Category Archives: Uncategorized

Fin.

Well, it is with a heavy heart that I say that this blog must inevitably come to a close. Film is one of my favorite subjects, and I feel as though it is under appreciated in our society. Sure, film is popular, but many people only see it as a form of escapism or entertainment. Film is much more than an opportunity to see a giant mechanical alien attempt to destroy civilization as we know it (Transformers) or to feel the thrill of victory as Neo finally finds his power just in time to defeat Mr. Smith (The Matrix). As real as these emotions are and as satisfying it is to watch these films, there is always some way we can apply film to our everyday lives.

This notion can seem a little ridiculous, but I implore you to make every film personal, and take a lesson out of it. Whether we know it or not, film has shaped our culture and left an impression on our society for years, starting with its achievement of mainstream fame in the early 1900’s with films like Birth of a Nation (1915) and of course the various Charlie Chaplin comedies.

Whether we know it or not, you can relate film to yourself: whether it be through a character, a situation, or a relationship. Take the director’s aesthetic choices and ask why that was done. Take an actor’s attitude and portrayal of a character and wonder what moves him or her. Sometimes I go through life as if it were one big film reel, only you can’t edit the material on your own. Sometimes you see in color, other times in black and white, and occasionally it will seem like a montage of scenes happening in seconds. So pretty much what I’m trying to say is this: learn to look at the film and it will help you figured out how look at your own world.

So remember, keep watching, keep observing, and most of all, keep living. Make a much enjoyed pastime into a helpful tool, and turn it into something you can actually use. And now we’ll let the curtains close…

“I think I must have one of those faces you can’t help believing.”

This film defies my criteria for typical film that I enjoy for a variety of reasons:

1. I hate horror films (this one is actually the first actual horror film I will be discussing)

2. It was made in 1960: an era of melodramas and film that I just particularly didn’t like or relate to. I’m not going to bash the decade entirely, I mean, there are a few gems.

3. It’s in black and white: As much as I appreciate the aesthetic merit of black and white films, I usually become easily bored. With the exception of this film and On the Waterfront, black and white usually turns me off if it’s not tastefully pulled off (another example of a good black and white film being 12 Angry Men)


I bet you’re wondering what film I’m talking about. I’m sure hope the suspense kills you before Norman Bates does… because the film for this week is Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho.

psycho

I consider this to truly be “a classic”. I know I throw that word out a lot, but I honestly believe that this is a stone on which all horror was founded. Both Hitchcock’s story and the way he depicts it sends out a creepy, suspenseful vibe that resonates throughout the film, and throughout your mind.

Well another reason I thought this was relevant is because of the new show released that serves as a prequel to Psycho. The show is called “Bates Motel” and it is centered around the relationship Norman Bates had with this mother before the time period in which Psycho occurred. If anyone has seen the film before, you can’t help but be intrigued as to what the makers of “Bates Motel” interpreted that relationship according to Hitchcock’s work. One of the most integral parts of the film is his relationship with his mother, and I don’t want to spoil the ending so I won’t say anything more.

50 years later... a prequel?

50 years later… a prequel?

So I was kind of rambling about the creepiness of the film, but at the same time I mentioned how I hate horror. Correction: I don’t really hate horror, I just despise tasteless gore (prime examples being all of the Saw films). This film uses murder and death in almost a meaningful and artistic way: something that I can really appreciate. I will provide this scene as an example:

I bet you think I’m going to mention the shower scene. Nope. As brilliant as that scene is it is way too discussed, and I don’t want to beat a dead horse. The scene I will be discussing is the part when the sister of  Marion Crane (our shower scene victim) whose name is Lila, goes to the Bates Motel on a quest to find her sister. Whilst in the motel, she finds her way to the fruit cellar while trying to hide from Norman, where she sees a rocking chair facing away from the entrance. There appears to be a woman sitting in the chair. Lila recognizes her as Mrs. Bates and approached the chair. As soon as she lays a hand on her shoulder and turns the figure around a decomposing body is found dressed in the clothes of Mrs. Bates. At this moment Lila screams and hits the low-hanging light in the process, making it swing back and forth, casting light upon the empty eye sockets in the corpse. This visual plus the musical composition of panicked violins provides a fantastic scene that just scares the living crap out of you.

