Thursday, June 6, 2019

2019 Summer Film Viewing Assignment!

Hello future students! Here's a video message from Mr. Weintraub, your possible film studies teacher. (Note that in the video I say "Film Studies 2015-2016", but that's only because I made the video a few years ago...it's just as applicable to "Film Studies 2019-2020"!)



BACKGROUND: Welcome to Film Studies. For some of you, this will be your first time immersing yourself in the world of film; for others, you've lived here for quite some time. If you're taking ACP Film Studies, your first assignment of the year, which I'd like you to complete this summer, asks you to watch THREE movies that you've never seen before; if you're taking Honors, I'd like you to watch SIX (two from each era); and then blog about them in the comments section of this website!

ASSIGNMENT: As stated above, please watch THREE movies (or SIX, if taking Honors), one (or two) from each of the three periods listed below. Then, by Tuesday, September 3rd, write ONE blog post where you share your thoughts about the films. Please don't write more than 100 words about each film; and you can choose whichever of the movies to write about (you don't need to write about all of them). Please don't write more than 400 words, total.

In your entry, please feel free to respond to the films as you like, but if you need more specific questions, here are some:

1. What did you notice about the film that you felt was important to its style and meaning?
2. What other films does this film remind you of? Why?
3. What did you like about the movie? What did you dislike? Why?
4. What do you think the filmmakers are trying to do and say in this film? How do they accomplish that goal?
5. What do you not yet understand about the film(s)? What questions do you still have?

FILM LIST:

FORMATIVE PERIOD (1900-1930)

DW Griffith (US, Historical Drama)
Charlie Chaplin (US, Comedy)
Buster Keaton (US, Comedy)
Fritz Lang (Germany, Crime/Sci-Fi)
FW Murnau (Germany, Horror/Drama)
Sergei Eisenstein (USSR, Political Agitprop)

CLASSICAL PERIOD (1930-1980)

Alfred Hitchcock (UK/US, Suspense/Horror)
Jean Renoir (France, Comedy/Drama)
Vittorio De Sica (Italy, Social Realist Drama)
Orson Welles (US, Great American Stories)
Roberto Rossellini (Italy, War/Drama)
John Ford (US, Westerns/War)
Sam Peckinpah (US, Westerns)
Ingmar Bergman (Sweden, Metaphysical Horror/Drama)
Nicholas Ray (US, Melodrama)
Luis Bunuel (Mexico/Spain/France, Surrealist Comedy/Horror)
Ousmane Sembene (Senegal, Poltical Drama/Comedy)
Satyajit Ray (India, Realist Drama)
Akira Kurosawa (Japan, Historical Epics)
Kenji Mizoguchi (Japan, Domestic Dramas)
King Hu (China, Martial Arts)
Andrei Tarkovsky (USSR, Philosophical Sci-Fi)
Jean-Luc Godard (France, Philosophical Crime/Comedy/Drama)
Michaelangelo Antonioni (Italy/UK, Moody Mysteries)
Francois Truffaut (France, Sentimental Comedy)
Agnes Varda (France, Feminist Melodrama)
Werner Herzog (Germany, Masculine Epics/Total Weirdness)
Rainer Werner Fassbinder (Germany, Sci-Fi/Melodrama/Political Crime Films)
Martin Scorsese (US, Crime)
Robert Altman (US, Westerns/Musicals/War)
Lindsay Anderson (UK, Satirical Surreal Comedy)

CONTEMPORARY PERIOD (1980-today)

Wong Kar Wai (Hong Kong, Romance/Martial Arts)
Jim Jarmusch (US, Hipster Comedy/Crime/Drama)
Claire Denis (France, Meditative Feminist Drama/Horror)
John Woo (Hong Kong, Hyperkinetic Action)
Joel and Ethan Coen (US, Sardonic Crime/Comedy)
David Lynch (US, Surrealist Americana)
Kathryn Bigelow (US, Action/War)
Michael Haneke (Austria/France, Crime/Horror)
Spike Lee (US, Comedy/Action/Political Drama)
Wes Anderson (US, Quirky Comedy)
Paul Thomas Anderson (US, Crime/Mystery/Epic)
David Fincher (US, Crime/Thriller)
Andrea Arnold (UK, Social Realist Drama)
Bong Joon-Ho (South Korea/US, Monster Movies/Family Dramas)
Richard Linklater (US, Indie Comedy/Drama)
Park Chan-Wook (South Korea/US, Revenge Thrillers)
Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Thailand, Philosophical Drama)
Kelly Reichardt (US, Quiet, Meditative Dramas)
Jia Zhangke (China, Social Satire/Realist Drama)
Sofia Coppola (US, Satirical Drama/Comedy)
Ava DuVernay (US, Fantasy/Historical Drama)
Dee Rees (US, Contemporary/Historical Drama)
Lynne Ramsay (UK, Suspense)
Maren Ade (Germany, Satirical Comedy)
Ryan Coogler (US, Realist Drama (and Black Panther))

I am so excited to get started...and to meet all of you, too. Happy viewing. Please let us know if you have questions:

Mr. Weintraub: david_weintraub@newton.k12.ma.us
Ms. Shorey: cara_shorey@newton.k12.ma.us

Have fun!
Learn something!

50 comments:

  1. I chose to watch horror films from each of the periods given to me because I wanted to relate how movies in the early 1900’s differentiates to those from today.

    “The Haunted Castle” directed by F.W. Murnau gave me a good idea about how Horror has evolved over the last century. This movie deals purely on psychological horror which doesn’t seem to give the same reaction as it once did. Something I would say is a pro of the movie is during the 2nd half of the movie tension starts to rise as the characters start to accuse one another for the disappearance of another character. The biggest con of the film was that the first 41 minutes seemed to be there for exposition solely.

    “Funny Games” directed by Michael Haneke shows a version of horror that is rarely used today. Instead of using loud music cues to evoke jump scares, or even creepy synthesizers or strings to set a tone, the movie relies entirely on sound that reacts to the plot. The movie also uses the color white a lot in the movie to resemble misconception or, more specifically, dark intentions behind a light color. The movie shows the transformation of a happy family with a perfect world to a threatened family fighting to stay alive till morning.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am unable to read articles online very often, but I’m glad I did today. This is very well written and your points are well-expressed. Please, don’t ever stop writing.
    Micro Budget Film

    ReplyDelete
  3. I really enjoyed watching ‘Shutter Island’ by Martin Scorsese, and following the plot was really interesting because the audience feels there is something wrong with the island from the beginning, and you can feel there is a mysterious ambiance around the island. The style of this movie reminded me of movies like The Great Gatsby, not just because they both star Leonardo Dicaprio, but because they both are mysterious and a lot of the plot is up for the audience to gather themselves. I also enjoyed the fact that a lot of the secrets were supposed to be inferred rather than explicitly said, and the ending makes you question the whole movie and wonder what side of Shutter Island is really the truth. I wish there was a more clear cut ending and the filmmakers showed if Teddy had a lobotomy. I found it really interesting to see how mental illnesses were treated and how the Island claimed to be treating the patients, but in actuality, the patients were subject to cruel surgeries, and hallucinogenic drugs. I found myself also really enjoying Lynne Ramsay's movie ‘We need to talk about Kevin’ this movie had me on the edge of my seat through the whole movie trying to piece together the story of this little boy who grew up to become a school murderer. In our current society School shooting have because of a lot more common and it was really interesting to see how in this particular case the mother of the murderer was paying the price for what her son did. This movie made me question accountability and who we can and should hold accountable in society because although Kevin the archer did a horrific thing and maybe something that happened in his childhood attributed to his crimes there is no acceptable reason for murdering your classmates at school. I liked seeing Kevin's mother going throughout life after the incident and trying to have a normal life, but failing because the people in the neighborhood cannot seem to move on from the accident. The movie showed Kevin and his mother's strained relationship through her perspective, but I would have liked to see Kevins' perspective and know how he feels about his mother and why he feels the need to kill his little sister and his father who both adored him but keep his mother alive.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To my great surprise (as I usually don't like early movies) I really enjoyed Fritz Lang's "Metropolis." The story is a pretty classic one about the struggles of the working class, yet the way it presented it was very novel to me. For example, the movie uses an interpretation of the story of the Tower of Babel to make a point about the importance of the communication between the upper and working classes that I had never heard before, yet found absolutely fascinating. Another thing that this movie does really well is overcome its inability to use dialogue - the actors accomplish the goal of helping the viewer understand the conversation just through body language.

