Obviously, the "simply plan" turns out to be much more than "simple".
However, after watching this movie, my final decision is this:
money is a plague that ruins lives.
Money stimulates greed, which can be defined as: an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth (dictionary.com)
Some say that greed is part of human nature. Isn't it true that we always strive to achieve more? We send our children off to college and hope that they will come out with an education that will allow them never to have to worry about money. The question is, will we ever actually stop worrying about money even when we already have enough to live well on?
We see how Sara tells Hank that she would return the money if she was ever in Hank's described situation, but this was before Hank spills the $4 million in front of her eyes. Its amazing how suddenly, all thoughts of returning the money is thrown out the window and the creepiest smirk/laugh escapes from her mouth. Jacob, Lou, and Hank too (Hank who has everything a guy could have in life: a beautiful wife, a child, a good job, a respectable reputation, and good friends/neighbors) are all blinded and overcome by greed. Of course, at first, they think twice before taking all the money, but overabundance of the money soon overtakes them.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Memento
This movie was interesting in plot, but it was definately confusing for the audience, such as myself.
I think this was the director's intention though, to portray how leonard feels and also to portray his life being stuck in his condition that he has. Since he can never actually remember anything, the things that happened in his life could be easily distorted, his memories could be inaccurate, none of these thigns could have actually happened, and i guess how and why things happened could be open to interpretation.
I like the beginning part where we see leonard waving around a photo until it is completely blank, and also when he reaches out his hand and his gun flies into it.
At that time, i thought maybe Leonard had some alien superpowers or something. But i now realize that it is a backwards replay of Leonard taking a picture and dropping a gun.
I have some questions though, just to clear up some confusion w/ the plot, since i gave up trying to understand the order of events with the frequent flashbacks and the backwards motion of the film.
So who is Dodd? And why was he chasing Leonard at one point in the film?
Did natalie go through all of that just to mess with leonard and take revenge?
Who was the man that leonard killed and how did he think that the man he killed was the one who killed his wife?
It sucks for Leonard because every time he wakes up, he has to figure out yet again where he's at, why he's there, how he got there, and what were his initial plans.
Why can't he just drop the whole case all together, not go through all that effort to figure things out, and just live comfortably? He can't remember anything, and the results? he ended up killing the wrong guy anyway. And even that, he will not remember. Does this mean that he will continue throughout his entire life looking to kill this man?
I think this was the director's intention though, to portray how leonard feels and also to portray his life being stuck in his condition that he has. Since he can never actually remember anything, the things that happened in his life could be easily distorted, his memories could be inaccurate, none of these thigns could have actually happened, and i guess how and why things happened could be open to interpretation.
I like the beginning part where we see leonard waving around a photo until it is completely blank, and also when he reaches out his hand and his gun flies into it.
At that time, i thought maybe Leonard had some alien superpowers or something. But i now realize that it is a backwards replay of Leonard taking a picture and dropping a gun.
I have some questions though, just to clear up some confusion w/ the plot, since i gave up trying to understand the order of events with the frequent flashbacks and the backwards motion of the film.
So who is Dodd? And why was he chasing Leonard at one point in the film?
Did natalie go through all of that just to mess with leonard and take revenge?
Who was the man that leonard killed and how did he think that the man he killed was the one who killed his wife?
It sucks for Leonard because every time he wakes up, he has to figure out yet again where he's at, why he's there, how he got there, and what were his initial plans.
Why can't he just drop the whole case all together, not go through all that effort to figure things out, and just live comfortably? He can't remember anything, and the results? he ended up killing the wrong guy anyway. And even that, he will not remember. Does this mean that he will continue throughout his entire life looking to kill this man?
Sunday, December 12, 2010
The Dark City
I like this movie. A lot.
It was so good, and it really got me thinking, what if our lives are like this? What if our memories are manipulated every night, and the problem is, we don't ever realize? What if we don't ever recall doing anything yesterday and our memories, try as we might to remember them, are only blurrs? What if we lived in a nightmarish world with no sun where it is run by beings with telekinetic powers who seek the souls of humans?
I think what really captivates the audience are the mind games and puzzles that are all brought up at once in the film. The audience tries hard to figure out what is going on, just as Murdoch, the main character in the film, is also trying to figure out what is happening in his life. Also, the way the camera films this movie succesfully brings tension and suspense. Often times, the camera seems to be shaking right and left and forever following closely to the back of the character who is running. Most of the film is portrayed in darkness and is immersed in the secrecies of the night, which helps to build suspense. (haha, at one point, i kept thinking, why is it always nighttime? oh well, everything will be better as soon as the sun comes out. and i kept thinking that the director intentionally did not include the city during the daytime because city during the daytime would only be extra fluff added to the movie<--of course, this was before murdoch asks the dectective if he ever remembers what he did yesterday and if he ever remembers daytime in the city. The audience then realizes of course, that it is always nighttime in the city)
My favorite character in this movie: one of the strangers is a little kid. I was slightly disgusted when he leaned down and bit Murdoch's finger. At the same time, i found it hilarious.
My favorite line of the film: kiiiilllllll hiiiimmmmmm
LOL
It was so good, and it really got me thinking, what if our lives are like this? What if our memories are manipulated every night, and the problem is, we don't ever realize? What if we don't ever recall doing anything yesterday and our memories, try as we might to remember them, are only blurrs? What if we lived in a nightmarish world with no sun where it is run by beings with telekinetic powers who seek the souls of humans?
I think what really captivates the audience are the mind games and puzzles that are all brought up at once in the film. The audience tries hard to figure out what is going on, just as Murdoch, the main character in the film, is also trying to figure out what is happening in his life. Also, the way the camera films this movie succesfully brings tension and suspense. Often times, the camera seems to be shaking right and left and forever following closely to the back of the character who is running. Most of the film is portrayed in darkness and is immersed in the secrecies of the night, which helps to build suspense. (haha, at one point, i kept thinking, why is it always nighttime? oh well, everything will be better as soon as the sun comes out. and i kept thinking that the director intentionally did not include the city during the daytime because city during the daytime would only be extra fluff added to the movie<--of course, this was before murdoch asks the dectective if he ever remembers what he did yesterday and if he ever remembers daytime in the city. The audience then realizes of course, that it is always nighttime in the city)
My favorite character in this movie: one of the strangers is a little kid. I was slightly disgusted when he leaned down and bit Murdoch's finger. At the same time, i found it hilarious.
My favorite line of the film: kiiiilllllll hiiiimmmmmm
LOL
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Asphalt Jungle
I actually find this film interesting, and I can't see how some people really dislike this film. It is captivating and intense, especially the scene where the characeters go and rob the jewels. You get nervous thinking that they might get caught, but of course, they don't (well, not so soon anyways)
The class was introduced to a new genre this week: film noir (haha, I thought it was film WAR all along until I saw everyone writing film NOIR). Asphalt Jungle is a typical film noir in that it is a crime drama with the low-key black and white visual.
I think that the film portrayed its characters well. Many of them have their own vices and demises as well as a human complex.
My favorite character is Dix. He definately seems like the type of tough guy that one would not want to deal with. His actions are smooth (when he shoots that man who works for Emmerich and when he lights Doll's cigarette for her), dislikes people who cheat their way of out of situations (when he points his gun at Emmerich and says something like, "What's keeping you alive?", when he slams the door and pushes Cobby back down into a chair when he tries to run for it, and of course, when he shoots the man who tries to take the jewels without paying back the money), and is simple (he refuses more than once when Doc offers to give him some of the stolen jewels. He also wants to go back to his farm).
What is going to happen next? Will Dix be okey? It would be nice to see Dix and Doll get together happily in the end, but knowing that this is a film noir, this probably will not happen.
And why is the film called Asphalt Jungle?
The class was introduced to a new genre this week: film noir (haha, I thought it was film WAR all along until I saw everyone writing film NOIR). Asphalt Jungle is a typical film noir in that it is a crime drama with the low-key black and white visual.
I think that the film portrayed its characters well. Many of them have their own vices and demises as well as a human complex.
My favorite character is Dix. He definately seems like the type of tough guy that one would not want to deal with. His actions are smooth (when he shoots that man who works for Emmerich and when he lights Doll's cigarette for her), dislikes people who cheat their way of out of situations (when he points his gun at Emmerich and says something like, "What's keeping you alive?", when he slams the door and pushes Cobby back down into a chair when he tries to run for it, and of course, when he shoots the man who tries to take the jewels without paying back the money), and is simple (he refuses more than once when Doc offers to give him some of the stolen jewels. He also wants to go back to his farm).
What is going to happen next? Will Dix be okey? It would be nice to see Dix and Doll get together happily in the end, but knowing that this is a film noir, this probably will not happen.
And why is the film called Asphalt Jungle?
Sunday, November 28, 2010
This film is called Unforgiven?
I did not know that until i signed in and saw all these posts titled, "Unforgiven".
Anyways, I like this film. It was exhileratinng and action packed. Though I don't usually watch western films, this has been a good experience.
On day one of viewing Unforgiven, Mr. Bennett told us all to take careful watch of the characters' usage of exaggeration (immediatly, everyone took out paper with pen ready in hand) This, i found all throughout the movie.
The beginning of the film starts with one of the prostitutes getting her face cut up by a man. The news spread through town. And when the Schofield kid shows up at Will Munny's house, he repeats the story, but with many stretched truths in it. Next, when Munny goes to his ex-partner's place, he repeats the Schofield kid's story, with even more stretched truths. Many a times throughout the film, we do not see the actual occurance happening, but the characters tell us what they think might have happened, or what they hear from some one else. Even at the end of the movie, we read that legends say that Munny disappears with his kids, settles in San Fransisco, and profits from a small business. It does not tell us that this is definately what happens. And so we can see that the whole film, from the beginning to end, is an exagerration.
About the Schofield kid: his personality is well portrayed/well rounded in this film. We see that he acts all tough. Meanwhile, Will Munny and Ned know that his whole story is a lie. He is young, unexperienced, and in reality, never killed anyone until the man who hurt the prostitute. This can be seen as he attempts and fails to shoot at everything and everyone in that field. I think that having the experience of killing someone, one would not be extremely proud and defensive, as is the case of the Schofield kid. Munny and Ned on the other hand, are both reluctant in talking about their past experiences in killing. This is reality, i believe, when the truth of having killed an innocent man washes over you in waves of guilt. The Schofield kid certainly experiences this at the end of the movie, after shooting that unarmed man. The scene where he sits by the tree and cries over what he has done is very emotional, and one can be sure that he will not be shooting anyone ever again. He says, "I'm not like you Will."
Certainly, Will does not enjoy killing either, and he is also guilty in what he has done in his past, but as he mentions more than once throughout the film, it was his wife who healed him of his drinking and killing. The power of love is what changes Will completely, unlike the Schofield kid (what's his real name?) who is more greatly and immediatly affected by guilt.
Anyways, I like this film. It was exhileratinng and action packed. Though I don't usually watch western films, this has been a good experience.
On day one of viewing Unforgiven, Mr. Bennett told us all to take careful watch of the characters' usage of exaggeration (immediatly, everyone took out paper with pen ready in hand) This, i found all throughout the movie.
The beginning of the film starts with one of the prostitutes getting her face cut up by a man. The news spread through town. And when the Schofield kid shows up at Will Munny's house, he repeats the story, but with many stretched truths in it. Next, when Munny goes to his ex-partner's place, he repeats the Schofield kid's story, with even more stretched truths. Many a times throughout the film, we do not see the actual occurance happening, but the characters tell us what they think might have happened, or what they hear from some one else. Even at the end of the movie, we read that legends say that Munny disappears with his kids, settles in San Fransisco, and profits from a small business. It does not tell us that this is definately what happens. And so we can see that the whole film, from the beginning to end, is an exagerration.
About the Schofield kid: his personality is well portrayed/well rounded in this film. We see that he acts all tough. Meanwhile, Will Munny and Ned know that his whole story is a lie. He is young, unexperienced, and in reality, never killed anyone until the man who hurt the prostitute. This can be seen as he attempts and fails to shoot at everything and everyone in that field. I think that having the experience of killing someone, one would not be extremely proud and defensive, as is the case of the Schofield kid. Munny and Ned on the other hand, are both reluctant in talking about their past experiences in killing. This is reality, i believe, when the truth of having killed an innocent man washes over you in waves of guilt. The Schofield kid certainly experiences this at the end of the movie, after shooting that unarmed man. The scene where he sits by the tree and cries over what he has done is very emotional, and one can be sure that he will not be shooting anyone ever again. He says, "I'm not like you Will."
Certainly, Will does not enjoy killing either, and he is also guilty in what he has done in his past, but as he mentions more than once throughout the film, it was his wife who healed him of his drinking and killing. The power of love is what changes Will completely, unlike the Schofield kid (what's his real name?) who is more greatly and immediatly affected by guilt.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
The Seventh Seal Ending
The film neither proves nor disproves the existence of God. It certainly questions it through three different viewpoints.
Jof, the most innocent character of all characters in the film, lives a simple life. He takes life as it is, appreciates nature, loves his family most of all, and seems to appreciate the life that God has given him. Of course, he is not perfect, as is seen when he steals something off the table and runs for it, but this portrayal of Jof only exemplifies the point that people are simply not perfect.
Squire Jons is the existentialist of the movie. This is seen several times through the film as he makes little remarks about life and God. He seems to take a more matter-of-fact view of life. He probably always thinks to himself, "What you see is how it is. Just accept it as the truth." For example, at the end of the movie, when Death visits Antonius Bloch's home, Antonius Bloch is on his knees praying and Jons says something like, praying is pointless since no one can escape death. I really like Jon's character in the movie though, because not only does he have the best lines, but i think of him as the hero of the movie. He really is portrayed as a great guy who happens to be there when someone is in trouble.
Antonius Bloch, the protagonist of the movie, can be seen playing a metaphorically symbolic game of chess with Death throughout the film. His character questions God's existance because he is trying to figure out whether God exists or not. He tries to find answers, as can be seen when he questions the witch girl and when he confesses to Death in disguise of a priest.
This film makes a point that death is unavoidable. Antonious Bloch plays chess with Death, but as the film goes on, it becomes apparant that Antonious is losing. Death cuts the tree and tells the actor that his time is up. Death visits the castle and the servant girl whispers, "it is finished". In the end, Jof sees Antonius Bloch and his friends dancing with Death, meaning that Death has gotten to them.
Meanwhile, i believe that of all the characters, Jof and his family were the onely ones to avoid death because they were the most innocent ones, living a life full of love for each other and what not.
Jof, the most innocent character of all characters in the film, lives a simple life. He takes life as it is, appreciates nature, loves his family most of all, and seems to appreciate the life that God has given him. Of course, he is not perfect, as is seen when he steals something off the table and runs for it, but this portrayal of Jof only exemplifies the point that people are simply not perfect.
Squire Jons is the existentialist of the movie. This is seen several times through the film as he makes little remarks about life and God. He seems to take a more matter-of-fact view of life. He probably always thinks to himself, "What you see is how it is. Just accept it as the truth." For example, at the end of the movie, when Death visits Antonius Bloch's home, Antonius Bloch is on his knees praying and Jons says something like, praying is pointless since no one can escape death. I really like Jon's character in the movie though, because not only does he have the best lines, but i think of him as the hero of the movie. He really is portrayed as a great guy who happens to be there when someone is in trouble.
Antonius Bloch, the protagonist of the movie, can be seen playing a metaphorically symbolic game of chess with Death throughout the film. His character questions God's existance because he is trying to figure out whether God exists or not. He tries to find answers, as can be seen when he questions the witch girl and when he confesses to Death in disguise of a priest.
This film makes a point that death is unavoidable. Antonious Bloch plays chess with Death, but as the film goes on, it becomes apparant that Antonious is losing. Death cuts the tree and tells the actor that his time is up. Death visits the castle and the servant girl whispers, "it is finished". In the end, Jof sees Antonius Bloch and his friends dancing with Death, meaning that Death has gotten to them.
Meanwhile, i believe that of all the characters, Jof and his family were the onely ones to avoid death because they were the most innocent ones, living a life full of love for each other and what not.
Friday, November 12, 2010
The Seventh Seal
So far, the Seventh Seal is not very interesting, as the scenes are yet going slowly.
I heard from other people in my class how reading subtitles really bother them, but I'm personally okey with the subs. As i read the subtitles, i can listen to the characters' swedish. It's like mutlitasking: reading a book and listening to the radio at the same time. I think the swedish language is funny, sounds to me like a whole bunch of gurgling and bumps. It's interesting, because whenever i listen to different languages, i hear different tones and as mr. bennett calls it, the "musical quality" of languages. For example, when i listen to different chinese dialects which i do not understand, i hear something so similar to mandarin, the dialect i speak, and i get this feeling like if i just listen more, then i can understand what they are saying. The feeling of the dialect spoken sounds so familiar, yet, there's always this invisible barrier that prevents me from understanding. Quite differently, if i listen to korean, i hear this really fluid, bubbly language. When i hear russian, i feel my tongue tripping. When i listen to spanish, i hear babbling. But when i listen to plain old english, that's all i hear--plain old english. But thats just me. I guess different people can hear different things within a language.
Here are some things i've noticed:
Perhaps Antonious Block's (is that the noble's name?) servant may be an existentialist. (I know i haven't been mentioning much on this belief of existentialism--i'm not that fond of this topic), but was it he who said, "meaningless in heaven, indifference in hell"? A few times already throughout the film, he laughs at the matter of God while others are punishing themselves in the name of God and kneeling in awe. He seems to take a bit of a sarcastic personality when it comes to this divine power as well.
And also, i noticed that the director cuts the intense choir music immediatly in the scene where the villagers don themselves in black clothing and parade through the town in a most torterous manner while inflicting punishments on themselves and others. At the same time the music is cut, the camera lingers on a completely empty field, as if to mention that the people only came and passed. were they even there? or a pigment of one's imagination? or will the towns people go right back to the jocular events they were enjoying themselves in before this procession arrived? These are all questions that the sudden disappearance of these people brought to mind.
I heard from other people in my class how reading subtitles really bother them, but I'm personally okey with the subs. As i read the subtitles, i can listen to the characters' swedish. It's like mutlitasking: reading a book and listening to the radio at the same time. I think the swedish language is funny, sounds to me like a whole bunch of gurgling and bumps. It's interesting, because whenever i listen to different languages, i hear different tones and as mr. bennett calls it, the "musical quality" of languages. For example, when i listen to different chinese dialects which i do not understand, i hear something so similar to mandarin, the dialect i speak, and i get this feeling like if i just listen more, then i can understand what they are saying. The feeling of the dialect spoken sounds so familiar, yet, there's always this invisible barrier that prevents me from understanding. Quite differently, if i listen to korean, i hear this really fluid, bubbly language. When i hear russian, i feel my tongue tripping. When i listen to spanish, i hear babbling. But when i listen to plain old english, that's all i hear--plain old english. But thats just me. I guess different people can hear different things within a language.
Here are some things i've noticed:
Perhaps Antonious Block's (is that the noble's name?) servant may be an existentialist. (I know i haven't been mentioning much on this belief of existentialism--i'm not that fond of this topic), but was it he who said, "meaningless in heaven, indifference in hell"? A few times already throughout the film, he laughs at the matter of God while others are punishing themselves in the name of God and kneeling in awe. He seems to take a bit of a sarcastic personality when it comes to this divine power as well.
And also, i noticed that the director cuts the intense choir music immediatly in the scene where the villagers don themselves in black clothing and parade through the town in a most torterous manner while inflicting punishments on themselves and others. At the same time the music is cut, the camera lingers on a completely empty field, as if to mention that the people only came and passed. were they even there? or a pigment of one's imagination? or will the towns people go right back to the jocular events they were enjoying themselves in before this procession arrived? These are all questions that the sudden disappearance of these people brought to mind.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Friday, November 5, 2010
Runaway Train
One word to describe this movie: INTENSE
This movie is very action-packed. I'm not going to say that this is my favorite movie of all times, after all there are some parts that were particularly disturbing for me to watch: Manny getting stabbed in the hand, Ranken shoving the train operator's head into the toilet, and Manny getthing all his fingers ripped off.
Mr. Bennett mentioned to the class to watch for examples of how Manny is portrayed as a train. Throughout the movie, Ive noticed how Manny is so persistant and so stubborn. At one point on the train, when Manny yells, "I wait for no miracle! I'm going around! Up and around! I'll make it! I'll make it!" He's so seriosuly stubborn, if he wants something, he makes sure he gets it. And if he does not get it, then it is quite scary. For example, when Buck tries hard and fails at climbing around the train, Manny keeps yelling at him, "GO GO GO!!" and when Buck comes back onto the train exausted, Manny really beats him up bad while yelling at him that he believes Buck can do anything if he sets his mind on it. Really, Manny reminds me of the runaway train that he is on. The train never stops once, but keeps moving onward at faster and faster speeds.
I find it ironic how the film really portrays Ranken and Manny as similar but different, like alter egos of each other. Besides the fact that they look alike and that both are evenly stubborn, Ranken is high in power while Manny is a lowly criminal. However, though Manny is the ultimate runaway criminal from a high-security prison, Ranken is the one that is portrayed as satanic and evil through-and-through.
I also noticed that when Manny goes on a rampage, yelling at Ranken up in the helicopter, he impulsivly pours the red wine onto his (was i the injured?) hand. He clenches his fist at the same moment. It really looks as if he is squeezing out blood. And i thought, "oh, this guy is set out to kill!" there's definately no stopping him now.
I have a few questions:
Why does Ranken and Manny hate each other so badly? Why does Ranken want to kill Manny so much as to go after him on a helicopter? And why at one point, does a guy from the helicopter fly in through the window, crash the glass pane, and end up killing himself? I initially thought that the glass-breaking can allow Ranken easy access to come in through the broken window, but this is not the case. And lastly, i've been thinking about the significance of the scrap metals hanging off each side of the damaged head of the train. Mr. Bennett says that the metal is shaped a certain way to resemble something. I kind of thought that the pieces of metal resembled a face mask and that each side of the train has a seperate half of the mask. Am i mistaken? Because i can't really see the significance of that.
I would like to conclude with a comment about the conclusions of all films that we have seen so far. All the three movies that the class has seen had left me with the same reaction: "What? That's it?" The movies simply end while you expect more to come. And in all three of them, a person dies in the end. Is this a trend that will be seen in all the movies that we will be viewing?
This movie is very action-packed. I'm not going to say that this is my favorite movie of all times, after all there are some parts that were particularly disturbing for me to watch: Manny getting stabbed in the hand, Ranken shoving the train operator's head into the toilet, and Manny getthing all his fingers ripped off.
Mr. Bennett mentioned to the class to watch for examples of how Manny is portrayed as a train. Throughout the movie, Ive noticed how Manny is so persistant and so stubborn. At one point on the train, when Manny yells, "I wait for no miracle! I'm going around! Up and around! I'll make it! I'll make it!" He's so seriosuly stubborn, if he wants something, he makes sure he gets it. And if he does not get it, then it is quite scary. For example, when Buck tries hard and fails at climbing around the train, Manny keeps yelling at him, "GO GO GO!!" and when Buck comes back onto the train exausted, Manny really beats him up bad while yelling at him that he believes Buck can do anything if he sets his mind on it. Really, Manny reminds me of the runaway train that he is on. The train never stops once, but keeps moving onward at faster and faster speeds.
I find it ironic how the film really portrays Ranken and Manny as similar but different, like alter egos of each other. Besides the fact that they look alike and that both are evenly stubborn, Ranken is high in power while Manny is a lowly criminal. However, though Manny is the ultimate runaway criminal from a high-security prison, Ranken is the one that is portrayed as satanic and evil through-and-through.
I also noticed that when Manny goes on a rampage, yelling at Ranken up in the helicopter, he impulsivly pours the red wine onto his (was i the injured?) hand. He clenches his fist at the same moment. It really looks as if he is squeezing out blood. And i thought, "oh, this guy is set out to kill!" there's definately no stopping him now.