(If you are at all interested in watching this scene, here is the link for it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWHYmNrAFlI)

after this, showers will never be the same...

after this, showers will never be the same…

One of the reasons for the film’s great success is the brilliant casting when it came to the character of Norman Bates. The actor selected was Anthony Perkins. For a while Perkins wasn’t even an option until Hitchcock recommended him to the screenwriter, Joseph Stephano. Upon this recommendation Stephano remarked with a grin, “Now we’re talking.” In the story Norman is portrayed as a middle-aged, Nazi-obsessed, mama’s boy. This film chose a different path from the scary-looking, heartless, unsociable killer that horror films before this age was used to portraying. They chose a killer that was good-looking and outwardly normal. In some ways, they opened the door to other movies like Silence of the Lambs where the mask of normalcy they wear is almost more scary than physical appearance. Anthony Perkins was born to play the part of Norman Bates, and quite frankly I don’t know if I’d be all that flattered by that fact if I were him.

Norman Bates, our villain. I mean, if the creepiness factor wasn't through the roof, one could say he is mildly attractive...

Norman Bates, our villain. I mean, if the creepiness factor wasn’t through the roof, one could say he is mildly attractive…

Well, I hope I painted a pretty good picture of why everyone should see this film. After watching this you will understand not only why your grandmother is afraid to take showers to this day but also the creation of the modern American psychopath. The character of Norman Bates is free to your interpretation, so play doctor and see if you can guess what’s coming next.

Sources:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054215/?ref_=sr_2

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91947125

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psycho_(film)#Bloch

http://collider.com/bates-motel-full-trailer/

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/02/best-villains-movie-history/psycho

http://spectrumculture.com/2012/09/re-makere-model-psycho-1960-vs-psycho-1998.html/

“Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!”

Now, I have talked about my passion for comedy before, but I have not really included it among my blog posts (with the exception of Anchorman and perhaps even Forrest Gump). I find that it’s difficult to really analyze films of comedy simply because they rarely have a deeper meaning. However today I will pay tribute to the knights who solely say “Ne” and the killer rabbit, and to the British comedic geniuses behind these creations: the group known as Monty Python. In this particular case, the famous Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

monty python cover

Throughout the years, I have developed a strong appreciation for silly humor. In particular, silliness displayed by the Brits. And what better way to discuss British silliness than to talk about works like The Life of Brian, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and of course the musings of Monty Python’s Flying Circus. Monty Python is the epitome of British humor and quite frankly I feel as though it has generally gone under appreciated. The combination of political satire and absurdity puts a sophisticated flare on stupidity, as contradictory as that sounds. So if you don’t really know what I mean when I say “British humor” be wary: it is not a taste everyone can appreciate.

Here is Sir Robin, the "not-quite-as-so-brave-as-sir-Lancelot" attempting to pass a massive three headed guard, who constantly bickers with himself. The quest for the grail can become quite dangerous... or not at all.

Here is Sir Robin, the “not-quite-as-so-brave-as-sir-Lancelot” attempting to pass a massive three headed guard, who constantly bickers with himself. The quest for the grail can become quite dangerous… or not at all.

Early on in the film. King Arthur (Graham Chapman) sets out on a quest to find the Holy Grail, and gain followers as his quest continued. Initially, he is accompanied by his faithful lackey, Patsy (Terry Gilliam) and travels without a horse across the country of England. To compensate for his lack of an equine addition he has Patsy hit two coconuts together to simulate the sound of hoof steps as they continue forward. At one point they come across two peasants apparently digging in mud for no apparent reason, and King Arthur attempts to address one of them by saying “Old Woman”. It will probably be easier if I just include the beginning of the conversation for humor’s sake:

King Arthur: Old woman.

Dennis: Man.

King Arthur: Man, sorry. What knight lives in that castle over there?

Dennis: I’m 37.

King Arthur: What?

Dennis: I’m 37. I’m not old.

King Arthur: Well I can’t just call you “man”.

Dennis: Well you could say “Dennis”.

King Arthur: I didn’t know you were called Dennis.