    This is something I did not really experience in the other older movie that I watched, F.W. Murnau's "Nosferatu." I disliked "Nosferatu" as I had a lot of trouble following both the plot and each individual character's motivations and the explanation behind their actions. I felt that although it definitely had some redeeming qualities it attempted to accomplish too much and add too many side characters who didn't really add much to the plot and just confused me.

    One movie that I was very impressed by was David Fincher's "Fight Club." I especially have to give credit to the movie's humor - it is definitely not a comedy, yet I found myself laughing at inappropriate moments throughout. The movie seeks to point out flaws in modern-day society and making things funny that absolutely shouldn't be is another way of mocking it. Also, I am interested in how cults form and as such really appreciated the way that the club itself develops. I found every development to be completely believable, which is terrifying in its own way.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I decided to watch Charlie Chaplin’s “The Dentist” to compare it to comedies seen in theaters today. I found that the comedic sense in the movie was based on physically hurting and attacking other people, which is what Chaplin was famous for in his movies. Also, I noticed that Chaplin’s movies were significantly shorter than modern movies, since not many resources we have now were available at Chaplin’s time so movies took longer to make.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Before being assigned this I had always heard the name Wes Anderson floating around but never got the chance to see any of his films. As of now I’m quite glad I did. Out of all the directors I watched in each period his work was truly fascinating and eye catching to me which is why I’m choosing to write about this one movie. As someone who loves things that are different from the norm or “quirky” I think he truly is masterful at capturing such a concept. I ended up watching not only one but two more of his works later in my free time because I enjoyed the first so much.
    The one I initially watched for this assignment was Moonrise Kingdom. I’ve always been a sucker for a good tale of romance so this really hit the target for me. It really portrays the innocence but also intense curiosity that comes with being so young and caring for someone romantically for the first time. I also saw a bit of my younger self in rebellious Suzy which made it all the more intriguing to me. One thing I liked very much and noticed is Wes Anderson’s very particular sense of humor. He tends to incorporate very odd and understated jokes that just make you chuckle to yourself. They’re so ridiculous and sometimes even dark but always just incorporated into the dialogue so nonchalantly.
    Along with the movies captivating story I deeply enjoyed Wes Anderson’s very unique aesthetic. Pretty much every aspect was visually stunning and so perfectly brought to life the setting of 1960s New England in the summer. The whole time I was watching the movie I couldn’t help but think about how much precise detail must’ve have gone into making each and every scene as interesting to look at as it is. His style is just so distinctive and I think that’s what makes his movies so amazing. It seems as if he really wants people to notice the little things and in my opinion you must be willing to do that to truly enjoy the full magnitude of one of of his films

    ReplyDelete
  9. As I was scrolling through the list of possible films to watch this summer, I came across one that I have heard my parents and grandparents talk about before. It was Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho". I am not the biggest fan of older movies and black and white pictures but when I began to watch "Psycho", my mind changed completely. I got so into it. The film is a psychological horror film and is about a secretary who steals roughly $40,000 from her employer to run away with her boyfriend and while on the run, stops at a hotel. The hotel is very old and isolated and is run by a man and his old mother. Norman (the owner of the hotel) is a pretty weird guy, he fixes dinner for the secretary and talks about weird things. In the second part of the film, Norman's mother is seen coming into the secretary's from and stabbing her with a knife. Eventually, the secretary's friends come and try to find her and Norman is seen in the last scene sitting in a jail cell.
    I am not the biggest fan of horror films but this film had me jumping out of my seat. The way Alfred Hitchcock portrayed Norman (the psycho) was thrilling, exciting, yet scary all at the same time. Furthermore, while I was watching the film I realized that a lot of the scenes involved mirrors so I decided to do some research as to why that was. I learned that Hitchcock purposefully used mirrors and relfections to show the duality of the film. For example, after the secretary steals the money, Hitchcock portrays her image through the window of the car, but the secretary doesn't look at herself in the window, demonstrating that she is a changed person and is now driven by her "madness" and psychotic behavior.
    I decided to do even more research and I realized that Hitchcock used dozens of other symbols throughout the film that I never even noticed like the birds chirping in the background or the uneaten foods. I like the way that Hitchcock uses tons of different symbols throughout his films. It's almost like a puzzle or a game, you have to try and put all the symbols and pieces together. Overall, I love Hitchcock's style of how he directs and uses symbols throughout his films and I hope to watch more of his films in the future!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Kathryn Bigelow’s Point Break delivers just as much California adrenaline-boosting brochacho surfer heist thrill as anyone would want from a Summer blockbuster. Going into the movie, I had heard about its cult following, which is apparently large enough to have warranted a remake, but didn’t really know much about anything else about it. I find both Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze interesting actors within the hollywood blockbuster movie genre, so I went into this movie with a positive and open mind, and after watching it, I can say that I really enjoyed it for exactly what it was: a somewhat disposable 90s blockbuster filled with impossible action. The story’s loosely tied together; the acting even looser. What hold this movie together are the charisma both these lead actors have, despite their acting abilities, the cool action set pieces, and an amazing skydiving sequence that will immediately make you want to go skydiving. Even though Keanu Reeves and Gary Busey are really irresponsible FBI agents, I didn’t mind because the story was silly and popcorn-y enough for the well-directed action sequences to compensate for it. I understand why this movie has a large cult following. It’s just so much fun. There are movies that are ambitious and meaningful: the arthouse films. This is where the Mulholland Drives and the Solarises would be categorized. These are the movies that win the awards and get the most critical acclaim. I love these films, but I also love the absent-minded macho action blockbusters. We should not love the Point Breaks, the movies made for pure entertainment and fun any less than we love the fancy arthouse films. We can find things we appreciate in all movies. I found myself having a lot of fun with this movie and I definitely intend on watching it again, over and over again.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I decided to watch a variety of films because I've never really watched any films from the formative period, or many foreign films for that matter. The two foreign films I ended up watching were "The Metropolis" directed by Fritz Lang, and "Persona", which was directed by Ingmar Bergman. "the Metropolis" presented a very heavy-handed portrayal of anti-industrialist sentiments. The film very clearly suggested that overworking of the poor not only strips them of any humanity they have, but that being overworked itself is an issue mostly confined to the less fortunate. There was also a lot of heavy handed biblical symbolism. It was interesting to see a movie so heavy handed in its symbolism.
    "Persona" was probably the scariest non-horror movie I have ever seen. It focuses on the relationship between an actress who has fallen mute and her caretaker. Almost all of the dialogue comes from the caretaker, who talks about her struggles in her life and how she feels that she is lacking fullfilment. However,this movie became unexpectedly dark and this caught me off guard. There is also a lot of jarring and seemingly erratic cuts to shots of a crucifixtion, amongst other disturbing images. To be quite honest, I am not sure what some of these images represent, but it was certainly distinctive to say the least. I am hoping that someday if I return to this movie, some parts of it will make more sense.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I decided to watch many films from different genres because I enjoy trying new things, however I was disappointed with the movie from the formative period. I watched Sunrise: a song of two humans directed by FW Murnau, and in my opinion the plot was poorly developed. I say this because the beginning and end of the movie were the only parts that made sense to me and actually connected, the entire middle of the movie was confusing and at some point the characters were in a carnival and I had no idea why or how this was important. Anyway I didn't really enjoy the movie to say the least.

