tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580143948944322392024-03-05T19:44:03.589-08:00CinemaVIEW• RWU SPRING 2021Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.comBlogger91125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-10848945060045511592021-03-06T11:52:00.001-08:002021-03-08T12:18:58.038-08:00‘Chinatown’ screenwriter Robert Towne talks about movies, history and Los AngelesBy Jonathan Crow <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_IKhVO9qBVezDlMNwZwMrSCBqqvMPDaB7Md7KQE-TBwhQmPLLcDlU_YSnzJ2GxsETxXgNfEZr7Wgq9LgIx81FUWCVcQd1DJ61WDnHASiOkoNFlNVIiL89zJpTHW-fqryNEN2iyjv3_chy/s1600/chinatown+poster.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_IKhVO9qBVezDlMNwZwMrSCBqqvMPDaB7Md7KQE-TBwhQmPLLcDlU_YSnzJ2GxsETxXgNfEZr7Wgq9LgIx81FUWCVcQd1DJ61WDnHASiOkoNFlNVIiL89zJpTHW-fqryNEN2iyjv3_chy/s1600/chinatown+poster.jpg" /></a></div><a href="http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/this-week-dvd-blu-ray/chinatown-screenwriter-robert-towne-talks-yahoo-movies-192618161.html">http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/this-week-dvd-blu-ray/chinatown-screenwriter-robert-towne-talks-yahoo-movies-192618161.html</a><br />
<br />
From the plaintive trumpet that opens the movie to that final killer line — "Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown" — Roman Polanski's 1974 noir is regarded by film geeks, movie critics and academics everywhere as one of the best American movies ever made. It's one of those rare movies where every scene feels iconic. A fictionalized of some real-life shenanigans pulled by William Mulholland and others who bought the water rights of the Owens rivers out from under the local farmers to feed the burgeoning city of Los Angeles, the movie's depiction of venality and corruption at the highest levels of power struck a nerve with when it came out in post-Watergate America and it's been the template for virtually every noir and thriller to come out since.<br />
<br />
"Chinatown" racked up twelve Oscar nominations — including for best picture, best direction, best actor and best actress -- but in the end, the only person to take home a trophy was the screenwriter, Robert Towne. In terms of pacing, dialogue and especially structure, Towne's final script is considered a masterpiece in its own right. "Chinatown" was the first script I read for Screenwriting 101 back in film school.<br />
<br />
I talked with Towne over the phone the other day about the movie and about some of the real life LA history that the movie is based on.<br />
<br />
Jonathan Crow: What was the inspiration for "Chinatown"?<br />
<br />
Robert Towne: Well, it was a number of things. There was an article in the old L.A West magazine that was kind of an appreciative nod to Raymond Chandler. It was called "Raymond Chandler's L.A" and I hadn't really read much of him, but they did send us some photographs at that time in 1970, the stand for 1936 or 1937. And one was a beautiful Pasadena home with Packard in the porte-cochere. They were noir shots of L.A taken in 1970 and it made me realize that it would be possible to recreate the city of that time period in a way that it would not be possible today. And that got me started thinking about it. "The Last Detail" was stuck in development hell and I was casting them out for something to do and I thought, "I'll try a detective movie." I went to Jack [Nicholson] and talked with him. That was the beginning of it and how the story developed. From there, it was a very lengthy process.<br />
<br />
JC: I understand that the first couple of drafts of the script were really painful for you. Is that correct?<br />
<br />
Photo by Jamie McCarthy/Getty ImagesRT: Well, parts of it were. I was trying to do something that I've never done before. I wanted to try to do a detective movie but based on a real crime, which was water and power, and I had to make that into a detective story. It involved what was in fact a conspiracy on the part of a bunch of wealthy men to buy up San Fernando Valley and then buy up the water rights of the Owens River and bring it down to L.A. and that show as a conspiracy. That was difficult.<br />
<br />
JC: You've made at least three films about the history of Los Angeles. What is it about L.A that draws you?<br />
<br />
RT: It's a town of transients and it always has been. Up until 70 or so years ago, most people spent their lives in one town. But here's a town where people escape wherever they were and start a new life. And they didn't know each other; they were lost. That gave rise to a lot of desperation and a lot of oddball crimes. The whole Charlie Manson story, this is a place that was made for that because people didn't know anybody's past. They had no place in that society, which is what drew those people to Manson. L.A is rife with crimes like that.<br />
<br />
[Related: 'The Deep Blue Sea' Director Terence Davies talks to Yahoo! Movies]<br />
<br />
JC: "Chinatown" has been so influential I think in the way people see Los Angeles that the story of the movie has, in many people's minds, supplanted the actual history. How do you feel about that?<br />
<br />
RT: When dramatizing a real historical situation, there's going to be a fabrication. You can't be confused by facts in order to tell a larger truth. William Mulholland's daughter was upset by "Chinatown" because she felt that it wasn't factual. But basically, what happened in "Chinatown" is really what happened. In the first place, the water wars of the Owens Valley took place from 1905 to 1937. The mayor of Los Angeles [Frederick Eaton] had a great scheme buying the land along the riverbanks of Owens Valley depriving the farmers of that land and then having the aqueduct brought 235 miles down to Los Angeles.<br />
<br />
It was like taking a gigantic straw, putting it in Mono Lake, the source of the Owens River, and sucking it straight down to Los Angeles without going to all the farms in the Owens Valley. It was a beautiful country and culture up there. So that's the basic truth.<br />
<br />
JC: Could you talk to me about working with Roman Polanski? What did he bring to the story? And of course, I need to know about the ending a little bit.<br />
<br />
RT: Well, Roman brought all of his skills to this story, which is willingness in a very disciplined way to make the story rigorously to the point of view of the detective, and that really required -- I mean to this date, the only detective movie I know went to the point of view of the protagonist and it's never broken. You're with him as you discover what it is that he discovers and you're never ahead of him nor are you much behind him. I think that the way which he shot the point of view was staying behind Gittes, not just a pure raw point of view. He was always in the shot. It gave you that same kind of poses the way you are in a dream when you are both the dreamer and the observer. So I think that's one of many, many things that he brought to it.<br />
<br />
As far as the ending is concerned, we argued about it. I actually did end up writing the way he wanted it. I thought it was no good I told him so. And he said no. In the end, though, he was right. My version had an equally bleak ending but it was too complicated and too literary. And after all of the complexity of that story, I think you need a simple and stark ending. And he gave it that.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FueLhmwT8E4" width="560"></iframe></div>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-64438156446661294652021-02-20T06:52:00.000-08:002021-02-21T15:37:23.375-08:00The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo - Original Swedish Version<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WHphEoLl5S8" width="560"><br></iframe></div>
<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/contributors/roger-ebert"><span itemprop="author" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"><span itemprop="name">Roger Ebert</span></span></a> <time content="2010-03-17T00:00:00-05:00" datetime="2010-03-17T00:00:00-05:00" itemprop="datePublished"> </time><br />
<time content="2010-03-17T00:00:00-05:00" datetime="2010-03-17T00:00:00-05:00" itemprop="datePublished">March 17, 2010</time><br />
<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-2010"><time content="2010-03-17T00:00:00-05:00" datetime="2010-03-17T00:00:00-05:00" itemprop="datePublished">https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-2010</time></a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHUTXq3ZYv0xvyLpi1xNkEhBpZBLvE3_yT73TkQg9jYPGs-3sI6L8SJCJvURBM5A5YCRfJU7spd7Rc_hu3-1iZWO_8UbXKcgPgu_1_1m6c7Q609_hph52sGrlyMC-B2tdUqhDW-rcwlIRK/s1600/FUW7ODUV5JG7VED4M4IFOOEQLM.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="787" data-original-width="1400" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHUTXq3ZYv0xvyLpi1xNkEhBpZBLvE3_yT73TkQg9jYPGs-3sI6L8SJCJvURBM5A5YCRfJU7spd7Rc_hu3-1iZWO_8UbXKcgPgu_1_1m6c7Q609_hph52sGrlyMC-B2tdUqhDW-rcwlIRK/s320/FUW7ODUV5JG7VED4M4IFOOEQLM.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="line-height: 1.45em;">"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo"
is a compelling thriller to begin with, but it adds the rare quality of
having a heroine more fascinating than the story. She's a 24-year-old
goth girl named Lisbeth Salander, with body piercings and tattoos: thin,
small, fierce, damaged, a genius computer hacker. She smokes to quiet
her racing heart.</span><br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Lisbeth is as compelling as any movie character in recent memory. Played by <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/noomi-rapace">Noomi Rapace</a>
with an unwavering intensity, she finds her own emotional needs
nurtured by the nature of the case she investigates, the disappearance
of a young girl 40 years earlier. As this case is revealed as part of a
long-hidden pattern of bizarre violence against women, memories of her
own abused past return with a vengeance.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
Rapace makes the character compulsively interesting. She plays against a passive fortysomething hero, Mikael Blomkvist (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/michael-nyqvist">Michael Nyqvist</a>),
an investigative journalist who has six months of freedom before
beginning a prison sentence for libel against a Swedish tycoon. Mikael,
resourceful and intelligent, is hired by an elderly billionaire named
Henrik Vanger (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/sven-bertil-taube">Sven-Bertil Taube</a>),
who inhabits a gloomy mansion on a remote island and broods about the
loss of his beloved niece Harriet. She vanished one day when the island
was cut off from the mainland. Her body was never found. Because the
access bridge was blocked, the killer must have been a member of
Vanger's large and greedy family, which he hates. Three brothers were
Nazi sympathizers during the war.<br />
<br />
The notion of a murder with a
limited list of suspects was conventional even before Agatha Christie.
Niels Arden Oplev's "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" pays it lip
service, with Mikael covering a wall with photos of the suspects. But
this is a new age, and in addition to his search of newspaper and legal
archives, he uses the Internet. That's how he comes across Lisbeth, who
has been investigating <i>him.</i> She's described as Sweden's best
hacker, a claim we have no reason to doubt, and the intensity of her
focus, contrasted to her walled-off emotional life, suggests Asperger's.<br />
<br />
They
team up on the case, and might become lovers if not for Mikael's
diffidence and her secretive hostility. They become efficient partners.
Scenes involving newspaper photographs and Internet searches create
sequences like a "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-blow-up-1966">Blow-Up</a>"
for the digital age. The film is unique in my memory for displaying
screen shots of an actual computer operating system, Mac OS X, and
familiar programs like e-mail and iPhoto. Ever notice how most movie
computers work like magic?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTCuIk8XyqYqBborAoDBtlbQbnksGmVZyxEMj1sB1ocrQ6nsClpuYlfLEQ8YdPFKb1nzmDZ3qOWuLF9RaMu_5kvBMwz9VwCoyle6mS0BtUvpUA-_Nrsvd_1kpQzxTi9MGODDL2czOuDTPH/s1600/noomi-rapace-lisbeth-salander-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-film-still1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1600" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTCuIk8XyqYqBborAoDBtlbQbnksGmVZyxEMj1sB1ocrQ6nsClpuYlfLEQ8YdPFKb1nzmDZ3qOWuLF9RaMu_5kvBMwz9VwCoyle6mS0BtUvpUA-_Nrsvd_1kpQzxTi9MGODDL2czOuDTPH/s320/noomi-rapace-lisbeth-salander-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-film-still1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
The forbidding island setting, the
winter chill, the frosty inhabitants, all combine with dread suspicions
to create an uncommonly effective thriller. It's longer than average,
but not slow, not after we become invested in the depravity of the case.
There are scenes involving rape, bondage and assault that are stronger
than most of what serves in the movies for sexual violence, but these
scenes are not exploitation. They have a ferocious feminist orientation,
and although "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" seems a splendid title,
the original Swedish title was the stark "Men Who Hate Women."<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
The novel, one of a trilogy which <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/stieg-larsson">Stieg Larsson</a>
completed before his untimely death at 44 in 2004, was an international
best-seller. It is destined to be remade by Hollywood. That remake may
turn out to be a good film, but if I were you I'd be sure to watch this
version. The Hollywood version will almost certainly tone down the
sexual violence. I can't think of an American actress who could play
Lisbeth. <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/kristen-stewart">Kristen Stewart</a>, who I respect, has been mentioned. <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/dakota-fanning">Dakota Fanning</a>. I dunno. A younger <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/jodie-foster">Jodie Foster</a>, maybe. Someone able to play hard as nails and emotionally unavailable. Make her a Swede, and simply cast Noomi Rapace.<br />
<br />
This
is not a deep psychological study. But it's a sober, grown-up film. It
has action, but not the hyperkinetic activity that passes for action in
too many American movies. It has sex, but not eroticism. Its male lead
is brave and capable, but not macho. Its female lead is sexy in the
abstract, perhaps, but not seductive or alluring. This is a movie about
characters who have more important things to do than be characters in an
action thriller.<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-13367451338898758972021-02-11T21:18:00.000-08:002021-02-12T21:19:03.684-08:00The Aesthetics of Black and White and Color<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcfozt9bVfvmw8ffCW_HhPTVr0dze1U43URK7uwypkQYDUmsEHxuxJJpf7yRqPfEXf8cBjf5PLaRhldYqxRNpKGbavnOmxReglH4BCJTeW9DJNt2_yG2zX0_OlZFs_db41sjk-6lpg4Ckl/s1600/pleasantville.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcfozt9bVfvmw8ffCW_HhPTVr0dze1U43URK7uwypkQYDUmsEHxuxJJpf7yRqPfEXf8cBjf5PLaRhldYqxRNpKGbavnOmxReglH4BCJTeW9DJNt2_yG2zX0_OlZFs_db41sjk-6lpg4Ckl/s1600/pleasantville.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<h2>
Black and White and Technicolor in Hollywood's Golden Era
</h2>
In the 1930s and 1940s cost was not the only factor
determining which film stock a film project would employ. Hollywood
Technicolor tended to be used to make everything pretty, so that the
most serious dramas often tended to be black and white: <i>Citizen Kane</i> (1941), <i>The Little Foxes</i> (1941), the entire genre of film noir, and so on.<br />
<br />
<b>Black and White </b><br />
It's extremely important to remember that black
and white can be just as subtle as color because
you can do so many things to it. First, black and
white is never just that: It is also all the gradations
of gray in between. And silver. And beiges. And so
on. When you walk into a paint store and ask for
black the clerk (after laughing at your naïveté) will
hand you 50 color chips: jet black, deep-space
black, Frederick's of Hollywood black, midnight
blue, and so on. White has, if anything, even more
variations, and gray is practically infinite.<br />
<br />
Black and white is the color of glamour cinematography. The most glamorous icons of the screen,
those actors who only require last names—Garbo,
Bogart, Bacall, Gable, Dietrich—are most famously
photographed in black and white.<br />
<br />
And, as its name suggests, at least one whole film
genre is defined in large part by the fact that it was
shot in black and white: film <i>noir</i>.<br />
<br />
<b>Nitrate Stock</b><br />
Silver nitrate stock, on which much silent film was shot, produced a
shimmering, other-worldly quality, seeming to set the screen on fire.