I have a few questions:
Why does Ranken and Manny hate each other so badly? Why does Ranken want to kill Manny so much as to go after him on a helicopter? And why at one point, does a guy from the helicopter fly in through the window, crash the glass pane, and end up killing himself? I initially thought that the glass-breaking can allow Ranken easy access to come in through the broken window, but this is not the case. And lastly, i've been thinking about the significance of the scrap metals hanging off each side of the damaged head of the train. Mr. Bennett says that the metal is shaped a certain way to resemble something. I kind of thought that the pieces of metal resembled a face mask and that each side of the train has a seperate half of the mask. Am i mistaken? Because i can't really see the significance of that.
I would like to conclude with a comment about the conclusions of all films that we have seen so far. All the three movies that the class has seen had left me with the same reaction: "What? That's it?" The movies simply end while you expect more to come. And in all three of them, a person dies in the end. Is this a trend that will be seen in all the movies that we will be viewing?
Ending to Citizen Kane
Here are some quotes that i find to be related to Charles Kane:
Money can't buy you happiness but it does bring you a more pleasant form of misery.
Spike Milligan
Money is only loaned to a man. He comes into the world with nothing and he leaves with nothing.
William Crapo Durant
founder of General Motors and Chevrolet
I say that these quotes relate because anyone who watches Citizen Kane will notice that Kan'es life is filled with luxary and money. He can own everything in the world, as you can see through all that junk he's collected over the years, yet he loses all that is most important. He loses his son and first wife, then he loses his second wife, as Susan Alexander walks out on him. Has he ever had a one true friend in life? i think not. One of his co-workers (i forgot his name) since the beginning of his newspaper company betrays him. And what happens to all the junk in his basement? Everything gets burned, including his childhood sled, "rosebud". One is illusioned to think that hes ever experienced genuine love or happiness in his life. And as you can see, he dies alone as well.
I also noticed a characteristic trait about Kane, that he keeps a hold over every single thing that belongs to him, as it is mentioned in the movie that he never throws anything out. This would explain the massive amount of odds and ends collected throughout the years. It is like a treasure box filled with so many worldy possesions, yet are only meaningless. This also explains his watchful and strong hold over Susan Alexander's life, how he never lets her out of the house and never lets her do anything. In a way, he treats her like a possession as well. He tells her what to do with her life and expects her to do it and he keeps her caged up in his mighty castle, like a lonely pet.
So just to comment on the meaning behind "rosebud", like everyone else, i'm very disappointed to learn that all this time, the one puzzle piece that everyone tries to figure out in Kane's life is a childhood sled. Like..what?? However, i still don't understand why Kane would say, "rosebud" of all things to say. Also, i noticed that in the midst of trashing Susan Alexander's room, he stops short when he spots a small snow globe. Then, he walkes out of the room in a statue-like state with the globe still clutched in his hands. Now what is up with that? How does the globe relate to the sled?
I would also like to comment on the scene where Kane is viewed through a mirror reflecting many more mirrors. At first, i really thoguht that the room is an inncredibly large room. But then u see kane march out, with an endless row of Kanes walking out beside him. I think this scene portrays how small in size and powerless he actually is.
I know the class finished citizen Kane a while ago, but this is just to sum up my thoughts of the movie.
Money can't buy you happiness but it does bring you a more pleasant form of misery.
Spike Milligan
Money is only loaned to a man. He comes into the world with nothing and he leaves with nothing.
William Crapo Durant
founder of General Motors and Chevrolet
I say that these quotes relate because anyone who watches Citizen Kane will notice that Kan'es life is filled with luxary and money. He can own everything in the world, as you can see through all that junk he's collected over the years, yet he loses all that is most important. He loses his son and first wife, then he loses his second wife, as Susan Alexander walks out on him. Has he ever had a one true friend in life? i think not. One of his co-workers (i forgot his name) since the beginning of his newspaper company betrays him. And what happens to all the junk in his basement? Everything gets burned, including his childhood sled, "rosebud". One is illusioned to think that hes ever experienced genuine love or happiness in his life. And as you can see, he dies alone as well.
I also noticed a characteristic trait about Kane, that he keeps a hold over every single thing that belongs to him, as it is mentioned in the movie that he never throws anything out. This would explain the massive amount of odds and ends collected throughout the years. It is like a treasure box filled with so many worldy possesions, yet are only meaningless. This also explains his watchful and strong hold over Susan Alexander's life, how he never lets her out of the house and never lets her do anything. In a way, he treats her like a possession as well. He tells her what to do with her life and expects her to do it and he keeps her caged up in his mighty castle, like a lonely pet.
So just to comment on the meaning behind "rosebud", like everyone else, i'm very disappointed to learn that all this time, the one puzzle piece that everyone tries to figure out in Kane's life is a childhood sled. Like..what?? However, i still don't understand why Kane would say, "rosebud" of all things to say. Also, i noticed that in the midst of trashing Susan Alexander's room, he stops short when he spots a small snow globe. Then, he walkes out of the room in a statue-like state with the globe still clutched in his hands. Now what is up with that? How does the globe relate to the sled?
I would also like to comment on the scene where Kane is viewed through a mirror reflecting many more mirrors. At first, i really thoguht that the room is an inncredibly large room. But then u see kane march out, with an endless row of Kanes walking out beside him. I think this scene portrays how small in size and powerless he actually is.
I know the class finished citizen Kane a while ago, but this is just to sum up my thoughts of the movie.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Citizen Kane
This movie gets more and more interesting.
First of all, i find the filming techniques very fresh and different for an old black and white film. A few things i especially enjoy as aspects of this film:
1. how they step over each other's lines. They're so pro at it, its amazing. but they do it so frequently int he film that i think they over do it sometimes. Seriously, if there's ever a line-stepping competition between 'All Quiet on the Western Front" and "Citizen Kane", Citizen Kane would definately win by a milestone.
2. The accompanyment of epic music that really sets the mood of gloom and sinister-ness in this movie.
3. The usage of lighting to really pinpoint one object, for example, when an inquirer went to investigate the meaning of "rosebud", he goes into a museum where the lady hands him a thick book. This book, however, was put directly in the center of bright light shining through the window. The lighting makes the book seem holy, as if portrayed as the holy bible. Then we know for sure that this book or diary is extremely important.
4. How many transitions are made through a picture taken for a newspaper for example.
One example of this would be when the camera lingers on the hosue number of Susan Alexandra's house, but then the house itself becomes a picture on the front page of a newspaper.
A few questions that came to me while watching this film:
1. How does the director make Kane and others look fatter and older?
2. They smoke so much in this movie...does anyone them actually die from lung cancer or anything later on?
3. What is the meaning of monkeys in this film?
First of all, i find the filming techniques very fresh and different for an old black and white film. A few things i especially enjoy as aspects of this film:
1. how they step over each other's lines. They're so pro at it, its amazing. but they do it so frequently int he film that i think they over do it sometimes. Seriously, if there's ever a line-stepping competition between 'All Quiet on the Western Front" and "Citizen Kane", Citizen Kane would definately win by a milestone.
2. The accompanyment of epic music that really sets the mood of gloom and sinister-ness in this movie.
3. The usage of lighting to really pinpoint one object, for example, when an inquirer went to investigate the meaning of "rosebud", he goes into a museum where the lady hands him a thick book. This book, however, was put directly in the center of bright light shining through the window. The lighting makes the book seem holy, as if portrayed as the holy bible. Then we know for sure that this book or diary is extremely important.
4. How many transitions are made through a picture taken for a newspaper for example.
One example of this would be when the camera lingers on the hosue number of Susan Alexandra's house, but then the house itself becomes a picture on the front page of a newspaper.
A few questions that came to me while watching this film:
1. How does the director make Kane and others look fatter and older?
2. They smoke so much in this movie...does anyone them actually die from lung cancer or anything later on?
3. What is the meaning of monkeys in this film?
There is no meaning to life
We finished watching All Quiet on the Western Front on Friday.
Though i knew already that Paul was going to die by the end of hte movie, through different foreshadowings earlier on--i am still shocked that the director would let paul die so easily. For Paul, Kat was the only one worth living for. And when Kat simply died, it seemed as if Paul also thoguht that there was nothing left in life. The next seen showsPaul sitting there quietly, looking lifeless. It was as if he was thinking "what am i doing here? Theres nothing left for me now." By that point, Paul had seen all his friends die off one after another. The thought occured to me that he probably no longer cared whether he lived or died.
There were other parts of the movie that involves this theme of how there is no meaning to life, especially when the soldiers easily died off one by one. The other soldiers referred to the dead ones as, "It" and "only a corpse", as if humans are things that live and die, and once they die, thats it. When paul was simply shot after reaching out to the butterfly (something small yet beautiful that is left in Paul's world), my first reaction was, "what? thats IT?" the movie makes death seem like soemthing unavoidable, like soemthing that is is very ordinary.
I find it hard to wrap my mind around this viewpoint, and i do wonder if there is anyone who actually believes that there is no meaning to life. For me, i can think of a thousand reasons for living.
But all in all, i'm glad that i've watched this movie which has introduced me to different viewpoints on life as well as many interesting aspects of film.
Though i knew already that Paul was going to die by the end of hte movie, through different foreshadowings earlier on--i am still shocked that the director would let paul die so easily. For Paul, Kat was the only one worth living for. And when Kat simply died, it seemed as if Paul also thoguht that there was nothing left in life. The next seen showsPaul sitting there quietly, looking lifeless. It was as if he was thinking "what am i doing here? Theres nothing left for me now." By that point, Paul had seen all his friends die off one after another. The thought occured to me that he probably no longer cared whether he lived or died.
There were other parts of the movie that involves this theme of how there is no meaning to life, especially when the soldiers easily died off one by one. The other soldiers referred to the dead ones as, "It" and "only a corpse", as if humans are things that live and die, and once they die, thats it. When paul was simply shot after reaching out to the butterfly (something small yet beautiful that is left in Paul's world), my first reaction was, "what? thats IT?" the movie makes death seem like soemthing unavoidable, like soemthing that is is very ordinary.
I find it hard to wrap my mind around this viewpoint, and i do wonder if there is anyone who actually believes that there is no meaning to life. For me, i can think of a thousand reasons for living.
But all in all, i'm glad that i've watched this movie which has introduced me to different viewpoints on life as well as many interesting aspects of film.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
All Quiet on the Western Front (Day 3)
Today, we watched more of the movie.
I think I am mostly amazed at how the director managed to capture the battle scenes.
I thoguht to myself, "wooooww", especially after Mr. Bennett told everyone that the bombs that they used were real. Then i started to think, well, how did any of them manage not to get killed during the filming process? And theres so many of them running around everywere (they reminded me of ants dispersing after a rock has been lifted). It must have been extremely hectic and chaotic to plan out something like this.
And today, we were told to take notice of examples of dehumanization as well as the motifs of this film. One of the motifs is the camera view looking out onto a scene through doors or windows. I think the director did this so that viewers of the film can better take in the full view, vastbess, or hectic-ness of a situation. For example, in the beginning of the film when the streets had hundreds of people cheering and soldiers parading around, it is seen as an event worth celebrating. Through a big shop window, and a classroom window, we can see the hundreds of people crowding outside, and we can really sense the festivities going on outside those windows.
I think I am mostly amazed at how the director managed to capture the battle scenes.
I thoguht to myself, "wooooww", especially after Mr. Bennett told everyone that the bombs that they used were real. Then i started to think, well, how did any of them manage not to get killed during the filming process? And theres so many of them running around everywere (they reminded me of ants dispersing after a rock has been lifted). It must have been extremely hectic and chaotic to plan out something like this.
And today, we were told to take notice of examples of dehumanization as well as the motifs of this film. One of the motifs is the camera view looking out onto a scene through doors or windows. I think the director did this so that viewers of the film can better take in the full view, vastbess, or hectic-ness of a situation. For example, in the beginning of the film when the streets had hundreds of people cheering and soldiers parading around, it is seen as an event worth celebrating. Through a big shop window, and a classroom window, we can see the hundreds of people crowding outside, and we can really sense the festivities going on outside those windows.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
All Quiet On the Western Front (Day 2)
I've viewed this movie before during my AP world history class last year. However, back then, i simply thought this movie was out-dated, boring, and archaic. I found nothing about the film especially interesting or special. But now that this class has re-introduced the movie to me, I am amazed to see how much fun i am having watching an old film like this one.
The thing is, i've always been interested in, how should i put it? Behind-the-scene aspects of the film. i like noticing the different camera angles and the different special effects put into a certain scene, or noticing how the music in a movie is used. I also like thinking, "well, what was the director even THINKING or envisioning when he created this scene?" For example, i can be watching a really epic movie with epic music in the background, then suddenly come to the realization that without the music, the movie would simply be l-a-m-e with corny lines that people generally do not use in real life.
Yesterday, Mr. Bennett explained to the class about some elements of film. And as i continue watching, i begin to notice these elements that are portrayed very simply in this movie.
And as i analyze this film, my mindset begins to take in and notice things, such has how one thing can really reperesent or foreshadow another event. For example, when the men were in the classroom happily thinking that becoming soldiers would be a victorious and enriching experience, they marched out of the room and threw their papers everywhere. The papers h/e, fluttered about in the air and landed in a disarray all along the floor, giving the room a messy appearance. In the ending scene, when the camera kind of hovered on the papers in the room, it came to me that the papers were actually an irony and a foreshadowing about the war. The war that they are about to fight in is not exciting and happy and victorious. it is definately nothing to celebrate about. It is a disasterous mess that will include realities of life, including destruction, death, and deepening sorrow.
The thing is, i've always been interested in, how should i put it? Behind-the-scene aspects of the film. i like noticing the different camera angles and the different special effects put into a certain scene, or noticing how the music in a movie is used. I also like thinking, "well, what was the director even THINKING or envisioning when he created this scene?" For example, i can be watching a really epic movie with epic music in the background, then suddenly come to the realization that without the music, the movie would simply be l-a-m-e with corny lines that people generally do not use in real life.
Yesterday, Mr. Bennett explained to the class about some elements of film. And as i continue watching, i begin to notice these elements that are portrayed very simply in this movie.
And as i analyze this film, my mindset begins to take in and notice things, such has how one thing can really reperesent or foreshadow another event. For example, when the men were in the classroom happily thinking that becoming soldiers would be a victorious and enriching experience, they marched out of the room and threw their papers everywhere. The papers h/e, fluttered about in the air and landed in a disarray all along the floor, giving the room a messy appearance. In the ending scene, when the camera kind of hovered on the papers in the room, it came to me that the papers were actually an irony and a foreshadowing about the war. The war that they are about to fight in is not exciting and happy and victorious. it is definately nothing to celebrate about. It is a disasterous mess that will include realities of life, including destruction, death, and deepening sorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)