Do the Right Thing

For this post I have decided to analyze and decide once and for all if Sal, the pizza store owner, was a racist. Up until the end of the movie when he let our the n-word, I felt there is no way that his character was meant to be a racist. After him calling Radio-Raheem the n-word I decided that I needed to re-evaluate whether or not he is a racist. To do this I think it would be best to take all of the reasons that people feel he was a racist and prove why they really aren't as they seem.

One argument that people in class had was that when Sal was talking to Peno about how he loved feeding the people in the Bed-Stuy neighborhood he referred to the them as "they" or "them" which some thought made Sal look like a racist. While at first glance this seems to be something that someone would use to make another group of people sound inferior or different, there really isn't another way to put it without using the word "them". If you really think about it there really wasn't any other way for Sal to make reference to the people in that neighborhood without using the word they and those kids.

Probably the best argument that people had for calling Sal a racist was when he used the n-word towards Radio-Raheem at the end of the movie. In my mind I really don't think that using that word was something he had been thinking of saying and planning deep inside his head, but instead the result of his anger and the reaction to what Radio-Raheem was doing. I don't think Sal really felt that way about the people that lived in the neighborhood but was reacting to the events happening right in front of him and was very angry at Radio-R. Therefore I don't think he really meant what he said when he lashed out at Radio-Raheem.

Overall I really don't think that Sal was a racist, but just a person trying to make a living in a rough neighborhood. He didn't show many other signs of racism throughout the movie and the ones that he may have shown can be proven to be misleading. In the end I do not feel that Sal was a racist and really enjoyed watching this movie.

Battle of Algiers

For this post I have chosen to read the review from the Washington Post about the Battle of Algiers by Ann Hornaday. I pretty much agree with a lot of the stuff that she is saying about the movie, the biggest being that there were no heroes in this movie. She writes about how,

"The escalating skirmishes and attacks seem to culminate not in victory but in a far more deflating sense of inevitability."

This is exactly how I felt after seeing the movie, while at first you feel like Ali is going to be the main character and that we are going to follow him throughout the movie, it turns into many different characters with no one side really being shown as heroic. This is done by showing the planting of bombs by both sides, instead of just he French or Algerians. The movie also doesn't try to make one side look like saints and the other look like terrible people, but instead makes them both look like they are doing what needs to be done to save their country.

Another thing that Ann wrote in her review was about how the film looks like,"it is what would today be called a mock-documentary, but there is nothing mock about it" I also agree with this and feel that Pontecorvo did a really good job of using a lot of hand-held shots and black and white picture to make this movie more documentary-like. By having it this way the movie is more believable and you feel like this is actually exactly what happened during that time. I don't think that this movie would be nearly as good without those two aspects.

Overall I enjoyed this film to a certain extent as I feel like it can teach us something about terrorism and look at both sides of the problem. While I felt the movie was boring at times, there were still some good suspense scenes that made it worth seeing.

Fact Vs. Memory (Memento)

One theme that Lenny told people about during this movie was that memory isn't as good as facts and that memory gets forgotten and distorted but facts are always clear and stay the same. At first thought I would have agreed with what he said about memory vs. facts, but after watching the movie I completely disagree with him. In a way, especially for Lenny, facts can get even more distorted then memory could. Obviously if he didn't have the memory condition he hopefully wouldn't have killed Teddy and been tricked by Natalie so many times. He felt that the facts where better because they don't change, but he never considered what could happen if facts were un-true or changed to trick someone. This would seem to show that at least for Lenny, a memory would have been much more reliable than the facts that he had tattooed onto his arm.

When I first heard him say this in the movie I agreed with him because his argument made sense, Facts don't change but memory does. After seeing the movie though I would say that even in real life we need to use our memory of things more than we do facts. If people relied only facts and didn't consider what emotional and phycological effects that a certain event had on someone, then we would all be living really bad lives. I think that this can be said for Lenny in the movie because I would not say that his life seemed like it would be remotely enjoyable to live in. Overall I thought that this was a really great movie that made me think a lot "outside the box" and that the theme that Lenny presents about facts being better then memory is a really interesting concept to think about.

Kiss Me Deadly and "The Box"

Wow Kiss Me Deadly was a really strange movie. Apart from the ending which I didn't like at all, I didn't think the rest of the movie was that great either. I now understand why this was a B movie when it was released but I don't get why now it's appreciated so much. If you haven't seen this movie the rest of this blog won't make much sense to you so might as well exit out.