    I also watched to catch a thief directed by Alfred Hitchcock from the classical period and at some points I found the movie to be entertaining but as a whole the movie didn't really speak to me but I thought that the characters were funny and clever at times. Honestly I think I didn't like the movie since the entire theme was built around class and wealth, which is fine but personally I wasn't really into it.

    Lastly I watch Dazed and Confused directed by Richard Linklater. I was excited to watch this movie since it had many big names such as Ben Affleck and Matthew McConaughey, in their earlier acting days. I know this movie wasn't meant to be deep or meaningful but it was definitely a fun movie to watch and I really liked how it was set in the 70's.

    ReplyDelete
  13. For the formative period, I chose The Kid by Charlie Chaplin. This movie was very different from modern movies because the movie is completely silent. It was really interesting to see how the mood changes were displayed with the varying music. Another piece that was cool was that they explained parts or said what the characters were saying with words written on the screen. Because the characters could not use sound, they had to use very big facial expressions and motions to get their points across. Although it was extremely different than movies we watch today, I enjoyed it.

    For the classical period, I chose to watch Popeye directed by Robert Altman. This movie was considered a musical but unlike other movie musicals the songs, in my opinion, were not the best. It did not seem as though they tried to make the songs sound good. The movie was focused a lot on comedy but it was almost as if they were too focused on that. I was hoping for this movie to be better because of the reputation it has with its cartoons, but I did not this enjoy this movie.


    For the contemporary period I chose to watch A Wrinkle in Time directed by Ava DuVernay. I chose to watch this movie because I've heard great things about the book. In my opinion, the movie was alright. It had a ton of special effects which was very interesting to compare with the other two movies because many of these effects are new to the movie world. The overall message of this movie was love, and I believe it was carried out well.

    ReplyDelete
  14. One of the films I watched this summer was The General directed by Buster Keaton. Before starting this film, I was a little hesitant because I didn’t really know what to expect from a silent film. I was pleasantly surprised with how natural the silence felt. While watching the film I didn’t feel as though it was missing something (sound) or that it would be so much better with sound. I thought that it was going to be really hard to follow along due to the lack of dialogue, but that was not the case. There were some humorous parts that were dropped in throughout the film that really kept my attention. During the scene where Buster Keaton is hiding in the bush with his uniform and his hat got caught on a branch and then fell onto his head, that reminded me a lot of the three stooges, because it was just simple humor. At one point, I started having trouble following along with who was on what side ( North or South), but that didn’t come because of the lack of dialogue, but from the lack of colors because there was no distinguishing factors on either sides uniforms. Overall I really enjoyed this film and I am looking forward to watching more of Buster Keaton’s films.
    I also watched McCabe and Mrs. Miller directed by Robert Altman. Looking back at this film and comparing it to a film like The General, it is surprising to me that I had less difficulty following along the plot of The General compared to the plot of McCabe and Mrs. Miller. I felt as though the plot was quite slow and lost my attention at some points. There were also some points in the film where I was very intrigued by what was going on. All in all, I felt as though the film moved quite slow.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Of the six film studies films I watched, Birth of a Nation by D.W Griffith, Mean Streets by Martin Scorcese, and Zodiac by David Fincher stood out to me the most. Birth of a Nation struck me as an unforgivingly racist yet impressive movie, because despite the movie’s blatant racism, the premise of tracking the Ku Klux Klan’s origins through the civil war is intriguing in itself. I felt the film’s offensive nature truly detracted from the film’s value; as a modern viewer, I found it hard to focus on the movie’s historical value, and instead found myself cringing at most scenes. The film also failed to captivate me for the entire three hour runtime, a sin the can be forgiven on account of it being a century old film. Another movie that stood out to me was Mean Streets. I had never given this movie a chance: I heard it was lackluster in regards to Scorcese’s other films at the time. However, I thoroughly enjoyed Mean Streets. I loved Robert de Niro’s performance: I thought the scene where Charlie first confronts Johnny Boy about his debts was hilarious. I also liked Harvey Kietel’s character a lot: he perfectly emulates the stereotypical wise guy, but his character seems more compassionate than some other fictional mafiosos, like Ray Liotta’s Henry Hill in Goodfellas. While the film certainly was not as strong as Scorsese' other classics, like Taxi Driver, I was certainly glad I watched this film. Another film I watched this summer was Zodiac by David Fincher. I would describe Zodiac as a slow-paced mystery, but the Zodiac’s murders are realized throughout this movie, and David Fincher masterfully utilizes suspense, by exposing the audience to the brutality of the Zodiac early on, which created a sense of unease that lasted for the entire movie. I loved every minute of this film, and I felt this summer was appropriate for a serial killer biopic, since the new season of Mindhunters just came out as well.- Harrison G

    ReplyDelete
  16. For the formative period, I watched the Kid by Charlie Chaplin. This movie really brought to my attention the art of silent films, and how even without dialogue, Chaplin was able to create a story that was very easy to follow. I also noticed the story arc of the movie was extremely well done. The climax of the movie is when his kid is taken away from him, and he is shot. It makes the watcher sad and worried that the two will be separated, but right at the end he ties it together by having the Star mother of the child reunite Charlie with his son. I also really enjoyed the music in the background, which really helped set the mood of the film.

    The second movie I watched was 1976's Taxi Driver by Martin Scorsese. One of the reasons why I loved this film was because of the complexity of Travis's character(DeNiro). What was different about Travis was that he seemed like a man with a good heart overcome by a dark side. The whole movie I kept deciding between if Travis was a real creep or the man who wanted to help Jodi Foster escape a life of prostitution. DeNiro did an excellent job portraying the troubled man, and I liked that it was more of a psychological thriller than a violent and gory thriller. It was one of my favorite movies I have watched in a while. My one question I still have for Scorsese, is when Travis went looking for Jodi foster because he had been single for a long time and wanted love, was he doing it just to save Iris, or was he doing it for action and realized what he was doing was wrong and decided to help her from that point forward.


    The third movie I watched was black panther by Ryan Coogler. This movie was kind of similar to a lot of marvel movies, however, I enjoyed it more than most of them. Part of the reason could have been the use of many vibrant colors throughout the movie, making it very aesthetically pleasing, or the costumes, making the audience feel like they were truly in at the fantasy world of Wakanda. The thing I liked most about it, is Killmonger, the enemy, had a backstory that was so easy to relate to and it made the viewer feel sympathetic towards the supposed "villain". It added a really cool element to the film atypical of most superhero movies, and it made the viewer wish that the villain would actually live and not die to the "good guys". I thought the whole thing was well done and the special effects were also probably the best I've ever seen.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Charlie Chaplin's The Kid, a staple of the Formative Period, is a silent film about a tramp who finds and raises an orphan baby. Since there is no dialogue throughout the entire movie, I appreciate the way that the movie uses music to match the mood of the movie and to add suspense. At times, the movie even utilizes silence to add a dramatic effect. For example, in the scene where the picture of the woman falls into the fire, the music stops as the picture falls, and the audience is forced to sit anxiously in silence as they wait for the man to notice the burning picture; however after the audience learns that the man does not seem to care about the picture anymore, the music starts again and the story continues.
    The next film I decided to watch was Orson Welles' Citizen Kane of the Classical period, as it was recommended to me by a friend. What stands out to me about the movie is the fact that it is not told in chronological order. The movie begins with the death of Charles Foster Kane, and even stories of Kane are not told in order either. Although this is a bit confusing at times, I appreciate this aspect of the film because it leaves the audience in the same position as the reporter: trying to put together all the different puzzle pieces of Kane's life in an attempt to figure out what his last word, "rosebud," means. I also find it interesting how the movie leaves the audience both unsatisfied and satisfied at the same time, as the characters never figure out the meaning of rosebud, but the audience learns its meaning in the final shot of the movie.
    Lastly, one of the movies I watched from the Contemporary Period is Wes Anderson's Isle of Dogs. Something I find frustrating about this movie is the choice to not include English subtitles or to not translate some of the Japanese dialogue; however, at the same time, Anderson's choice to do this also allows the audience to watch the movie from the perspective of the dogs, as the dogs speak English and have a hard time understanding the Japanese characters as well. This creates a stronger bond between the audience and the dags, making the audience feel more sympathetic towards the horrible treatment of the dogs.