Dennis: Well you didn’t bother to find out did you?

King Arthur: I did say sorry about the “old woman”, but from behind you looked…

Dennis: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior.

King Arthur: Well I am king.

Dennis: Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how’d you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society.

This is the witty Dennis, who schools King Arthur with his knowledge of government and politics.

This is the witty Dennis, who schools King Arthur with his knowledge of government and politics in a field of mud. How’s that for satire.

Firstly, this conversation is absolutely ridiculous in itself. Second there is a great amount of irony in the fact that the working class peasant digging in mud is more well educated than the King of England. Third, the political satire behind this conversation is incredibly overwhelming. The situation in itself is not only humorous, it is also contains a certain degree of intellectual value.

A unique quality of this film is that many of the actors played multiple characters. The actor playing the most characters is Michael Palin, playing 12 throughout the course of the film. The comedic troupe played a majority of the characters in the film, even though it was quite an extensive list of characters. It was also an incredibly low-budget film, which added to the explanation of the lack of extra actors. In fact, the budget for the film was so low that they needed to use cardboard cutouts of castles when filming the scenes from a distance. Also, the profits made from a Pink Floyd album went to fund the production of the film because the group was so fond of Monty Python. With much needed financial support, this film eventually became a great success that is still cherished by many of today’s youth.

"The Black Knight always triumphs!" says the limbless fighter as he attempts to defeat King Arthur by kicking him.

“The Black Knight always triumphs!” says the limbless fighter as he attempts to defeat King Arthur by kicking him.

Now, it’s hard to take any film seriously that consists of scenes involving a disembodied knight dismissing his lack of a limb as “just a flesh wound” or a woman confirmed as being a witch simply because she weighed as much as a duck, but the film isn’t meant to be taken seriously. On the contrary, there is so much absurdity that it is impossible to take this film seriously, and its merit springs from its entertainment value as, rather simply put, a silly film. So be bold, and try this film out for the sake of silliness itself. And that is why it is so magnificently different from many of the other films that I have discussed thus far. Look past its low budget and cheap props, just to embrace how much they could actually accomplish with it.

sources:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071853/?ref_=sr_1

http://www.hellokids.com/c_13199/videos-for-kids/movies/screenrush-movies/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/monty-python/images/16524881/title/monty-python-holy-grail-screencap

http://www.intriguing.com/mp/holygrail.php

“I don’t think there will be a return journey, Mr. Frodo”

And it looks like inevitably Elijah Wood will make a second appearance in this film blog, but instead of being a cannibal/serial killer, he will instead be a courageous hobbit who stands no more than 4’6″ tall.

well you certainly look different from the last time we saw you.

well you certainly look different from the last time we saw you. let’s have a refresher…

 

Slightly more creepy than an adorable hobbit

Slightly more creepy than an adorable hobbit

I’m talking about The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King.

lord of the rings cover

Now, this week I have chosen this film for a multitude of reasons: 1. I was recently geeking out about this movie to a friend of mine, having an argument about why Pippin had a different accent than Frodo if they both lived in the Shire. 2. I probably quote this move 3 times a day (I have yet to find someone who knows what I’m talking about when I do this). 3. I was reminiscing about the Lord of the Rings movie marathon my sister and I had last Easter, completely shunning our family for 10 hours and becoming enthralled in the journey to destroy the one ring.

It’s true: every Lord of the Rings film is completely commendable and their merit does not differ vastly (which is incredibly rare in a trilogy, making this film series so unique). But alas, I could not blog about the entire trilogy. No one has time to read that. Therefore I chose my personal favorite of the three: The Return of the King. This film is the last one in the series of three, and my first time watching it was in theaters in 3rd grade (how I could even comprehend the film and why my father thought that was a good idea still eludes me) and I was in love. Since then I have watched the film around roughly 60 times, which is about 180 hours of my life. Time well spent I say. The sad part is I’m not even exaggerating.

