After a much needed break from writing these reviews for my film class that I was taking, I'm back again. This summer seems to be a pretty promising summer for movies and it looks like I will be going to a lot of movies. I've been to a bunch already this summer and the list of movies that I see is only going to get bigger!
The Pirates! Band of Misfits
This was the first movie I saw of the summer and I thought it was hilarious. I love stop animation and this is from the same creators of Wallace and Gromit and Chicken Run which are both AMAZING! I love the detail that the creators put into making these movies because they are so time consuming to make.
A movie based on pirates...okay Disney has done that with the Pirates of the Carribean series and used the star power and comedic performance of Johnny Depp to make it a great film. But, The Pirates! Band of Misfits uses just straight comedy. The whole premise of the movie is that the head pirate of this one ship of useless pirates or aren't really good at being pirates is trying to win "Pirate of the Year". The only thing that the Pirate Captain (which is his actual name) has to over come are: that he's not a very good pirate, there are 3 other amazing pirates that get a lot more booty than he ever has, and the Queen does not like pirates and is after and wanting to kill any pirate that crosses her. With these three things against him and his crew it is a ball of laughs the entire time.
As the poster says, "Laugh Your Booty Off" is a true statement. I don't want to give away anything about the plot because you need to see this film if you like kid movies that have a lot of adult jokes in it. I couldn't believe some of the jokes that they told and innuendos but then I realized I got them but a kid probably wouldn't so it be okay.
The Avengers not much to say about this movie other than it was an action pact superhero movie that tops all the others that have been made. It did amazing in the box office and put a star studded cast together. I thought the new Hulk, played by Mark Ruffalo was a great choice and hopefully if they make an Avengers 2 they go with him again because he was a good choice to play the big green man.
I've recently started watching the cartoon version of the Avengers and the one thing that had me wondering about it was why didn't they include all of the Avengers. The writers, director, and producers left of Ant Man, Wasp, and Black Panther. I wouldn't mind leaving out Ant Man because I think it wouldn't look realistic with the rest of the film and also his character is pretty boring. Wasp it would have been nice to see because she is really funny in the show. The one I was most disappointed about was Black Panther. He is such a bad ass character and it would have been great to see him in the movie! Just look at his costume it would have been amazing in the movie! But maybe, just maybe if there is a second movie he will make the cut to become part of the Avengers!!! Fingers Crossed
P.S. Make sure you see all of the other Avengers individual movies (except the Hulk one's they aren't very good) because it will easier to understand than without seeing them. The first time I went without seeing Thor and I was confused about all the characters in the movie that dealt with Thor.
Men in Black III eh...that's all really. I love these movies but this one was just eh. Will Smith is certainly showing that he is getting older in the film. It had some good laughs in it like all Men in Black movies do but the story line was eh. Not that impressed with it.
Dark Shadows it is a typical Tim Burton/ Johnny Depp film. These two have made great films together and this one is up there. It was funny and was very entertaining. I've never seen the original Dark Shadows television show, which I heard is really dark, but I thought for an interpretation of the film was pretty good. Of course Johnny Depp was great, Helena Bonham Carter was superb, and the rest of the cast were equally as good. I'm now very interested in watching the old Dark Shadows shows which are now on Netflix online if you have an account with them.
Snow White and the Huntsmen its sad to say that this was Kristen Stewart's best acting in a film...yup. I thought it was a good movie but it seemed long. It may have just been me but I thought it was. Charlize Theron was not as good as I thought as see was going to be in the movie, I found her portrayal of the Evil Queen was annoying. Chris Hemsworth once again played a ruggedly handsome character almost similar to Thor. Kristen Stewart for once I did not want to punch her in the mouth for the awkward things she said or her awkward style of acting. I would take her in the movie acting over the Twilight series or the way she acts in real life. However, the most annoying character besides Charlize Theron was her screen brother who was a pervert and just wouldn't stop chasing Snow White. He didn't know when to give up, like really your never going to get Snow White so give up!
Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted was really funny and I could not stop giggling. It was so funny and I went to go see it with my sister during the afternoon and it was completely filled with children. I think my sister who is 25 and me who is almost 22 were the youngest people there...NOT with a child. But what makes movies like this better is seeing it with little kids because they laugh and it is a genuine laugh that makes me laugh so much. The 3rd movie in the situation was the best of them all and it had songs in it that I could not stop singing because they are so damn catchy.
Welp, there are going to be many more posts like this and I can't wait to go see many more movies this summer!
So today was my last official cinema seminar class and the last time I would technically have to write a blog entry for this blog! But I enjoyed doing this blog so much and writing and discussing film, that I'm going to continue on writing!
I know you all must be so excite about this news but please try and contain yourselves! I'm going to try and continue to write at least once a month and anything more will be an amazing bonus for you and me!
Well for now, enjoy the summer thats coming up and keep searching for that next great film and so will I here at film quest!
My new favorite genre of film that I've been really getting into lately is thrillers. I love being scared and having those jump out of your seat moments that happen during the film. So, this semester at school I went and saw two thrillers that I was really excited for.
The 1st was The Woman in Black featuring Daniel Radcliffe. I feel like I'm going to use this word a lot when talking about thrillers but I'm gonna say...POTENTIAL. This film had such potential to be a great and scary film but because of some terrible acting and an iffy story line the film fell flat. There were only a few moments in the film that made me jump but other than that nothing.
The next film that had such great POTENTIAL was The Raven which I saw this past weekend and this was another film that rested on it being a thriller too much. Also the film relied too much on it being about Edgar Allen Poe short stories and poems and him being very dark. The acting and dialogue fell really short for me with John Cusak leading the way for disappointment. This movie could have been amazing but yet it wasn't.