Unfortunately, because it was rather unstable, it could also set the
projector, the booth, and the theater on fire, so that its projection is
now illegal in all but a handful of theaters in the country specially
equipped to contain a blaze.<br />
<br />
<b>Black and White Today</b><br />
Directors still sometimes opt for black and white to make a political and/or aesthetic point. <i>Street Scene</i> (1989)—a film by an African American director—restages Charlie Chaplin's <i>The Kid</i>
(1921) in the contemporary inner city, suggesting both that inner-city
denizens have at least the humanity we grant to the little tramp, and
that nostalgizing poverty is cruelly absurd.<br />
<br />
Some films are shot in black and white as a kind of homage to earlier cinema genres. Steve Martin's <i>Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid</i> (1982) pays tribute to film noir, while <i>Movie Movie</i> (1978) and <i>Young Frankenstein</i> (1974) fondly recall the 1930s backstage musical and the 1940s horror film.<br />
<br />
<b>The Golden Era: Color Classic</b><br />
Especially for the Technicolor technicians, the principal
job was to figure out how to make color film acceptable to an audience
and an industry that was at first hesitant about the technology. Some
actors, for example, did not think they photographed as glamorously in
Technicolor as in black and white. Still, after the box office successes
of films like 1939's <i>Gone With the Wind</i> and <i>The Wizard of Oz</i>
(we wonder whether Shirley Temple is still kicking herself for not
taking on the role of Dorothy), studio execs came to realize that adding
color to a film would measurably increase its box-office appeal. So
this expensive technology was used for high-profile prestige pictures,
like the Errol Flynn vehicle, <i>The Adventures of Robin Hood</i> (1938), which cost $2 million, an amazing price tag for the Great Depression years.<br />
<br />
<b>Black and Blue: Using All the Crayons in the Box</b><br />
Some directors have been thinking outside the Crayola box,
mixing panchromatic and color stock in the same film. Early on the
decision was in part economic: Technicolor was incredibly expensive. But
even early on the decision to mix it up could be motivated by plot and
theme as much as by economics. The most famous example is of course <i>The Wizard of Oz</i>
(1939). Monotonous Kansas is also monochromatic. But when, after her
tornado-driven house landed in Kansas, Dorothy opened the front door and
found herself in a Technicolor Oz, the 1939 audience shared her sense
of wonder at their introduction to a prismatically colorful new world.<br />
<br />
<b>Self-Reflexivity and Other Kinds of Color</b><br />
Though we shall visit the notion of self-reflexivity in some
detail, it is worth noting that sometimes black-and-white clips appear
in color films in order to suggest that these films have a connection to
the history of film. Old horror films play on television in the
background while the new horror takes place in <i>Halloween</i>'s foreground (1978). <i>Gilda</i> (1946) plays on the monitor of a video store while a disturbing love relationship takes place in the foreground of <i>The Fisher King</i>
(1991). Steve Martin and Bernadette Peters desperately dance during the
Great Depression against the very ironic backdrop of Fred Astaire and
Ginger Rogers dancing on film, in <i>Pennies from Heaven</i> (1981).<br />
<br />
Sometimes black and white is used in a color film as a way
of establishing a biographical past for a principal character. This
technique is used in <i>Mishima</i> (1985) and <i>Zelig</i> (1983). Sometimes it establishes a point of view, as for a gay man looking down desiringly on a group of schoolboys in <i>If</i> … (1969). Other older experiments with black and white and color include <i>Portrait of Jennie</i> (1948) and Eisenstein's great experiment with ideologically mixing it up in <i>Ivan the Terrible (Ivan Grozny</i>, Russia, 1944).<br />
<br />
Read more:<br />
<a href="http://www.zenoshrdlu.com/zenobw.htm">http://www.zenoshrdlu.com/zenobw.htm</a><span style="font-size: small;"> </span><br />
<a href="http://people.ucalgary.ca/~tstronds/nostalghia.com/TheTopics/On_Color.html"><span style="font-size: small;">Andrei Tarkovsky speaks about color <i>vs.</i> black-and-white cinema</span></a><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://variety.com/2013/film/news/indie-auteurs-delve-into-gray-areas-of-black-and-white-film-1200498910/">Indie Auteurs Delve into Black & White</a> </span><br />
<span style="color: white;"></span>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-32795404185590034032021-02-09T07:41:00.000-08:002021-02-12T21:15:16.458-08:00"The General" - An Appreciation<h1 class="article__hed" data-editable="overrideHeadline" itemprop="headline">
<span style="color: #3d85c6;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Buster Keaton’s The General</span></span><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"></span><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></h1>
<h1 class="article__hed" data-editable="overrideHeadline" itemprop="headline">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Yeah, it’s silent. So what? You’ll barely notice. It’s that good.</span><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"></span></h1>
<div class="article__meta">
<div class="article__byline" data-editable="authors">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">By
<span itemprop="author" itemscope="" itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
<span class="article__author" itemprop="name">
<a href="https://slate.com/author/gary-giddins">Gary Giddins</a></span>
</span></span>
</div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><time class="article__timestamp" content="2008-11-18T14:04:00+00:00" itemprop="datePublished">
<span class="article__date">Nov 18, 2008</span><span class="article__time">9:04 AM</span>
</time> </span></div>
<div class="article__meta">
</div>
<div class="article__meta">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgD8PJGPwhK7r96Gx2G7OUXmMKWY8s3MNzn-eB2mzR_0ls2Pp4kcZ4tKYqPtNXz8CLAjzp0ZdfDNFcVIKqOPU-4WDV35TAtrkjPNPeXbang_IgO2S8b7qT_lp70C2ZZfqH8WR0hAomMX_oa/s1600/Keaton_General.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="895" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgD8PJGPwhK7r96Gx2G7OUXmMKWY8s3MNzn-eB2mzR_0ls2Pp4kcZ4tKYqPtNXz8CLAjzp0ZdfDNFcVIKqOPU-4WDV35TAtrkjPNPeXbang_IgO2S8b7qT_lp70C2ZZfqH8WR0hAomMX_oa/s640/Keaton_General.jpg" width="356" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Those of us who grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, when television was awash in classic movies (<i>Million-Dollar Movie</i>, <i>Shock Theater</i>, <i>The Late Show</i>, and <i>Silents Please</i>
were among the first schools in cinema—just ask Scorsese, Spielberg, or
Coppola), are aghast to find that our children are often reluctant to
watch black-and-white films, let alone silent ones. Especially those
deemed to be among the greatest ever made. The imprimatur of the experts
turns pleasure into obligation, and suddenly the notion of sitting
through a comedy that had for decades convulsed audiences takes on all
the promise of reading <i>The Merry Wives of Windsor</i>—the most annoying and witless of Shakespeare’s plays, yet once upon a time thought to be a riot. </span></div>
<div class="article__meta">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="article__meta">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Still, for anyone who has never seen a silent picture or, worse, seen
only speeded-up pie-throwing excerpts, Kino International has an offer
you can’t refuse: a spotless new transfer of Buster Keaton’s 1926 epic, <i> <a data-amzn-asin="B001E18222" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001E18222?ie=UTF8&tag=slatmaga-20&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=B001E18222"><i>The General</i></a></i>. Kino initially released a DVD of <i>The General</i>
in 1999, which looks like every other version I’ve seen in theaters or
at home—the focus is soft, and the tinted film stock is faded,
scratched, and jumpy. The new edition, part of a two-disc set (most of
the extras concern the historical basis for the story), is pristine,
sharply focused, stable, and gorgeous. </span><br />
</div>
<div class="article__meta">
</div>
<div class="article__meta">
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-3@published" data-word-count="94">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
Gorgeous is important, because <i>The General</i> is a
peephole into history and by any definition an uncannily beautiful film.
Indeed, for a first-time viewer, I would emphasize the beauty over the
comedy. Many people are disappointed when they first see <i>The General</i>
because they have heard that it is one of the funniest movies ever
made. It isn’t. Keaton made many films that are tours de force of
hilarity, including <i>Sherlock Jr.</i>, <i>The Navigator</i>, and <i>Seven Chances</i> (all available from Kino). <i>The General</i> is something else, a historical parody set during the Civil War. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-3@published" data-word-count="94">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-4@published" data-word-count="72">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
The comedy is rich but deliberate and insinuating. It aims not
to split your sides but rather to elicit and sustain—for 78 minutes—a
smile and sense of wonder, interrupted by several perfectly timed
guffaws. <i>The General</i> belongs to at least three movie genres:
comedy, historical, and chase. Most of it is constructed around a
pursuit as relentless as any Bourne blowout, involving a Confederate
locomotive, called the General, hijacked by Union spies. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-4@published" data-word-count="72">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-5@published" data-word-count="115">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
The General’s engineer, Johnny Grey (Keaton), spends the first
half racing after it—on foot, handcar, bicycle, and another train—and,
once he has stolen it back, the second half in flight from the Texas, a
train manned by Union troops. If the film begins as a contest between
man and machine, it ultimately depicts a triumphant collusion between
the two. <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="return">Keaton, one of the</a>
greatest natural athletes and stuntmen in film, loves his train as much
as he does his inamorata, Annabelle Lee (played by the wonderfully
oblivious Marion Mack <a data-linktype="Bookmark" href="http://www.slate.com/#correction">*</a>).
He leaps and crawls over every inch of it, from the pilot, or
cowcatcher, riding low on the tracks to the tender carrying the fuel. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-5@published" data-word-count="115">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-6@published" data-word-count="50">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
In Keaton’s hands, the train is nothing more than a gigantic
prop, an incessant inspiration to his inventive genius. Many passages
are so suspenseful and minutely worked out that the gag, when it comes,
is like the release of the General’s steam. It gives you a chance to
breathe again. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-6@published" data-word-count="50">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-7@published" data-word-count="120">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
It’s worth remembering that <i>The General</i>, made 82
years ago, re-creates an incident that occurred only 64 years before it
was shot. In 1862, a civilian Union spy, James Andrews, led a small
attachment of soldiers 200 miles into enemy territory to steal an engine
of the Western & Atlantic Railroad at Big Shanty, Ga. The General’s
engineer, William Fuller (the basis for Keaton’s character), led the
chase that ended with their capture. Some were hanged, while others
escaped and became the first-ever recipients of the Medal of Honor.
Among the latter was William Pittinger, who published a memoir, <i>Daring and Suffering: A History of the Great Railroad Adventure</i>, which can be <a data-linktype="External" href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20509/20509-8.txt">freely downloaded</a> as part of the Gutenberg Project. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-7@published" data-word-count="120">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-8@published" data-word-count="96">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
When word got out that Keaton was making a comedy of
Pittinger’s story, he was refused permission to use the General, which
had survived and would later—partly because of Keaton’s film—be spruced
up for a Georgia museum. The town of Marietta, where the story began,
wanted nothing to do with him. So he re-created Georgia in the
Northwest, shooting the picture entirely on location. Much of our visual
sense of the Civil War derives from photographs by Mathew Brady and
Alexander Gardner. For all its humor, <i>The General</i> conveys the illusion of those photographs come alive.