So about the film itself. This film was shot in New Zealand and it’s incredibly famous for its mountainous terrain and breathtaking aerial shots of fairy tale-like mountains, streams and castles. The setting was only one of the reasons for its magical qualities. The wizard, Gandalf, was played by Ian McKellen and I believe his voice is only rivaled by Morgan Freeman and perhaps Christopher Lee (who plays the dark wizard Saruman). He is a knighted gentleman and was casted by Peter Jackson because he wanted to avoid “big names”. Well, because of the movies’ success, most of the cast ended up receiving fame afterward. The only cast member I can immediately recall as having a large amount of status beforehand is Sean Astin, who played Rudy Rudiger in one of the greatest sports films of all time, Rudy in 1993, before he acted out the role of Samwise Gamgee, Frodo’s faithful gardener.

absolutely breathtaking scenery. Thank you, New Zealand.

absolutely breathtaking scenery. Thank you, New Zealand.

water. so. clean. mountains. so. beautiful. again, superb location.

water. so. clean. mountains. so. beautiful. again, superb location.

One of the reasons I love this film is because of its artistic interpretations and metaphors. The concept of good v. evil is so clearly defined, and where other films are celebrated because they question the perception of what is good and what is evil, this film has its merit for the opposite reason. There is no question that the audience wants man to survive and the Saruon and the orcs to perish. Some have actually compared this conflict to an analogy of World War II from the allied perspective, because of the stark contrast between what we believe to be good and evil. Tolkien wrote this tale after the conflict and some believe it to have influenced his work. Actually, when Tolkien began to weave this fantasy land and create worlds, he started the novel out while grading papers at Oxford with the sentence “In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.” And thus legend was born. The emotion and adversity the entire cast overcomes is so powerful, and brilliantly backed up with an epic sound track of heavy brass and soprano voices.

the light radiating from the top of the image and the white horse clearly indicated that the oncoming charge is from the forces of good. Although this is from The Two Towers, I feel like this is a pretty good example.

the light radiating from the top of the image and the white horse clearly indicated that the oncoming charge is from the forces of good. Although this is from The Two Towers, I feel like this is a pretty good example.

Those who achieved fame after the release of this film include Viggo Mortensen, Orlando Bloom, Elijah Wood, Cate Blanchett, Ian McKellen, and various others. The Return of the King is the only fantasy film to have won the Academy Award for Best Picture and every single Academy Award it was nominated for it won (a total of 11 awards). This film was the second film to gross over 1 billion dollars worldwide.

Epic battles, beautiful setting, an seemingly impossible quest? What more could you want from a film?

Epic battles, beautiful setting, an seemingly impossible quest? What more could you want from a film?

Fantasy lovers and haters alike, I ask you to unite and watch this film if you haven’t already done so. But start from The Fellowship of the Ring then move onto The Two Towers and then last The Return of the King. Oh and while you’re at it go ahead and watch The Hobbit too because it just came out on DVD. Watch it while you’re sick and make whatever illness you have worthwhile because there are no regrets with this film.

Credits:

http://www.omg-facts.com/lists/42/7-Little-Known-Lord-Of-The-Rings-Facts/3

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0167260/

http://www.jenneethompsonblog.com/2012/10/lotr-frodo-baggins-and-heart-of-purity.html

http://www.technologytell.com/gaming/55189/lord-of-the-rings-motion-picture-trilogy-blu-ray-review/

http://themindofshadow.blogspot.com/2012/05/lord-of-rings-return-of-king-extended.html

http://www.thomasvan.com/inspiration/leadership-is-a-fundamental-of-life-follow-the-leader/attachment/the-lord-of-the-rings-the-return-of-the-king-2003

http://www.movpins.com/dHQwMTY3MjYw/the-lord-of-the-rings:-the-return-of-the-king-(2003)/

“Sometimes, there just aren’t enough rocks.”

Now, growing up, my parents boasted their collection of DVDs and frequently made me experience the thrills of comedy, tragedy, action, and sometimes even fear. A film that could fit into many of these categories is Forrest Gump.