This past
weekend, saw the film The Artist
directed by Michel Hazanavicius. This film was brilliantly done from the
beginning to end and was a pleasure to sit through in the movie theater. At the movie theater I attended they were
only showing two films being The Artist and
The Iron Lady starring Meryl
Streep. Normally I would go see any Meryl
movie because I absolutely love the way she acts because she is so diverse and
can truly act in any role, but I went against my normal choice and picked The Artist. The director was able to capture the essence
and magic of what silent films can capture and also what these films were like
when they first came out. From the
beginning of the film I got the sense that this was a treat instead of just
another movie that I would see any other time.
Sometimes I wish when I watch films like The Artist that I could go back to a time when films were starting
out so I could live during the time period when going and seeing a film was an
event and the processes of movie making and the stars where the big news in
everyday life. The Artist, I believe, captures what it used to be like for the
audience, movie stars, and directors of silent films in this time and what it
was like for them when film was changing from silent to talkies. I believe today that most films rest of the laurels
on-sound effect and the spectacular use of digital effects to maintain their audience’s
attention. This however takes away from
the message and the shot composition of the film because people who go to the
movies today are just looking for the new effect or the new 3D movie which is
going to wow them.
Staircases used in the film
The
Artist was able to wow me unlike any other film that I have seen recently
because of the shot composition that the director chose because they were all
cleverly thought out. The one scene that
sticks into my mind the most is when George Valentin is leaving the production
studio offices and heading down the stairs.
The shot reveals the different levels of stairs going up and down and
each floor. Nothing is obstructing your
view from seeing what is going on in the building. It made me think this is what it would look
like if you were looking at the stairs through a glass window or wall. This scene also reminded me of one of my
favorite films Rear Window, and its shot
composition of the buildings where the main character views all of his
neighbors. In the stair scene the
audience sees the stairs as if there were no walls surrounding them and you can
see everything that people are doing when they are walking up and down the
stairs, talking to people, and doing many other things. Michel Hazanavicius was able to create a very
visually appealing movie that I enjoyed and would recommend anyone to go and
see.
Cast of The Artist at the 2012 Oscars
The weekend that I saw the film was
very close to the Oscar Awards so it was really interesting at the awards to
have seen the film that won most of the awards. This year it was the 84th Academy Awards and The Artist received an amazing ten
nominations. The film ended up winning
five awards: Best Picture, Best Director for Hazanavicius, Best Actor for
Dujardin, Best Costume Design, and Best Original Score. I totally agree that the film should have won
in all of these categories because of it being such a great film.
So here it is...the final draft of my critical essay on a film from 1962. The film I did was Dr. No, so I hope you enjoy and learn something from what I wrote and researched!
Dr. No movie poster
In 1962, the world was
introduced to one of the most famous film spies’ movie history. With just three words, audiences learned the
identity of this man, this memorable statement: “Bond, James Bond.” James Bond was introduced in director
Terrence Young’s first Bond film Dr. No
and it helped change the action adventure genre forever. Dr. No
created a new genre some people call “secret agent,” which emerged and grew in
popularity in the 1960s. The James Bond
series has become one of the longest lasting secret agent film series and has
created an unforgettable character who always is trying to save the world from
a new villain. As it evolved the James
Bond series also has mirrored what was happening in the world at the time each
film was produced as 007 tries to save the world from the dastardly villains
who threaten it. The series continues to
tap into such anxieties and threats in its contemporary incarnation.
James Bond
was created by British writer Ian Fleming.
As of 1963 Fleming wrote eleven James Bond books in eleven years and
sold millions of copies of the books.
The novels attracted many readers from around the world because of the
adventurous situations James Bond was involved in. According to Geoffrey Boca, writer of “The
Spectacular Cult of Ian Fleming,” “each winter, he [Ian Fleming] retreats from
London whirl and writes a new Bond novel at his beach house in Jamaica,” which
is interesting in relation to the film Dr.
No because, like Fleming, Bond leaves England to head for Jamaica to
complete his assignment and help out another spy (1). Most people believe that Fleming based Bond
on himself with whom Bond shares a couple of similarities, but according to
Fleming this is not true. In fact
Fleming wrote Bond to be the “opposite of himself…Bond, Fleming writes in every
book, is “cruel”. The essence of
Fleming’s personality is his gentleness, he abhors violence” (Boca, 1). When Boca says James Bond is cruel he means that
James Bond is not afraid to hurt some people in order to figure out the truth
and complete his missions, he does not care whom he hurts in the process.
Fleming was
able to create such a likeable interesting character with Bond that many people
such as President Kennedy enjoyed reading the books. With this success of the books, Eon
Productions and producers Harry Saltzman and Albert R. Broccoli picked up the
rights to produce James Bond novels into a feature film. After deliberation, producers Saltzman and
Broccoli decided to produce Dr. No as
the first film, even though it was not the first book in the Bond series. The first book in the series was Casino Royale, which they later decided
to adapt to film in 1967. James Bond is
one of those book and film characters that can be both likeable and unlikeable
by people because of the way he acts towards people and always puts his
aggression out on others. There are many
reasons as to why James Bond is a likeable character with the first one being
his good looks. It is hard for a person
to be hated in a film if he has such good looks. Also he is very suave and both men and women
wish dream about him, in different ways though.
“Guns, fast cars, hot women and the free life of a spy…the life of a
suave British spy is some sort of escapist fantasy for men” (Ewing, 1). These are all reasons as to why men want to
be like James Bond because they can vicariously live a lifestyle that is. Women also fall in live with the fantasy of
James Bond because they want to each be wooed by Bond just like the women in he
books and films are. Bond’s likeability
is questioned sometimes because of his negative traits are the only things that
people notice. James Ewing noted that
“Bond is some kind of socially sophisticated sex maniac or he’s one
misogynistic SOB” (2). Most of the
negative characteristics and traits that Bond possesses all have to deal with
two things—sex and women. Bond seems to
not know the acceptable ways of courting women because he does not court them at
all, he only sees them as objects of desire that he finds attractive. “Womanizing is all well and good, but it
seems Bond has a come on line for just about every woman he meets…Bond bedded a
woman he knew was working for the enemy and then turned her in to the
authorities right after that” (Ewing, 2).