</span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-6@published" data-word-count="50">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-6@published" data-word-count="50">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Keaton’s best films function as a loving record of American town life,
with its shops and picket fences and leisure pursuits, set against a
splendor of mountains, gulches, rivers, and fields. Using Cottage Grove,
Ore., as his main location, Keaton preserved two eras: the Civil War,
re-created with daunting attention to detail, and 1926, as passers-by in
Cottage Grove would have seen it—the costumes were of the 19<sup>th</sup> century, but the buildings and natural surroundings were little changed. Other Civil War films, not least <i>The Great Locomotive Race</i>,
Walt Disney’s dramatic 1956 telling of the same story (from the
perspective of the Union raiders), invariably look like Hollywood
pageants. Keaton’s authenticity and comedic understatement make <i>The General</i>
a surprisingly modern experience. The storytelling and the gags are
free of sentimentality and knockabout clichés. The four-minute battle
scene is simply one of the most gripping, and occasionally hilarious,
ever filmed. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-6@published" data-word-count="50">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-12@published" data-word-count="90">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
Silent movies suffer as home video. They were meant to be seen
in theaters, where the audience morphs into a comedy meter, responding
en masse to each gag. I’ve seen it in theaters enough times to know that
a few moments always elicit gales of laughter, some of them fleeting by
so quickly that you will be grateful for instant replay, like Keaton’s
running mount onto a wooden bicycle or the scene in which he straddles
the pilot and averts disaster by using one log to get rid of another. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-12@published" data-word-count="90">
<br /></div>
<div class="ad ad--box ad--desktopOnly ad--inArticleBanner" data-criteo-id="1157131" data-density-test="0" data-google-query-id="CN_Q95v8w-QCFZmlyAodb2kIsw" data-page-type="article" data-placeholder="settings" data-placement-id="12399462" data-prebid-sizes="300x250" data-prebid="true" data-site-id="271366" data-sizes="300x250" data-trustx-id="3020" data-type="mid-article-box" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-ad/instances/midArticleBox@published" data-zone-id="768494" id="mid-article-box-2">
</div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-13@published" data-word-count="0">
</div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-14@published" data-word-count="126">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
A classic minute in the history of movie romance (55:30 to
56:32) occurs when Annabelle tries to help him fuel the train, throwing
wood into the furnace. She rejects one log because it has a hole in it
and tosses in a small stick. Keaton, watching this, hands her a
splinter. She conscientiously throws it in the fire, at which point
exasperated playfulness gets the better of him, and he briefly strangles
and then kisses her—all done so quickly that she remains entirely
unfazed. A standard joke in Keaton’s comedies (and Charlie Chaplin’s,
too) is that the world of silent movies is truly silent when a
character’s back is turned. As Keaton chops wood, facing forward, he
doesn’t hear the Union army passing behind his back.
</span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-4@published" data-word-count="72">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-15@published" data-word-count="74">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
Most Keaton films have astonishing scenes that transcend comedy. In <i>The General</i>,
there is an overhead tracking shot of Keaton and his train entering a
smoke-filled tunnel. The most unforgettable shot, said to be the
costliest filmed during the silent era, is one in which Keaton sets fire
to a bridge, causing the Union train to crash into a ravine—prefiguring
by 30 years the climax of David Lean’s <i>The Bridge on the River Kwai</i>. </span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-15@published" data-word-count="74">
<br /></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-16@published" data-word-count="0">
</div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-17@published" data-word-count="57">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
Kino offers three soundtracks for <i>The General</i>, though
the only one worth bothering with is the default musical score composed
by Carl Davis in 1987. It keeps a straight face throughout, heightening
without intruding on a magical film that is too brisk to bore and so
absorbing that you may find yourself forgetting that it is silent.
</span></div>
<div class="slate-paragraph" data-editable="text" data-uri="slate.com/_components/slate-paragraph/instances/cq-article-ac85ee0aaa21c11fb695e125b2131d0e-component-4@published" data-word-count="72">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="article__meta">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><a href="https://slate.com/culture/2008/11/why-you-really-do-need-to-see-buster-keaton-s-the-general.html">https://slate.com/culture/2008/11/why-you-really-do-need-to-see-buster-keaton-s-the-general.html</a> </span></div>
<h2 class="article__dek" itemprop="alternativeHeadline">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></h2>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-78445005746095230712021-02-05T00:01:00.000-08:002021-02-12T21:14:45.093-08:00The Art of Comedy: Humor in Film<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>For more information, please go to this URL: <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/comedyfilms1.html">http://www.filmsite.org/comedyfilms1.html</a></b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b><br />
</b></span></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5CnYoiwcffvH4-giL9SAfF4SrEjoFv8Atq1MasLHsnAUD3LBhPMXkrQpM8mi6U4g6Rn_O4eVa458zXEqWzbrfFL0UG_VmbTFkqml4yQXbes3_Wlq1eMyy9mr0byGm8__ZE1n7LogI5F5w/s1600/chaplin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5CnYoiwcffvH4-giL9SAfF4SrEjoFv8Atq1MasLHsnAUD3LBhPMXkrQpM8mi6U4g6Rn_O4eVa458zXEqWzbrfFL0UG_VmbTFkqml4yQXbes3_Wlq1eMyy9mr0byGm8__ZE1n7LogI5F5w/s320/chaplin.jpg" width="299" /></a></span></span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b><br />
</b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Comedy Films </b> are "make 'em laugh" films designed to elicit laughter from the audience. Comedies are light-hearted dramas, crafted to amuse, entertain, and provoke enjoyment. The comedy genre humorously exaggerates the situation, the language, action, and characters. Comedies observe the deficiencies, foibles, and frustrations of life, providing merriment and a momentary escape from day-to-day life. They usually have happy endings, although the humor may have a serious or pessimistic side. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Types of Comedies:</b></span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Comedies usually come in two general formats: comedian-led (with well-timed gags, jokes, or sketches) and situation-comedies that are told within a narrative. Both comedy elements may appear together and/or overlap. Comedy hybrids commonly exist with other major genres, such as musical-comedy, horror-comedy, and comedy-thriller. Comedies have also been classified in various <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/subgenres.html"><i>subgenres</i></a>, such as romantic comedy, crime/caper comedy, sports comedy, teen or coming-of-age comedy, social-class comedy, military comedy, fish-out-of-water comedy, and gross-out comedy. There are also many different kinds, types, or forms of comedy, including:</span></span><br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Slapstick</b></span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Slapstick was predominant in the earliest silent films, since they didn't need sound to be effective, and they were popular with non-English speaking audiences in metropolitan areas. The term <i>slapstick</i> was taken from the wooden sticks that clowns slapped together to promote audience applause. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">This is primitive and universal comedy with broad, aggressive, physical, and <i>visual</i> action, including harmless or painless cruelty and violence, horseplay, and often vulgar sight gags (e.g., a custard pie in the face, collapsing houses, a fall in the ocean, a loss of trousers or skirts, runaway crashing cars, people chases, etc). Slapstick often required exquisite timing and well-honed performance skills. It was typical of the films of Laurel and Hardy, Abbott and Costello, W. C. Fields, The Three Stooges, the stunts of Harold Lloyd in <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/safe.html"><b>Safety Last (1923)</b></a>, and Mack Sennett's silent era shorts (for example, the Keystone Kops). Slapstick evolved and was reborn in the screwball comedies of the 1930s and 1940s (see further below). <br />
<br />
More recent feature film examples include the comedic mad chase for treasure film by many top comedy stars in Stanley Kramer's <b>It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World (1963)</b>, and French actor/director Jacques Tati's mostly dialogue-free <b>Mr. Hulot's Holiday (1953, Fr.)</b>, and Jim Carrey in <b>Ace Ventura, Pet Detective (1993)</b> and <b>The Mask (1994)</b>.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The Blake Edwards series of <i>Pink Panther</i> films with Peter Sellers as bumbling Inspector Clouseau (especially in the second film of the series, <b>A Shot in the Dark (1964)</b> with Herbert Lom as Clouseau's slow-burning boss and Burt Kwouk as his valet and martial arts judo-specialist) are also great examples. Cartoons are the quintessential form of slapstick, i.e., the Roadrunner and Wile E. Coyote, and others. </span></span><br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Deadpan</b></span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">This form of comedy was best exemplified by the expression-less face of stoic comic hero Buster Keaton. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span> <br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> <b>Verbal comedy</b></span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">This was classically typified by the cruel verbal wit of W. C. Fields, the sexual innuendo of Mae West, or the verbal absurdity of dialogues in the Marx Brothers films, or later by the self-effacing, thoughtful humor of Woody Allen's literate comedies. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span> <br />
<ul>
<li> <span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> <b>Screwball</b></span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Screwball comedies, a sub-genre of romantic comedy films, was predominant from the mid-1930s to the mid-1940s. The word 'screwball' denotes lunacy, craziness, eccentricity, ridiculousness, and erratic behavior. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">These films combine farce, slapstick, and the witty dialogue of more sophisticated films. In general, they are light-hearted, frothy, often sophisticated, romantic stories, commonly focusing on a battle of the sexes in which both co-protagonists try to outwit or outmaneuver each other. They usually include visual gags (with some slapstick), wacky characters, identity reversals (or cross-dressing), a fast-paced improbable plot, and rapid-fire, wise-cracking dialogue and one-liners reflecting sexual tensions and conflicts in the blossoming of a relationship (or the patching up of a marriage) for an attractive couple with on-going, antagonistic differences (such as in <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/awfu.html"><b>The Awful Truth (1937)</b></a>). Some of the stars often present in screwball comedies included Katharine Hepburn, Barbara Stanwyck, Claudette Colbert, Jean Arthur, Irene Dunne, Myrna Loy, Ginger Rogers, Cary Grant, William Powell, and Carole Lombard.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The couple is often a fairly eccentric, but well-to-do female interested in romance and a generally passive, emasculated, or weak male who resists romance, such as in <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/brin.html"><b>Bringing Up Baby (1938)</b></a>, or a sexually-frustrated, humiliated male who is thwarted in romance, as in Howard Hawks' farce <b>I Was a Male War Bride (1949)</b>. The zany but glamorous characters often have contradictory desires for individual identity <i>and</i> for union in a romance under the most unorthodox, insane or implausible circumstances (such as in Preston Sturges' classic screwball comedy and battle of the sexes <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/ladye.html">The Lady Eve (1941)</a></b>). However, after a twisting and turning plot, romantic love usually triumphs in the end. (See more discussion later in this section.)</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span> <br />
<ul>
<li> <span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> <b>Black or Dark Comedy</b></span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">These are dark, sarcastic, humorous, or sardonic stories that help us examine otherwise ignored darker serious, pessimistic subjects such as war, death, or illness. Two of the greatest black comedies ever made include the following: Stanley Kubrick's Cold War classic satire from a script by co-writer Terry Southern,<a href="http://www.filmsite.org/drst.html"> <b>Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)</b></a> that spoofed the insanity of political and military institutions with Peter Sellers in a triple role (as a Nazi scientist, a British major, and the US President), and Robert Altman's <b>M*A*S*H (1970)</b>, an irreverent, anti-war black comedy set during the Korean War. Another more recent classic black comedy was the Coen Brothers' violent and quirky story <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/fargo.html"><b>Fargo (1996)</b></a> about a pregnant Midwestern police chief (Oscar-winning Frances McDormand) who solves a 'perfect crime' that went seriously wrong.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Hal Ashby's eccentric cult film <b>Harold and Maude (1972)</b> was an oddball love story and dark comedy about a suicidal 19 year-old (Bud Cort) and a quirky, widowed octogenarian (Ruth Gordon), with a great soundtrack score populated with songs by Cat Stevens. (See examples of other feature films below for more.) John Huston's satirical black comedy <b>Prizzi's Honor (1985)</b> starred Jack Nicholson as dimwitted Mafia hit man Charley Partanna for the East Coast Prizzi family, who fell in love with West Coaster Irene Walker (Kathleen Turner) - another mob's hitwoman. The film included an Oscar-winning performance from Anjelica Huston as the vengeful granddaughter of Nicholson's Don. Tim Burton's dark and imaginative haunted house comedy <b>Beetlejuice (1988)</b> featured Michael Keaton as the title character in a dream house occupied by newlywed spirits Geena Davis and Alec Baldwin. The shocking but watchable first film of Peter Berg, <b>Very Bad Things (1998)</b> told the dark and humorous story of a 'bachelor' weekend in Las Vegas gone bad for five guys when their hired stripper/prostitute was accidentally killed.</span></span><br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> <b>Parody</b> or <b>Spoof - </b>also <b>Satire, Lampoon</b> and <b>Farce</b></span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">These specific types of comedy (also called put-ons, send-ups, charades, lampoons, take-offs, jests, mockumentaries, etc.) are usually a humorous or anarchic take-off that ridicules, impersonates, punctures, scoffs at, and/or imitates (mimics) the style, conventions, formulas, characters (by caricature), or motifs of a serious work, film, performer, or genre, including:</span></span> <br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the Marx Brothers' satiric anti-war masterpiece <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/duck.html"> <b>Duck Soup (1933)</b></a> with anarchic humor</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the western spoof <b>Cat Ballou (1965)</b></span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Woody Allen's Japanese monster film parody <b>What's Up, Tiger Lily? (1966)</b></span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the 'genre' films of Mel Brooks (the quasi-western <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/blaz.html"><b>Blazing Saddles (1974)</b></a>, the quasi-horror film <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/youn.html">Young Frankenstein (1974)</a></b>, the inventive Hitchcock spoof/rip-off <b>High Anxiety (1977)</b>, the <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/starw.html"><b>Star Wars (1977)</b></a> spoof <b>Spaceballs (1987)</b>, and his swashbuckler send-up <b>Robin Hood: Men in Tights (1993)</b>)</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> Herbert Ross' <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/playi.html"><b>Play It Again, Sam (1972)</b></a> poked fun at Woody Allen as an insecure nebbish-hero who worshipped an imaginary, trench-coated, archetypal tough-guy detective (a la Humphrey Bogart)</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Silver Streak (1976)</b> - a comic thriller parody of Alfred Hitchcock's 'train' pictures, with Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor (their best film together) onboard the <i>Silver Streak</i> from LA to Chicago</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Neil Simon's scripts for <b>The Cheap Detective (1978)</b> and <b>Murder By Death (1978)</b> spoofed Agatha Christie detective films</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Jim Abrahams' and the Zuckers' revolutionary comedy <b>Airplane! (1980)</b> - a sophomoric parody of the earlier disaster series of <b>Airport (1970)</b> films and the original <b>Zero Hour (1957)</b>; their <b>The Naked Gun (1988)</b> series parodied TV cop shows, and <b>Top Secret! (1984)</b> ridiculed Cold War agents and espionage spy films (and Elvis Presley films); Abrahams' military comedy <b>Hot Shots! (1991)</b> was a genre parody/spoof of <b>Top Gun (1986), </b>while <b>Hot Shots! Part Deux (1993) </b> parodied <b>Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985)</b><br />