The film begins with Forrest sitting on a bench telling the story of his life to a woman waiting for the bus

The film begins with Forrest sitting on a bench telling the story of his life to a woman waiting for the bus

Throughout his childhood and onward, people called Forrest (Tom Hanks) stupid. His response would consistently be “stupid is as stupid does.” Along with being a marvelous testament to both the shining moments and harsh realities of our history, Forrest Gump tells a story of a life being present through these times, and mainly floating along any path presented to him, valuing love, friendship, and camaraderie above all things. An example of this is during the Vietnam War when he goes into the forest swarming with enemy soldier to save multiple people, including Lieutenant Dan, a key character later in the film.

At one point in the film, Forrest enlists to serve in Vietnam, and he goes back into heavy gunfire so save Bubba, his "good best friend" from death, risking his own life.

At one point in the film, Forrest enlists to serve in Vietnam, and he goes back into heavy gunfire so save Bubba, his “good best friend” from death, risking his own life in the process.

Although his successes and stories have their comedic value (for instance when he shows the woman a picture of himself on the cover of Fortune Magazine with Lieutenant Dan) his simple desires and his quest for the happiness of others is ultimately what provided him with his success. Laughably enough, at one point in the film Forrest said that Lieutenant Dan invested their money in “some fruit company” (which was known to actually be Apple by the audience) and he said that they didn’t have to worry about money any more. “Good. One less thing.” said Forrest. The naivety of this statement combined with the fact that not having to worry about money is one of the main goals of Americans nowadays provides a rather humorous response. Although I do not believe the primary purpose of the film to be humor, it does play a crucial role in the development of the plot. Actually, Mr. Hanks received the award for “Funniest Actor in a Motion Picture” at the American Comedy awards.

"And this is me on the cover of Fortune Magazine..."

“And this is me on the cover of Fortune Magazine…”

One of the most amazing things about the film is how they insert Tom Hanks into historical scenes, such as the during the desegregation of the Alabama school and during an interview with John Lennon at his side, as well as him even shaking hands with President Nixon. I was intrigued as to how the scenes worked so perfectly, and the editing was remarkable. The film actually received the Oscar for Best Film Editing in 1994.

The editing masterfully done in this film works to fully incorporate Forrest into very crucial scenes in American history.

The editing masterfully done in this film works to fully incorporate Forrest into very crucial scenes in American history.

Again, Gump meeting with president Nixon, thanks to the film's editor

Again, Gump meeting with president Nixon, thanks to the film’s editor

I bet a lot of you didn’t know that the man who directed Forrest Gump, Robert Zemmicks, is the same person who directed films like Back to the Future and Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Once he picked up the screenplay, “I couldn’t put it down” he said in an interview. He was so intrigued that the film’s plot had no goal, no hero, no villain. Certainly an concept that had never been seen or tried before.

After running across the country for 3 years, 2 months, 14 days, and 16 hours, he stopped to announce that he was going home. This was one of his many adventures throughout the course of the film and remarkably enough the filmmakers worked to make sure the feat itself was possible, making calculations  for distance. Forrest ran a total of 15,248 miles.

After running across the country for 3 years, 2 months, 14 days, and 16 hours, he stopped to announce that he was going home. This was one of his many adventures throughout the course of the film and remarkably enough the filmmakers worked to make sure the feat itself was possible, making calculations for distance. Forrest ran a total of 15,248 miles.

Forrest Gump has its share of laughs, tears, aha moments, and even sympathy. He had overcome adversity without ever having any actual goals in the first place. Everything he had accomplished, as well as having entertainment value had also a degree of impressiveness and a demonstration of persistence. With the film illustrating American history painting a portrait of our country through the eyes of another, it’s no wonder why millions, including myself and my family, fell in love with Forrest Gump.

Sources:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109830/awards?ref_=tt_awd

http://www.klemm-site.de/23f9ae94210e52919/23f9ae94210e5a31c/23f9ae94210ed922f.html

http://www.tcm.com/this-month/article/359270%7C0/Forrest-Gump.html

Pictures:

http://justcomedies.com/forrest-gump/

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/?p=6960

http://www.propstore.com/product-Fortune-Magazine-Cover-Framed-Display.htm

http://blogs.amctv.com/movie-blog/2010/02/elf-life-is-bea.php

http://www.centives.net/S/2012/forrest-gumps-running-route/

“I’m a goddamn miracle of modern science.”