    ReplyDelete
  18. From the formative period, I watched “Neighbors” by Buster Keaton and “The Lonely Villa” by DW Griffith. While watching Keaton, I was impressed by his commitment to each stunt and having them really happen on set. Something else that sets him apart from other early films that I’ve seen is the lack of words inserted into the scenes. By doing this, the movie feels much more fluid, and as an audience member, I enjoyed not feeling interrupted by having to intermittently read in order to understand the plot. While some of the jokes were outdated, much of the physical comedy I could recognize as being referenced often in modern media.
    From the classical period, I watched Lindsay Anderson’s “if….” And “Black Girl” by Ousmane Sembene. “if….,” compared to the other films, was not the most exciting. The meditations on the frustrations of young men felt somewhat trite and antiquated, and the plot only really picked up as the film descended into surrealism. I suppose the point could have been to show the blandness of life in the institution where these boys went to school, but that doesn’t make for a very interesting movie-watching experience. One of the few women, I learned, had a nude scene only because Malcolm McDowell, the main actor, wanted to see his costar in the nude, which I found somewhat unsettling. I very much enjoyed “Black Girl” for its portrayal of the lasting effects of colonialism and the rich symbolism of black vs white, the continual use of the mask to represent the main character’s heritage and free spirit, and the stark and shocking ending.
    From the contemporary period, I watched “Fargo” by the Coen brothers and “The Grand Budapest Hotel” by Wes Anderson. In “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” every shot was so thoughtfully composed and you could sense that the director had a clear vision of what he wanted the movie to look and feel like. It was by far my favorite that I watched due to the hilarious characters, the captivating plotlines, the vibrant colors, and the general campiness that it exuded. I look forward to watching more of Wes Anderson’s films in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I did not think I would enjoy old black-and-white films, but those movies turned out to be my favorites out of the six movies I watched. Because Buster Keaton could not feature speaking his film The General, the actors had to make up for the lack of speaking with action, stunts, and fantastic acting. I was fully invested in that movie and did not care that there was no audible talking. Before I started watching Charlie Chaplin’s The Great Dictator, I believed it would be a comedy, but it was both funny and surprisingly dark. I was wondering the whole time why the movie was called The Great Dictator, until I realized afterwards, without spoiling the ending, that the Great Dictator was not Hinkle. That movie touched my heart and deeply moved me. I was not expecting to enjoy Orson Wells’ Citizen Kane as much as I did, but when the movie ended, I flipped out with how much I loved the ending. I love how one can observe the characters developing and changing as the movie progresses and how the ending wraps the whole movie together. It was beautifully made and had great effects for its time, such as reflections in the window and swift scene shifts.
    On the other hand, I did not enjoy my other three movies as much. Alfred Hitchcock’s To Catch a Thief had a lot of character development that happened too rapidly, which made it seem as if I was not watching the same characters anymore. The plot also seemed to be lacking and uncompelling. Spike Lee’s The Original Kings of Comedy was hilarious for the most part and then not very funny in other parts, but I did enjoy watching a stand-up comedy movie. I was pleasantly surprised by Wes Anderson’s The Royal Tenenbaums because I told myself that the only director on the list provided that I refused to watch any movies of was Wes Anderson, as I have been disturbed by some of his films in the past; however, I actually liked this movie overall, though, admittedly, some parts were very strange.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I watched Charlie Chaplin’s “The Great Dictator” from the Formative Period, which was very much to my liking. I’m a big fan of satire, and although some of the slapstick comedy was a little more miss than hit, I found the majority of the humor to be right up my alley. I also adored the message and presentation of the final speech at the end of the film.
    From the Classical Period, I watched Robert Altman’s “Nashville.” This did not turn out to be the best three and a half hours that I’ve ever spent. Keeping track of the large number of characters ended up occupying most of my attention, and the lack of a well outlined plot made every scene seem quite empty. I had hoped that the music would be quite good, but it was mediocre at best.
    Finally, for the Contemporary Period, I got around to watching Ryan Coogler’s “Black Panther,” of which I had only made it through the first seven minutes the first time I tried to watch it. I’m usually not a lover of superhero movies, so it wasn’t my favorite, but I definitely enjoyed it. Good music, great special effects, and an outstanding number of people running around killing each other.

    ReplyDelete
  21. From the Formative Period, I watched Buster Keaton’s “The Goat” and Charlie Chaplin’s “The Kid.” I expected these silent, black and white films to be boring, but they ended up being somewhat refreshing. I noticed that the films were shot on stationary cameras, unlike movies today. Despite no words in the movies, I could fully understand the actors through their overly gestured acting. The angel scene towards the end of “The Kid” surprised me as I was not expecting special effects to happen in a film from the twenties. “The Goat” has clever comedy, and it was clear how comedy has evolved from this era.
    I also watched Lindsay Anderson’s “if....” While the film has sneaky foreshadowing such as a Whip calling Travis “Guy Fawkes,” I can confidently say this is the worst film I have ever seen. The movie has a confusing blend of black and white scenes in addition to color. Some characters, such as the little boy, seem to have no meaning to the plot whatsoever. The development of the conflict is very slow, which is similar to the other Classical Period movie I watched, “Taxi Driver.” I found “Taxi Driver” more interesting. The film has much clearer character development, and it was very explicit that Travis Bickle’s mental state was deteriorating.
    The films in the Contemporary Period jump right to the conflict, and I found this technique far more enjoyable. I watched “Fargo,” directed by the Coen Brothers. In the Contemporary Period, the directors seem to use the camera for different styles of shots. “Fargo” has several long cuts which added suspense. With close up shots to the face, the movie made it easy to tell that Gaear Grimsrud was out of his mind. The Coen Brothers have a strange sense of humor that I have difficulty explaining, but I found the movie both captivating and hilarious. The final movie I watched was “Face/Off.” The script is very original, and seeing John Travolta try to act like Nicholas Cage’s character acting as John Travolta’s character while Nicholas Cage does the opposite was funny and interesting. Some of the action sequences seemed a little over-the-top with doves flying and explosions in slow motion, but overall, I found the film enjoyable.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Out of all the movies I watched, “Snowpiercer” was by far the most simultaneously terrifying and exhilarating. The suspenseful music throughout continuously made me sit on the edge of my seat and freak out about who was going to get killed this time. The movie uses a lot of parallels between the world we live in and the one that the characters in the movie are living in to set up the metaphor that the train is in the movie. When we hear the saying “in the whole wide train,” it emphasizes that the train is not only the character’s whole world, but that our world can be seen the same as the train is seen in the film.

    “The Quiet Man” was my least favorite movie. It was much slower than most movies I had seen before and it often felt to me like there was nothing interesting or dynamic happening. The narration was honestly dull to me, and the constant instrumental in the background made the movie feel like it was never going to end. This movie was slower than even the silent films I have watched, and I just never really got invested in the character's lives.

    Another movie that I struggled to get into was “Metropolis.” While the storyline was fascinating, I couldn’t fully relate to the character’s lives. The people were all so mechanical, much more like cogs in a system than tangible human beings, so that the need to keep working with no room for anything else is illustrated. While there is definitely relevance to it today, the contrast between the worker’s lives and opulence in the wealthy’s lives is different in the present.

    “Burn After Reading” was the final movie I watched. It was so different than the movies from earlier time periods that I watched, with much smoother transitions, more vulgar language, and increased violence. There also wasn’t that typical happy ending seen in most movies; it was darker. The different camera angles were used to draw focus to different people. For example, there was shot with two people, focusing on the one farther from the camera, even though they weren’t talking so that the audience would see their facial expression. Overall, all this added to the intrigue in the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  23. When scrolling through the list of directors I chose ones that I knew but films of theirs that I have not seen. Of the 6 films I watched the two that spoke to me the most are Martin Scorsese’s “Taxi Driver” and Alfred Hitchcock’s “Vertigo.” From the formative period, I chose Charlie Chaplin’s “The Kid” and Buster Keaton’s “The General.” Since both films are silent it was interesting to see how they had to captivate the audience in other ways, for “The Kid,” it was interesting to see the use of music both to help create a mood and to change add suspense. For “The General,” it was interesting to see the creativeness of the world that was created to resemble the civil war and the stunts were amazing I had no issue keeping my focus on the film. Both films needed a (arguably) higher caliber of acting then what we see today in order to captivate the audience and it was impressive to see.