Bond’s womanizing ways disgust and turn people away from his character
because he is cold to women. It seems
that he does not have any interest in knowing how to treat women properly and
seems to only want them to fulfill his sexual needs and desires and often his
needs as a spy. 007 is one of those men who
will always remain a bachelor because he is content with just sleeping around
with different women and never getting married.
However, in On Her Majesty’s
Secret Service, James Bond played by George Lazenby, actually gets married
to one of the Bond girls that he falls in love with. This marriage is short lived because after
they are married his wife is shot and dies in Bond’s arm and cementing the fact
that James Bond will always be a womanizing bachelor. The first time that we meet Honey Ryder, we
see her emerge from the water in a white bikini through the eyes of James
Bond. The director uses point of view
focalization to show that James Bond looks towards the ocean and sees Ryder
coming out of the water and the camera follows her trek from the water to the
sand. When she throws down the shells
she has collected the camera moves back to James Bond and a smile comes across
his face and then the camera turns back to Ryder again. When the camera goes back to Honey Ryder it
is a close-up of her torso and head focusing on her wet body. The camera once again turns back to Bond and
the smile on his face is even bigger and he begins to interact with Ryder. Bond’s gaze is seen throughout the Bond
series because of the use of point of view focalizations because other
directors pay homage to this particular scene in other Bond films in the
future.
Dr. No established many iconic images
and characters that have appeared in twenty-two other Bond films. The first iconic image is in the opening
sequence with Bond walking across the screen as we see him in the scope of the
gun. While we see him walking across the
screen he abruptly turns towards the viewer and shoots his gun, and still
looking through the scope of the gun, we see blood begin to travel down the
scope. Once this happens the iconic and
memorable James Bond theme song begins to play and we are introduced to the
next other iconic image in the film. The
opening title sequence, which is similar to that in other Bond films. In Golden
Eye, the opening title begins with gun scope, similar to Dr. No, but instead of just having the
gun scope be filled with blood, a bullet is being shot at the audience as if
they were staring down the barrel of that gun.
In every Bond film the opening is an animated sequence, which features
characters that will be introduced later in the film and also features multiple
women. In all the openings animated
shapes of women’s body is shown from head to toe in silhouette form. The women are shown as if James Bond himself
was looking at them moving in sexual and sensual ways that could be the women
teasing Bond with their good looks because they know they are an object of his
desire. This is seen in both Dr. No and Golden Eye. However, in Golden Eye the women’s silhouettes are
done in 3D animation making them seem more realistic than the women shown in
the Dr. No opening sequence. While women are being shown in the Golden Eye opening sequence, other
symbols and objects that are relevant to the films plot lines are featured,
like communist Russia symbols and a mask that has a golden eye. Women become an
important image in the James Bond films because Bond is a very sexual person
and loves any women that are pretty whether she is good or bad for him.
Sean Connery
When it
came to casting James Bond, it called for someone who could command the screen
while also being suave and sexual. The
front runners for the part of James Bond in the beginning were, Cary Grant,
Patrick McGoohan, James Mason, and Steve Reeves, all of whom turned down the
role either because of other commitments or for other reasons. Sean Connery was
ultimately cast as James Bond 007. Sean
Connery was not Ian Fleming’s choice for Bond but Saltzman and Broccoli cast
him “because they liked how he was big, tough-looking man who nonetheless moved
gracefully” (IMDB). The producers and
the public embraced Sean Connery as the British spy who would help save the
world. Sean Connery used his good looks,
charm, and smooth voice to win over Bond lovers as 007. It is said by film critics and fans that they
“view George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, and Pierce Brosnan as
impostors” in the role of James Bond (Berardinelli, 2). Sean Connery was such a great Bond that he
reprised the role six more times after Dr.
No. “Connery’s panther-like movement
and look of an ever-ready sexual predator, made him Bond worthy…with his
leisurely smile, deadpan wit and impassive manner, Connery epitomized the early
Bond to such an extent that it seemed near impossible task to replace him”
(Black).
Along with
Sean Connery as the iconic Bond in the film series, the Bond girl, and the
villains also became staple characters in the series that would set the
standard for the other films in the future.
The first Bond girl is Honey Ryder played by Ursula Andress. Honey Ryder set the standard of how a Bond
girl should look in the films. Bond
girls should be extremely beautiful and sexy women that men lust over. It also happens that Bond girls are given
“exotic and far out names like Honey, Kissy, Pussy, Bibi, Lupe, and Jinx” to
name a few (Black). Honey Ryder’s
entrance, which happened to be almost halfway through the film, was an
attention getter for both James Bond and viewers. Honey Ryder, enters the film by emerging from
the Caribbean waters on Crab Key Island wearing only a white bikini that shows
off her assets and wielding a knife and a bag of shells. When Honey Ryder comes out of the water she
is singing the song, “Underneath the Mango Trees” which is one of the songs
from the opening title sequence that is played after the iconic James Bond
theme song. Ryder agrees to help Bond
out on Crab Key Island for his search of Doctor No and his secret lair. At nightfall, the two are attack by the
supposed “dragon” of the island and they are captured and brought under Doctor
No’s control. James Bond near the end of
the film searches for Ryder as she is in danger because the maze of a lair is
about to blown up due to nuclear weapons.
Bond and Ryder are reunited at the end and share a passionate kiss that
is familiar in all Bond films as an ending.
For many Bond fans, Honey Ryder is considered to be the best looking and
most memorable Bond girl to have ever graced the screen. She is able to capture the attention and make
James Bond become entrenched in her good looks and everything that she
does. These characteristics are what
makes a Bond girl because James Bond should be entirely entrenched in who she
is and always desire her like Bond does of Honey Ryder in Dr. No.
