Chinatown

Released in 1974, Chinatown starred Jack Nicholson as J.J. Gittes, Faye Dunaway as Evelyn Mulwray, and John Huston as Noah Cross.
Though this film was made a good thirty years after the established film noir era, it is boldly reminiscent of that era's tradition.
The movie opens to a scene describing Gittes' profession as a private investigator. Then a woman claiming to be Evelyn Mulwray hires him to follow her husband, whom she believes to be having an affair. Gittes takes the job and makes the discovery, subsequently ruining Mulwray's reputation. When the real Evelyn Mulwray enters the scene to sue Gittes for libel, the man becomes thoroughly confused. He becomes determined to get to the bottom of this mystery - which deepens when Mulwray turns up dead, apparently a suicide.
Gittes' adventure is classic noir and classically entertaining. The cameo by director Roman Polanski is especially enjoyable.

Touch of Evil

It was a passion project. It was Orson Welles' baby. It was "Touch of Evil," released in 1958. It stars Charlton Heston as Miguel Vargas, Janet Leigh as Mrs. Vargas, and Orson Welles as Police Captain Quinlan.
I would consider this film to be a defining one for film noir. The film is centered around a border town between Mexico and the United States. This is important, because the border-town creates an entire culture unto itself. The story is dark, as well as the surroundings.
The story starts as a panoramic view of the border town's nightlife. Having just crossed the border, a car suddenly explodes. Both Vargas (a top Mexican narcotics official) and Quinlan are drawn into the investigation because of the location.

The investigation of the murder unravels simultaneously to the raveling up of mysteries. Vargas is a good detective, perhaps too much for his own good. His wife becomes an instrument of implication and deception. Everyone has to make a decision and ultimately those decisions will never come to fruition and choices were made for naught. It is the washed-up, tarot card-reading prostitute who has the last word.

The Maltese Falcon

Hailed as a noir classic, this 1941 film is delightfully simplistic in its complexity. Humphrey Bogart brings his trademark rolling eyes and come-what-may cynical character.

Bogart is Sam Spade, a private eye. A beautiful woman comes into his office one day to commission him. She claims she's looking for a runaway sister who may be with a boyfriend (who is, by the way, married with children). She pays him up front and assigns him with the task of confronting this dangerous boyfriend. Spade's partner goes and gets shot. The problem is, the guy who supposedly shot him also turns up dead.

We've got a mystery on our hands. A foreign "gentleman" comes to visit Spade and politely sticks him up - even after Spade knocked him out once. The lady was a liar, Spade figures that much out. He's got some investigating to do. When he makes contact with the aptly referred to "fat man," he gets the whole story...and drugged. Trust is apparently a rare privilege.

When Spade finally gets the whole crew in one room together he gets the story straight. Then they can get down to business - the friggin bird.

Comparing Narration Styles: Casablanca, Daughters of the Dust, & Monsoon Wedding

Casablanca is a good example of the conventional narration in a movie. It introduces the situation in a formal manner, it introduces the characters in a methodical manner, and then it introduces the conflict very politely so that the audience will understand. There is a formula; introduction, conflict, climax, conflict resolution, conclusion.

However, not all movies follow this narrative style. Daughters of the Dust is one of them. Monsoon Wedding is another. These movies had unique narration styles, which, between the two of them, had similarities and differences.

They both told background stories of the family through a critical situation. Daughters of the Dust was more broad than Monsoon Wedding. In Daughters of the Dust, the situation wasn't even really decided upon the opening of the movie. The Peazant family had been discussing the matter of moving to the mainland, but a decision had not been absolutely made. In Monsoon Wedding, the parents had already chosen a husband for their daughter and arrangements had already been made. The preparation for the wedding and the wedding itself provided the insight into the family and the characters.