</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">in <b>The Freshman (1990)</b>, Marlon Brando (as Carmine Sabatini) poked fun - with brilliant parody - at his own characterization of Don Corleone in <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/godf.html">The Godfather (1972) </a></b></span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Carl Reiner's <b>Fatal Instinct (1993)</b> spoofed suspense thrillers and murder mysteries such as <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/basi.html"><b>Basic Instinct (1992)</b></a></span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Gene Quintano's <b>Loaded Weapon I (1993)</b> made fun of <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/series-lethalweapon.html">Lethal Weapon (1987)</a></b> as well as <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/sile.html"><b>The Silence of the Lambs (1991)</b></a>, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/basi.html"><b>Basic Instinct (1992)</b></a>, and <b>Wayne's World (1992)</b></span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/series-austinpowers.html">Austin Powers</a></b> films <b>(1997, 1999, 2002)</b> - parodies of the James Bond 007 films</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the <b>Scream</b> films <b>(1996, 1997, 2000)</b> - spoofs of slasher horror films </span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Barry Sonnenfeld's <b>Men in Black (1997)</b> - a sci-fi comedy farce based on a comic book series that poked fun at alien invasion films, with Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith as government agents (with camaraderie similar to Mel Gibson and Danny Glover in the <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/series-lethalweapon.html">Lethal Weapon</a></b> series) battling about 1500 Earth-dwelling, other-worldly extra-terrestrials in the New York area; a sequel appeared in 2002</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Galaxy Quest (1999)</b>, about the cast (including Tim Allen, Alan Rickman, and Sigourney Weaver) of a 70s sci-fi TV series in reruns, this was a parody of sci-fi TV, <b>Star Trek</b> itself, and cultish "Trekkie" activities</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">director Nora Ephron's romantic comedy <b>You've Got Mail (1998)</b> updated and paid homage to Ernst Lubitsch's classic <b>The Shop Around the Corner (1940)</b>, with leads Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan in their third teaming (after their previous hit with Ephron - <b>Sleepless in Seattle (1993)</b>), replacing James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan as feuding-by-email Manhattan bookstore owners</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Last Action Hero (1993)</b> - a spoof of action films</span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">This category may also include these widely diverse forms of <i>satire</i> - usually displayed as political or social commentary, for example: </span></span><br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Billy Wilder's sex farce <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/seve.html"><b>The Seven Year Itch (1955)</b></a> - a parody of a conventional Hollywood romance</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Terry Gilliam's tasteless but hilarious <b>Monty Python's The Meaning of Life (1983) </b>and <b>The Life of Brian (1979) </b>- an irreverent parody of religious films</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> the witty Monty Pythonesque <b>A Fish Called Wanda (1988)</b>, co-scripted by veteran John Cleese (with the character name of Archie Leach - named after Cary Grant's real name) and directed by veteran Charles Crichton (whose film career was responsible for such classics as <b>The Lavender Hill Mob (1951)</b>); it was both an acclaimed black comedy and caper farce about a search for a stolen cache of diamonds; the title referred to both a fish and the name of Jamie Lee Curtis' character</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">writer/director Albert Brooks' satirical <b>Real Life (1979)</b> - a pseudo-documentary on 'real' small-town suburban family life</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Woody Allen's pseudo-documentary <b>Zelig (1983)</b> with its use of vintage historical clips to portray a human cipher or chameleon in various time periods</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Rob Reiner's largely-improvised show-biz mockumentary <b>This is Spinal Tap (1984)</b> about a non-existent British heavy metal rock band on tour of third-rate venues </span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the serious-comedic political satire of Tim Robbins' pseudo-documentary (or fictional mockumentary) <b>Bob Roberts (1992)</b> about running for Senatorial office; <b>Tanner '88 (1988)</b> was a similar made-for-TV mini-series about a fictional Presidential candidate (Michael Murphy)</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Steven Soderbergh's <b>Schizopolis (1996)</b> - an irreverent, bizarre, and absurdist media satire</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Christopher Guest's <b>Waiting for Guffman (1996)</b> - an intelligent satirical parody (and mockumentary) about small-town 'drama queen' hopefuls</span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">In many comedies, there is much overlap with the category of <b>'farce'</b>, since the term has now been broadened and extended (from the early part of the 20th century) beyond its origins and roots in silent film (and early talkies) comedy (W.C. Fields, Charlie Chaplin, The Marx Brothers, and Buster Keaton to name a few), and the works of The Three Stooges. Now, farces - and farcical elements in films, may include fairly outrageous plots, unlikely and absurd circumstances, frantic-paced action, mistaken identities, a major transgression or hidden secret (i.e., often an extra-marital infidelity) sometimes based upon a misunderstanding, and lots of verbal humor, absurdities and physical slapstick, often with a concluding chase scene of some kind. Recently, farces have widened their scope by deliberately and satirically mocking established genres and standard filmic conventions themselves:</span></span><br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Classic screwball comedies and other classic comedies: such as <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/trou.html">Trouble in Paradise (1932)</a>, Twentieth Century (1934), <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/myman.html">My Man Godfrey (1936)</a>, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/hisg.html">His Girl Friday (1940)</a>, To Be or Not to Be (1942), <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/more.html">The More the Merrier (1943)</a>, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/arse.html">Arsenic and Old Lace (1944)</a>, Born Yesterday (1950)</b>, <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/seve.html">The Seven Year Itch (1955)</a>, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/some.html">Some Like It Hot (1959)</a>, </b>etc.</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">UK comedies: the British Ealing Studios comedies (<b>The Lavender Hill Mob (1951)</b>), the grotesque commentaries found in the <b>Monty Python</b> films, <b>Tom Jones (1963)</b> </span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Kubrick's classic, black comedy: <b><a href="http://www.filmsite.org/drst.html">Dr. Strangelove: Or... (1964)</a></b> </span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Other comedies in series: the Hope/Crosby 'Road' movies, the Peter Sellers/Inspector Clouseau Pink Panther films, the Mel Brooks comedies (beginning with <b>The Producers (1968)</b> and including such films as <b>Spaceballs (1987), </b><b>Robin Hood: Men in Tights (1993)</b>, and <b>Dracula: Dead and Loving It (1995)</b>), the Abrahams/Zucker/Zucker films such as <b>Airplane! (1980)</b> and <b>Hot Shots! (1991)</b>, some Woody Allen films (i.e., <b>Love and Death (1975)</b>), Carl Reiner/Steve Martin films: (i.e., <b>The Jerk (1979), The Man with Two Brains (1983)</b>, and <b>All of Me (1984)</b>), the Mr. Bean movies (i.e., <b>Bean (1997)</b>) </span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Other recent examples: <b>What's New, Pussycat (1965), A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum (1966), Murder by Death (1976), Tootsie (1982), Planes, Trains and Automobiles (1987),</b> Peter Bogdanovich's <b>Noises Off... (1992)</b>, <b> There's Something About Mary (1998), Waking Ned (1998), South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut (1999), Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004), The 40 Year Old Virgin (2005)</b>, <b>The Simpsons Movie (2007)</b>, etc.</span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Earliest Comedy:</b></span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Cinematic comedy can be considered the oldest film genre (and one of the most prolific and popular). Comedy was ideal for the early silent films, as it was dependent on visual action and physical humor rather than sound. <i>Slapstick</i>, one of the earliest forms of comedy, poked fun at farcical situations of physical mishap and indignity, usually in pratfalls, practical jokes, accidents, acrobatic death-defying stunts, water soakings, or wild chase scenes with trains and cars. [<i>Burlesque</i> is another form of early comedy, characterized by unrefined and broad humor, designed to produce ridicule.] Pioneers in the early days of silent cinema and film-making, the Lumiere Brothers, included a short comedy film in their very first public screening in 1895 titled <i>Watering the Gardener</i> or "The Sprinkler Sprinkled" (<i>L'Arroseur Arrose</i>). Its predictable subject matter included a man with a garden watering hose who was tricked into being soaked by a prankster child.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Keystone Studios:</b></span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">It took until 1912 for American comedy to emerge. The first comics were trained by performing in the circus, in burlesque, vaudeville (music halls), or pantomime. Film entrepreneur Mack Sennett, soon nicknamed "The King of Comedy" and "The Master of Slapstick Comedy," formed the Keystone Company (and Studios) in 1912 - it soon was the leading producer of slapstick and comic characters.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The major hallmark of Sennett's career work was inventive, visual, improvised comedy displayed in short silent films that moved frantically. His early short comedies featured wild slapstick chase finales, visual gags and stunts, and speedy, zany action. The action appeared all the more frantic and frenzied by his use of a filming technique whereby he shot the pictures at a slow camera speed, and then accelerated the frames in the projector during playback. He often cast vaudevillian, burlesque, and circus performers in his films. Those with exaggerated or grotesque looks (obese, cross-eyed, lanky, leering, pop-eyed, etc.) were chosen to add to the unreality of the situations. His most popular pictures involved his bumbling comedy policemen, the Keystone Cops. There would be flying pies, bricks, careening vehicles with people hanging off, crashes, and other dangerous-looking stunts. Cinema's first custard-pie-in-the-face was in Sennett's silent film comedy <b>A Noise From the Deep (1913)</b>, in which comedian Mabel Normand, a farmgirl threw a pie into the kisser of obese farmhand Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Eccentric comic artists (and character actors) included Arbuckle, Edgar Kennedy, Mabel Normand, zany and cross-eyed Ben Turpin, Mack Swain, Billy Bevan, Charley Chase and Chester Conklin. [Even Carole Lombard began her career at Keystone.] Charlie Chaplin got his start at Keystone (his first film was the short <b>Making a Living (1914)</b>) and made numerous short films from 1914-1919 (for Keystone, Essanay, Mutual, and First National), until his first full-length feature that he directed, wrote, and acted in, <b>The Kid (1921)</b> - see below.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>The Silent Era Clowns</b></span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle:</b></span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle was one of the earliest silent film comedians (as well as director and screenwriter). He started out with the Selig Polyscope Company in 1909 (his first film was <b>Ben's Kid (1909)</b>), and then went onto Universal Pictures in 1913 where he appeared in several of Mack Sennett's <i>Keystone Comedies</i> films, noted for fast-paced chase sequences and 'pie-in-the-face' segments. Arbuckle was the first of the silent comedians to direct his own films, starting with <b>Barnyard Flirtations (1914)</b>. His teaming with Mabel Normand at Keystone, in a series of "Fatty and Mabel" films, were lucrative for the studio.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">In 1917, Arbuckle formed his own production company ("Comique Film Corporation") with producer Joseph Schenck which afforded more creative control, hiring Buster Keaton to star in his first film <b>The Butcher Boy (1917)</b>. He used his 'fatness' as part of his sight gags, and his slightly-vulgar but sweet and playful character became extremely popular with younger audiences. By 1919, he had secured at $3 million/3-year contract with Paramount Pictures - the <i>first</i> multi-year, multi-million dollar deal for a Hollywood studio. It is little mentioned that Arbuckle mentored and aided Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin as they entered the film business, before his own downfall in the early 1920s. He was accused of the rape and murder of young starlet Virginia Rappe in San Francisco in a widely-publicized case -- and thoroughly chastised by Hearst's 'trial-by newspaper' (with soaring sales) and public condemnation. His career was over, although he was eventually fully acquitted of the act after three trials.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Charlie Chaplin:</b> </span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Charlie Chaplin, a silent actor and pantomimist, was recruited to Keystone from an English variety act, and became Sennett's most important discovery. Chaplin made 35 short Keystone films for Mack Sennett in 1914. In Chaplin's second picture, the 11-minute <b>Kid Auto Races in Venice (1914)</b>, he invented his immortal, trademark Little Tramp character as he attends a 'baby-cart' race in Venice, California. His first masterpiece, <b>The Tramp (1915)</b>, produced by the Essanay Company in Chicago, showed the early development of the character, known for his baggy pants, bowler hat, walking cane, funny stride, and oversized shoes. Chaplin had appeared in Sennett's feature-length <b>Tillie's Punctured Romance (1914)</b> and produced two dozen two-reelers for Mutual, including such classics as <b>The Rink (1916)</b>, <b>The Floorwalker (1916)</b>, <b>The Pawnshop (1916)</b>, <b>The Cure (1917)</b>, <b>The Immigrant (1917)</b> and <b>Easy Street (1917)</b>.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Chaplin made two masterpieces in the 1920s: his first full-length starring feature that he directed was <b>The Kid (1921)</b> pairing him with young Jackie Coogan. It was followed by another full-length comedy titled <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/gold.html"><b>The Gold Rush (1925)</b></a>, Chaplin's best silent film with segments of poetic miming and classic slapstick. Even though the silent era was ending and the sound era had arrived, Chaplin turned out more "silent" features: the exquisite <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/city.html"><b>City Lights (1931)</b></a>, and his satire on the machine-age, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/mode.html"> <b>Modern Times (1936)</b></a>. Chaplin resisted the coming of the talkies until his first talking picture <b>The Great Dictator (1940)</b> and other talkies including <b>Limelight (1952)</b> - a film with silent comedian Buster Keaton as co-star. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Buster Keaton:</b> </span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">One of the great silent clowns of the early comedic period was Buster Keaton, known for acrobatic visual gags, physical action, and for his deadpan, unsmiling, expression-less "stoneface." (His first name was a nickname given to him by Harry Houdini after he fell down some steps.) Keaton was first a vaudeville performer, performing and partnering quite often with former Keystone star and mentor Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle. He entered the profession of film-making in 1917 at the age of twenty-one as a supporting player, in his film debut <b>The Butcher Boy (1917)</b>. Then, he started his own production company and became an actor in his own production unit in many excellent short films (usually two-reelers) from 1920-1923, including <b>One Week (1920)</b>, <b>Neighbors (1920)</b>, <b> The High Sign (1921), The Boat (1921)</b>, <b>The Haunted House (1921)</b>, <b>The Playhouse (1921)</b>, <b>The Paleface (1921)</b>,<b> Hard Luck (1921)</b>, and <b>The Frozen North (1922)</b>, but none as a repeating character. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">A few years later, he also starred in a number of feature-length silents, his first being <b>The Three Ages (1923)</b>. Among his best features were <b>Our Hospitality (1923)</b>, <b>The Navigator (1924)</b>, <b>Sherlock, Jr. (1924)</b>, <b>Go West (1925)</b>, <b>Seven Chances (1925)</b>, and <b>Battling Butler (1926)</b>. His most-acclaimed feature-length production was the fast-paced Civil War adventure tale of a railroad engine called <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/gene.html"> <b>The General (1927)</b></a>, which he soon followed with <b>College (1927)</b> and <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/stea.html"><b>Steamboat Bill, Jr. (1928)</b></a>. The latter film is known for one of the most suicidal stunts ever filmed - a falling wall with only a top-floor open window to save him from being flattened. [One of his last film appearances was as one of the 'waxworks' friends who plays bridge with silent film star Gloria Swanson in <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/suns.html"> <b>Sunset Boulevard (1950)</b></a>.]</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Harold Lloyd:</b> </span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Harold Lloyd, a popular silent clown, has been dubbed the 'third' genius or master of silent comedy - after Chaplin and Keaton. [An actor/producer, he actually outgrossed his better-known counterparts, by retaining ownership of his films and their profits.] Like them, Lloyd also spent some time in the early years with Mack Sennett, became known for realistic, daredevil stunts, and for his bespectacled, neat, innocent, noble-hearted, 'average Joe' characters. From 1915-1921, he produced a number of short films for Keystone and for major comedy producer Hal Roach, playing the character of Willie Work (debuting in his first starring film <b>Just Nuts (1915)</b> as a Chaplin-like character) and Lonesome Luke (first appearing in <b>Lonesome Luke, Social Gangster (1915)</b>). </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Lloyd graduated to full-length features playing the part of a normal Everyman (or "Glasses Character") or "Boy" - which debuted in the short <b>Look Out Below (1919)</b>. His last short was <b>Never Weaken (1921)</b>. He became most identified with this 'boy'-next-door character (normally named Harold) with his most famous trademark - horn-rimmed glasses. His most-remembered film, the feature-length <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/safe.html"><b>Safety Last (1923)</b></a>, featured his perilous, memorable climb up a tall skyscraper's face that climaxed with his hanging off a giant clock. Lloyd's career lasted 34 years with over 200 comedies (mostly short subject featurettes, but including 11 silent features and 7 sound features). One of Lloyd's other greatest films was also his most successful, <b>The Freshman (1925)</b>, in which he portrayed a college underclassman (Harold 'Speedy' Lamb) determined to redeem himself - on the football field. Other well-known films included <b>Grandma's Boy (1922)</b>, <b>Why Worry? (1923)</b>, <b>Girl Shy (1924)</b>, <b>The Kid Brother (1927)</b>, <b>Speedy (1928)</b> (his final silent film) and <b>Movie Crazy (1932)</b>. His last film was released in 1947 - director Preston Sturges' <b>The Sin of Harold Diddlebock (1947)</b>, retitled <b>Mad Wednesday</b> by co-producer Howard Hughes, re-edited and released by RKO in 1950.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Harry Langdon:</b> </span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Another early comic performer was baby-faced, innocent, timid Harry Langdon, who also worked at Keystone. He experienced only a brief period of fame during the end of the silent era, although he could be placed in the same league as his three other comic contemporaries: Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and Harold Lloyd. His best feature film in a short four-year film career, <b>The Strong Man (1926)</b>, was director Frank Capra's feature-film debut. The film predated Chaplin's <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/city.html"> <b>City Lights (1931)</b></a> by several years with its plot of a meek man in love with a blind woman. Langdon also starred in two other hits: <b>Tramp, Tramp, Tramp (1926)</b> and Capra's <b>Long Pants (1927)</b> in which Langdon played his typical simple-minded, man/child role. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Larry Semon:</b></span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Another popular, second-level slapstick comedian in the silent era who made hundreds of two-reel shorts from 1916-1924 for Vitagraph and for the B-picture company, the Chadwick Pictures Corporation, was the charming, white-faced, smiling, and clownish Larry Semon. He began film work at Vitagraph in 1915 as comedy short gag writer and then as director in 1916. His first feature-length film was also his best known and most influential work - a remake and adaptation of Baum's <b>The Wizard of Oz (1925)</b>, with Semon serving as both director and star - as the Scarecrow opposite Oliver Hardy (of the comic team) who played the Tin Woodsman. The film's release was highly publicized, but the public didn't like it - and it was essentially a failed effort. Afterwards, he took a supporting role in Josef Von Sternberg's classic film <b>Underworld (1927)</b>, and his last film, after filing for bankruptcy, was <b>A Simple Sap (1928)</b>, released posthumously after his prematurely-short life.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>The 30s Clowns</b></span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> With the coming of sound, slapstick went into a bit of a decline and the flexible freedom of the earliest comedians was curtailed. Comedy was transformed, however, and began to be refined as an art form, with new themes, elements, and written characterizations, and comedic humor was now being derived from clever dialogue. Visual comedy remained strong throughout the 1930s, but now witty dialogue and verbal comedy were added. Some of the great comedians or teams, including Laurel and Hardy, the Three Stooges, the Marx Brothers, and Abbott and Costello, or individuals such as radio star Jack Benny, Eddie Cantor, Joe E. Brown, W. C. Fields, and Mae West emerged. Hal Roach's company was responsible for other ground-breaking comedy shorts during the 1930s, including the popular "Our Gang" series that lasted until 1944. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Laurel and Hardy:</b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">One of the greatest and most-beloved of the comedy teams was the one of British-born Stan Laurel and the fat-faced Oliver Hardy, first purposely teamed together toward the close of the silent era by producer Hal Roach in the slapstick film <b>Slipping Wives (1926)</b>. They had first met, by accident, during the filming of <b>Lucky Dog</b> in 1917. Director Leo McCarey at Hal Roach Studios recognized their potential as a team and capitalized on their contrasting, disparate physical differences (Stan: the "thin" man and Oliver: the "fat" one - each with derby hats) and classic gestures (bewildered head-scratching, tie-twiddling, eye-blinking and baby-like weeping). </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Although Laurel and Hardy worked together as a successful comedy team for 20 years (and were precursors of the 50s team Abbott and Costello), they were not equal partners - Stan considered himself the creative force and "brains" of the team. Their dozens of short films and twenty-seven feature-length films were produced over three decades (the 20s to the 40s), including such film classics as <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/sons.html"><b>Sons of the Desert (1933)</b></a> - arguably their best film, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/wayo.html"><b>Way Out West (1937)</b></a>, <b>The Flying Deuces (1939)</b>, and <b>A Chump At Oxford (1940)</b>. One of their funniest bits involved getting a piano up a set of stairs in <b>The Music Box (1932)</b>. Laurel and Hardy's last Hollywood film was <b>The Bullfighters (1945)</b>, capping a teamed career of almost twenty years. They were among the few actors who successfully made the transition from silents to talkies.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Plots of their hilarious films used situational mishaps or incidents to trigger chaos and personal jeopardy, usually with the dignified, superior-acting, pompous Ollie trying to succeed and boast, only to be frustrated, exasperated and sabotaged by the simple-mindedness, childishness and brainlessness of Stan. Audiences were amused by their endearing qualities of naivete, clumsiness, innocence, and stupidity as they sunk deeper and deeper into trouble, chaos, and self-destruction. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>The Marx Brothers:</b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Once talkies emerged, the most famous and popular comedy team was the zany foursome of the Marx Brothers. They were the only real-life sibling comedy group in Hollywood history:</span></span> <br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the witty, wise-cracking, ad-libbing, absurdly-punning, caustic, fast-talking Groucho (famous for his crouched walk, mustache, cigar, round glasses and leering eyes)</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">piano-playing, broken Italian-accented Chico, famous for distorted logic</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the mischievous mute-pantomimist/harpist Harpo (with an old taxi horn and numerous harp solos), known for chasing girls</span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">the straight-man Zeppo (who left the other brothers in 1933 after his performance in <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/duck.html"> <b>Duck Soup (1933)</b></a>, his fifth film)</span></span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Their comedy was a mixture of slapstick, sophisticated verbal comedy (often absurd and risque), zany anarchistic disrespect for the establishment, nonsensical action, and inspired buffoonery. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">After almost two decades in vaudeville together, the brothers finally received widespread attention in their screen debut, <b>The Cocoanuts (1929)</b>, filmed at Paramount's East Coast studios. Next were major box-office and critical successes - the film version of their Broadway play, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/anim.html"><b>Animal Crackers (1930)</b></a>, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/hors.html"><b>Horse Feathers (1932)</b></a> and their last film for Paramount - the political, anti-war satire/spoof <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/duck.html"> <b>Duck Soup (1933)</b></a>. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> The Marx Brothers further developed their unique brand of absurdist, hilarious, slapstick comedy with a change to MGM Studios in the mid-30s. MGM's productions of <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/night.html"> <b>A Night at the Opera (1935)</b></a> with its memorable scenes of the stateroom and a legal contract, and <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/daya.html"><b>A Day at the Races (1937)</b></a> were made at the height of their popularity. A frequent romantic foil for Groucho who appeared in a number of their films was Margaret Dumont, a memorable character actress. The film career of the Marx Brothers extended from 1929 to 1949. Marx Brothers Groucho, Chico and Harpo made their final film appearance as a team in <b>Love Happy (1949)</b>, with a young 23 year-old Marilyn Monroe. Later on, Groucho became a star as an early TV game-show host. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>W. C. Fields:</b> </span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">W. C. Fields is known for his recognizable raspy voice, pool cue, oversized bulbous nose and nasal drawl, stove-pipe hat, flask of 100-proof whiskey and love of drink, caustic verbal wit and wisecracks, and irritable disdain for small children, animals, upper-class snobs and bullying wives. The vaudeville star was an inspired comedian, a master of visual gags, double-takes, casual asides and pantomime. His film debut was in the silent one-reel comedy short <b>Pool Sharks (1915)</b>, in which he showed off his pool-playing ability, and his first sound feature film was Warners' (and First National's) pre-code musical comedy <b>Her Majesty, Love (1931)</b>. Fields usually wrote his own scripts and produced such classics for Paramount as <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/itsag.html"><b>It's A Gift (1934)</b></a> and possibly his best film, <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/bank.html"><b>The Bank Dick (1940)</b></a>, in which he credited himself as screenwriter Mahatma Kane Jeeves. Another wacky contribution was <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/neve.html"><b>Never Give a Sucker an Even Break (1941)</b></a> (written with the pseudonym of Otis Criblecoblis) - his last starring role in a feature-length film. Fields was a natural while portraying a hen-pecked husband, a phony, an eccentric, a windbag, a non-conformist schemer, or a pompous charlatan. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b>Mae West:</b> </span></span> <br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Another contemporary, wise-cracking, drawling performer was the bold, blowsy and flirtatious Mae West who enjoyed titillating and shocking audiences with <i>double entendre</i> dialogue, sexual innuendo and a desire for sex, especially before the advent of the Hays Production Code. [One of her typical lines was: "Listen, when women go wrong, men go right after them."] Mae West starred in her own films, notably as a buxom burlesque queen and singer in an 1890s saloon in <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/shed.html"><b>She Done Him Wrong (1933)</b></a>, and as a circus floozy in <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/imno.html"><b>I'm No Angel (1933)</b></a>. She also appeared with Fields in their only film together: <b>My Little Chickadee (1940)</b>. </span></span>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-52208286686268729782021-02-02T05:58:00.000-08:002021-02-12T21:14:00.965-08:00Welcome to RWU Intro to Film, Spring Semester 2021<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10pt;">This course provides an introduction to the
development of film forms, styles, and theories providing a basic aesthetic and
social understanding of film as both a mode of communication and a means of
artistic expression. It explores the interrelationship of the diegesis, visual
design, motion, editing, and thematic significance, helping students develop
the foundational skills with which to interpret and articulate the myriad ways
in which films create meaning, and elicit responses within viewers. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10pt;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The
ultimate objective of the course is for students to become acquainted with a
variety of film forms/styles, while developing the basic skills necessary to
analyze and evaluate the cinematic presentations. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><i> </i></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><i>Fulfills a course
requirement in the FILM</i> <i>STUDIES minor and CORE CONCENTRATION.</i></span></p>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-62028852595118318622021-01-24T11:07:00.000-08:002021-01-24T13:32:08.156-08:00Robert Eggar's THE LIGHTHOUSE<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRQju5XeqxiNAMSpFa3oiKU1i16qIACOHQOci_WE7uA7cRaI1MfuDOZhr4P4OaYAYbHah33bXZQtWIeB4-EorrhmFwfPZiFp-0l2DO_nXlTgW354Jf1GVC9zuQ5zD34PqfNkageoqDLjZ2/s1200/the-lighthouse-movie-review-2019.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="1200" height="253" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRQju5XeqxiNAMSpFa3oiKU1i16qIACOHQOci_WE7uA7cRaI1MfuDOZhr4P4OaYAYbHah33bXZQtWIeB4-EorrhmFwfPZiFp-0l2DO_nXlTgW354Jf1GVC9zuQ5zD34PqfNkageoqDLjZ2/w609-h253/the-lighthouse-movie-review-2019.jpg" width="609" /></a></div><p></p><p><span class="byline"><a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/contributors/brian-tallerico">Brian Tallerico</a>
</span>
<time class="time">October 18, 2019</time><time class="time"> </time></p><p><a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-lighthouse-movie-review-2019 "><time class="time">https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-lighthouse-movie-review-2019 </time></a></p><p><time class="time"> </time>Waves crash, birds scream, and rain pounds. <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/robert-eggers">Robert Eggers</a>’ “The Lighthouse” wants to drive you a little mad. It’s not just a film <i>about</i>
two people on the edge of sanity, it uses sound design and filmmaking
tools to push you there too. It has the feel of watching someone else’s
nightmare, and it’s not one that’s going to end well. While it’s
ultimately a bit too self-conscious to provoke the existential dread and
true terror of the best films like it, it’s still an impressive
accomplishment thanks to Eggers’ fearlessness and a pair of completely
committed performances.</p><p>Life is bleak for Thomas and Ephraim from the first gloomy frame of “The Lighthouse.” And I mean <i>gloomy</i>.
This is a movie that will be listed as “black and white” but would more
accurately be called “gray.” There are few distinct blacks or whites in
a film that looks like an overcast evening even during the day. It
opens with the two men, played by <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/willem-dafoe">Willem Dafoe</a> and <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/robert-pattinson">Robert Pattinson</a>,
arriving to work a shift at a lighthouse on the edge of the world.
Thomas, played by Dafoe, is the older one and the boss of the operation.
He orders around Pattinson’s Ephraim, making sure he takes care of all
of the daily duties like cleaning and repairing but always reminding him
who’s in charge. Thomas refers to Ephraim in diminutive terms like
“lad” and orders him around when he’s not telling a long-winded story,
or farting.</p><p>Ephraim toils and troubles all day, develops a rivalry with a seagull,
and is forced to listen to Thomas’ tall tales over dinner before his
boss heads up to the light that Ephraim has been denied. Not only does
he start to become obsessed with what exactly happens at the top of the
lighthouse, but he has increasingly terrifying visions between bouts of
self-gratification and back-breaking labor. A film that is already in
experimental territory from its opening scene gets more and more
surreal, allowing us to question which one of these guys will go crazy
first and what the repercussions will be. “The Lighthouse” takes on the
tenor of a slow-motion car crash, from which you know there will be no
survivors. This is not a buddy movie, but one that reminds us that
nothing may be scarier than being stuck with someone you can’t stand. </p><p>Dafoe does what sometimes feels like a salty dog caricature—if they ever
do a live-action “Simpsons” movie, he’s the man for the Sea Captain—but
it’s a captivating performance. As the old-timer of the two, Dafoe’s
Thomas gets to remain tantalizingly vague for a while in that we’re not
sure if he’s just a jerk or someone actively trying to destroy the
person making him beans. He's hysterical and annoying in equal measure. <br /></p><time class="time"></time><p>And Pattinson is even better. In a long line of daring performances recently (“<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-lost-city-of-z-2017">The Lost City of Z</a>,” “<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/high-life-2019">High Life</a>”),
this may be his best work. He imbues Ephraim with desperation, the
reasons for which are revealed later, that makes his plight more tragic.
He doesn’t just need to survive, he needs this job to climb out of the
hole of life. He <i>needs</i> the light. He needs success. Pattinson throws himself entirely into the role and it’s fun to watch. </p><p>Pattinson, Dafoe, and an angry seagull may be the stars of “The
Lighthouse” but this is a film that’s constantly calling attention to
the choices of its director and creative team. From the decision to
shoot it in gray 4:3 ratio to heighten the claustrophobia to the
non-stop cacophony of noise—it feels like if they don’t kill each other,
the waves or storm will—“The Lighthouse” is a sensory assault. It’s an
easy film to admire with both in its ambition and execution, but there’s
a creeping sense that it doesn’t really add up to much more than a bit
of a self-aware poke in the eye, and the film doesn't quite stick the
landing to make that feeling go away. Sure, that kind of experimental
provocation is fun in its own twisted way, but it feels like a missed
opportunity to be more than just "fun." With its incredible level of
detail, “<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-witch-2016">The Witch</a>”
transported us back to its era and made its horror tangible. There’s
nothing tangible here. If you try to put your hands on “The Lighthouse,”
it slips through your fingers. </p><p>Although maybe that’s the point. Maybe this is just Eggers’
existential version of a salty dog tale told on the high seas—the urban
legend of a couple of guys stuck on a lighthouse who drove each other
insane. Anyone searching for more than that does so at their own peril.
Be careful not to crash on the rocks. </p> <p><i>This review was filed from the Toronto International Film Festival on September 6th.</i></p><p><i> <br /></i></p><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Hyag7lR8CPA" width="560"></iframe></div>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-38109465707797796252021-01-19T03:30:00.000-08:002021-01-19T05:37:42.973-08:00The 3 Types of Animated Films<div class="comp updated-label article-updated-label" id="updated-label_1-0">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcDEMcfWHs33gQBma6P3hY9Ihy0SWwgweG4Su3n56T0HJBUhkcI2VBHXqlt3g02WrmHLJORrtozSqbzizTWfXKVXPIzqGj7y1d95TxedCV8oo1OvGKZRnAWNI3gzCyux5EmWstgMqBgStY/s1600/GettyImages-143711487-59607c273df78cdc68b9be55.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="432" data-original-width="768" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcDEMcfWHs33gQBma6P3hY9Ihy0SWwgweG4Su3n56T0HJBUhkcI2VBHXqlt3g02WrmHLJORrtozSqbzizTWfXKVXPIzqGj7y1d95TxedCV8oo1OvGKZRnAWNI3gzCyux5EmWstgMqBgStY/s640/GettyImages-143711487-59607c273df78cdc68b9be55.jpg" width="640" /></a> </div>
</div>
<div class="comp updated-label article-updated-label" id="updated-label_1-0" style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> Handout/Getty Images Entertainment/Getty Images</span></div>
<div class="comp updated-label article-updated-label" id="updated-label_1-0" style="text-align: right;">
</div>
<div class="comp updated-label article-updated-label" id="updated-label_1-0">
by <span class="byline__container flipboard-author">
<a href="https://www.liveabout.com/david-nusair-2419020">David Nusair</a></span></div>
<div class="comp updated-label article-updated-label" id="updated-label_1-0">
Updated March 30, 2019 </div>
<div class="comp updated-label article-updated-label" id="updated-label_1-0">
</div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0">
Animation has certainly come a long way <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="1" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" href="https://www.liveabout.com/timeline-of-animated-film-history-2420991">in the decades</a> since its debut in the early 1900s. The <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="2" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" href="https://www.liveabout.com/animation-techniques-for-beginners-137590">techniques used by animators</a>
to bring characters and stories to life have improved immeasurably over
the years, yet there remains only three primary types of animation:
traditional, stop-motion, and computer. Descriptions of and the
significant differences between the three major forms of animation are
described below.<span class="mntl-sc-block-heading__text"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><span class="mntl-sc-block-heading__text">Traditional Animation </span></b></span> <br />
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-3">
Arriving on the scene at roughly the same time as its live-action
counterparts, traditionally animated films have certainly come a long
way since the early days of crude drawings and experimental narratives.
Traditional animation made its debut in 1906's <i>Humorous Phases of Funny Faces</i>, a short film featuring different facial expressions.<br />
<br />
The genre allows for the illusion of animated movement due to the
frame-by-frame manipulation of drawings and illustrations. Although
computer technology has assisted animators in their efforts over the
years, the basic means by which an animated film comes to life has
essentially remained the same—by drawing frames one by one.<br />
<br />
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-7">
The popularization of the cel-animation process in the early 1920s
proved instrumental in the genre’s meteoric rise to infamy, with the
technique ensuring that animators no longer had to draw the same image
over and over again—as see-through “cels” containing a character or
object in motion could be laid on top of a stationary background. The
release of <i>Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs</i> in 1937 marked the
first time that traditionally animated films began to be taken seriously
by the Hollywood community and audiences alike.<br />
<br />
In the years since, traditionally animated films have remained popular
at cinemas the world over—with the wild success of the genre affording
filmmakers the opportunity to break out of the mold from time to time
(i.e., 1972’s <i>Fritz the Cat</i> became the first animated feature
to land an “X” rating). Disney’s domination over the 2D animated realm
has ensured that their name has become synonymous with animated films,
although it’s certainly worth noting that some of the most popular
cartoons from the last few decades have come from other studios
(including <i>The Rugrats Movie</i>, <i>Beavis and Butt-head Do America</i>, and the <i>Land Before Time</i> series).<br />
<br />
However, traditional animated films have become increasingly rare from
the major U.S. studios, mostly because they're so expensive and
time-consuming to produce. However, independent filmmakers and
international animation studios still produce traditional animated
movies.However, traditional animated films have become increasingly rare from
the major U.S. studios, mostly because they're so expensive and
time-consuming to produce. However, independent filmmakers and
international animation studios still produce traditional animated
movies.<br />
<br />
<b><span class="mntl-sc-block-heading__text"><span style="font-size: large;">Stop-Motion Animation </span></span></b> <br />
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-14">
Far less common is stop-motion animation. Stop-motion actually predates traditional, hand-drawn animation: The first attempt, <i>The Humpty Dumpty Circus</i>,
was released in 1898. Stop-motion animation is shot frame-by-frame as
the animators manipulate objects—often made out of clay or similarly
flexible material—in order to create the illusion of movement.<br />
<br />
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-16">
There’s little doubt that the biggest hindrance to stop-motion
animation’s success is its time-consuming nature, as animators must move
an object one frame at a time to mimic movement. Considering movies
generally contain 24 frames per second, it can take hours to capture
just a few seconds worth of footage.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-adslot mntl-block" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-17">
<div class="comp mntl-block" id="mntl-block_9-0">
<div class="comp scads-to-load right-rail__item billboard5-sticky billboard-sticky scads-ad-placed" data-height="600" data-parent="" id="billboard5-sticky_2-0" style="top: 3409px;">
<div class="spacer">
<div class="comp billboard5-dynamic mntl-gpt-dynamic-adunit mntl-gpt-adunit gpt billboard dynamic" data-ad-height="250" data-ad-width="300" id="billboard5-dynamic_1-0">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-18">
Although the first full-length stop-motion cartoon was released in 1926 (Germany’s <i>The Adventures of Prince Achmed</i>), the genre’s widest exposure came in the 1950s with the release of the <i>Gumby</i>
television series. After that point, stop-motion animation started to
be seen less as a gimmicky fad and more as a viable alternative to
hand-drawn animation—with 1965’s <i>Willy McBean and his Magic Machine</i>,
produced by legendary stop-motion duo Arthur Rankin and Jules Bass, the
first full-length stop-motion film to be produced within the United
States.<br />
<br />
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-20">
The prominence of Rankin/Bass Christmas specials in the ‘60s and ‘70s
only added to stop-motion animation’s growing popularity, yet it was
the increased use of stop-motion within special effects field that
cemented its place as an invaluable resource—with George Lucas’
pioneering work in both the <i>Star Wars</i> films and in his effects
company Industrial Light and Magic setting a standard that the rest of
the industry struggled to match.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-adslot mntl-block" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-21">
<div class="comp mntl-block" id="mntl-block_10-0">
</div>
</div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-22">
Stop-motion has seen a dip in popularity in the wake of computer
animation’s meteoric rise, yet the style has seen something of a
resurgence in the past few years—with the popularity of movies like <i>Coraline</i> and <i>Fantastic Mr. Fox</i> ensuring that stop-motion will likely continue to endure in the years to come.<span class="mntl-sc-block-heading__text"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><span class="mntl-sc-block-heading__text">Computer Animation </span></b></span> </div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-25">
Before it became a pervasive, all-encompassing force within the cinematic community, <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="1" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="externalLink" href="https://www.lifewire.com/traditional-vs-computer-animation-p2-140527" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">computer animation</a>
was primarily used as a tool by filmmakers to enhance their
traditionally-conceived special effects work. As such,
computer-generated imagery was used sparingly in the ‘70s and ‘80s—with
1982’s marking the first time it was used on an extensive basis within a
full-length feature.</div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-adslot mntl-block" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-26">
<div class="comp mntl-block" id="mntl-block_11-0">
</div>
</div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-27">
<br />
Computer animation received a substantial boost in 1986 with the release of the first short film from <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="1" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" href="https://www.liveabout.com/10-facts-you-never-knew-about-pixar-4145192">Pixar</a>, <i>Luxo Jr., </i>which went on to receive an <a data-component="link" data-ordinal="2" data-source="inlineLink" data-type="internalLink" href="https://www.liveabout.com/who-votes-for-the-oscars-4021744">Oscar</a>
nomination for Best Animated Short Film and proved that computers could
provide more than just behind-the-scenes special effects support. The
increased sophistication of both hardware and software was reflected in
the progressively eye-popping nature of computer-generated imagery, with
1991’s <i>Terminator 2: Judgment Day</i> and 1993’s <i>Jurassic Park</i> standing as landmark examples of what computers were capable of.<br />
<br />
It wasn’t until Pixar released the world’s first computer-animated
feature in 1995 that audiences and executives alike first saw the
possibilities offered by the technology. It wasn’t long before other
studios began clamoring to get into the CGI game. The three-dimensional
appearance of computer-generated cartoons instantly assured their
success over their 2-D counterparts, as viewers found themselves
transfixed by the novelty of the lifelike images and jaw-dropping
visuals.<br />
<br />
Although Pixar (now owned by animation pioneers Disney) remains the
undisputed champion of the computer-generated landscape, there have
certainly been plenty of equally successful examples of the genre in
recent years—with, for instance, the series raking in well over two
billion dollars worldwide.</div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-adslot mntl-block" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-32">
</div>
<div class="comp mntl-sc-block mntl-sc-block-html" id="mntl-sc-block_1-0-33">
In 2001, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences introduced
the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature. Since its introduction,
most of the winners have been computer-animated films—but the
traditional animated<i> Spirited Away </i>won the 2002 award and the stop-motion film <i>Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit </i>won
the 2005 award. In recent years, the Best Animated Short category has
continued to see winners in both traditional and computer animated
shorts.</div>
</div>
<br /></div>
<a href="https://www.liveabout.com/different-types-of-animated-films-2420979" target="_blank"> https://www.liveabout.com/different-types-of-animated-films-2420979</a></div>
</div>
</div>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-86474037018117560852021-01-17T23:30:00.000-08:002021-01-19T05:37:10.875-08:00How Technicolor changed movies...<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Mqaobr6w6_I" width="560"></iframe></div>
<h2 class="c-entry-summary p-dek" style="max-width: 901px;">
Glorious Technicolor was much more than groundbreaking movie technology.</h2>
Updated by
<span class="c-byline__item">
<a href="https://www.vox.com/authors/phil-edwards">Phil Edwards</a><span class="c-byline__item"> - </span><span class="c-byline__item"><a href="mailto:phil.edwards@vox.com" title="">phil.edwards@vox.com</a></span>
</span>
<time class="c-byline__item" data-ui="timestamp"> Dec 1, 2017, 2:10pm EST </time><br />
<br />
<div id="JGy6lS">
You’ve probably heard about “glorious Technicolor”
before. But Technicolor wasn’t just a groundbreaking technology — it was
a powerful corporate influence in Hollywood and created an aesthetic
that shaped the look of the 20th century.</div>
<div id="JGy6lS">
<br /></div>
<div id="QMtVKn">
<a href="http://www.technicolor.com/">Technicolor</a> still exists today, but at its zenith, it was an inescapable part of the visual landscape. From <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0031381/"><i>Gone With The Wind</i></a><i> </i>to <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032138/?ref_=nv_sr_1"><i>The Wizard of Oz</i></a>, it shaped how our movies look. But, as the above video shows, that influence stretched far beyond technological trends.</div>
<div id="QMtVKn">
<br /></div>
<div id="GdikEY">
If you want to learn more about Technicolor, visit <a href="https://eastman.org/">The George Eastman Museum</a> or Barbara Flueckiger’s <a href="http://zauberklang.ch/filmcolors/">fascinating website</a>,
which catalogs the many competing color technologies that emerged in
the 1900s. Technicolor made the greatest impact, thanks to its
revolutionary technology, staunch advocates like Technicolor supervisor <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalie_Kalmus">Natalie Kalmus</a>, and a look that was inimitable for decades.</div>
<div id="GdikEY">
<br /></div>
You can find this video and all of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLXo7UDZvByw2ixzpQCufnA"><b>Vox's videos on YouTube</b></a>.<br />
<br />Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-15961222649056847592021-01-14T22:40:00.000-08:002021-01-15T22:30:27.695-08:00WHAT WE DO IN THE SHADOWS - TRAILER<div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/C6V1ecxkF5I" width="560"></iframe>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-89699273466799885342021-01-13T22:50:00.000-08:002021-01-15T22:29:44.228-08:00Movie Review: What We Do in the Shadows<p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiRHeBU7tJ2jwHABftjIdBQQrSYnAe7fCEJNmJp11sWFhd19eMH712PVKJiW8pMVFFPPdXr-pMsJavhDcAGgYbUFTHPggTl83QBzO6e55UAQN9mNMrdcYRVjXoXJmi0gQJOcvuAUJxPdPi/s620/What-We-Do-in-the-Shadows-010.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="372" data-original-width="620" height="358" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiRHeBU7tJ2jwHABftjIdBQQrSYnAe7fCEJNmJp11sWFhd19eMH712PVKJiW8pMVFFPPdXr-pMsJavhDcAGgYbUFTHPggTl83QBzO6e55UAQN9mNMrdcYRVjXoXJmi0gQJOcvuAUJxPdPi/w597-h358/What-We-Do-in-the-Shadows-010.jpg" width="597" /></a></div><p></p><ul class="post_details clearfix"><li class="detail author"><a class="author" href="https://www.etownian.com/author/leo-costello/" title="Leo Costello">Leo Costello</a></li></ul><p><a href="https://www.etownian.com/campus-life/movie-review-what-we-do-in-the-shadows/">https://www.etownian.com/campus-life/movie-review-what-we-do-in-the-shadows/</a></p><p>In honor of Taika Waititi’s latest Oscar win, this week’s review will
be a throwback review of his and co-writer/director Jemaine Clement’s
2014 horror mockumentary “What We Do in the Shadows.” </p>
<p>Both Clement and Waititi have always had a somewhat unconventional
sense of humor, if the latest Waititi film “Jojo Rabbit” (2019) is any
indication. </p><p><br />“Shadows” is no different. It takes the genre of horror
and flips it, making fun of it in the same way “This Is Spinal Tap”
(1984) makes fun of the rock music industry — they both use the style of
the mockumentary. </p>
<p>“What We Do in the Shadows” follows the daily life of three vampires,
two of whom are played by Clement and Waititi, whose lives are
interrupted when their oldest flatmate changes a human into a vampire. </p>
<p>The film unfolds in ridiculous humor and a little bit of gore, but that is to be expected in a vampire film. </p>
<p>This film pays homage to many well-known classics such as “Dracula”
(1931), “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” (1992), and even “Twilight” (2008). </p>
<p>Homage might be too kind a term for what “Shadows” does. If anything,
this film is an hour and a half of them endearingly making fun of the
vampire horror genre. </p>
<p>Spoofs and parodies are often difficult things to create without
becoming incredibly cheesy, like “Scary Movie” (2000). Those films have
seemed as though they would never stop being churned out and nearly
exhausted the horror spoof genre for me, personally. </p>
<p>“Shadows” doesn’t become cheesy or tiresome with its jokes. In fact,
there aren’t any jokes in the film; it is made up entirely of humorous
situations, and that is where the difference lies. Comedic things just
happen to these characters, rather than them saying something and it
needing a punchline. </p>
<p>The dialogue of this film is so well done that I’d be incredibly
happy to watch another three hours of these characters bickering. </p>
<p>These vampires aren’t what one would typically imagine when they
think of vampires: they don’t live in some large castle, they live in a
house in Wellington, New Zealand. They aren’t the graceful, brooding
type like Dracula. They are awkward and have no idea what the latest
trends are, which is a joke in and of itself. </p>
<p>“What We Do in the Shadows” flips the entire horror genre on its head
and answers question like: How do vampires spend their time? What do
they do in the shadows? </p>
<p>Overall, what makes this film so funny is that it takes a subject so
mundane — the idea of four guys sharing a flat in Wellington, New
Zealand — and makes it ridiculous: the four guys are vampires. </p>
<p>If horror is something that would usually spook you, but you enjoy
the concept, this film might be for you. It is not scary; however, there
are gory moments with a decent amount of blood shown. It is funnier
than it is spooky, so if that sounds intriguing, I would absolutely
recommend this film. </p>
<p>It is ridiculously hilarious and bound to give you a good time. </p>
<p>Final score: 11/10. </p>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-61239805037503002582021-01-13T18:44:00.000-08:002021-01-15T22:30:05.486-08:00MY LIFE AS A DOG (Mitt Liv som Hund)<div style="text-align: center;"> </div><p><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QSqlvZy339s" width="560"></iframe> </p><p><span class="cap" title="T"><span>T</span></span>he cinema of Lasse
Hallström, always toeing the fragile line between sincere tenderness and
full-blown schmaltz, is most affecting when immersed in the
complexities of childhood experience. <em>My Life as a Dog</em> remains
the best representation of Hallström’s filmmaking prowess, a wondrous
children’s story that organically overlaps the magic of youth with the
harsh realities of impending adulthood. In the story of Ingemar (Anton
Glanzelius), an inquisitive young boy forced to spend the summer in the
countryside so his sickly mother can recuperate from tuberculosis,
Hallström foreshadows the themes of isolation, mortality, and compassion
he would further develop in his best American film, <em>What’s Eating Gilbert Grape?</em> Instead of sentimentalizing Ingemar’s emotional highs and lows, <em>My Life as a Dog</em>
relishes the ambiguities inherent to his impressionable gaze, the gaps
in his memory that seem as natural and cyclical as the changing seasons.</p><p>While death is a constant in <em>My Life as a Dog</em>,
it’s never sensationalized as a morbid curiosity or gimmick. Instead,
Hallström focuses on the ripples of mortality, how Ingemar connects his
personal anguish with experiences of loss from supporting characters.
Ingemar spends much of the story observing other people suffer from
various ailments, his mother being the obvious example, but also in the
case of a bedridden elderly man living with his Uncle Gunnar (Tomas von
Brömssen). It’s as if proximity to the process of death is more
important than the event itself (we don’t see either character die).
Whether Ingemar is bringing his mother breakfast in bed or reading aloud
to the decrepit old man from a woman’s underwear catalogue, there’s a
focus on the nuances of wrinkled skin, frail hands, or skeletal bone
structure, and how Ingemar views these details in from the vantage point
of a child.</p><p>Despite its contained 1950s rural setting, <em>My Life as a Dog</em>
references the world at large through Ingemar’s contemplation of other
people’s experiences with tragedy. Random newspaper stories from around
the world define his frank voiceover narration, which comes during hypnotic cutaways of the starry night sky. Hallström creates a
juxtaposition of separate temporalities and experiences to structure
Ingemar’s tangential thought process, a way for both character and
audience to make sense of events that often defy expectation. The
defining example of this aesthetic trend, a story Ingemar references
more than once, is of the Russian space dog Laika sent into orbit as an
experimental precursor to manned flights. Ingemar continuously ponders
why anyone would let a harmless dog die alone hundreds of thousands of
miles away from home, especially after his own dog is taken away to a
kennel before his departure for the countryside. Once again, the
personal aspects of his consciousness merge with surrounding world.</p><p>Still, for every sequence in <em>My Life as a Dog</em> concerned with
the subtle and unseen ramifications of death, there’s countless more
about the rhythms of life, punctuated by Björn Isfält’s breezy musical
score bridging sequences of vibrant movement and discovery. During
Ingemar’s extended vacation to Gunnar’s hometown, he meets a wide array
of unique characters that expand his physical and emotional world. He
plays soccer, learns to box with a tomboy named Saga (Melinda Kinnaman),
and helps build a small gazebo with Gunnar. Fields of green grass,
crystal clear streams, and dense forests frame these moments, as Ingemar
spreads his wings away from the heartache of his mother’s sickness.
It’s always clear the adult world and its conflicts are unfolding
simultaneously on the fringes of Ingemar’s heightened childhood
experience, but whether it’s an argument between his aunt and uncle or a
fight between workers at the local glass blowing factory, these are
merely momentary distractions to the overall world of play.</p>Time
is never a concern for Ingemar since he has no need for dates,
deadlines, or responsibilities, and this might be my favorite aspect of
Hallström’s filmmaking. <em>My Life as a Dog</em> is one of the few
children’s films that defies this sort of temporal structure, allowing
fleeting moments of experience, like an embrace between two friends or
naked woman being sketched by the light of a candle, to progress without
any constraints beyond the elemental observations of a child’s
imagination. In a way, Hallström relinquishes the pace of the film to his child protagonist, and Ingemar’s meandering thoughts often
splinter without notice to incorporate whatever his impression of the
world becomes at that particular moment. This makes for a beautiful and
incomplete vision of one boy’s subjective act of remembrance.<p>It’s extremely disheartening that Hallström has never been able to recapture the hypnotic and honest feel of <em>My Life as a Dog</em> during his tenure as a Hollywood filmmaker, even though <em>What’s Eating Gilbert Grape?</em>
comes close. In fact, his American career reflects an extended 20-year
slide downward into the dank realm of melodramatic drivel (<a href="https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/dear-john"><em>Dear John</em></a>
being his worst offense to date). Alas, it wouldn’t be the first time a
talented foreign filmmaker was consumed by such Western indulgences.