In this film, Jack Nicholson is in his most natural state: completely insane and abundantly recalcitrant. This is the story of a house of whack jobs, nuts, looneys, crazies, and whatever other words you would use to describe those within a mental institution. It’s bold. It’s powerful. It’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.

cuckoos nestNow, this is based off a novel by Ken Kesey. The film starts out almost comically as there is a scene of the patients aimlessly wandering around in a mental hospital: some of them talking to themselves and others simply drooling. Suddenly R.P. McMurphy (referred to as Mac), a rather brash and overconfident patient is admitted. Throughout the film he rallies the other patients to retake their independence and manhood by combatting the tyrannical head of the hospital, Nurse Ratched. He turns from a lazy criminal, feigning insanity to get out of a work farm into an unexpected but effective teacher.

I wish my teachers did this...

Education at its finest

So one of the reasons I love this film is because of its absolute absurdity. McMurphy trying to teach the delusional Martini (played by Danny Devito) how to play poker, and a paranoid patient, Dale Harding constantly fighting with the belligerent Max Taber, and the outward and childish Cheswick shouting and whining at anyone who will listen are really only a handful of ridiculous commonalities typical to Nurse Ratched’s mental hospital.

Also, no one is better at crazy than Jack Nicholson. Between this and The Shining he’s got that role down pat.

Mac: In one week, I can put a bug so far up her ass, she don’t know whether to shit or wind her wristwatch.

But really, comments like these are what make the film.

boy she's terrifying

boy she’s terrifying

But this film has a lot of meaning. It told a story about finding yourself and not letting other people tell you who you are. The routine and the iron fist of Nurse Ratched had the other patients convinced that they were vegetables that served absolutely no purpose to society: outcasts. Losers. Dependents. But McMurphy kept telling them that they too were human and that they were “no crazier than the average asshole out walkin’ around on the streets”. I know, a real confidence booster, but it worked.

just your average book club. without books

just your average book club. without books

As much as I am in support of the principles of individuality and independence, this film actually shows a little bit of misogyny because the only roles women play are the antagonizing and dominating role (which is only ridiculed throughout the novel), characters of a meeker nature, intimidated by the patients, and prostitutes. Now, I feel like point of the movie isn’t to undermine the authority of women, but it definitely has those undertones. However the original charm and just ridiculous nature of the film makes me continue to enjoy, love, and recommend it.

pure joy

pure joy

So please, just embrace the insanity that lives within and relish in this film. I mean, it can’t be that bad since it was rated as the #13 movie of all time on IMDB. Not too shabby if you ask me.

“Does Barry Manilow know that you raid his wardrobe?”

The iconic fist of triumph in the air. We all know it. It’s the fist of the fantastic Judd Nelson in his pivotal role as John Bender in The Breakfast Club.

The Breakfast Club

five people who REALLY don’t want to be there.

This movie is sometimes negatively viewed as the typical 80’s movie. But in a lot of ways it’s so much more than that. Let me give you the story:

So basically I watched this movie for the first time probably around last month on the floor of my friend’s dorm with nothing separating me from the hard wooden floor but a towel, so the viewing situation was certainly not ideal. However, despite the discomfort, the movie itself was incredibly hilarious/thought-provoking. Okay so now for the real story:

In a nutshell, a bunch of kids did some bad things and landed themselves in detention. On a Saturday. Tell me this: WHAT COULD SUCK MORE. But Anyway, the 5 kids that end up there really could not be any more different; they classify themselves as the athlete, the princess, the basket case, the criminal, and the brain. Now, this film really works to accentuate the stereotypes that each one holds. However, it slowly begins to cause the barriers between those images to fade away, revealing that they are more similar than they once thought they were.

faceless.....

faceless…..

I may just be a sucker for a good but kind of corny 80’s movie (Karate Kid, 16 Candles… you know what I mean) but I really feel like this film challenges a lot of conceptions and assumptions that still hold true in today’s society. We all have cliques, and it’s these cliques that keep us together, but also further apart. And we end up forgetting that we all go through the same stuff. It becomes more about my problems and my challenges, instead of accepting that many other people actually go through it as well.

breakout sesh

breakout sesh

Other than the timeless message behind the film, I love the fact that the role of comic relief is largely shared between the whole cast. For example, I die every time when John Bender asks the utterly ignorant and insensitive Richard Vernon if Barry Manilow knows that he raids his wardrobe.  Just snarky comments like that really sprinkle the film with a perfect mix of seriousness and humor (much similar to how Forrest Gump is, but a completely different story). It’s not strictly a comedy, nor is it a completely reflective film.

Richard.............

Richard………….

I also really enjoy the fact that it is so easy to relate this film to my life. Any one of us can really put ourselves in one or more of those roles. And you know what? All of us can fit into more than one role. There really never is a single label that we give ourselves because we are so complex as individuals. This proves even more the point that we are more similar than we think, especially if we have a tendency to don more than one stereotype to ultimately form our personality.

So think about it. Although I do dislike some aspects about the film (some parts are a little corny I must admit, but it was the 80’s so I gotta give them a by), overall the message and the cast was enough to make me fall in love with it. If you haven’t seen this one you’re really missing out, so I’d recommend grabbing a comfy chair and some popcorn and watching this one all the way through until Judd Nelson thrusts his fist in the air.

“Hey, you wanna hear my philosophy of life? Do it to him before he does it to you. “

What a classic. Marlon Brando can get thrown into pretty much any movie and make it memorable. One of his brightest moments was in the unforgettable 1954 film, On the Waterfront.

1954. Vintage.

1954. Vintage.

It’s a story of corruption and self-conflict, and of course just some romance (they needed to broaden their audience somehow) and it’s really quite masterfully done. Elia Kazan worked to tell the story of an ex-championship boxer, Terry Malloy, who battles with both himself and his corrupt union bosses. And they pretty much just added the chick, I’m not really sure where she fits in.

What would any film be without a random love interest?

What would any film be without a random love interest? And pigeons!

I gotta say: I am a little partial to this film just because I watched it in my intro to film studies class last semester. But I mean, it’s still a really meaningful film, and it’s rated on IMDB as the #116 movie of all time. And it won 8 Oscars. And Marlon Brando. That’s enough of a reason to talk about the film in itself.

marlon brando

So the film begins with a body falling from a roof. No one knows what happened, but all they know is that Joey Doyle is dead and that someone wanted it that way. Terry Malloy and his brother Charlie work for the corrupt union boss Johnny Friendly, who is thought to have some implication in Joey Doyle’s murder. Terry then falls in love with Joey’s sister, Edie, but is still afraid to turn against Johnny Friendly, while his brother thrives in the spoils of crime. Little does Edie know, Terry was the one who lured Joey onto the roof in the first place to be ambushed.

Through this web of a plot lies a strong and riveting story of inner strength. Brando so clearly yet magnificently displayed conflict in his individual character, deciding between continuing his lavish lifestyle of riches from his various “jobs” in the union, or risking his own life to testify against Johnny Friendly.

"Friendly" is a bit of an overstatement.

“Friendly” is a bit of an overstatement.

There is such a strong presence of fantastic metaphors scattered really everywhere throughout the film. For example, Terry raises pigeons on his roof: so innocent and unassuming, yet dull. But the pigeons had always seemed to hold a place of endearment in his heart. One day he  commented on the number of hawks in the city:

Terry: “You know this city’s full of hawks? That’s a fact. They hang around on the top of the big hotels. And they spot a pigeon in the park. Right down on him.”

This is obviously a comparison to the corrupt union bosses and the workers whom they are supposedly “helping”. In actuality the union bosses prey on the workers mercilessly, like hawks go after pigeons. Another mention of pigeons was brought up after Joey Doyle was killed:

Charlie: So, how’d it go?
Terry: He up on the roof.
Charlie: The “pigeon”?
Terry: Uh, yeah, it worked.

The pigeon is a reference to Joey Doyle, an innocent and widely loved “kid” who wanted to do the right thing by testifying against Johnny Friendly, but unfortunately had to be put in his place.

Honestly, this post does not do justice to this film at all. There are a million other things I could talk about in this film: the film’s stress of religion, the overestimation of physical confrontation, the human spirit, the power of unity, and sacrifice. But that would take way too long. So just watch the movie yourself and save me the trouble.

so... are you intrigued yet?

so… are you intrigued yet?