    For the classical period, I watched Alfred Hitchcock’s “Vertigo” and Martin Scorsese's “Taxi Driver.” What I loved about both films is how long they take to build the story and add suspense. In “Vertigo,” there are so many twists and turns and different aspects of the movie. In addition, James Stewart’s acting was phenomenal. “Taxi Driver” definitely popped out the most out of all the films. The film takes its time to show how Robert Di Nero’s character (Travis Bickle) slowly turns into a psychopath from a normal guy.

    From the Contemporary period, I watched the Coen Brother’s “Fargo” and Spike Lee’s “Do the Right Thing.” What I liked about “Fargo” I really enjoyed the dark and twisted sense of humor as well as how the Coen Brothers really got every ounce of brilliant acting and theme perfect for this movie. Hats off to Frances McDormand in particular. What I really enjoyed about “Do the Right Thing” was how Spike Lee combined comedy and chaos. While the goal of Buggin out, Pino, and Mookie were to get black actors on the wall of fame it was interesting and also funny to see the neighborhood's response to what they are trying to do.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Though Agnès Varda’s Cleo from 5 to 7 was made in 1962, its themes and messages still remain relevant today. The film follows a French pop singer, Cleo, through Paris for two hours of her day as she anxiously awaits the results of a medical test that will confirm a cancer diagnosis. At first, Cleo is portrayed as a vain and shallow character, obsessed with her appearance and status. She is constantly looking at her reflection, whether in mirrors or store windows. As she grows more tense and frustrated, however, Cleo takes off her wig and leaves her apartment to walk through Paris alone. By taking off her wig, she essentially breaks away, at least for the time being, from the societal pressure she feels. Her walk is a time for introspection as she struggles with questions of existentialism. Indeed, later on her walk, she accidentally shatters a mirror, symbolizing the change in her mindset.

    I watched this while also reading The Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf, which enhanced my understanding of Cleo. The beauty myth is the idea of a physically perfect woman, an image that is completely unattainable, yet something that all women are constantly under pressure to achieve. Cleo is tall, thin, and pretty— the ideal image of beauty. Yet, even she is not exempt from this crushing societal pressure, constantly checking her reflection and submitting to the men in her life. By the end of the film, however, she comes to terms with her illness, and in turn, herself.

    Out of all the films I watched this summer, this was one of the films that stood out to me the most. In addition to the beautiful black-and-white shots and the glimpse into 1960s Paris, both of which I loved, the message of the film was ultimately what stuck with me. Agnès Varda has a subtle yet deliberate way of addressing feminist issues, and I look forward to seeing her other work.

    ReplyDelete
  25. In films from the formative period, it was very interesting to see where many of the recurring visual elements I'm used to seeing in modern films originated from. In Nosferatu by F.W. Murnau, one of the earliest horror films, all the doors the vampire walked through would open and shut by themselves, a device that has been used in many horror films since. In some scenes, you would notice the shadow of the vampire coming into the room or its fingers approaching a character before actually seeing the vampire, another suspenseful device that has been used in countless movies.
    I really enjoyed Battleship Potemkin by Sergei Eisenstein for a number of reasons, but it was the editing that stood out most to me. Isenstine would build suspense during a scene by progressively intercutting shots faster and faster towards the climax, or intercut multiple times between two things that were happing in order to lengthen the time it took for the action to be resolved. The final scene of Battleship Potemkin was one of the most suspenseful scenes I have ever watched and it didn’t matter that it was black and white and 4:3 format.
    Because this assignment was about watching films that we would never normally choose to watch I decided to take a look at The Passenger by Michelangelo Antonioni. The Passenger is a very slow building film, consisting of extremely long drawn out shots, little dialogue, and confusing plot points. The exact opposite of the mind-numbing action films I usually enjoy. However, I ended up enjoying it a lot more than I thought I would. It differs from most films I’ve watched in that the viewer is not being explicitly told a story, but is more of an observer of what is taking place and is allowed to come to conclusions on their own. The long takes give the viewer time to digest what is happening in each scene and better understand the point of view of each character. The Camera is almost a character of its own and sometimes confusingly wanders away from the action to observe other parts of the environment that seem to have no bearing on the story. For example, in the final scene, there is a six-minute long take where the camera pans away from the protagonist and moves out a window to observe the world outside as the protagonist is killed inside. At first, I didn’t like this style of filmmaking at all but once I began to understand it more I appreciated and enjoyed The Passenger a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Film Studies Summer Work Blog
    The Movie Fargo despite its name has only one seen in Fargo, North Dakota. Most of the movie takes place in Minnesota and the movie adds to this effect by having the characters use accents from that region. I really liked how the two kidnappers personalities clashed throughout the film. One of the criminals Carl is talkative and is constantly trying to engage with his partner Gaer who is quiet and is always smoking. I also found how the main character constantly lied combined with his apologetic manner hilarious.
    I also watched Taxi Driver. What I thought distinguished this movie from others like it was how the director (Martin Scorsese) used music to set the mood for each scene such as when Travis is driving the cab. I also noticed how in the beginning of the movie scenes with Betsy have lots of color and are during the day while scenes with Travis are during the night and have more drab backgrounds.
    I chose to watch The Birth of a Nation by DW Griffith because of its historical significance. I noticed how to obtain the meaning of the dialogue the viewer had to use the words being put on screen, the music and the actual film. Black people in this novel were portrayed in two different ways, if they were serving white people then they were shown as loyal and obedient, but if they were free then they were shown as savages.
    Lyle Spitz

    ReplyDelete
  27. For about as long as I can remember, I've been really interested in the way music contributes to the impact of what's being shown on screen. Since this assignment gave me an excuse to watch six movies, I took the opportunity to examine the use (and absence) of music in the films I saw. I also selected several of the films based on their composers (Bernard Hermann, Carter Burwell, and Charlie Chaplin).

    Of all the films I saw, music played the largest role in the Formative Period. Without the ability to hear actors emote, music more or less told the viewer to feel one of a few basic emotions: happy, sad, or afraid. That went hand in hand with the perfect synchronization of the music to the events on screen, especially in 'The Kid' by Charlie Chaplin, who directed, starred in, and composed for his films. Seeing the effect of such a direct relationship helped me understand the effect of overt musical cues, especially for comedic purposes. Personally, I really enjoyed the timpani hits every time Chaplin punched someone.

    The role of music grew more nuanced in the Classic Period, in which both the films I saw were scored by Bernard Hermann. The span between the films was 35 years long, allowing me to look at not only the changing role of music but also the evolution of Bernard Hermann's compositional style— he actually passed away at 64 the day after recording the music for 'Taxi Driver' (Scorsese). In 'Taxi Driver' and 'Citizen Kane' (Welles) both, the music was much more expressive and self-contained than that of the earlier films, the scores easily standing on their own merit. The timing of the musical themes struck me the most in these films: Kane's growing arrogance is underlaid by darkening musical cues, and the moments at which the theme swelled in 'Taxi Driver' help relate Trevor's warped perception of the world.

    Counterintuitively, in the modern period, directors seem to be using... less music. 'The Forest for the Trees' (Ade) and 'No Country for Old Men' (Coen brothers) both utilized silence to build suspense. The films were both driven by characters with prominent anxieties, albeit very different ones — teaching 9th graders vs. being murdered —, and those feelings were highlighted by leaving music out of the films almost entirely, which I'll definitely be taking as a tool for scoring films later this year.