I'm going to compare the box in the end of the movie to a real life situation and how they're similar. First of all when the woman is opening the box she immediately starts screaming revealing that whatever was in the box was really bad and she was afraid of. My question for her is, why the hell did you keep opening it then? This is something that I don't' understand. My only conclusion is that she had to open it so that the house would blow up and the movie could come to a confusing end. The way that this relates to the real world is when people do things that they know are bad, but do them anyway. She obviously knew nothing good was going to come out of opening the box but she did it anyway. This is similar to an arsonist who starts a fire with no cause. The arsonist knows that nothing good is going to come out of lighting something on fire but chooses to do it anyway.

My final thought on this movie is that I didn't like the way that it ended and didn't really feel that everything leading up to the ending was all that special either; this usually isn't a good combination for a good movie. In the end I didn't really enjoy the movie very much but am glad to have seen what a B film noir movie looks like and how it is different from an A movie.

Double Indemnity

Double Indemnity was a very interesting film and like nothing I have ever seen before. Until this one I had never seen a "film noir" and didn't think that I would really enjoy them. The beginning seemed a bit slow for me because we already knew that he was going to get caught and that everything he was planing out was going to waste anyway. Having said that I really enjoyed the last 30 or so minutes of the movie and thought it was all really exciting and interesting. After having watched what looked like a flawless fake crime, I was interested in knowing how he gets caught and exactly how Keys ends up finding out. I felt that the lighting played a big part in this movie and there where a lot of scenes where shadows of things were used and where the shadows from a window would fall on a character. I didn't really find the lighting to make the movie any better or worse it was just something I noticed while watching. Overall I would have to say that by the time the movie was done I had enjoyed watching it and that the plot was fairly interesting.

Groundhog Day

I really enjoyed this movie and it's probably my favorite out of the ones we've seen in class. I really like the crazy concept of someone being trapped in the same day and having to live it over and over again. I think this really reflects the lives that some of us live throughout the school year. I feel like I wake up every morning, eat breakfast, drive to school, and then sleep during school. This movie may be telling us that we need to spice up our lives a little bit and start making the most out of it. I also felt like the reason I liked this movie so much was just the overall concept behind it. In a far out way it was kind of like the concept in the Matrix and how life may not really be as it seems. Overall I thought it was a hilarious movie and Ned Ryerson is the man.

As far as acting goes I really liked the humor of Bill Murray's character and thought that he did a really great job of showing the emotions that were going through Phil during the movie. I also felt that the character who played Rita did a great job of playing into the script and not showing that she knew anything about what was going on to Phil after each day. Otherwise the other actors were all good and Ned Ryerson was very funny.

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.

Strangers on a Train Review

I recently saw Strangers on a Train released in 1951 and directed by Alfred Hitchcock. This movie is really like nothing that I have ever seen before. The title may be a little misleading because only a few scenes are actually shot on trains. The beginning is somewhat confusing and slow but once the plot starts to unfold, it’s one of the most suspenseful and exciting movies that I’ve seen in a long time. The movie starts off with the opening scene only showing the feet of the two main actors whose names in the movie were Guy and Bruno. By doing this, the viewer really can’t tell what to expect other then the fact that they’re on a train. Once Bruno introduces himself to Guy, a rich tennis player dating the senator’s daughter, Guy’s life starts to unravel.

The main plot is that Bruno is “a little wacky” and tells Guy that if he kills his father for him, then Bruno would kill Guy’s old wife who won’t divorce him. Guy laughs it off and goes about his regular routine but the next night Guy returns home from a tennis practice and Bruno is waiting for him across the street in an alley. Bruno tells him that he “did the job” of killing Guy’s wife and that he awaits for Guy to return the favor and finish off his father. Throughout the rest of the story Bruno follows Guy around and threatens to plant one of Guy’s lighters at the crime scene so that he will be charged for a murder he didn’t have anything to do with.

What starts to happen here is what makes the movie truly exciting. Even though Guy had nothing to do with the murder of Merriam, his wife, it seems like he’s already defending himself and that he’s going to have to do a lot to prove his innocence. Anne, the senator’s daughter and Guy’s girlfriend, explains to her father what happened and they all meet to talk about how there’s nothing to worry about. This all changes however when Guy’s alibi, a man he spoke with on a train during the murder, can’t vouch for him because he says that he was to drunk and couldn’t remember anything. This is when the problems start and Guy and Anne begin to panic.

