Bringing Up Baby

Wow, what an interesting movie... First off I just want to say that no one would ever act like either of the two main characters in the movie in real life, but this didn't bother me that much. I actually enjoyed how crazy Susan was and all her schemes to get David to stay with her. The dialogue was really interesting as well as the "unique" humor in this movie. What I mean by this is all of the crazy things that happen that would never actually happen to normal people, then they are repeated. I found this to be funny and thought this movie was making fun of our daily lives and how people worry and work to hard. It's definitely a different type of movie then I have ever seen before and probably won't want to see another screwball comedy for a while, but I can say that I am glad that I saw this one.

Classic and Revisionist

After watching both My Darling Clementine and Once Upon a Time in the West I have decided that Once Upon a Time in the West is much better. During class we discussed the differences between classic westerns and revisionist westerns. Once Upon a Time in the West, being more of a revisionist western, really got my attention and I really liked the story behind it. For this blog I will compare the female characters in both the movies and what makes them similar and what makes them different.

First off Jill, from OUATITW, is a very independent character that can think for herself and was even able to outsmart some of the men in the movie. On the other hand Clementine was more of a "follower" and depended on men to help her and protect her. While Jill had more of a lead role and did things by herself with her own intentions in mind, Clementine didn't really make any decisions on her own and followed Wyatt and Doc. I think that this is the biggest difference between the two female characters in the two movies. It seems to me like in the classic westerns it's more common for the women to play a smaller role and not have much say, while in the revisionist westerns they can sometimes have a big impact on the story. One thing that both had in common where that they were both "easy" when it came to sleeping around with men.

Overall I can say that I did enjoy seeing both westerns but feel that the revisionist western is more appealing to me become it's longer and I feel like more things go on "Plot-wise". I hope I can see Unforgiven for this essay assignment on Monday.

Journal 3 : Schindler's List (Actors)

I first have to say that despite the advice of Mr. K., I went into this movie with very high expectations for something great. Schindler’s List directed by Steven Spielberg completely surpassed all my expectations and is one of the best movies that I have ever seen. Spielberg gets you very attached to the characters and when something very emotional happens in the movie you feel it as well. I felt like the reason for this was the great acting jobs by the three main characters but especially Oskar Schindler’s character, by Liam Neeson, and Itzhak’s character done by Ben Kingsley.
(Itzhak is on left in picture and Schindler is on right)

Liam Neeson’s character (Oskar Schindler) was based off the true story of a man named Oskar Schindler that saved the lives of thousands of Jews. His character starts the film as a greedy Nazi that wants to use forced labor to become a millionaire. The transformation of his character is one thing that the movie does a really great job of showing. By the end of the film he ends up spending all of his money that he had earned, and uses it to save the Jews by letting them work for him at his factory in order to prevent them from going to Auschwitz and being gassed. According to an interview with Spielberg that I read, Liam was chosen to play the role of Oskar due to his personality and presence rather then his physical similarities to the real Schindler. Spielberg said that,

“I wasn't really concerned that he look like Schindler. Liam had the charm and the bearing of Schindler. And he had the presence of Schindler. He had the charisma, just existing there without doing very much. And he also had the humanity that would always be there, you know.”

He was also asked why he didn’t choose a “movie star” for the role and he said that,

“I didn't want the distraction of a whole bunch of other movies to cloud this one.”

I really felt that Liam did a great job as Schindler and that his transformation throughout the movie was very believable. A few other movies that Liam has been in include: Batman Begins, Gangs of New York, Love Actually, Gun Shy, and Start Wars: Episode I.

The other character that I thought did a really good job in this movie was Ben Kingsley (Itzhak), a Jewish man who is hired by Schindler to be his personal accountant. We can really see how Itzhak notices Schindler’s transformation throughout the movie especially in one of the last scenes when every Jew that Schindler saved hugs him. I think that Kingsley was chosen for this role because of his acting abilities and how he was truly able to turn into his character. His character was also very believable and the way he felt Schindler’s emotional transformation is also felt by the viewer. Kingsley has also been in: The Confession, The Assignment, Gandhi, and Bugsy.

Another thing that I learned from reading the interview with Spielberg was how the actors were off-set. Spielberg said that,

“Everybody just did their best work. They didn't even work - they just existed in these characters. And there never were any real questions or arguments or long didactic discussions about how do I play my character.”

Overall I really felt like all the actors did a great job of transforming into their characters and it really made this movie and the amazing story of what Schindler did everything that it is.

My Darling Clem.

There were really two scenes in the entire movie that I thought were really interesting. One was the showdown at the end between the sheriff and the bad guys, and the other was when Doc Holiday met the sheriff in the bar and then went to the show together. Theses two scenes really stuck out to me because they seemed like they were going to have a lot to do with the plot and how the story was going to unfold.

The first scene, Doc meeting Wyatt in the bar, was probably my favorite scene in the movie. It was very suspenseful because I didn't know if Doc was going to accept him or just want to shoot him. The way that Wyatt acts showed a lot about his charachter's attitude and that he wasn't going to back down to Doc even though everyone made him out to be some crazy bad-ass. This really set the tone for Doc and Wyatt's relationship throughout the movie and helped develop a mutual friendship between Doc and Wyatt.

The other scene that I really enjoyed was the gunfight at the O.K. corral. It was very suspenseful and kept me on the edge of my seat the whole time. The fact that the bell rang right before someone was about to get shot also played a part in the suspense but I really liked the fact that I had no idea how it was going to turn out. While I must say that one of the gun shots sounds more like a laser from Star Wars, the camera and sound were really good in this scene. I felt that the climax of this scene was when Wyatt came out from behind the stagecoach and said, "I have a warrant for your arrest(or something along those lines" to the bad guy. At this point I didn't know if he was going to be shot at or if it would just break out into a crazy gunfight. These suspenseful parts of the scene are what really make it great and I thought it was a great way to finish up the movie.

Overall I liked the movie and the whole shoot first, ask questions later attitude that it had. I can't wait to see this Once Upon a Time in the West and am thinking that it's probably going to be even better.

Citizen Kane and Cinematography

Orson Wells uses different cinematic elements throughout the film that really make the movie more interesting and appealing. One element that I noticed in particular that Wells used a few times was the "crane" camera angle. The film starts off with a great crane of his entire property and really shows us everything in a interesting way. By using a crane we see more and more in a gradual way which I think makes it much more exciting then if the entire property is shown to us all at once. Another time that Wells used the crane that I thought was very cool was when it went over all of his stuff after Susan left him. I didn''t even notice until Mr. K brought it up, but when it does this shot all off his things sort of look like skyscrapers and roads.

Another cinematic element that I thought Wells was good at was with using high and low angles on different shots. One example I remember was when Susan was in the Opera house singing and the camera showed her from a high angle. I don't know if this was the intended effect but it made her seem defeated and overwhelmed by how badly her singing was. Another time that I can remember was right after Kane lost the election, they showed a street side view of his office from a high angle. This shot made Kane seem defeated. There was also the time when Kane was up in front of all the people giving his election speech. The Low angle that he was shot at made him look powerful and confident.

Overall I really enjoyed watching Citizen Kane and felt that the cinematic effects that he used really made the movie more interesting and appealing.