Doctor
Julius No sets the stage for villains that James Bond has to defeat in order to
save the world. Doctor No is hired by
SPECTRE, which stands for SPecial Executive for Counterintelligence Terrorism,
Revenge and Extortion, to help topple and ruin the United States Space Program
by disrupting Project Mercury which was the first human spaceflight. Doctor No uses his location on Crab Key to hide
his secret plans of using a radiation beams to disrupt the space launch. Another feature that makes Doctor No
memorable is that he has metal hands because constant exposure to radiation
that has caused the loss of his hands.
During the film, it is evident that Doctor No shares certain traits with
James Bond because they “both have a cool, calculated demeanor but both fight
for two competing ideologies” (Ewing, 3).
Doctor No remains calm believing that he will outsmart and prevail
against James Bond and complete his mission.
The only time Doctor No loses his calm, in the film is at the end when
James Bond is messing around with the nuclear reactor and defeating the plans
that Doctor No set up to sabotage the United States Space Program. Doctor No set the standard high when it came
to other villains and foes that James Bond was later to fight against because
he outwitted most people that he faced and did it with his wits instead of just
power.
One thing
that the James Bond films have been able to accomplish very well is having
relevant story lines that go along with what is happening in the world at the
time in 1962:
Not only does Fleming write with
great skill and verve, but there is a startling topicality about his work. Bond’s world of spy fantasia has proved to be
no fantasia at all but a mirror of what is going on in the world. We know now that the Russians do build
missile bases in nearby Caribbean islands (Dr.
No)… (Boca, 84).
Fleming uses his stories to show the public that the things
in his novels and subsequently films may truly be happening in the world. Bond films, like Dr. No, play on the fears that people have. One of the fears is that there may actually
be a villain like Doctor No, trying to plot against the United States Space
Program, as there is in the film. Dr. No is a great example of using
events that are going on during the time of the film to set up the scenes of
the film. “The U.S.-Soviet Cold War had
worked its way into the fabric of everyday life in both countries, fueled by
the arms race and the growing threat of nuclear weapons…”
(www.history.com). The threat of nuclear
weapons became ever increasingly real when the Soviet Union launched a “R-7
intercontinental ballistic missile—Sputnik…[and showed] the demonstration of the
overwhelming power of the R-7 missile—seemingly capable of delivering a nuclear
warhead into U.S. airspace…” (www.history.com).
Nuclear warfare was such a threat to Americans that they began to worry
about everything that the Soviet Union happened to be doing with their space
program. Also in 1962 the Cuban Missile
Crisis became world headlines as President John F. Kennedy believed that the
Soviets had armed the country with nuclear missiles pointing toward the United
States. It is amusing to see the
similarities between the United States and Soviet Union conflict in relation to
the film Dr. No.
During the
Cold War, Khrushchev, the Premier of the Soviet Union, decided to place nuclear
missiles in Cuba and help another communist country. Khrushchev stated that Kennedy and the United
States had violated an air and space agreement that was a part of an
international treaty. But Kennedy,
“blocked Cuba, halted the shipment of new missiles, and demanded the removal of
existing installations” which led to Khrushchev removing all missiles from Cuba
and thus ending the immediate threat of nuclear warfare (Kagan, 915). James Bond can be seen as similar figure
during the time of Dr. No was made
and when the story takes place. James
Bond can be related to John F. during the placement of the film because of his
calm and collected nature during a time of national terror. James Bond himself during his mission trying
to defeat Doctor No also remained calm and collected always knowing that he
would be able to figure out how to solve the problem. Along with Bond having the same personality
as Kennedy he also had the same good looks that also help him with women. Many women thought that John F. Kennedy was
very good looking and that helped with his popularity. James Bond is also a good looking man and
this helps him with the women also.
Writer Ian
Fleming and film director Terrence Young in 1962 were able to create a film
that would change film forever. Dr. No set a new standard for film genre
featuring spies while also setting the standard for the future James Bond films
to come. James Bond and the Dr. No film created iconic images and
characters that movie viewers were able to remember for years after the film
was released. Sean Connery as James Bond
set the standard for the suave, smooth talking, secret agent, Bonds to come
throughout the film series. Honey Ryder set the standard for
Bond girls and how they were supposed to look as a sexual object within the
film and Doctor No was the first dastardly villain the 007 would face in order
to save the world from his plan for world domination. The James Bond film also raised discussion of
how Bond treated women and how this film set the standard for how other Bond
girls were to be objectified by other Bond’s in later films. The film was able
to use current events in order to play on the fears of the viewers and keep
them entertained with its story lines during the Cold War period. Ian Fleming’s Dr. No introduced the world to the most famous secret agent in the
world and was able to do it with three words; “Bond, James Bond” and with those
three words the film industry was introduced to the greatest international spy
that would stay around for years to come.
Black, David. "The Villians." The James Bond International Fan Club. Web. 16 Feb. 2012. <http://www.007.info/default.asp>.
Bocca, Geoffrey. "The Spectacular Cult of Ian Fleming:." Rev. of Dr. No. Saturday Evening Post 22 June 1963: 66-68. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. <http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=cd31fe2d-cf33-4b56-a20f-ad3422ba72dc%40sessionmgr110&vid=4&hid=104>.
"Dr. No (1962)." The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055928/>.
Dr. No. Dir. Terence Young. Perf. Sean Connery, Ursula Andress and Bernard Lee. Eon Productions, 1962. DVD.
Ewing, James B. "Dr. No (1962)." Rev. of Movie. Cinema Sights: Through the Eyes of Film. 21 June 2010. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. <http://cinemasights.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/dr-no-1962/>.
Kagan, Donald, Steven E. Ozment, and Frank M. Turner. "The Cold War Era, Decolonization, and The Emergence of a New Europe." The Western Heritage. 10th ed. Vol. 2. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2010. Print.