That brings me to another part of the storytelling and narration. It doesn't have to be an obvious panorama of the situation. It can be told through the characters. Also, a description of a character's conflict can contribute to the overall conflict of the film. In Daughters of the Dust, the voiceover of Eli and Eula's unborn daughter describes the emotional turmoil of much of the family.
In Monsoon Wedding, it is dialogue which unravels the story - dialogue and nuance. In both of these movies, the main conflict was not as important as the character development. The characters drove the story - not the other way around.

Trust and Obey, It's the Family Way...

Mira Nair's 2001 film "Monsoon Wedding," is a view of an Indian family through the window of a wedding.
In Bollywood style, the scenes and clothes are as colorful as the characters. The Verma family is celebrating their daughter's impending marriage to a young man of their choosing. However, she may not be ready to be someone's wife.
It's a romantic comedy rich with culture and the importance of family.
I genuinely enjoyed this film, not because of its happy ending or convenient romance but because of the family dynamic, the music, and the richness of the characters. By the end of the film, I felt like part of the family because I had laughed, cried, wondered, and rejoiced with them.

THE PAST IS ALWAYS PRESENT

The 1991 independent film "Daughters of the Dust," was unconventional, to say the least. Set in the beginning of the 20th century, it portrays the Gullah family Peazants' conflict of moving to the mainland of South Carolina or to stay on the island of their family estate.
It's a different American South history than we're used to, and that's refreshing. It shows a rich piece of humanity which was previously silent.
Though the story itself was wonderfully rich, the movie was terribly dull. I was open-minded and initially interested enough, but no matter how much I tried to invest myself in the film I was still bored by it. The characters, music, and the setting were beautiful, but the movie was boring.

Here's Looking at You, Classic Film!

1942's "Casablanca" is practically a cultural memory in this day and age, but sixty-seven years ago that was not the case or the intention.

It was a film made in the studio age. Studios were just popping films out regularly, and at the time "Casablanca" was thought to be rather unimpressive. It was later re-released due to popular demand.

This film takes place in an unoccupied province of France in Morocco called Casablanca. People trying to get to America during the Nazi's occupation were stuck indefinitely in Casablanca unless they could get a visa.

Rick Blane (Humphrey Bogart) is an American who owns Rick's Cafe Americain. He remains conveniently neutral so that his business does not suffer, but he is also a straightforward cynic. When the hero of the resistance Victor Lazlo (Paul Henreid) comes in for a drink with a beautiful woman (Ingrid Bergman), Rick is visibly rattled, as is the woman named Ilsa.

Old feelings are stirred and allegiances are made in Casablanca.

Editing in "Bonnie and Clyde"

This film showed a very cooperative and satisfying compromise of Hollywood continuity editing and the newer style, more disjunctive editing.

The scenes never jumped around to the point where the audience would be confused. It just jumped around in logical places. Sometimes it was a tad confusing, but never frustratingly so. It was part of what made that movie fun and not boring.

The rhythm of the editing in the movie was closely linked to the story's rapid progression and urgency. Things happened quickly between Bonnie and Clyde and things happened quickly to and for Bonnie and Clyde. The editing indicated this, especially in the final sequence when they were shot to death. Everything was very quick, yet their movements (which were in slow motion) sort of mirrored the audience's disbelief.

Emotional and intellectual responses evoked by the editing choices were complex. The audience is made aware of Clyde's interest in Bonnie, Bonnie's attraction to Clyde, C.W.'s amusement by the two, and so on.

Continuity editing was used whenever cars pulled up around a building or during the car chases. The practice encouraged the audience to identify with the characters or believe in the story's world because it makes everything reliable. The geography was faithfully established in every scene and the movie had a very linear time line. That said, whenever there was a sudden jump, one could always rest assured that it was at least a jump forward and not a jump backward.

Since both continuity and disjunctive editing were present in Bonnie and Clyde, they interacted with one another and that interaction was skillfully executed.

Along For the Ride with Bonnie and Clyde!