    ReplyDelete
  28. My favorite movie I watched for this assignment was Paul Thomas Anderson’s “Boogie Nights.” This is the 5th PTA film I’ve seen and by far my favorite. Paul Thomas Anderson always does such a fantastic job at humanizing characters that are lonely and/or morally flawed (or seen as such by those around them). His protagonists often find happiness in an unlikely source, either another person or a group, and in “Boogie Nights,” the main character finds a community in the adult film industry. Anderson humanizes a business that is often looked down upon, incorporating the highs and lows that come with any profession, conventional or not. These characters, although they have lives far different than most, still struggle with relationships, growing up, and failure—they are just like anyone else. All the performances are great, my personal favorites being Julianne Moore and Heather Graham. Overall, I absolutely loved this movie and will be rewatching it soon for sure.

    Another standout was “Le Bonheur,” directed by Agnès Varda. Although the plot is simple, this movie is a powerful, scathing commentary on nuclear families and how men use women to fulfill themselves. After watching this and “Cleo from 5 to 7,” it’s clear that Varda is a master at blending tone. “Le Bonheur” is filled with stunning visuals that mask and enhance the darkness of the story beneath. From the pastels of the forest to the bright technicolor houses, every shot is beautiful—even the crossfades are done in bright colors. I was both captivated by the color palette and unsettled, as it almost seemed to parody itself by choosing vivid tones for such a sad story. The character Therese works so hard to please her husband that she ultimately loses herself, while Francois takes Therese for granted and abruptly starts an affair with no regret whatsoever. “Le Bonheur” is fantastic, and like “Cleo from 5 to 7,” effectively captures the pressures and isolation of womanhood. I definitely want to check out more of Agnès Varda’s films in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am obsessed with the complexity and depth that went into Bong Joon-Ho's "Snowpiercer". The colors of the rainbow throughout the train, the words “extinct” and “eternal” describing the opposite, and the repetitive use of fasces symbolizing governmental authority are a few examples of some intentional choices that made the movie interesting and exciting to watch. On the surface, it is clear that the movie touches heavily on the divide between social classes; however, the main character is really just like everybody else– completely reliant on the train.

    The baby carriage scene, as well as the final squadron scene, were both truly iconic in Sergei Eisenstein’s "Battleship Potemkin". When I decided to watch this movie, I was scared I would be bored because it’s over an hour and a silent film. However, the storytelling and the tension building were so well done that it was entertaining to watch. I was especially impressed at how many people are shown in this film– the mobs of people running around the boat and on land added to the level of chaos.

    I loved how Wong Kar Wai’s "In the Mood for Love" plays with time and reality through the color palette, editing choices, and costume designs. The relationship between Ms. Chan and Mr. Chow progressed so well that they effectively trick the audience twice with the practice break up scenes for Ms. Chan’s husband– it was because the audience never saw either spouse’s face that this trick worked. The slow-motion scenes with the music, panning, and mirror shots were incredibly intimate, as well as the close-ups of Mr. Chow reaching for Ms. Chan’s hand, both of them wearing wedding rings.

    While for every other movie I’ve watched for this assignment, I paid close attention to deliberate directing choices, such as costume designs, colors, and camera movements… what I loved best about watching Alfred Hitchcock’s “Rear Window” was that I was simply watching it. The beginning is quick to get the audience invested in the story, rooting for our main character. The climax of the movie, when Lars confronts Jeff, is absolutely terrifying and the ending is satisfying in that it gives (almost) everybody a happy ending. Although most of it takes place in Jeff’s room, it never felt too confined.

    - Lexie Paik

    ReplyDelete
  30. From the Formative Period, I chose to watch two Charlie Chaplin movies, “The Kid” and “The Great Dictator.” It was cool seeing the contrast between the two because “The Kid” was Chaplin’s first full-length film, and also a silent film, whereas “The Great Dictator” was a slapstick comedy from much further in his career. I surprisingly liked “The Great Dictator.” There were many jokes and bits that I found quite funny, and I think it’s interesting to see the pieces of comedy that can carry over into 2019.

    From the Classical Period, I watched “North By Northwest”, a classic Alfred Hitchcock movie, as well as “Nashville”, directed by Robert Altman. I’ll admit that I’d actually never seen an Alfred Hitchcock movie previous to “North By Northwest”, and I really enjoyed the story. In “Nashville”, the absence of a general plot and the many different characters was a smart choice to convey a feeling of unpredictability. By the end, the characters made many different connections with each other which represents unity, not only in the movie, but also as a final theme for the viewer. While I liked the music and understood that “Nashville” holds a deeper meaning about American lifestyle, I didn’t love the film because I felt disconnected from the characters.

    Finally, from the Contemporary Period, I watched “Do The Right Thing” directed by Spike Lee, and “Dead Man” directed by Jim Jarmusch. I very much disliked “Dead Man.” It was confusing, and made me wonder if it was making fun of westerns or trying to dig at something deeper. The artistic choices were strange yet deliberate, from the black and white to the lack of a real soundtrack (the electric guitar got tiring after a while). The movie overall was just too weird for me. I really liked “Do The Right Thing” because of its thought-provoking themes about race that can still be discussed today. The movie’s usage of unique camera angles (especially side-ways angles) added to the growing tension within the neighborhood that ultimately led to the climactic fight scene. When Mookie threw the trash bin into Sal’s window, it raises the most important question: did he do the right thing?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Of all the films I watched, I most enjoyed Goodfellas by Martin Scorsese. I really admired the film's juxtaposition of the "glamorous" mobster lifestyle that many people envy and the horrors and hardships that these mobsters went through: Having to take part in violence, a constant fear of being murdered, etc. Watching this movie is a very fun and rewarding experience because you can really immerse yourself into the characters and story.

    -Jason Garb

    ReplyDelete
  32. Over the summer, the two movies I watched from the Formative period were “Cops” by Buster Keaton and “The Pawnshop” by Charlie Chaplin. As silent films, both employ exaggerated acting to express their characters’ thoughts, actions, and desires. I found both films to be rather funny, but I particularly liked Buster Keaton’s “Cops” a lot more. Keaton’s “Cops” both started and ended on a similar scene - Keaton’s character being denied by the woman he fancies. I thought this final scene was very funny, because after eluding the entirety of the police department, Keaton still can’t seem to impress this woman, who was oblivious to the wild events of the day. From the Classical Period, I watched both Martin Scorsese’s “Taxi Driver” and “Mean Streets”. In “Taxi Driver”, I thought the acting was great; in particular, I thought De Niro played the role of an insomniac fed up with the dirty, uncomfortable situations of New York City very well. In addition, the camerawork was well thought-out and I particularly liked the way Scorsese employed a lot of light contrast to convey the dark emotions that protagonist Travis Bickle feels; however, I did not agree with the plot itself. I’m sure there was plenty to analyze - Taxi Driver is, after all, an arthouse film - and I’m also pretty sure a fair amount of it went over my head, but as a whole, the film’s plot felt a bit too slow to me. The film felt, at some level, like a New York City version of the movie “Apocalypse Now” or the novel “Heart of Darkness”, which both tackle how members of society become primitive while enveloped in an environment of overbearing darkness, stress and hatred. I thought the main differences between “Taxi Driver” and “Apocalypse Now” / “Heart of Darkness” were setting and location. While “Taxi Driver” takes place in New York, “Apocalypse Now” and “Heart of Darkness” take place in Vietnam and Congo, respectively, locations more in the wilderness that New York City. The ending differs in that Bickle’s growing insanity, despite teetering on the edge of malevolent in his near-assassination of Politician Palantine, goes to a relatively good cause in the end, whereas in “Apocalypse Now” and “Heart of Darkness” the characters become consumed by their craziness. From the Contemporary Period, I watched “No Country For Old Men” and “Black Panther”. I enjoyed “Black Panther” a lot. I think the story arc was well thought-out and did a great job of introducing a new superhero to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The special effects and soundtrack were unique and incredible. Although “No Country For Old Men”, like “Taxi Driver”, didn’t have a super rigid plot, I enjoyed the Coen brothers’ film very much. It was interesting to see the stark contrast between main characters Moss, Chigurh and Bell and to see how each one’s strict ethical code is violently trodden on by a rapidly changing world. The cattle gun was an interesting yet mildly disturbing touch.
    - Yono Bulis

    ReplyDelete
  33. One director I have always heard about as being amazing is Martin Scorsese. I've always wanted to watch some of his movies, but I hadn't gotten around to it until this summer. The film of his I chose to watch was Taxi Driver. I really enjoyed this film, and I found it fascinating how it demonstrates the road to insanity and violence for the main character, Travis Bickle. Scorsese paints a clear picture of how PTSD and loneliness can affect one's mental state, and of how Bickle's view of New York's underworld further drives his growing disdain for the world. I also really liked how the film takes a nuanced approach as to whether Bickle is a hero or a villian, which made the film ahead of its time in the 70s.