While Bruno is following Guy there is one scene in particular that really plays a big role. While Guy is out with Anne, Bruno comes out of no where and starts talking to Guy. There is then an extreme close up on a necklace that Bruno is wearing that says “Bruno” in gold letters. What makes this really significant is that Guy tells Anne that he’s never met this person before but then later in the movie Bruno goes to talk to Guy and he is again wearing the same gold necklace. This is when Anne realizes that something very bad is happening to them.

I think the reason that I really enjoyed the movie was due in part to the work of the main actors: Farley Granger (Guy Haines) and Robert Walker (Bruno Anthony). These two really did an amazing job of playing their roles and really made the plot very believable. I would characterize their dialogue as very realistic with the exception that most of the things Bruno said where completely crazy. Hitchcock really does a great job of creating suspense that lasts throughout the movie without having to have any big Hollywood things such as fighting or explosions.

Overall if I had to rate this movie on a scale of 1 to 100; I would give it an 86. It was really a great movie that kept me on the edge of my seat. It had great acting combined with some very interesting locations. This is definitely one of my favorite “old movies” being that it was in black in white and I would recommend it to anyone that wants to experience something a little different then what our modern day movies can offer.

A Recent Movie

One movie that I have really been itching to see since I saw the previews was Inside Man with D-Washington. I hadn't really gotten around to seeing it until last week when it was on HBO but let me tell you that it was an eye opening experience. I mean first of all the way that they robbed the bank would have flawlessly worked in real life as it did in the movie. I'm not getting any ideas but if this whole "college" thing doesn't work out, let me know if you’re interested. Anyway I really enjoyed the movie and thought that it was very exciting and suspenseful. At the time I wasn't really paying any attention to the cinematic things that we learned in class but there where definitely some dank explosions and a lot of yelling. By the time the movie was done I was really inspired and it made me want to do something really exciting so I popped in Madden and played a knuckle biting game online with the G-men versus some kid with the panthers (48-0). The HD really made the movie even better because I felt like I was right there with them. I would have to say that this movie, for me, compared to Oceans Eleven as a really phenomenal robbery movie and that if there’s any chance of Inside Man 2, I hope I can be in it.

The Bourne Ultimatum

I read the review by Chris Vognar from the Dallas Morning News on The Bourne Ultimatum. I still haven't gotten around to seeing the film, but this review certainly makes me want to. Chris writes in his review that the movie is filled with lots of suspense and great "Cat-and-Mouse" chase scenes like in the previous Bourne movies. I really enjoyed the first two Bourne movies and it sounds like this one might be even better and more action-packed. He also makes reference to a movie that I've never heard of, The French Connection, and how this movie would fit right in with its "brand of breathless pursuit sequence[s]". Another thing I also noticed in his review was that he mentioned how the handheld camera kinetics really make a difference and make the movie even more exciting especially in the different chase scenes that the trilogy is known for. The review also pointed out that the movie is a lot like the Bourne Supremacy with a, "story [that] feels fresh." I'm glad that he said this because I was worried that with the first two Bourne movies being so good, they would run out of new and interesting ideas for this one and that the plot would end up being dull with a lot of great action scenes that wouldn't really matter. But yet Chris proves his argument of how great of an action movie it is by saying that,

"The Bourne Ultimatum leaps, scampers, scraps and drives its way into the pantheon of all-time great action movies".

Another thing that he mentioned in the review is how good of an acting job Matt Damon and Julia Stiles perform and how they really invested into their characters. He says at the end that,

"It's tempting to say that any actor could show up on the Bourne set and coast on the movie's considerable craft. But that wouldn't really be fair to Mr. Damon, who continues to invest his character with the stoic urgency of a man who will die if he doesn't find the truth".

What I really got from the review was that this movie is loaded with great action scenes and that the things that made the past Bourne movies so good are still a part of this one.

Overall I thought that this was a really good review because he stated several reasons for why he felt that this was really an amazing movie and how it relates to other great action movies. He was able to prove his point by the short summary that he gives in the 3rd and 4th paragraph of his review and show us how action packed and suspenseful the movie really is. He also does a good job of pointing out that even though this movie is made for action and suspense scenes, the plot is fresh and the story is just as good. After reading this review I definitely want to see the movie but will probably just end up renting it on hd-dvd when it comes out because I don't want to spend 9 dollars to go and see it.