The story of Bonnie and Clyde is a famous one. They were notorious bank robbers and car thieves during the time of the Great Depression, and their actions took place in the Midwest and the South, where the Great Depression was felt the most.
The 1967 film entitled, "Bonnie & Clyde," performs what its title suggests, which is to tell the story of this couple. Warren Beatty played Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker was played by Faye Dunaway.

When Bonnie catches Clyde presumably looking to steal her mother's car, the two get to talking. Right away Clyde is able to sum up Bonnie's restlessness and her untapped potential and the two jump-start a relationship and a career of crime.
The film was able to represent a tight gridlock of morals which the Great Depression had thrust upon the poor folk of the country, therefore bringing sympathy and some justification to the Barrow Gang. They apparently never meant to hurt anyone, and the murders they did commit could be blamed on the overdeveloped trigger fingers of the policemen. They shot first - that sort of thing.

The film also got personal and inside Bonnie and Clyde's relationship. Love was mentioned and they were tender to each other. There was a unique closeness which everyone generally desires, and this would also bring sympathy to their story.

Overall, the details derived from the true story were obviously romanticized. However, I enjoyed this film immensely and will view it again at some point.

Editing in "Run Lola Run" and "Breathless"

The temporal organization in the two films were obviously unorthodox. Breathless not only jumped around, but it practically refused to explain much about the characters or the plot. The continuity was purposely nonexistent, therefore certain things feel unsure and I'm left to assume things.
Run Lola Run set up the plot and characters but jumped around to things that were happening simultaneously, in the future, or in the past. There were flashbacks, flash forwards, and the throbbing rave-techno soundtrack painfully illustrated the urgency with which Lola and Manni needed to act in their simultaneous situations. In the beginning, Schuster called it a game. Like a game, one can always go back and try something different when the end result is less than satisfactory. To use a mis-en-scene term, that makes the tradition in which the film was written more theatrical than naturalistic.

There is continuity in Run Lola Run. All of the characters' costumes and minor movements are consistent. There is disjunctive editing and it interacts with the continuity in a way that makes it complementary. When Lola is reliving some moments, there are discrepancies which are consistent with minor changes in the character's actions (like ripples in a pool outwardly affecting the rest of the water).

Cutting is used to extend my perspective in both of these films because it removes the audience from the story even more than a movie usually does. In some ways, both of the films sort of refused to share the whole stories, but Run Lola Run also shared intimate flash forwards of seemingly unimportant characters, and that's a privilege which the audience is never given. It may be sending mixed messages about the relationship between the film and the audience, but then again, being unsettled during a movie is hardly detrimental.

I think that's what this whole lack of continuity thing is about. If the audience is being kept on their toes and they're really thinking about the movie; and then they're actually investing more mental and emotional energy in the movie. Therefore, there's more reaction to certain events, and THAT'S entertainment.

YOU CAN'T GO BACK...OR CAN YOU?

This week our class viewed the 1999 German film entitled, "Run Lola Run." This film is fast-paced and is fueled by a throbbing rave-techno soundtrack.

It unfolds in a fashion somewhat comparable to a seemingly simple (yet surprisingly complex) mathematical equation.
Manni calls Lola with a serious problem. She must have the solution to the problem in hand twenty minutes from the moment of the phone call. She thinks about who can help her, then literally runs as fast as she can to implement her plan.

With an equation comes variables, and every variable has its own variability. Did I mention that this equation had a dizzying truth to it? Every character has a meaning, and all of their actions and words mean something to the grand equation.

Ultimately, trial and error lends its hand to the equation's realization and the film ends.

Mis-en-scene and "Do the Right Thing"

Throughout this film, a photograph of Martin Luther King, Jr. shaking hands with Malcolm X was shown. This prop was both instrumental and metaphorical. It was instrumental because the character Smiley was going around the neighborhood trying to sell copies of this photograph. The metaphorical aspect came from the men in the photo. MLK promoted nonviolent resistance to injustice, but Malcolm X promoted the opposite. The conflict there is metaphorical to the conflict in the film.
When Buggin Out wanted some black heroes on the Wall of Fame at Sal's Pizzeria, his first action was to boycott the business and to try to get others in the community to do the same. Things then escalated from a boycott to intense vandalism and fiery destruction.
Another example of a prop photo being both instrumental and metaphorical was not prominently featured, in fact it was quite literally like a flash. One of the photos on the Wall of Fame was the scene in "Raging Bull" when Robert DeNiro's character was boxing against the black character. The movie was black and white, and the boxing match was black vs. white. When the scuffle between Radio Raheem and Sal erupted, this image was manifested.

The setting was a neighborhood in Brooklyn during a summer day. As it was reiterated numerous times, it was an incredibly hot day. The heat was not just a fact of the setting. It also served as a plot device as a crucible.
The heat was illustrated using costumes and props. People fanned themselves, shirts were unbuttoned, and shorts were donned. Characters were sweating and complained about the heat.

This film was definitely of the naturalistic tradition. There was nothing which broke or even bent the laws of physics. The neighborhood in which the film took place bore a familiarity to which most of the audience could relate.

CERTAIN ELEMENTS JUST DON'T MIX...

An independent film from 1989, Spike Lee's "Do the Right Thing," takes place in a neighborhood in Brooklyn which is predominately black and Hispanic. White folk in this neighborhood were few and far between and appeared to be not overly welcome.

The film follows Spike Lee's character, Mookie, his neighborhood and all its inhabitants for one excruciatingly hot day. As the heat rose, so did voices and racial tensions. Whether it was at the Korean grocery story or Sal's pizzeria across the street, someone was having a problem with somebody else. There became a pattern. There was very little reflection and mostly reaction.

Repeatedly featured in the movie is a photograph of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X. They were shaking hands, but at the time they were preaching very different things. Like the question of violence versus nonviolence, much of the characters were conflicted.

At the end of the day, the sun and the heat went down, but the momentum of unrest could not be stopped. The crucible was overheating and steam needed to be released.
When things blow up and go up in flames you're left wondering, "Did Mookie do the right thing?"

Mis-en-scene and "The Godfather"

The beginning sequence introduced Don Corleone's study and Connie's wedding. The events of the wedding and the events within the study are happening simultaneously, even though they contain contrasting imagery.
In the study, Vito is the character given the most presence in the scene, and not just because he's being played by Marlon Brando, the "star" of the film. He's the head of the Corleone family; the Godfather, and he is being requested to do things, per Sicilian tradition. There were many props in that set, two of which were very prominent. There was the cat which Vito was holding during his first medium shot. This cat contrasted the dark setting, both in nature and in color, and it was a symbol that though Vito is a foreboding figure he is a caring family man. The other was Vito's desk. This prop may have had even more of presence than Vito. That desk represented power, and it was a powerful symbol.

The best interaction of settings in the film was probably the back and forth viewing of the study and Connie's wedding. These interactions, as I mentioned before, contrast in elements but communicate the same things; the importance of tradition and family.

The overall setting for the movie was 1940's New York. The sets, therefore, reflect this time period. It's post-WWII America, and though most citizens are breathing a sigh of relief about peace time, the Corleones end up waging a mob war. Some scenic connotations therefore reflect and underworld war during civilian peace time.
One aspect of the set(s) which contributed to the understanding of this would be concealed pistols.

There was one scene in which the blocking was important and highly explanatory of the characters. It is the scene in which Clemenza, Tom Hagen, Michael, and Sonny are discussing the problem with Sollozzo and McCluskey. In one particular shot, Clemenza is not in view, but Tom is sitting and leaning back into a chair, because he is the one who always wants to talk things out. Sonny is standing, hungry for action (which usually means blood). Michael is sitting between them, and he is sitting in an unsettled way, communicating his ambivalence and balance between the two. In my opinion, it's as early as that scene when the realization that he would be the next godfather begins to set in.

Costumes play a monumental part in this film, partly because of the time period, and partly because of the occupation of most of the characters. There are a lot of suits. One example is that Michael makes a suit-wearing transition throughout the film. When we are first introduced to Michael, he's wearing his Army uniform. He's a war-hero, proud to be American. For a bit, he's wearing nice but casual clothes. He's a civilian. In Sicily he's wearing simple clothes. He's finding himself. When he's courting Appolonia, he wears modest but gentlemanly clothes. He's a nice, Catholic, Sicilian boyfriend. When he's back in America, his suits are very nice. He's the semi-head of the Corleone family. Toward the very end of the film, he's wearing fancy, expensive-looking suits. He is the Godfather.
Through costuming creating scenic realism, a stark contrast is drawn between Kay and Appolonia. Kay wears nice American fashion. She is a sort of simple and plain character. Appolonia is strikingly beautiful, and her subtle dresses accentuate her beauty.
Make-up is also integral. At one point, both Michael and Connie have badly battered faces and the make-up portrays that. Vito's aging is portrayed through make-up, and very well, too, considering that Marlon Brando was at least fifteen years younger than his character.

The mis-en-scene is this film definitely fits best with a naturalistic tradition. Besides the violence, there were really no grand, sweeping gestures indicating what the story was, nor were there any long monologues. Everything was subtle.

SO MANY CATCH PHRASES, SO LITTLE TIME...

Based on Mario Puzo's novel of the same name, Francis Ford Coppola's 1972 masterpiece, "The Godfather," is a panoramic view of family and of mob activities in the 40's.

This is where the lines between right and wrong; good and bad are blurred. Vito Corleone is a faithful and loving family man; many call him "Godfather," but still others call him a murderer.

Michael Corleone is a WWII vet - an American hero. Like a good American, he wants to blend in and live the honest life with his blond girlfriend. However, when the family needs him he answers the call with great abandon comparable to those tragic heroes from the ancient Greek era. And like those great dramas, the story progresses with a staggering body count and an ethical metamorphosis.

Sorrow, joy, and high levels of ambivalence are all active elements in this film.

Critically Analyzing, "Apocalypse Now"

The film utilized a pretty varied array of shots for different kinds of scenes. In the beginning, there were off-screen helicopters that we could hear before we could see. The battle-ravaged jungle would fade out as sequences of Captain Willard's face and the whirring ceiling fan which he was facing would fade in, and vice versa. In between the fading in and out the images would be superimposed on one another, and this was a recurring phenomenon throughout the film. It was a way to seamlessly weave shots together, but it also may have represented an emotional state which most of the characters shared. I felt as though the days sort of just dragged on for those men.
There were close-ups for character revelation and dialogue, and crane shots for the helicopter fly-ins and skirmishes. Medium shots were instructional and long shots were contemplative, especially towards the end.

Colors seemed very important in the storytelling, not only because it took place in the Vietnamese and Cambodian jungle, but because the point of the story was that nothing is ever clean-cut black and white. Red and orange were probably the most prevalent because of the associations and presence of blood and fire. Shadows and night were also powerful elements. The shadow was mostly utilized when Willard finally met Kurtz. For most of that scene, neither the audience nor Willard could see his face for the shadow covering it.

I felt that this film emphasized the value of representation more than it did presentation, and I definitely experienced it as an example of presence. The presence wasn't so much the made up of the characters as it was created by the emotional and mental states of the characters.

Viewing, "Apocalypse Now"

The movie was set in Vietnam and Cambodia, and at no point was there a flashback or visual allusion to the States. It follows the mission given to army Captain Willard concerning a seemingly insane renegade Colonel Kurtz.
Almost everyone I know has either seen this movie or heard of it, and it seems to be infamous a little more than it is famous - which is understandable because it's a powerful film and as a certain character teaches, power is not always good.
There are few people in this country (and others) who don't find the Vietnam conflict detestable as a general concept. Now, I wouldn't go so far as to say that this film was an anti-Vietnam flick, but it was most definitely nodding toward an anti-war flick. The fact that it was made in 1979 just validates that in my mind. The conflict was fresh and like most fresh wounds the healing process was itchy and uncomfortable.
Loosely based on the Joseph Conrad novel, "Heart of Darkness," this movie is full of undertones, overtones, and cynical tones. It blurs the lines between good and evil, and that's the whole point.

Critically Viewing, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"

Since we read the chapter on cinematography and then discussed its points in class, I feel that I have a much improved understanding and appreciation of the process and the art.
This movie was a good icebreaker in the discussion of the chapter. It broke many rules, but at the same time it set many standards.
When writing a book, the author must establish the characters and establish the plot through dialogue and description. That's all there is to it, right? Wrong. The author must use nuance and tone to convey the ultimate theme of the story as well as to tie up the plot.
When making a movie, the director/cinematographer must establish the characters in the actors and establish the plot through dialogue, image, and sound. That's all there is to it, right? Wrong. The director/cinematographer must use visual/audio nuance and tone to convey the ultimate theme(s) of the story as well as to tie up - or leave untied - the plot. It seems deceivingly simple. When I read the chapter on cinematography, I was amazed at just how much one person's perspective on life matters and translates into the film, and just how much an artistic perspective must be interwoven with technology exactly. If something isn't properly coordinated, it screws up the whole thing.
"Diving Bell" was sort of traditional, at first. There were credits and there was soothing and stereotypically Parisian-type French music. The backgrounds, which were x-rays of the human skeleton seemed to be metaphorical as well as literal - especially the part where it flashes many x-rays at an impossible pace to follow. I felt this also set the tone for the rest of the movie. It was rich with metaphors and second meanings.
The framing was mostly unconventional. For a good part of the movie, the audience sees things through Jean-Do's left eye (his very limited vision). This was incredibly important. Not being able to see certain things, wondering, and being frustrated with the situation put the audience right where he was, and long enough to establish an emotional connection or an understanding. Without this element, the movie could have been as exciting as an artfully done documentary (which can be nice, but it's not something that really impacts a person the way this movie impacted me).
The lighting and color represented a somewhat dreary outlook usually, except for when Jean-Do had flashbacks. The flashbacks were sometimes more vibrant and bright. The lighting was basic. It was pretty dark in the Berck-su-Mer hospital rooms and it was brighter when he was taken outside -pretty realistic.
As far as shots and depth of field go, things in Jean-Do's vision were either very close or considerably far. That, too, was metaphorical. When the movie was in 3rd person view, there was a scene where the depth of field was direct and intensely metaphorical. This was the scene in which Henriette (the speech therapist) and Jean-Do are sitting outside, "talking" and he expressed to her that he had decided to stop feeling sorry for himself. At first it was a long shot of Henriette and Jean-Do and then after he said that he was no longer going to indulge in self-pity, it cut to an extreme long shot. It was simple yet profound.

Viewing, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"

This is a 2007 French film based on the autobiographical commentary of "Elle" magazine editor Jean-Dominique Bauby, following his "cerebrovascular accident" (a massive stroke) which left him with locked-in syndrome. He was completely paralyzed and unable to speak.

I didn't have any expectations for this movie because before tonight I had no idea that it existed. Having said that, I made sure to keep an open mind. I must admit that I have some preconceptions about European films, and especially about French films. I repeat, I made sure to keep an open mind.

This film was exquisite.

It touched me deeply. Obviously, it wasn't a warm and fuzzy "feel-good" movie, but then again, maybe it was. It left me deeply reflective without any spiritual panic. Take that as what you will, just know that I have a certain fear of oblivion.

The photography and framing was shockingly poignant. As I mentioned, I have some preconceptions about French films, and one of them is an inexplicable talent for photography and framing. Even with that preconception, I was impressed. The entire cast was talented, and it was stupendously written. Rich with symbolism and depth, it's a film people could watch over and over.