    One of the modern films I watched was Seven, directed by David Fincher. I have always loved detective films and films about criminals, so I picked this film out because it provided such an interseting twist on the genre. Aside from finding it to be the most brutal and disturbing film I've ever seen, I also found it interesting how Fincher portrayed the cops as seemingly inferior to the villian. In most detective dramas, the cops are always on top of the case and can find incriminating clues anywhere. In this film, the two main detectives are seemingly dumbfounded at many points, and it feels like John Doe is one step ahead of them wherever they go.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Of the movies I watched, I found myself shocked by how much I enjoyed Charlie Chaplin’s comedic film, Modern Times. Because this film involves minimal speaking, I was curious as to how the characters would be able to show emotion affectively. In order to do so, the film utilized music to create the same emotion the characters were feeling in the viewer. The lack of dialogue did not detract from the film as I had expected, but rather allowed the humor as well as characters’ actions and facial expressions to be greater emphasized, creating a simple yet wonderfully done film.

    I was also surprised by how much I enjoyed Alfred Hitchcock’s suspense film, North by Northwest. While I was not excited to watch an ‘old movie,’ my dad insisted this film was worth watching and he was correct. I enjoyed the unexpected plot twists because they helped provide more depth and story to the characters. Having just watched Modern Times, I also found that music was used in this film to create moments of suspense or worry when words were omitted. I found this idea interesting because one can see the progression of music from the earliest films to today.

    Lastly, I watched Sofia Coppola’s Lost in Translation. I had heard that this film got great reviews so I was excited to watch it; however, I ultimately found myself disappointed by how the plot progressed. I enjoyed the message that friendships and connections can be formed when we least expect them, yet I found the setting of Tokyo to be distracting. Additionally, the plot felt a tad unrealistic to me, which some might find appealing but I found to be poorly done. I did find the modern context interesting after watching two older films and enjoyed hearing modern references.
    -Ilana Greenstein

    ReplyDelete
  35. From the Formative Period, I started with Buster Keaton’s “Sherlock Jr.”, which I really enjoyed, not only because its abundant jokes, visual gags, and overall physical comedy were so well-timed, but also due to how these came together to create a simple but genuinely sweet and poignant storyline. I chose “A Woman of Paris” since it was Charlie Chaplin’s first venture into drama, but it disappointed me in the end. I found the plot flimsy and underdeveloped, with too many scenes of women weeping into handkerchiefs and not enough conflict.

    The first film I watched from the Classical Period was Ousmane Sembene’s “Black Girl,” which was beautifully shot and scored, and I thought the use of voiceover and the symbolism of the mask were very effective in encapsulating Diouana’s struggle without hinting at the ending. I wasn’t a fan of the more outlandish scenes or the hypersexualization of the female characters in the next film, Lindsay Anderson’s “O Lucky Man!”. However, I liked the subtler comedy and how the film’s episodic structure, interspersed with musical numbers by a band that later show up as characters, added to its odyssey-like feeling (almost unnecessary as it’s 3 hours long!!). It’s a clever commentary on capitalism and ambition.

    Finally, I chose Spike Lee’s “Do the Right Thing” and Lynne Ramsay’s “We Need to Talk About Kevin” for the Contemporary Period. “Do the Right Thing” surprised me with its blend of humor and tension that ultimately builds to the climax; the film’s portrayal of the Bed-Stuy residents’s interactions with their neighbors, featuring lingering, intimate shots that break the fourth wall, gradually gain momentum as the stakes rise, making the unfolding events both shocking and tragically expected.

    I had mixed feelings about “Kevin.” The film itself is extremely uncomfortable to watch; Ramsay’s script constantly alternates between past and present, preventing the watcher from settling into a linear narrative. In addition, occasional jarring shots as well as Tilda Swinton and Ezra Miller’s deadpan performances kept me on edge and made even the most innocent tableau feel weighted, almost grotesque. That being said, I found myself asking questions even after the movie ended: how much of Kevin’s resentment of his mother is caused by Eva’s disdain for him as a child, and vice versa? How do their similarities keep them apart? And why does he spare her from his spree of destruction?

    - Maia Kahn

    ReplyDelete
  36. I chose Charlie Chaplin's movie "The Kid" for the formative period. When the movie started, it would switch from the movie scenes to a black screen with white writing on it to communicate the story. Another part of the movie that amazed me, was how easily I could relate to the story. Before I started the movie, I had expected the story to be flat without much depth, however, I was positively surprised. The story wasn't just humoring, but also very emotional. An example would be when the orphanage tried to take the child from Mr. Chaplin. While the scene was played out in a pretty humorous way to not make the movie too serious, it nevertheless affected me.
    - Giselle Hoermann

    ReplyDelete
  37. Out of the movies I watched, those from the most recent time period stood out to me the most for a few reasons. I watched Richard Linklater’s “Boyhood” and Wes Anderson’s “Rushmore,” both of which seemed out of the ordinary compared to most movies from the contemporary time period that I’ve watched throughout my life.

    “Boyhood” told the story of a boy named Mason who goes through a series of challenging events throughout his childhood, mostly having to do with his mother’s multiple divorces. The movie’s plot was fairly standard, but the style of the movie stood out to me because the movie repeatedly jumped from time period to time period in Mason’s life without using any text or subtitles. I actually only figured out the way the movie worked after the first few transitions.

    “Rushmore” might have been one of the weirdest movies I’ve ever seen. The movie told the story of a quirky teenage boarding school student named Max who falls in love with a teacher at his school but can’t quite get her to reciprocate the feelings. Anderson’s directing style was intriguing as he made me feel almost like I was in the movie and observing a series of awkward interactions from across the room.

    Overall, the two contemporary period movies surprised me the most, whereas the other four movies I watched (Chaplin’s “The Adventurer,” Keaton’s “One Week,” Hitchcock’s “Strangers on a Train,” and Welles’ “The Stranger”) all played out like I expected them to. The formative period movies used the exact type of humor I expected and the classical period movies had the exaggerated expressions and intense sound effects that I expected to see from mid-1900s movies. I guess film style has become more diverse and unpredictable over the years.
    -Andy Goldberg

    ReplyDelete
  38. I decided to watch A Wrinkle in Time, directed by Ava DuVernay because the book had such fantastic reviews. I had read the book a few years ago but was rusty on the plot. The movie’s overall theme of love was very apparent from the start. Although the movie seemed rather childish, the love and ambition between Meg and her family were evident. When watching the film, it struck me how different the costuming of Meg and brother was compared to the warriors. I would have liked to see the warriors in more modern costumes since it is a contemporary remake. Another exciting aspect of the movie was an all African-American cast. I think this was a brilliant choice on the director’s part because more African-American representation in film is crucial. All in all, A Wrinkle in Time was a feel-good movie that can resonate with audiences of all ages. Another movie that I watched was City Lights, directed by Charlie Chaplin, which is one of his most famous and highest-rated films. Watching a film from this time period gave me a whole new perspective on watching movies, because of the silent black and white theme. I was able to feel the emotion without color and minimal dialogue. Charlie Chaplin falls in love with a blind woman who sells flowers. He helped her with paying her rent and getting her surgery, and even though the movie was silent, the romance and emotion were presented clearly. The film had a great deal of tragic comedy, which is ambitious for a silent film. Finally, my question is, what were the most intricate musical scores that the director had to produce that was able to show the mood of the scene? Lastly, I watched Taxi Driver, directed by Martin Scorsese because I've watched a lot of his comedies and this film caught my interest. This film was in Robert De Niro's younger days, and I found the setting of the movie intriguing. When the main character becomes violent to rescue a teenage prostitute, there was a sudden shift in the tone of the film. The music and lighting became somber. This set the mood for the rest of the movie. Also, the movie is set in New York. The other films I watched were Stranger in Paradise(Directed by Jim Jarmusch), Legend Of The Mountain(Directed by King Hu), and Que Viva Mexico(Directed by Sergei M. Einstein).