Before I finish this blog let me just say that if you’re going to watch one scene in this entire film, make it the last 10 minutes of the film. It may not be the most satisfying conclusion even made, but it is definitely epic and fitting. Just see for yourself. I really don’t want to be the one to spoil it for you.

“You mustn’t be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.”

Christopher Nolan’s most mind-blowing creation: Inception.

inception

Sure, he made the Batman movies, but their plot was pretty predictable: some guy dressed like a bat runs around Gotham and saves the day. Big whoop.

The real story is the absolutely insane plot line of Inception, which just keeps making more and more sense every time you watch it.

Okay, so let’s talk about why this is one of my favorite movies of all time. 1. Leonardo DiCaprio. 2. Joseph Gordon-Levitt. 3. the end. But actually, have you ever seen 500 Days of Summer? Jason Gordon-Levitt is amazing.

Fantastic casting. the end.

Fantastic casting. the end.

Anyway, anyone who has ever has a crazy experience in a dream can pretty much relate to this film. This one time I had a lucid dream (which is a dream in which you are consciously aware that you are dreaming) and I could pretty much do whatever I wanted. I started flying and building stuff and when I saw this movie it all pretty much made sense.

But that was my own crazy experience, I’m not really sure how many other people that’s happened to. But honestly, even though this film really makes you think and really blows your mind, it’s definitely worth watching. It really makes you ponder the true meaning of reality. And what is real to some people may not be real to others, and who are we to judge what is real and what is not? It’s questions like these that this film seeks to open up and I truly appreciate this message along with its epic action. The fight scenes are just fantastic and the effects are superb.

rotating room fight scene... could you ask for anything more?

rotating room fight scene… could you ask for anything more?

One of my favorite parts of this film is the soundtrack. I love how the tempo of the music slows down from layer to layer of a dream, symbolizing this transition and making the viewer understand that time itself slows down within each layer. This portion of the film really has great value, however it is often overlooked.

“I love hitmen. No matter what you do to them, you don’t feel bad.”

Sin City is not the funniest, most action packed film I’ve ever seen. But it is definitely milks every last drop out of the moments it does have. This is an example of neo-noir, and its abstract and comic book-like style gives it a unique twist right off the bat. This film tells the stories of three different individuals and how their battles for justice and twisted forms of retribution bring them together. sin city I’ll admit: this movie is a little “messed up”. And by messed up I mean that it contains scenes of an absolutely atrocious nature. For example, Elijah Wood (who played Frodo from Lord of the Rings anybody?!) plays a sadistic serial killer cannibal who cannot feel pain. And there is an entire portion of town run by prostitutes that aren’t afraid to kill anyone that intrudes for the wrong reasons. But although these plots can seem a little… different, this film has a pretty sick cast. Bruce Willis (of course), Jessica Alba, Mickey Rourke, and Clive Owen, along with a lot of other people just made to be in this film.

sup Frodo

Sup Frodo. Whatcha readin?

I used the term “neo-noir” before and by that I was referring to a contemporary style of “noir” which was used in the 1940’s and 50’s and was notorious by its dramatized, dark, over-sensitivity to light picture with themes of fatality and hopelessness. The directors of this film cleverly used selective coloring to display symbolism of various objects throughout the film. For example there is a character referred to only as “Yellow Bastard” in the film, and of course the phrase “Yellow Bastard” is used to describe a cowardly and shameful individual who is generally a bad person. But in this case, “Yellow Bastard” is actually yellow. The yellow coloring is symbolic of his rotten nature and his cowardice. I feel like this film really helped me to see people for their personalities and not just by their physical appearances. mickey Keep in mind that this film, although incredibly symbolic and artistic, is extremely disturbing and, to put it frankly, gross. I normally CANNOT STAND gore simply for the sake of including carnage, but in this case there is a strong message that goes along with the violence and blood in the film. I love this film and I strongly recommend it if you want to care about the characters and have a longing to see justice being done. and did I mention that one of the guest directors is QUENTIN TARANTINO? Well that just seals the deal doesn’t it?!