"The Space Race." History.com. A&E Television Networks. Web. 18 Feb. 2012. <http://www.history.com/topics/space-race>.
North America in the future. Post uprising. Famished districts. Two pieces of paper. Girl on Fire. 24 Tributes. Arena. Savage Killings. Love Blossoming. Television Broadcast. Mockingjay. Gale. Peeta. Katniss. This is THE HUNGER GAMES!
The Hunger Games was the #1 film that people were looking forward to in 2012. The Hunger Games book series are one of the most addicting novels that I have ever read, EVER!!! I literally could not put the book down, I kept telling myself "okay its midnight, only one more chapter"--5 chapters later I would still be reading. I read the first two books in three days which is remarkable for me because I'm a really slow reader or I just fall asleep while I read. But these novels engaged me throughout the whole story and they wanted me to read more and learn more about the characters and the games!
So, as soon as I found out there was going to be a Hunger Games film--I FREAKED OUT--I was like a kid on Christmas. I went online and researched (yes researched) who was going to the main characters, who was directing, and first of all how long was I going to have to wait to see the film on the big screen. March 23, 2012 was the date that I had to wait and I was counting down the days till I could see Katniss, the girl on fire, and the other 23 tributes fight to the death in an arena.
The story of the Hunger Games pushes the envelope in story-telling. Suzanne Collins, the writer of the trilogy, wasn't afraid to create a story revolved around kids killing other kids for a nations entertainment. But the novels "graphicness" left me wondering how they were going to bring it to the big screen. Were they going to censor the film due to the studio possibly catering toward a younger demographic? Or were they going to go over the top and lose a large group of people who do not enjoy overt violence. With the film though, they would have to find a happy medium between not enough violence and overt violence to appease all of the book and film fans. The director, Gary Ross however found the happy medium between the two too well. At some points in the film, when there was going to be an overtly violent scene, Ross played around with the camera angles and the speed that they moved the camera at and also the speed the actors moved at so you could not really tell how violent the scene truly was. The opening area scene by the cornucopia 12 tributes die as the 24 tributes rush toward the cornucopia in order to gain weapons, food, and other survival tools; but you would never really have known that 12 had died until later on when they're deaths were announced. I don't know if its my sadistic side of myself coming out but I wanted to see the blood shed and the violence that I read and weirdly enjoyed in the book. This wasn't the only problem I found in the film. But first I want to clarify something, when I say problem I don't mean it like the film was awful, I mean it as just bothersome.
Most of my other problems I found were in the selection of what details be left in or out of the film. The director chose to leave out highly important information like the whole back story of Katniss's father, Rue's District sending Katniss bread and many other story lines I thought were important to the story itself.
With Katniss's father's story, it was only briefly mentioned in the film during a dream sequence, but if you had not read the book this scene may have been confusing. The confusing part is that the director shows a bunch of coal miners heading down into the mines and then an explosion. In District 12 the profession of the men was coal mining so therefore Katniss's father was a coal miner, but in this scene we are not give any knowledge that one of those men was her father. It was just a very confusing scene that basically if you blinked you would have missed it because it was very, very quick.
With District 11-Rue's District-in the film are not given any information about the important role they play. When Rue dies, Katniss takes it very hard because of the relationship they had formed and the comparison the Rue has to Katniss's sister Prim. At her death instead of just leaving her there Katniss places flowers around her body before the game keepers take her away, giving her a sort of funeral. Because of the kindness that she showed, when Katniss is starving of hunger, District 11 sends her bread thanking her for her kindness. During the film, the only admiration that you see District 11 give is they put there three fingers in the air. When they showed District 11 what I ABSOLUTELY hated was that they put a lower third saying that we are in District 11. NO! Get that out of there, okay I get it people who haven't read the book won't know that that's District 11 but we do. Us Hunger Games book fans know that is District 11. The lower third looked out of place since it was the first one since the beginning of the novel and it was unnecessary. Ross you have already catered to people by lowering the violence but please stop dumbing it down. It makes me afraid that they are doing this in this film because the books just get more confusing as you get into the 2nd and 3rd one so if they are dumbing it down for people now, oh vey!
The last thing that really bugged me was the relationship between Katniss and Haymitch. In the book, Haymitch seems to have no interest in Katniss as one of his tributes. They have a hate hate relationship that seems to work in the end but brings up lots of arguments and disagreements. Haymitch holds out on sending things to Katniss in the games to teach her lessons and to think of different things that can keep her alive. In the film this hate hate relationship is non existent. Haymitch and Katniss are civil to one another and Katniss is sent things, like medicine and food, in what seems like right away. We don't hear the inner-monologues that we read in the book of Katniss wondering why she is not being send food and other supplies. We don't hear the questions like: What is Haymitch doing other there, is he wanting Peeta to win instead of me, and is he trying to kill me here? The inner monologue was important in understand Katniss and her thought process which we do not get at all in the film.
Even with the storyline flaws, I was still able to enjoy the film. I thought the actor selection was great. I was highly surprised by Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket and Lenny Kravitz as Cinna. Elizabeth Banks I'm used to seeing in comedies like Zack and Miri Make a Porno and not in dramatic roles where she could not rely solely on stupid comedy. Banks, however played the role of Effie Trinket with perfection. She captured the quirkiness of Effie and the strangeness of her since she is from the Capital and everyone from the Capital is a little off in the minds of everyone else. I thought her make-up and costumes were amazing because they were over the top but just exactly how I imagined her to look like. Elizabeth Banks surprised me and I hope she does reprise her role in the next film because I thought she did a great job and defiantly surprised me in how well she did.
Lenny Kravitz was another real surprise for me since I did not see that choice in actor coming at all. When I think of Lenny Kravitz I think of him singing and playing the guitar, but in the film he played the stylist for Katniss and Peeta. And once again I thought this ended up being a great choice and role placement because Lenny Kravitz was able to bring the coolness that he has from being a musician and brought it to the role of Cinna. He played a passionate friend to Katniss and Peeta that was there to help them out. When imagining the person of Cinna from what I read in the book I didn't know what to really think of but now looking back at Kravitz that's exactly what I can think of of Cinna looking like.
I didn't want to spend that much time on the main characters like Katniss, Peeta, and Gale because honestly its the same as any other critique of the film: Jennifer Lawrence brought beauty to her amazing performance as Katniss, Josh Hutcherson even though younger than what people expected for the role did a good job, and Liam Hemsworth personifies Gales masculinity to a T.
When I saw the film in theaters at the midnight showing of the film I saw it at our theaters IMAX screen and it was worth every penny. The movie has amazing panning shots of nature and the other surroundings that the story takes place in and with the IMAX high definition screen it made it look even more spectacular. The establishing shots were great because you were able to see what the Panem (what the country is called now) really looks like. But any who seeing the movie in IMAX is recommended, even though you will be out $15 dollars!
So go see The Hunger Games because it was great movie but I defiantly recommend reading the books first because you will truly understand and appreciate the movie a lot more if you do so. And hopefully you as much as I am will be looking forward to the 75th Hunger Games and remember, "May the Odds Be Ever in Your Favor".
So this past week Titanic was re-released to the big screen for the first time since it came out. Many people believe that Titanic is one of the greatest films ever because of its story and the digital effects that James Cameron was able to use in his film. Others however believed that this film was a flop and it did not meet the standards that it should have. Some critics had bad reviews at the time of the film, but it did not hurt it in the box office.
One of the best and most famous reviews of the film was done by Kenneth Turan because after his review, it enraged James Cameron so much that he contacted the publication that Turan worked at and wished for him to be fired. This little spectacle that Cameron had to make because one person didn't write a good review solitified Cameron's "Ass of Hollywood" persona.
To the question of the day--what does $200 million buy?--the 3-hour-and-14-minute "Titanic" unhesitatingly answers: not enough.
Note that despite the hopes of skeptics, aghast at the largest film budget of modern times, money enough to run a full-dress presidential campaign or put a serious dent in illiteracy, the answer is not nothing. When you are willing to build a 775-foot, 90% scale model of the doomed ship and sink it in a 17-million-gallon tank specially constructed for the purpose, you are going to get a heck of a lot of production value for your money. Especially if your name is James Cameron.
Personally, I'm really excited to go see Titanic in 3D but I don't know what to expect from it. What is going to make it remarkable? Why does it need to be re-released in 3D? Will it make me fall in love with the movie all over again? All of these questions and many more are racing through my head but they won't be resolved until I leave that theater on Saturday night (the night I plan to go see it because of a coupon that is being offered).
For information about the coupon I just talked about here is the link to the AMC website. AMC COUPON
“Unless someone like you cares a whole lot, nothing is going to get better, it’s not”
-The Once-ler
I had the pleasure of going to see my favorite Dr. Seuss book The Lorax come to life. As a kid in elementary school we used to have Dr. Seuss days on Dr. Seuss’s birthday because it is a big thing in Massachusetts since he comes from our state. But on this day we used to go back to school at night, wearing our pajama’s and brought pillows and blackest with us so we could sit around and enjoy people reading many of Dr. Seuss’s books and the worlds that he had created. The book I looked forward to every year was The Lorax because I loved the story and the pictures that occupancies the book. The book was filled with bright colored, whimsical trees that caught my attention every time because I wished they were real.
Other than my love for the book, it has a great message that can last for many generations. The message that the book, movie, and the characters are trying to tell its readers and viewers is that you need to appreciate nature and our environment and take care of it because once it’s gone it’s gone forever. The quote that I wrote in the beginning basically sums up the whole message of the film because we need to learn from our past mistakes and take better care of our world.
This next part is an overview of the plot of the book and movie. The Once-ler, who is voiced by Ed Helms recently famous for The Hangover movies, in the beginning of the film tells Ted (Zac Efron) about his story and about trees. The Once-ler is a young entrepreneur that is setting out to find a material he can use to make his Thneeds. After traveling through many different areas n Dr. Seuss’s created world, he comes upon a valley full of Truffula trees and he decides this is what he is going to use to make his Thneeds. So with a couple of swift whacks with his ax, the first Truffula tree comes falling down and this is where we first meet the Lorax (Danny DeVito). The Lorax does not like that the Once-ler ahs cut down the tree and states that “he speaks for the trees” and tells the Once-ler that there will be consequences for him and everyone, humans and animals, if he continues to cut down the trees. The Once-ler disobeys the Lorax and his many warnings and cuts down all of the Truffula trees. While the trees are being cut down, the bears, fish, birds, and other animals move away because they no longer have a place to live anymore. The air is disgusting due to the Once-ler creating an over the top factory that produces his Thneeds in masses but in turn pollutes the water and air.
Ted (Zac Efron) listens to the Once-ler’s story and is determined to plant the very last truffula seed in the center of Thneedville which is completely plastic and fake town. At first Ted plans to plant the tree in order to win the love of the girl across the street, Audrey (Taylor Swift). Why plant a tree for a girl you may ask, well Audrey wants to see a tree because she is so amazed by them and she draws them all over the backside of her house. But once Ted hears the Once-lers story and he is being pressured by Mr. O’Hare to not leave the city limits and to get rid of the Truffula seed, he decides that he needs to plant the tree in the center of town and he does. When the tree is planted the Lorax and all the animals return and join the Once-ler outside in the real world again.
So since I gave the brief synopsis of The Lorax, I guess I’ll talk about what I thought about the film itself. The graphic animation in the film I thought was really good. My favorite animations were the Truffula trees, bears, and the Once-ler. The Truffula trees looked exactly like they did in the book which I thought was a big deal to get right and I didn’t want them to change them. One thing with the trees that really impressed me was the life like movement that the trees exhibited. They moved with the wind and when the Once-ler was cutting them down the trees “fur” moved every which way like they were actually being cut down. The little brown bears were probably my favorite characters in the film because they were loveable and cute characters that the animators created. These bears were wide-eyed, marshmallow loving, trouble making bears. The bears, but mostly the largest and tiniest bear, were extremely expressive showing emotions of horror, happiness, confusion, and sadness. The bears made me feel the same emotions that they were through their expressions. When the bears are forced to leave because of their environment being destroyed they are walking head down and just trudging along. The Once-ler called out for the tiniest bear that turns to the Once-ler with his tear glossed eyes and shakes his head and turns back to his head facing toward the ground. Finally the Once-ler was one of my favorite animations of a person because of the details put into him, even though he is seen through the two slats of the boarded up window. His eyes, hands, and what you think is possibly hair move with every movement that he tells.
When I saw the film, I saw it in 3D which was a special treat and when I say special I mean that most of the movie did not benefit from it being in 3D. There were only a couple of actions scenes that benefitted from the 3D animation. What attracted me to the film, other than it being my favorite Dr. Seuss book, was the stars that voiced the characters. Zac Efron, Taylor Swift, Danny DeVito, Ed Helms, Betty White, and Rob Riggle all lend their voice that helped in the creation of the characters. There was one person I was really excited about being in the film and no it wasn’t Zac Efron, Taylor Swift, or Danny DeVito, it was Betty White. Betty White, now at the age of 90, has not lost her sense of human and I love that. She adds her quirkiness to Grammy Norma as the strange but caring person that is trying to help Ted learn about trees.
So now I’ve given the synopsis and given my positive critics, so here are the negatives about the film. Going into the film I expected it to be a little silly because of it being a Dr. Seuss book, but I did not expect it to have musical numbers in it. The songs were annoyingly catchy for the most part with some songs just being annoying. I think John Powell and Cinco Paul, who wrote the songs, attempted to create music that would help benefit the story lines, but in my opinion did not at all. The most annoying song was “Everybody Needs a Thneed”, which is sung by the Once-ler in an attempt to sell his Thneeds. The repeatative lyrics and unnecessary lead guitar screeching throughout the song made me want the song to end right away, which it did not. Other than the music choice, the only other part of the film that I did not like was the character of Mr. O’Hare. I found him really annoying and I wanted him to not be in the film at all. But I guess the director achieved what he wanted to because Mr. O’Hare was after the bad guy in the film that wanted to keep Thneedville a plastic, fake society that depended on the fresh air that he sold.
“I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees, I speak for the trees, for the tress have no tongues”
-The Lorax
Would I say The Lorax is my favorite Dr. Seuss book to film adaptation, no, but it is not the worst. My favorite of all time is How the Grinch Stole Christmas, and then Horton Hears a Who, but The Lorax is by far standards better than The Cat in the Hat featuring Mike Myers. Even with its couple of flaws the entertainment factor of the film is great and it is an enjoyable and interesting film for people to see and also to think about. Would I see The Lorax in theaters again, no but I will probably end up buying it when it comes out on DVD.
This week at Rider University the Film and Media studies department held its annual film symposiums. Previous years themes, that I remember, have been horror films (my favorite by far) and independent films. The horror film symposium was my favorite because I love old horror films like Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Friday the 13th because I think they are scarier than horror film now-a-days. Horror films now depend on blood and guts to get them through the film where old horror films depended on suspense, perfect example Friday the 13th because you never see who the killer is until the end so you are constantly wondering who it could be. But anyways this year’s symposium was all about films of 1962. This was the topic of the symposium because it is the 50th anniversary of Rider’s School of Liberal Arts and Sciences. At first I had no idea why they picked 1962 but when they told us it was because of the anniversary it made sense. Also 1962 was an AMAZING year of films because some of the greatest films to date came out in 1962. In 1962 some of the films that came out were Dr. No, The Music Man, Lawrence of Arabia, Advise and Consent, To Kill a Mockingbird, and many others.
So during the symposium there were many events that you could attend that were all about films, film industry, and the year 1962. The events that I attended were the screening of Dr. Gerald Peary’s movie “For the Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism”, the student faculty panel, the Actors Studio, The Method and Film of the Early 1960s, “Purely Geographical: Politics as Space and Movement in Advise and Consent”, Film and the Film Industry in the 1960s, and the student film festival and competition. All of the events were very entertaining and informative and I thoroughly enjoyed attending them because they were very informative and thought provoking.
Dr. Gerald Peary’s film, “For the Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism” was great. It was very informative and gave the nitty-gritty inside into what it is like being a film critic in the world today. Some of the critics made some great points that were very interesting when discussing whether people who are online bloggers are actually film critics like them. Some of them believed that they are not really critics because unlike them they do not get paid and do not have the qualifications that they have. I disagree with this opinion because even though a person may not be paid to write critiques they can still form opinions on what the films aesthetics and mise-en-scene. Regular film viewers and film students like myself that are starting their own film critique blogs are just as knowledgeable or sometimes even more knowledgeable than the critics that are getting paid to make the critiques. Overall, I enjoyed the documentary but I did find some technical aspects of it that bothered me, like during some of the b-roll footage and interviews there was a black object obstructing the view in the top right corner. This became bothersome to me because I kept on noticing it and that was all I could focus on in some of the footage in the film. But, the documentary and Dr. Peary were very informational and I enjoyed watching and hearing him speak.
The next speaker that I went to was Professor Joe McElhaney who teaches at one of the CUNY schools. He lead a discussion about Advise and Consent and then participated in a roundtable discussion about film and the film industry in 1962. Both of these were very informational and I believed that I had learned a lot from both of these discussions. A lot of people attended the first section of Professor McElhaney discussion where he paid great attention to detail in his scene analysis which I thought was very interesting because I honestly thought that he would be discussing more of the politics of the film rather than the meaning behind some of the scenes and the theatrical trailer. The scene analysis that I discussed with the people that were left at the symposium and the roundtable panel was in the gay night club. I thought it was quite interesting that this scene viewed gay men in a positive manner. I thought this because during this time being gay was something that was still widely frowned upon but in the film the director does not glorify it but he doesn’t attempt to hide the fact that these men are gay and what they are participating in within the night club.
The last event of the symposium that I attended was the student film festival and competition. The films that were shown of my fellow classmates were very interesting and enjoying to watch. My favorite films of the night were Denise Petti’s Midlife Crisis, Marina Marcello Innocent, and Jordana Grosso The Offer. Strangely enough the order that I put these in was the order of 3rd, 2nd, and 1st place for the competition. I had seen both Denise and Jordana films before because I took the same class with them that they had made the films in but I still enjoyed both of theirs. Marina’s film was the only one that I had never seen before and I really enjoyed hers and was very impressed when I found out it was shot completely done with the iPhone 4s; maybe Apple could use this in one of their campaigns??? But anyways, all the films had a great story line to them and I thoroughly enjoyed them and loved discussing each of the films with the creators that were present. The symposium in my opinion for the 4 or 5 events I went to was a great hit and I wish I could be around for the next symposium that is happening next year.
Just a side note, my next two blogs will be talking about The Lady in Black the Daniel Radcliffe film and The Lorax in 3D. Hope you enjoyed this post and keep searching for that next great film!
Hello movie goers, my name is Lucy Higgins and I am a college senior studying communications: television and radio with a minor in film and media studies. Originally when I came to college, I did not expect to be minoring in film but after taking a film class my freshman year, I realized that I should study film and turn my love into a possible career. At school, I have been able to take a lot of film classes with different topics like Film Music; Law, Literature, and Film; Film Memory; and American Artists in Film. Through these courses I have gained a great love for film and have started to watch a lot of films that I would have never considered watching before I had taken film classes. Some of my favorite films that I have watched at school have include Rear Window, Memento, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Mystic River, and Psycho. Without a doubt, since taking film classes, I have fallen in love with Alfred Hitchcock as a director. I love his style and all of the stories of the films are very entertaining and keep me at the edge of my seat in the classroom. These films and directors that I have been introduced to have helped blossom the way I watch film and also inspired me when I am producing and directing my own student films that I produce at school.
This past weekend, I went and saw the film The Artist directed by Michel Hazanavicius. This film was brilliantly done from the beginning to end and was a pleasure to sit through in the movie theater. At the movie theater I attended they were only showing two films being The Artist and The Iron Lady starring Meryl Streep. Normally I would go see any Meryl movie because I absolutely love the way she acts because she is so diverse and can truly act in any role, but I went against my normal choice and picked The Artist. The director was able to capture the essence and magic of what silent films can capture and also what these films were like when they first came out. From the beginning of the film I got the sense that this was a treat instead of just another movie that I would see any other time. Sometimes I wish when I watch films like The Artist that I could go back to a time when films were starting out so I could live during the time period when going and seeing a film was an event and the processes of movie making and the stars where the big news in everyday life. The Artist, I believe, captures what it used to be like for the audience, movie stars, and directors of silent films in this time and what it was like for them when film was changing from silent to talkies. I believe today that most films rest of the laurels onsound effect and the spectacular use of digital effects to maintain their audience’s attention. This however takes away from the message and the shot composition of the film because people who go to the movies today are just looking for the new effect or the new 3D movie which is going to wow them.
The Artist was able to wow me unlike any other film that I have seen recently because of the shot composition that the director chose because they were all cleverly thought out. The one scene that sticks into my mind the most is when George Valentin is leaving the production studio offices and heading down the stairs. The shot reveals the different levels of stairs going up and down and each floor. Nothing is obstructing your view from seeing what is going on in the building. It made me think this is what it would look like if you were looking at the stairs through a glass window or wall. This scene also reminded me of one of my favorite films Rear Window, and its shot composition of the buildings where the main character views all of his neighbors. Michel Hazanavicius was able to create a very visually appealing movie that I enjoyed and would recommend anyone to go and see.
So here is my first blog post and no it is not on a film that I have seen yet, but I just wanted to let everyone know that I will soon be writing my criticisms down on this blog for everyone to read. Feel free to comment and ask questions about my different blog posts and I hope you enjoy!
A movie based on pirates...okay Disney has done that with the Pirates of the Carribean series and used the star power and comedic performance of Johnny Depp to make it a great film. But, The Pirates! Band of Misfits uses just straight comedy. The whole premise of the movie is that the head pirate of this one ship of useless pirates or aren't really good at being pirates is trying to win "Pirate of the Year". The only thing that the Pirate Captain (which is his actual name) has to over come are: that he's not a very good pirate, there are 3 other amazing pirates that get a lot more booty than he ever has, and the Queen does not like pirates and is after and wanting to kill any pirate that crosses her. With these three things against him and his crew it is a ball of laughs the entire time. 
Snow White and the Huntsmen its sad to say that this was Kristen Stewart's best acting in a film...yup. I thought it was a good movie but it seemed long. It may have just been me but I thought it was. Charlize Theron was not as good as I thought as see was going to be in the movie, I found her portrayal of the Evil Queen was annoying. Chris Hemsworth once again played a ruggedly handsome character almost similar to Thor. Kristen Stewart for once I did not want to punch her in the mouth for the awkward things she said or her awkward style of acting. I would take her in the movie acting over the Twilight series or the way she acts in real life. However, the most annoying character besides Charlize Theron was her screen brother who was a pervert and just wouldn't stop chasing Snow White. He didn't know when to give up, like really your never going to get Snow White so give up!