    ReplyDelete
  39. “The Kid,” by Charlie Chaplin, was meant to be a comedic story about a man taking care of an orphan. The movie had a comedic feel to it, but the story in actuality was depressing and sad. I had never seen movies from this era, but the acting was so drastically different. The movie reminded me of theater or some kind of play. Their reason for comedy took a sad story and made it a satire, but not for the reason of stressing an issue that needs to be solved. All of the comedy was placed in the ridiculousness of the characters movements and actions - such as the way Chaplin walked - or the physical injuries or fighting that occurred throughout. The orchestra contributed to the film drastically and emphasised the emotion of the characters, and this is a tactic many films use in the contemporary era as well.
    “The Birds,” by Alfred Hitchcock, was supposed to be a horror film, but I found it to be more humorous. Not only was the acting so horribly exaggerated and the special effects being questionable, but the whole concept does not seem frightening to me. I was excited to see how he would make it scary, but the execution was not anything surprising. The image of the man with his eyes plucked out was definitely the only disturbing image. I want to know more about the “Love Birds” symbolism if there was any, because it seemed to be such an unnecessary back story that was not fully explained.
    Lastly, in “Rebel Without A Cause,” by Nicholas Ray, I found the whole story to be seriously interesting and different. It was an interesting story about facing the world rather than running from your problems. I would like to know more about the ending, because I don’t understand the meaning behind Plato being shot. He was mysterious and lonely until the end when we saw he finally had someone that cared for him. I believed it was either a message on mental awareness, police brutality, and/or an example of the struggle and complexity of a teenagers mind. This movie displayed the disconnect between the younger and the older generation as adults seem to avoid trouble and act safely, while the teenagers consistently took unnecessary and life threatening risks to prove that they are worthy and grown up.
    Grant Geyerhahn

    ReplyDelete
  40. For the Formative Period I watched the movie Battleship Potemkin. The movie was very different then anything I normally watch. First of all it was a silent movie but it did have background music and sometimes they had written explanations of what was going on in the movie. Even though the movie was black and white, they did show the red flag a few times. I thought it was a little funny how the whole fight started on the boat because some sailors refused to eat borscht and when one of the sailors died, on his gravestone it said “because of a spoonful of soup”.

    For the Classical Period I watched the movie The Birds. The movie was very interesting, at first I just thought it was a love story about a woman following a man to his hometown and bringing a gift of love birds. As the movie went on a huge mass of birds starting flying over people. At first the birds were leaving just a few scratches on people but then they started attacking people in huge masses and killing people. The movie left me in a big suspense because I never understood why hundreds of birds were attacking people.

    For the Contemporary Period I watched the movie Do the Right Thing directed by Spike Lee. I enjoyed how the movie was able to portray some comedy and funny moments but also portray the racism that Sal and his sons had in the pizzeria towards black people. I was really surprised that the movie ended with the beloved pizza place destroyed and a man being killed for no reason by the police. The movie was mostly comical and I did not expect the ending to be with a murder.

    ReplyDelete
  41. One of the films I watched over the summer was Gold Rush by Charlie Chaplin. In Gold Rush, the way the film used the silence to amplify drama was important and interesting. Instead being able to talk, actions had to be exaggerated and drawn out, which I think added to the way the story was presented. No other film I’ve watched has specifically compared to this, which I think made it more compelling. I liked how the film was able to get across a sense of comedy yet ensure the plot was all tied together. Through the use of dramatic expressions and actions of the characters (such as the bear chase, and the chicken scene), the director is successfully making an enjoyable comedic film, even with the way it looks so different to a comedy might look today.
    All in all, I quite enjoyed watching different films from different era, and seeing the vivid contrasts in style, execution and general plot lines. I think this made for a very interesting exercise in how films are produced, and how films are made for the era they are from.
    --William K.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Paul Mercer’s viola improvisations and Bruce Bennett’s percussive piano were the only parts of Dimitri Kirsanoff’s Ménilmontant that felt familiar to me. I have not seen many movies from the formative period so this was a brand new experience. I first noticed the lack of speaking, color, and the very shaky editing techniques. These qualities made the plot somewhat harder to follow but I liked how dark the film looks and feels. The flashbacks and time changes could have possibly inspired Quinten Tarantino to incorporate non-linear storytelling into his movies and the overall nightmarish feeling present in the film reminded me of David Lynch. There were some times where the film felt more like a piece of history than a piece of art. I could imagine that a Film Studies teacher would show Ménilmontant to their classes to exemplify the roots of cinema and reaffirm their good taste in art. There were not many times I felt this though and I ultimately enjoyed how regardless of when it was made, the story of two sisters whose lives are plagued by violence, seduction, and stress was able to connect with me almost a hundred years after it was made. It’s also important for everyone to know that I discovered this movie from an article on The A.V. Club and that I don’t actually know anything about experimental French cinéma from the 1920s.



    Finn O'Rourke

    ReplyDelete
  43. One of the films I watched was “School of Rock,” directed by Richard Linklater. Released in 2003, “School of Rock” immediately grabbed my attention due to the fact that it had Jack Black cast as the leading role. Playing the quirky yet lovable Dewey Finn, Jack Black executes his comedic role to near perfection. With funny moments littered throughout its runtime, “School of Rock” was an enjoyable watch from start to finish.
    I think the reason I enjoyed this movie so much is that it’s simple in its goals, and perfect in its execution. Almost every single one of the jokes hit their mark, and the shenanigans the band of schoolchildren and their teacher (Dewey) get into are not too over the top, and therefore do not present the risk of losing the viewers attention. I have found that most comedies these days tend to take a “so unrealistic it’s funny” route in their comedy instead of trying to ground themselves in reality. “School of Rock” does this grounded humor extraordinarily well, with many of the jokes and comedic scenes being plausible in real life. This groundedness really kept me intrigued throughout the entire film, and I actually found myself interested in the eventual resolution that the movie would provide for the characters, something that I cannot say for almost every comedy I’ve seen in the past two years.
    In summary, “School of Rock” nails exactly what it set out to do, and no more. Its comedy is top notch, the acting is great, and the down to earth feel of the plot makes it a truly fun movie to watch. Also rock music is awesome, that certainly helped.

    ReplyDelete
  44. One of the films I watched was Boyhood by Richard Linklater. Boyhood takes place over 12 years with the same cast. Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke powerfully execute their role over a little more than a decade with flawless consistency and their performances feel very genuine. The fact that this movie was filmed over 12 years makes the audience feel as if they watched them grow up and watched the young parents grow and change as well. The plot of this movie is intertwined with dark themes of alcoholism and nasty divorces. Because of these themes this movie was incredibly thought provoking and made you sympathize over the issues of a dysfunctional family. The tone of this movie reminds me of many other coming of age flicks such as The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Despite the similarities, Boyhood provides a very unique plot that allows you to witness monumental changes and phases of people's lives all in the span of two hours.This is combined with a plot that features exciting and frightening ups and downs. This distinctive style allows Boyhood to convey a profound message. Time goes by as fast as a blur but things can always change for the better and nothing is permanent.

    ReplyDelete
  45. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete