist a night before it won an Academy Award for Best Picture. I'm not sure I know what that means about the movie.
I was first surprised by the odd quality of the film. Later I learned that the movie was shot with a color stock then transferred to black and white. I can't really make sense of why they would do that. Apparently this transferral gave the black and white a higher quality, crisper image. But, if the movie attempted to capture the spirit or feeling of old silent films why would they want a hi-def look? I think this film transfer also made the movie look hazy or stuck behind a thin layer of smoke. I wish that there had been more emphasis on the medium itself and richer blacks and brighter whites.
There were several really inspiring shots of people walking on stair cases. The shots included multiple floors of open stair cases on which, in some scenes, there were many people bustling about or just George Valentin or Peppy Miller. The contrast of moods with the repeated motif of stairs (success, failure/falling) were powerful and helped position the two main characters in their diverging career paths (or one's career and their other's unemployment.)

Audition by Takashi Miike

Audition is a Japanese film centered around a widower who decides to date again (with the hopes to marry)- only to find out that the woman he chooses is interested in torturing him.

The opening scene is black with the sound of footsteps, only to be replaced with an image not soon after the sound - of someone looking down as they walk.
I really liked this, because it made me think back to our readings about the relationship between sound and image and how sound can produce image. We knew someone was walking by the sound we heard, not by the image - which wasn't available initially.

Takashi places the main character, Aoyama, in the center of the screen when he's alone or speaking and to the left of anyone who might be accompanying him (his friend, his son etc.). What's interesting about this is that he enforces the 180 rule during these shots, he shifts from one side, to the other, to the front, and far away. Maintaining this order in almost all of the shots (Aoyama to the left, whomever else to the right).

The lighting is mostly natural yellows or artificial blues. The blues are really evident when his son is walking down the hospital corridor at the beginning - the blue light shines overhead, while yellow shines on his body. Aoyama's face is usually placed in dramatic light, which helps to convey his inner struggle over his wife's death and how uncertain he feels about finding someone to "take her place."
After she turns out the light, there is a distinctive change in atmosphere

Takashi uses close ups to break scenes, or to shift from place to place. He uses flowers in the beginning to allow flashes to the hospital room where Ryoko was dying, as her son was walking down the hall. He uses a fish he caught, to break up the scene where they were out fishing and when his son told him he should re-marry. He uses hands, objects, and faces to break up scenes - providing close ups.
One if the woman auditioning

There always seems to be a light over Aoyama's head when he is home. When he sits down at dinner with his son, when he's doing the dishes, and when he's looking through audition photos. It is always stationed to shine right on him, and no-one or nothing else.

There are times when Takashi will place female voices that extend into another scene, or he uses the female voices on the radio and provides abstracted images of carlights covered in rain or elevator doors. I think that this helps the audience to better understand how Aoyama sees women, in the sense that after his wife died - they became elusive to him. Something he could only see and admire but never really grasp.

Takashi uses doors and wide open spaces a lot to break up scenes and to provide foreground and background images. When Aoyama is talking to his son at dinner, we see them at the table from the living room, a wide open wall leads into the dining room, and to the right we see another open door leading to the kitchen. What's interesting is that all of these spaces have different lighting, the kitchen lights are turned off which leaves a cold ominous feeling as the son walks into the kitchen, the dining room has one light over head, and the living room has a small light to the far left. Both emitting yellow florescent light.

When the characters are outside Takashi includes a lot of land. When Aoyama was out fishing standing on rocks on a coast, he frequently broke the scene by shifting the perspective as though we were looking at the main character from the sea. In this shot he broke up the composition into three equal parts, water, land and sky.

There is dialogue in the film, and it seems necessary that most of it comes from Aoyama, who is after all the main character. It's important that we understand what kind of a man he is prior to him going through with finding another wife.

There is a scene or two where the camera shakes a bit when doing a close up of Aoyama when he's speaking. Most notably a scene when he's discussing what characteristics the woman should have while getting a drink at a hotel bar.

Once Aoyama understands what she's after, the light becomes bolder the yellows become bigger and brighter and the blues become pressing and overwhelming. Which demonstrates the sudden change in atmosphere for the characters, when the mundane and "normal" starts to become surreal and strange. For example: He goes to meet the music instructor at an abandoned building only to find him in a wheelchair next to the crackling of a fire, with orange lights. Another, is when he tries to find Asami and ends up at an old abandoned tilted bar, where one of the men who lives in the complex begins telling him of the murder that took place there years ago - and he starts to see a tongue writhing on the floor making a slapping sound.
In the scene with the tongue, he uses the slapping to bring them main character back to the present instead of cutting to a close up.

Takashi also repeats a few edits, like the bottle of alcohol when he reaches for it, and the conversation Aoyama and Asami have when he finally calls her back and they meet in a small diner. But each scene offers something new, we find out more about Asami's tragic past in this scene and farther along when they are at a different diner (which we saw in sequence earlier in the film)- when she starts to reveal more about her mother's abuse and her music instructor's torture.

PULP FICTION by Quentin Tarantino


 Believe it or not I’ve never seen Pulp Fiction before! I decided to watch the film last night for this weeks posting. I love this film by Tarantino! To make a work like this one day or be part of a team that contributes to making a work like this would be a dream.

A brief synopsis: A crime movie, which unfolds in an unpredictable sequence and at different points in time revolves around the happenings of a couple of robbers (Pumpkin and Hunny Bunny), two hit men by the name of Vincent Vega and Jules Winnfield (Travolta and Jackson) and a boxer, Butch Coolidge.
How their stories intersect is often vague and as I was watching the film I was constantly trying to piece together how one story was connected to another. I was particularly confused by the role of the fighter and his relevance to the rest of the story until I could piece together his relationship with Marsellus, whom he betrayed his word by winning a fight he took money for in an exchange for a promise to purposefully lose. I really liked this layering and unpredictable story line. 

The whole film really worked for me. I loved the aesthetic of the way it was shot. The colors were rich and reminiscent of film noir. The lighting was perfectly executed! I really enjoy the dramatic tones and sharp constrast. Another part of the shooting I enjoyed were the dolly shots. One dolly shot in particular which I think really worked was in a scene were Samuel L and Travolta are walking at a  rhythmic pace towards the camera down a hall way and the dolly is in front facing them moving to their beat as it backs up down the hallway. I really felt engaged with the characters and a part of the scene with this shooting style.

An unconventional shot I really enjoyed was within the first 20 minutes of the movie. There is a scene where Travolta and Samuel L are having a conversation which is filmed of the back of their heads rather than of their faces. This really made me consider camera angle and being innovative.

Something cool I wasn’t expecting to see- When Uma Thurman and Travolta’s characters are outside of the restaurant I the convertible and Uma tells Travolta not to be a square and she draws the square with her hand and we see a white square appear on the screen. Totally unexpected and totally exciting to me!

The aspect of the film which was most effective and impacting was the script. The language is lyrical and poetic, particularly in the case of Samuel L’s character and also Uma Thurman’s character. I could list so many scenes right now that are sticking with me! ( Tasty burger… uncomfortable silence… the list goes on!) 

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Persona

This film was incredible. It blew me away in every way possible. It was wonderfully shot, the plot was very interesting, and the presentation of things was intriguing and psychologically challenging. On top of that it was all very well acted. In terms of how everything was shot, Bergman had a very nice progression through the whole film. At the start of the film, most of the scenes are very neutrally toned and calm, but as the film gets more ambiguous and the psychological state of its characters becomes questionable, the compositions of each scene becomes more dynamic and the lighting is more dramatic. There is a great point in the film where the nurse character starts to question herself and the film is physically altered in reaction to this. It signals a turning point in the film and I thought it was a great way to visually articulate the psychological state of the characters. I will try not to give away too much as I talk about the way this film is ended too. I think the brilliance is in how ambiguously Bergman ends things. It is never completely clear which character is the persona and which is the "real" person. When I realized that this question would never be answered for me, I was frustrated but also very impressed. I think everyone in our film class must watch this because its not only a great story but also has great examples of ways to visually communicate the psychological content of the film.

Anemic Cinema, 1926 by Marcel Duchamp

This film consists of spiral images, with spinning phrases.  The rhythm of the sounds hypnotizes the viewer just as the spiraling images.

This is a very short film, but it was interesting to view because of the image and sound relationship.  It clearly shows how a film can be influenced and aided by sound.

Silent "Reduced" Listening Walk

I feel that I have done this exercise many times before but I have also done it again this weekend.

As I walked around or stood in one place for a while, it felt as if sounds were competing with one another.  Natural sounds such as the wind, fought with sounds of cars and people.  I thought the natural sounds were more relaxing where as noises from the street felt more chaotic and loud.

When just thinking about sounds, they can seem scary without knowing where they are coming from; from looking where the sound comes from.

The sounds I found most interesting where the softer ones, which I could not hear as well.  The softer sounds were of wind, and rustling leaves--earthy tones.  The more chaotic sounds were of cars, people talking, or walking.  These were the mechanical tones that everyone passes by every day.

I think it is interesting to note that most people block out these sounds and listen instead to their own soundtrack instead of the sounds out in the world. I think parts of us want to listen to the sounds but others do not, because they are not natural to us.

Die Hard

Die hard is well known for being one of the greatest action films ever. The story is about a New York City detective named John McClane, who has arrived in Los Angeles to spend Christmas with his wife and kids. Unfortunately, it is not going to be a Merry Christmas for everyone. A group of terrorists, led by Hans Gruber is holding everyone in the Nakatomi Plaza building hostage. With no way of anyone getting in or out, it's up to McClane to stop them all. 


This film is directed by John McTiernan and based on a novel from Roderick Thorp. One of the things that got my attention is the use of special effects, specially when it comes to explosions, guns and helicopters. There are explosions and guns all over the place, and a whole building is exploded using dinamite in one scene, at that time in 1988, watching this was remarkable.




I should also mention the great roll made by bruce Willis in this film. I like the fact that the director place them as a strong cop, but not an ultra super hero. He is strong when it comes to his body, but he is very intelligent and clever, so he could face the terrorists situation without being ridiculously place.




Die Hard succeeds is because it presents every challenge McClane has to face realistically and clearly. As the tension mounts, the ordeals for John become increasingly harder. First, it's just a terrorist. Then a whole slew of them. Later, it's the NYPD and even the FBI! Director McTiernan gives the film a good pace and makes the film work by showing that John isn't superhuman; he only uses his brain more than his gun.



Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1965)

Directed by Russ Meyer.
This is one of the best movie's I've ever seen.

It opens with a somewhat bizarre monologue on violence that frames the film. This is a voice over an image of optical sound, which doubles and triples as the speech goes on.




Despite this film's exploitation, many of the shots are quite beautiful.The sense of composition is really great. Some of the cuts are great too-- particularly one where it cuts from a shot of man drinking a glass of water to a shot of a couple kissing. Despite this film's look of being made for profit soft-core porn, it is well made, and empowering to several of its female characters.
The weakest part of the shooting for me was the tendency for closeups of the character currently speaking. I found them uninspiring and almost boring. Shots were much better when they included more than just a face, as they tended pick out interesting compositions with what was in the background and the characters positions. The only exception to this I found were shots of Linda, a teen who had been kidnapped. The actress playing Linda was actually quite good, and her closeups tended to convey some emotion.
There was very little camera movement. Considering the fact that there was probably very few crew members working on this film, this makes sense just from a technical point of view. There simply wasn't the manpower to produce complex dolly shots. The movement that does exist is primarily in the form of pans, mostly to keep the action in the frame. A few shots from a very low point looking up at actors were very effective- since much of the plot revolves around power relations between characters, making them big or small worked very well.
Overall, a very entertaining, yet well made film.


Dance

Dance (A$$) Remix ft. Nick Minaj

(could not find director on artists’ websites or with video)

This music video takes advantage of a lot of the effects that we’re learning about about, so I thought it relevant to analyze. Despite the fact that in all likelihood everything here is digital, much of the aesthetic is derived from analog techniques.




I was particularly impressed by the use of tape lines around 0:50 into it. They line up with druml taps and bring out the rhythm. It makes me wonder if this could be used outside of a music video context. Watching the clip without sound suggests it could. These tape lines show up again at the end of the video, and at this point enhance the idea of out of control inebriation.

I found much of the camera the least effective part of this video. The spinning move, while it did reference drunkenness well, was over used the point where it didn’t mean anything. While yes, it seems the video arches and is at its most drunken towards the end, but this spinning motion is used almost evenly throughout, instead of highlighting the arch, it just beats a dead horse. The most effective camera technique here for conveying inebriation is the out of focus and dirty lens.


Wednesday, February 22, 2012

I, An Actress

I decided to try and track down some of George Kuchar's stuff because I haven't seen too much of it.  This film is a recording of a rehearsal in which Kuchar actually appears in the frame and directs an actress in front of the camera. As she delivers each line, Kuchar asks her to restate each line getting more dramatic and ridiculous each time. Its hysterical and a very interesting representation of direction. I love that Kuchar fully participates with the actress and really pushes the film to be as absurd as possible. One of the highlights is when both Kuchar and the actress throw themselves at a dummy and the dummy's head falls off. It's also comical that Kuchar chose to use a dummy instead of an actual actor. The camera is fixed in one spot for the whole film and the frame adjustments are all made and observed as Kuchar directs the camera man. There are also sometimes jump cuts and a shaky hand held feel. This combined with the bare setting of the rehearsal all give the film a raw, unedited look. This is a great and funny representation of process and I really appreciated it.

Kustom Kar Kommandos & Eaux d'Artifice (Kenneth Anger)

These two Kenneth Anger shorts were great, although not quite what I expected after seeing Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome.
Kustom Kar Kommandos (1965)
This 3 minute film can be summed up very quickly- a shirtless man festishically cleans a muscle car in a bizarre pink space (I couldn't figure out where it was, a pink painted room or what). The color was amazing. The sound is Dream Lover, a 1960's pop song. The shots idealize the man's body as a sexual object.
I was very impressed by the lighting in this film- the car gleams. Never have I wanted a car so badly. In a way, the film acts as an advertisement, but I think it was more about the creation of desire. By using "beauty" shots of the man and the car, and their interaction, Anger manufactures a desire, but refuses to give us any additional information. I have no idea what car it was or who the actor was- we're left with no action to take but sublimate our new desire.

Eaux d'Artifice (1953)
To quickly describe this film- a woman dressed, as I think it is easiest to describe, like Marie Antoinette, runs through a garden appropriate to Marie Antoinette. There are a lot of beautiful closeups of the water and fountains that dominate the landscape. The film is in black and white, with a flash of color- when the actress pulls out a fan, it flashes gold. I think it was hand painted, but honestly I'm not sure.
Many of the closeups use different camera speeds, which manipulate the way the water shows up on film. It was surprisingly beautiful, as many of the water shots began to make me think about bodily fluids- especially saliva and urine. I found this to be a very pretty film, but the least favorite of the Anger films I have seen so far.

Another Earth

I started watching the 2011 movie Another Earth.  So far it is not what I have expected and I recommend it to everyone to watch.

Not only is the plot interesting but the cinematography is not what I expected.  The film has little dialogue with a classical score in the background.  The little amount of sound adds emotions to the imagery and strengthens their meaning.  The story is about another planet that sustains life--it is 'Another Earth'.  This gives the story mystery and intrigue, which the sound and image convene as well.  I think this is a great film to look at for how sound can add to a film.

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

AT SEA by Peter Hutton


This past weekend I drove out to Salem to visit the Peabody Essex Museum where Peter Hutton (among other artists) was showing a film. The film in the exhibit was Hutton’s ‘At Sea’, a 60-minute piece he made between 2004 and 2007. The subject of the film is the journey of a container ship, which is shown in many different circumstances, from being constructed, sailing across the ocean in varying weather conditions, and being deconstructed by labor workers while docked. The film is shot in a typical Hutton fashion: poetic, silent, meditative, and subtly revealing.
A funny thing happened while I was sitting in the screening room. I had been sitting there for about five minutes, just enough time for the effects of one of Hutton’s stunning masterpieces to start to take my mind to another place. I was starting to sink into a thoughtful abyss when my brief moment of mediation and connectedness was interrupted by a simple-minded woman who had entered the room with a man who most likely was her husband. Less than a minute after finding a seat she asks her husband “so when’s it start?” followed by an uncomfortable laugh.  He didn’t respond and she pushed further. “I know this is an art film but seriously is this it?” Her husband paid attention to her disappointment now. He got up from his seat and walked around to the front of the showing room. The couple left and never came back. I saw them later walking around other parts of the museum. I smiled when I heard this whole reaction and interaction unfold. Some people really can’t handle just sitting and watching without being fed uber-stimulating material to occupy their brains.  The lady didn’t even give it a shot.
This slow paced and focused aesthetic is what I love so much about Hutton’s work! I find it romantic. His long length shots make the viewer notice and value the miniscule and precious transient moments often overlooked by way of distractedness. This quality is poetic and urges me personally to write poetry upon viewing. Very inspiring! The silence is lush. Having no sound stimuli turns all my senses more acute. My hearing becomes considerably keener, and I begin to notice the buzzing sound that is present when a space is devoid of actual created sound.
In this film, as in other films by Hutton there is a strong curiosity of light. One shot in particular that I remember noticing the shift of light was a shot of the crates on a sunny day (time looked like morning) after a rainstorm. The light kisses the wet crate in the top right corner of the frame, disappears for a moment as the sun is covered by a cloud whose shadow is visible where the sun once was, and then reappears reflecting gloriously on the surface of the water. The position of the camera in these shots, bouncing with the motion of the ship being pushed along by the waves, helped to create an appreciation of what it might be like to be at sea for a length of time. In some shots water from the boat or the misty weather appeared on the surface of the camera’s lens. This was another feature of the shooting style, which helped to create some frame of reference and perspective for the viewer in relation to the imagery and content. This is an emotionally engaging and cognitively pleasing piece of cinema. 


Monday, February 20, 2012

8 1/2


In Fellini’s 8 ½ , a filmmaker struggles with writer’s block and the film becomes about the creative process of filmmaking as well as the fantastical dream like memory sequences interspersed throughout.  It is a self reflexive work that immediately makes apparent its own awareness of its self reference within the opening scene, where Guido the struggling director discusses the film as “a series of completely senseless episodes.” What is most striking about this classic is the dramatic lighting, carefully composed shots, and the fluidity of the editing between the “present” plot and the memory sequences.  
There is dramatic high contrast present throughout most of the shots.  The opening scene is a particularly vivid example of this—the cars in the foreground are very dark and defined while the cars further away are ghostly, pale, and misty. 

Fellini maintains a formal balance in his shots; there is a balance of dark blacks and light whites, as well as a balance of negative space to positive space, and near/far away.  For example, often a figure will be dressed in dark garments against a light background, increasing the drama.  Similarly, a figure against a black background will be shown in a lighter color.  For instance, in the dancing scene depicted below, the figures a very dark against the ground.


There is a dynamic tension between the use of shadow and light that is perhaps most prominent in the depictions of peoples’ faces.  The actors’ faces are frequently reduced to a few large painterly shadows, that are simple yet distinct enough to be instantly readable.  Frequently a character will enter a dark room and the camera shows there face moving in and out of shadows and slivers of light.

The fluidity between settings is impressively effortless.  The scenes depicting episodes from Guido’s memories of childhood or dreams feel natural albeit surreal.  The transitions between vastly different settings go unnoticed.  For example, in one scene there is a strange meeting with the cardinal in the woods and a moment later there is a dancer on the beach singing.  Each scene has a completely differently tone—the only thing tying them together is perhaps their strangeness—and yet they fit together without question.  The film’s ability to capture memory calls to mind Dorskys’s thoughts on cinema as a particularly magical medium in that unlike other media, it has the unique ability to very nearly replicate our experience of vision and therefore it functions as a direct model for our being.  Fellini’s daydream sequences also speak to Dorsky’s suggestion that “We don’t experience a solid continuum of existence.”  Dorsky argues that life is full of gaps—spaces in which our mental imagery overrides the imagery that actually appears before our eyes.  Fellini’s montages illustrate this phenomenon very vividly.  Dorsky also writes of cuts being like dream connectives or shifts in space, having an eerie and poetic quality to them.  He argues that a good cut will arouse a certain response: “how unexplainable, how poignant, how disarming.”  This is perhaps the best way to characterize Fellini’s use of the camera in 8 1/2.

Capturing The Friedmans

I read a brief description of "Capturing the Friedmans" before I actually watched the film. The description of the film paired with the suggestive nature of the title led me to assume it would be a story where a sick and undoubtedly guilty man would be found out and rightfully persecuted for his crimes. What I experienced was vastly different than what I expected. The title is appropriate and to the point: the Friedmans are "captured." However, this hardly refers to their alleged crimes, because it is the chaos defining their struggle with the social and legal systems, and the wounds suffered by an already dysfunctional family which ultimately give the title meaning. By the end of the film, we still may not be sure whether or not Arnold and Jesse are guilty of the heinous crimes they are accused of. The only thing we can really be sure of is that we can't fully trust either side. In the end, we have so many people telling us exactly what took place, yet I was left with no idea who to believe. Andrew Jarecki examines the cases of Arnold and Jesse Friedman from all sides and, by skillfully straddling the line between perception and reality, is able to create a haunting commentary, not about their specific crimes, but rather about the evasive nature of facts.

The Friedmans live in Great Neck, Long Island, an affluent community where social status and its associative symbols reign supreme. Because of this, there is a an heir of competition between families over things like clothing, cars, children's achievements, and the idea that "everybody's kid is a genius." It is the sort of place where nobody could stand to have a black mark on their family name. Because of this, it makes sense that neighbors would be very quick to jump on a family scandal made public. A huge factor in "Capturing the Friedmans" is the role of hysteria associated with crimes of pedophilia in general. Because these are considered some of the worst offenses a person can commit, one might assume that if a person is accused by the police, ample investigation has taken place and the person is likely to be guilty of the crimes. Though by the end of the film, I was left unsure of Arnold and Jesse's guilt or innocence, it was clear that thorough investigation had not taken place before their convictions were made. Even though no forensic evidence was ever discovered to prove one way or another that the alleged molestation had taken place, the community was in an outrage. Arnold and Jesse received death threats, and parents of alleged victims almost seemed to want to believe the allegations because it was easier and more socially acceptable to believe the police than to follow an individual line of reasoning. One father of an alleged victim who is interviewed throughout "Capturing the Friedmans" describes the backlash he and his wife received from the community for concluding on their own that their son had never been molested. Neighbors and parents of Arnold's other students seemed outraged that they had strayed from their communal state-of-mind for fear that they were being foolish by believing the police account of things. Essentially it seemed as if they felt they were being called silly for not attempting to draw their own conclusions and recognizing the possible failings of the legal system.

Whether or not Arnold and Jesse are guilty of their crimes becomes less and less relevant as the film delves into the often unfair and seemingly even extralegal methods employed by the police leading the investigation, as well as the persecution of the two. After the discovery of Arnold's child pornography and his subsequent arrest, the police began to conduct a series of questionable interviews with the students from Arnold's computer class. Detective Francis Galasso and Detective Anthony Sgueglia alternately describe contrasting methods for interviewing the children. Galasso describes the better way to go about it, talking about how children want to please and give the right answer, so the interviewer must be very careful not to ask leading questions or make remarks with any sort of bias or emphasis on right or wrong. Sgueglia, on the other hand, describes a much more dangerous and faulty method, in which questions are phrased in ways like, "Arnold Friedman molested you, didn't he?" This would be followed by the insistence that the police knew that this had happened if the child said "no" or seemed uneasy about answering the questions. One of the greatest faults of this method is that it makes it very unclear whether the children's feelings of uneasiness are created by the trauma associated with being harmed, or by the stern, assumptive tone of the questioning. According to the film, this method of questioning has been known in many cases to provide false and unreliable information.

Even as we are unable to draw any concrete conclusions as to Arnold's or Jesse's guilt, we are flooded with information not just about the conviction and trials but also the inner workings of their family life. As viewers of "Capturing the Friedmans" we are afforded the privilege of reviewing the case not just from outside information, but also from direct interviews of family members as well as recordings of the daily life of the family during the time of the trial. One would think that with this plethora of information we might be able to conclude definitively for ourselves what actually took place. However, the goings-on of the family turn out to be just as confusing as the testimony of the police and really only serve to reveal a dysfunctional dynamic that likely existed long before any accusations were made.

By the End of "Capturing the Friedmans," I found myself just as confused as I was at the beginning. We can acknowledge that Arnold was certainly capable of committing the crimes he was convicted of, yet it also still seems possible that he was framed. Instead of a conviction of guilt or proof of innocence for Arnold and Jesse, I take away from this film a story of a broken family and an increased wariness of the very possible faults and failings of the legal system, the word of which many of us take for granted more often than we should. Andrew Jarecki does a brilliant job of turning focus from the nature and severity of the crimes to the disjointed and often ineffective methods of discovering the truth.


Tarnation

I chose to watch Tarnation after reading a very brief description of its content, expecting something charming, eccentric, and a little sad. What I experienced was beautiful, heart-wrenching, and completely different than what I anticipated. Caouette's auto-documentary fluidly combines home movies, photographs, and super 8 film, as well as other filming media, to create something incredibly personal. Caouette (who I feel like I should call "Jon" after watching this) has a deep understanding of the way people think and relate to each other; and this capacity for empathy translates into his film-making allowed me to feel I was truly experiencing someone else's life. Tarnation is a truly effective example of the formalist style, using a wide variety of artistic and stylistic devices to impart it's messages. Tarnation is first and foremost of and for Caouette. It is part diary, part expose, part coping mechanism, and an escape from an alien world which in itself is a beautifully raw commentary on the fragility and complexities of the human mind, the dynamics and inner workings of family, and the resilience of the human spirit.

Tarnation is a combination of home movies, VHS tapes, super 8 footage, answering machine messages, and phone calls recorded on video. Upon some follow-up research, I found out that Caouette's budget for the film was a mere $218.32 which accounts mainly for the cameras he used throughout his life to shoot. The filming methods used are modest and achieve a very raw, very real effect.

Caouette combines video from his various cameras with light/wash effects added with standard Imovie software to create a product that is psychedelic and dream-like in effect while retaining a shocking realism.  The mix of delusion and reality is one of the most important themes in Tarnation as this complex relationship applies to schizophrenia as well as Depersonalization disorder. We see images in Caouette's life as he interprets them, making connections that aren't always linear but are realistic in terms of how the mind processes things. What this accomplishes is that overall, the film mocks the idea that anything is truly "real," suggesting there is no actual line between what is real and what isn't.

The written narrative is simple and evocative. It is reminiscent of the style of a children's book and it serves as the most linear and straightforward device in the entire film. It is clear that Caouette chose his words very carefully, for even the short, simple and factual phrases he uses to impart important information to his story carry incredible poignancy. For instance, when introducing Renee and her parents, the phrase "everything was good,"  dropped a pit of anticipatory anxiety into my stomach. At first, the narrative uses white text against a black background, asserting the seriousness of the film. Throughout, the font stays the same yet the color and texture of the background changes , seeming to become more hectic and saturated as the film progresses. Because the text is the only real narrative in Tarnation we are forced to place much more emphasis on the more subtle sentiment attached to scenes which accompany it. This is effective because it allows us to draw our own conclusions rather than just absorbing what the film-maker has to say.

After viewing Tarnation there is one thing that is incredibly clear: Caouette must have a deep and personal understanding of amor fati if only for the fact that he manages to stay resilient and retain a strong sense of self despite the "government experiment" quality of his family's life. In the end there is no attempt to reconcile the dualities in his life, but Caouette's acceptance of them as inevitabilities allows him appreciate his life for what it is. His story is raw, tragic, painfully real, and hauntingly tragic. It is not a story of redemption, of rebirth, of courage. It is a portrait of human life, with all of its joys, pains, and complexities, existing and changing just as all our lives do.

Harold and Maude


Harold and Maude is a film about life and death and the longing for both. Seventeen year old Harold, obsessed with death and finding excitement in attending funerals, meets seventy-nine year old Maude, a woman whose life has been full of travel, art, song, and fabulous adventure. In a matter of a few days, they fall in love, and Maude restores Harold's interest in life as she prepares for her eightieth birthday- a day she seems to have chosen long ago for a special kind of farewell.

I want to comment on the theme of a lack of resolution throughout the film. Many of the scenes are morbid and graphic, yet they are never revistied or expained. Visual cues are given in attempt to lead the viewers interpretation astray for a time, yet they never quite turn out as you'd expect them to.

I find Harold and Maude to be a very visually stimulating film. There are usually several layers of action of some sort to be paid attention to in any given scene. There is a good amount of give and take in terms of this, though, and some scenes are very perfectly made to have only one intense event happening.

Until the end of the film, the scenes are introduced, acted out, and closed. There is very little if any revisting of scences. At the end, however, this shifts- just for the last few minutes. The scenes keep cutting between Harold's car driving, the hospital, back to the car, and so on- this so accurately conveys the emotions of a time like the one that Harold was going through- the feelings of things overlapping, moments caving in on eachother.

This has been such an important film to me, but I don't have much else to say about it on this blog. Please see Harold and Maude, and then find me, and we can talk about it over a cup of coffee. I'd be thrilled to hear what you think. It's a movie that really gets to core of what it means to be alive. I like movies like that.


Anvil! The Story of Anvil


   

 For this week, I watched the documentary film, “Anvil! The Story of Anvil”. This is actually one of my favorite movies so I have watched this movie several times. This film is about the unsuccessful Canadian heavy metal band, Anvil and directed by screenwriter Sacha Gervasi.



   The film starts by listing the headlining acts of the Super Rock festival in Saitama, Japan in 1984: Scorpions, Whitesnake, and Bon Jovi all of whom have gone on to sell millions of records, except one, Anvil. In spite of their ambition, the Canadian band was unable to get the same level of success. This film focuses on their current life and documenting how they are struggling to make their dream come true. 


 
    I really like this film because the film asks audience that what does happiness mean. As a band, Anvil is not successful but they have family and friends who support them and they are still dreaming to make the band bigger. This film has a lot of Love.

Beetlejuice by Tim Burton

Beetlejuice by Tim Burton is a film centered around a recently deceased couple learning to cope with the living family that has just moved in. It follows the struggles of the deceased to be noticed and understood in a changing environment.

Tim Burton uses a lot of divisions of space in his piece. By utilizing household structures such as: bed posts, basement pipes, doorways, and windows and even mirrors to create divisions of space. These divisions appear to lead the viewer into another place that we can't completely see, it helps to emphasize the idea of the co-existance between two worlds, one we can plainly see as the living and one we struggle to understand - the dead.
A lot of divisions occurring at once!

He lets his moving characters to control the camera movements, he doesn't usually allow them to completely move out of frame. Instead he moves with them, when they engage in conversation he focuses on one, leaving the back of the other one to dominate the empty portion of the frame. This abstracts the individual whose back is to us, because he focuses in on the facial expressions and movements of the other person. The individual with a back to us, is nothing but an out of focus mop of colors and patterns. Usually the out of focus person is listening to the person doing the engaging.

He does use close ups a few times within this film. Often times to indicate significance for instance, after the Maitland's die, he focuses in on three separate but very linked items. The cuckoo clock as it dings, the Handbook for the Recently Deceased, and the obituary as Beetlejuice thumbs through the Afterlife News.
Beetlejuice's number at the end of the film

When the Maitland's are alive Tim uses natural light, and the sounds are voiceless but very up beat and happy in tune. Once they die, he quickly begins experimenting with filters rose, and blue to be specific. He uses rose as Adam Maitland opens the door to attempt to exit the house. He then switches to blue as Barbara grabs him and brings him back from Jupiter. The music also becomes more dramatic with the usage of trombones. Because of this the lighting also becomes really dramatic when engaging other ghosts or using anything within the realm of the "Afterlife."
A filter!
Another!

Tim also likes to use hands or external environments to change from scene to scene.
He uses Adam's hands in the very beginning when he is scooping the spider off of the model town. He uses Barbara's hands to indicate cleaning as the attempt to discover the contents of the Recently Deceased. Or after the Maitland's try to get the attention of the landlord, and fail. He exits the scene by showing the car driving off of the property. When he uses external space, after the die, it is always a shot of the house they are trapped in.
The model house in the beginning


Whenever people are placed together in a space, he makes sure they are on separate planes which helps to indicate depth. So one may be laying down as the other is standing and pacing in the same shot, or one may be at the top of the stairs and the other in a door way at the bottom. It creates this illusion of the characters rarely being on the same plane - if they are on the same plane, there is a third person present to reflect the depth. Which goes back to the core idea of the film between the living and the dead, as separate, but co-existing planes.

It is also rare to see the 'living' characters from the waist down, he keeps most of the shots as profiles or movements of the individuals. There are scenes where he backs up and allows you to see the characters slumped over chairs or walking into doorways. They almost float from frame to frame. He also, at times, continues a dialogue into the next scene, which creates an eerie disembodied feeling.

Drive


            Drive was visually both quiet and noisy. The “chase” was the major force in the film, with speeding cars and guns and violence to go along with it. One of the first readings we had for Film 1 mentioned that the medium of film was well suited for showing the chase. Indeed, in Drive the filming of the chase emphasized its kinetic energy and emotional intensity. In one getaway scene, the car, driven by a professional driver and stuntman, swerves, turns, and speeds away while the shots jump from the car interior to the car following the getaway, zooming in on their almost touching respective back and front bumpers. The shots of the chase are not usually wide shots. Instead, the close ups and medium shots support the driver’s serious need to flee and the follower’s anger at having been robbed. The shifts and movement within these kinds of shots are much more noticeable and disrupt any sense of balance or safety.
            In contrast to the hectic chase scenes, the film’s quietness is most strongly seen in several dark, medium shots in which Driver or Irene (their heads and necks), his neighbor, are alone at either the far left or right of the shot. Behind them is almost black and their might be some street or car lights misty in the background. Their faces are lit with soft green or red lights. The color and composition of the shots evoke an otherworldly atmosphere, providing the two characters some form of escape from their difficult and uncertain realities. I decided to call them quiet shots because they are at least so in comparison to the action scenes. Furthermore, they are dark and the only action is the subtle movement of their breathing and faces. These shots are painterly and emotive, and suggest the character’s inner worlds and Driver and Irene’s now intertwined lives.
            The internal life of the Driver, who happens to be known only as the Driver, is a mystery. He barely speaks. My brother, when we watched this together, compared his portrayal as deep, brooding yet powerful and potentially violent to comic book heroes. How could a person who acts criminally, violently also care for and love Irene and her son? The film's hinting at the Driver’s inner complexities reminds me of several movies from my French Cinema class (where a lot of my educational experience of film has come from) that feature criminals made by their situations in society or the grotesqueness of their cultures, criminals who exhibited nearly hidden layers of tenderness and humanity. They were Jean-Luc Godard’s Michel Poiccard in Breathless, Janine in Claude Miller and Francois Truffaut’s The Little Thief and Antoine Doinel in Truffaut’s 400 Blows

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Spellbound (1945)



From the drawing of swimming pool, it starts viewer with a hint of trouble ahead. The drawing was shown few times also using Dr. Petersen’s eyes as a hint too. This hint is given as a puzzle; also the shapes are change to narrow down the possibility of what John is afraid of. Before Dr. Petersen discovers the cause, she is the only person who is willing to believe John through the love goggles, which gives a doubt for viewer to debate over the film.

In the beginning of the film a line from Shakespeare “The fault… is not in our stars, but in ourselves”, which point it out the doubt viewer will have for John. Since his illness with his own doubt from others, create what we think due to his condition. In away I think Hitchcock is mocking everyone for the stupidity of our judgmental behavior, and often criticize others from rumors or image for public. In the film, Dr. Petersen is also very judgmental by her coworker due to her appearance.

Over time, Dr. Petersen’s dress color appears much darker and mature with fur in court, when she was defending for John Ballantyne; this technique was also shown in Rebecca while in the court. Another repeat Hitchcock signature also appears in Spellbound that is to exaggerate on the poker card as in The Lady Vanishes’s wine glass.