Still, <em>My Life as a Dog</em> and its sublime vision of childhood
will always be there to remind us of the filmmaker Hallström once was,
and potentially could be again.</p><h3>Image/Sound</h3><p><em>My Life as Dog</em> is often defined by
physical surroundings and seasonal imagery, mainly the lush greenery of a
countryside summer and the dense snowcaps of a Swedish winter. These
elements parallel Ingemar’s experiences with life and death in
fascinating ways. Criterion’s strong 1080p high-definition transfer
improves on their standard-definition disc in this respect, accentuating
the textures of his environment so the viewer can experience them with
an added sense of clarity. The color schemes are also superbly realized
with this disc, my favorite being a shot of Ingemar and Saga aglow in
warm light while resting in hay. The sound design is less impressive, if
only because it stems from a compressed monaural track that sometimes
lowers and rises mid-scene.</p><h3>Overall</h3><p>One of the great films about childhood perception, with atmospheric beauty. </p><p><strong>Cast:</strong> Anton Glanzelius, Tomas von Brömssen, Anki Lidén, Melinda Kinnaman, Kicki Rudgren <strong>Director:</strong> Lasse Hallström <strong>Screenwriter:</strong> Lasse Hallström, Reidar Jönsson, Brasse Brännström, Per Berglund <strong>Distributor:</strong> The Criterion Collection <strong>Running Time:</strong> 101 min <strong>Rating:</strong> - <strong>Year:</strong> 1985. <br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY9Pvhyphenhyphen3HH-CDPIL-jNFsrly9m00xmR09Xb9OIeajdbzIMV1o56EY_yQYX_mVi3mR6i1d7mHrwSunUC3_fvnq-IWELaH0chi4MqJp3irhKYAI37IVy5cH4DIeAI-IUcQ9HkQTas9nq9kMZ/s400/MyLifeAsADog.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="288" data-original-width="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY9Pvhyphenhyphen3HH-CDPIL-jNFsrly9m00xmR09Xb9OIeajdbzIMV1o56EY_yQYX_mVi3mR6i1d7mHrwSunUC3_fvnq-IWELaH0chi4MqJp3irhKYAI37IVy5cH4DIeAI-IUcQ9HkQTas9nq9kMZ/s320/MyLifeAsADog.jpg" width="320" /></a></div> Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-37978195401686400792021-01-12T07:16:00.000-08:002021-01-12T19:25:57.339-08:00"Ex Machina" and the nature of humanity<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhLBKHjn2f-M0NgeTK2Tm4L_llGxUGPV5aBYRsAwUGv4rimMvlcrwnzjT3mgNi05nJW8KU3Fjvcti5tcRxBylE6OBR4MzB1YLqTu-VxqUt06AZPWoOXhAsNL3m1Jq4AVOrP1ZBFGLAAz42/s1920/ex-machina.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" height="335" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhLBKHjn2f-M0NgeTK2Tm4L_llGxUGPV5aBYRsAwUGv4rimMvlcrwnzjT3mgNi05nJW8KU3Fjvcti5tcRxBylE6OBR4MzB1YLqTu-VxqUt06AZPWoOXhAsNL3m1Jq4AVOrP1ZBFGLAAz42/w595-h335/ex-machina.jpg" width="595" /></a> <br /></div><p></p><p>Review by <span class="byline"><a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/contributors/matt-zoller-seitz">Matt Zoller Seitz</a>
</span>
<time class="time">April 09, 2015</time></p><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/ex-machina-2015"><time class="time">https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/ex-machina-2015</time></a></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">Real science fiction is about ideas, which means that real science
fiction is rarely seen on movie screens, a commercially minded canvas
that's more at ease with sensation and spectacle. What you more often
get from movies is something that could be called "science
fiction-flavored product"—a work that has a few of the superficial
trappings of the genre, such as futuristic production design and
somewhat satirical or sociological observations about humanity, but that
eventually abandons its pretense for fear of alienating or boring the
audience and gives way to more conventional action or horror trappings,
forgetting about whatever made it seem unusual to begin with.</time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">Ex Machina," the directorial debut by novelist and screenwriter <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/alex-garland">Alex Garland</a> ("<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/28-days-later-2003">28 Days Later</a>," "Sunshine"), is a rare and welcome exception to that norm. It starts out as an ominous thriller about a young programmer (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/domhnall-gleeson">Domhnall Gleeson</a>) orbiting a charismatic Dr. Frankenstein-type (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/oscar-isaac">Oscar Isaac</a>)
and slowly learning that the scientist's zeal to create artificial
intelligence has a troubling, even sickening personal agenda. But even
as the revelations pile up and the screws tighten and you start to sense
that terror and violence are inevitable, the movie never loses grip on
what it's about; this is a rare commercial film in which every scene,
sequence, composition and line deepens the screenplay's themes—which
means that when the bloody ending arrives, it seems less predictable
than inevitable and right, as in myths, legends and Bible stories. </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">The scientist, Isaac's Nathan, has brought the programmer Caleb
(Gleason) to his remote home/laboratory in the forested mountains and
assigned Caleb to interact with a prototype of a "female" robot, Ava (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/alicia-vikander">Alicia Vikander</a>),
to determine if she truly has self-awareness or it's just an incredible
simulation. The story is emotionally and geographically intimate, at
times suffocating, unfolding in and around </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">Nathan's stronghold. This
modernist bunker with swingin' bachelor trappings is sealed off from the
outside world. Many of its rooms are off-limits to Caleb's restricted
key card. The story is circumscribed with the same kind of precision.
Caleb's conversations with Ava are presented as discrete narrative
sections, titled like chapters in a book (though the claustrophobic
setting will inevitably remind viewers of another classic of shut-in
psychodrama, Stanley Kubrick's film of "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-the-shining-1980">The Shining</a>").
These sections are interspersed with scenes between Caleb, Nathan, and
Nathan's girlfriend (maybe concubine) Kyoko (Sonoya Mizono), a nearly
mute, fragile-seeming woman who hovers near the two men in a ghostly
fashion. </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> Because the film is full of surprises, most of them character-driven and
logical in retrospect, I'll try to describe "Ex Machina" in general
terms. Nathan is an almost satirically specific type: a brilliant man
who created a revolutionary new programming code at 13 and went on to
found a Google-like corporation, then funneled profits into his secret
scheme to create a physically and psychologically credible synthetic
person, specifically a woman. This is a classic nerd fantasy, and there
is a sense in which "Ex Machina" might be described as "Stanley
Kubrick's Weird Science." But despite having made a film in which two
of the four main characters are women in subservient roles, and making
it clear that Nathan's realism test will include a sexual component, the
movie never seems to be exploiting the characters or their situations.
The movie maintains a scientific detachment even as it brings us inside
the minds and hearts of its people, starting with Caleb (an audience
surrogate with real personality), then embracing Ava, then Nathan (who's as screwed-up as he is intimidating),
then finally Kyoko, who is not the cipher she initially seems to be. </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">"Ex Machina" is a beautiful extension of Garland's past concerns as a screenwriter. Starting with Danny Boyle's "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-beach-2000">The Beach</a>,"
based on his novel, and continuing through two more collaborations with
Boyle, "28 Days Later" and "Sunshine" and the remake of "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/judge-dredd-1995">Judge Dredd</a>,"
Garland has demonstrated great interest in the organization of society,
the tension between the need for rules and the abuse of authority, and
the way that gender roles handed down over thousands of years can poison
otherwise pure relationships. The final section of "28 Days Later" is
set in a makeshift army base where soldiers have taken up arms against
hordes of infected citizens. No sooner have they welcomed the heroes
into their fold than they reveal themselves as domineering monsters who
want to strip the tomboyish women in the group of their autonomy and
groom them as concubines and breeders in frilly dresses, in a skewed
version of "traditional" society. The soldiers, not the infected, were
the true zombies in that zombie film: the movie was a critique of
masculinity, especially the toxic kind.</time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> Likewise, "Ex Machina" is very much about men and women, and how their
identities are constructed by male dominated society as much as by
biology. Nathan actively rebels against the nerd stereotype, carrying on
like a frat house alpha dog, working a heavy bag, drinking to excess,
disco dancing with his girl in a robotically choreographed
routine, addressing the soft-spoken, sensitive Caleb as "dude" and
"bro", and reacting with barely disguised contempt when Caleb expresses
empathy for Ava. It's bad enough that Nathan wants to play God at all,
worse still that he longs to re-create femininity through circuitry and
artificial flesh. His vision of women seems shaped by lad magazines,
video games aimed at eternal teenagers, and the most juvenile "adult"
science fiction and fantasy. </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"><br /></time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">As Ava becomes increasingly central to the story, the movie acquires an
undertone of film noir, with Nathan as the abusive husband or father
often found in such movies, Caleb as the clueless drifter smitten with
her, and Ava as the damsel who is definitely in distress but not as
helpless as she first appears (though we are kept guessing as to how
capable she is, and whether she has the potential to be a femme fatale).
The film's most intense moments are the quiet conversations that occur
during power blackouts at the facility, when Ava confesses her terror to
Caleb and asks his help against Nathan. We don't know quite how to take
her pleas. Despite her limited emotional bandwidth, she seems truly
distressed, and yet we are always aware that she is Nathan's creation.
Her scenario might be another level in the simulation, or another
projection of Nathan's twisted machismo. There is also canny commentary,
conveyed entirely through images, which suggests that "traditional"
femininity is as artificial and blatantly constructed as any android
siren, which makes creatures like Ava seem like horribly logical extensions of a mentality that has always existed. (This movie and "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/under-the-skin-2014">Under the Skin</a>" would make an excellent double feature, though not one that should be watched by anybody prone to depression.)</time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">Throughout, Garland builds tension slowly and carefully without ever
letting the pace slacken. And he proves to have a precise but bold eye
for composition, emphasizing humans and robots as lovely but troubling
figures in a cold, sharp mural of technology. The special effects are
some of the best ever done in this genre, so convincing that you soon
cease marveling at the way Ava's metallic "bones" can be seen through
the transparent flesh of her forearms, or the way that her "face" is a
fixed to a silver skull. <br /></time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"><br /></time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time">Garland's screenplay is equally impressive, weaving references to
mythology, history, physics, and visual art into casual conversations,
in ways that demonstrate that Garland understands what he's talking
about while simultaneously going to the trouble to explain more abstract
concepts in plain language, to entice rather than alienate casual
filmgoers. (Nathan and Caleb's discussion of Jackson Pollock's
"automatic painting" is a highlight.) The performances are outstanding.
Isaac's in particular has an electrifying star quality, cruelly sneering
yet somehow delightful, insinuating and intellectually credible. The
ending, when it arrives, is primordially satisfying, spotlighting images
whose caveman savagery is emotionally overwhelming yet earned by the
story. This is a classic film.</time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> </time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline"><time class="time"> <br /></time></div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline" style="text-align: center;"><time class="time"> </time> <iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XYGzRB4Pnq8" width="560"></iframe> </div><div class="page-content--byline-share--byline" style="text-align: center;"> </div>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-84123441194081534492021-01-10T22:30:00.000-08:002021-01-12T19:26:41.494-08:00Science Fiction as Art: "Arrival"<div class="c-entry-hero__header-wrap">
<h1 class="c-page-title" style="max-width: 939px;">
<span style="color: #3d85c6;">Arrival is a stunning science fiction movie with deep implications for today</span></h1>
</div>
<div class="c-entry-summary p-dek" style="max-width: 753px;">
One of the year’s best movies is about linguistics, metaphors, and aliens.</div>
<span class="c-byline-wrapper">
By
<span class="c-byline__item">
<a data-analytics-link="author-name" href="https://www.vox.com/authors/alissa-wilkinson"><span class="c-byline__author-name">Alissa Wilkinson</span></a><span class="c-byline__item"><a class="c-byline__twitter-handle" href="https://www.twitter.com/alissamarie">@alissamarie</a></span><span class="c-byline__item"><a href="mailto:alissa@vox.com" title="">alissa@vox.com</a></span>
</span>
<span class="c-byline__item">
Updated
<time class="c-byline__item" data-ui="timestamp" datetime="2016-11-24T15:22:00">
Nov 24, 2016, 10:22am EST
</time>
</span> </span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7RO4a1NIhKrPBPjjzmRCGwc-_k_Td0GXDivTl0g-CbpdLcFFupCb57sm55jY1Hjbri8ntu4XN_-3m2jI3nRUWKUR8yXUG4r_LlqoMOvCL6J-bSKqHXb7LTkVQBBg0FoN3WGQu_srUBZYR/s1600/arrivalcover.0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1067" data-original-width="1600" height="425" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7RO4a1NIhKrPBPjjzmRCGwc-_k_Td0GXDivTl0g-CbpdLcFFupCb57sm55jY1Hjbri8ntu4XN_-3m2jI3nRUWKUR8yXUG4r_LlqoMOvCL6J-bSKqHXb7LTkVQBBg0FoN3WGQu_srUBZYR/s640/arrivalcover.0.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div id="qBB5LG">
Science fiction is never really about the future; it’s always about us. And <i>Arrival</i>,
set in the barely distant future, feels like a movie tailor-made for
2016, dropping into theaters mere days after the most explosive election
in most of the American electorate’s memory.</div>
<div id="qBB5LG">
<br /></div>
<div id="hvRWE1">
But the story <i>Arrival</i> is based on — the award-winning novella <i>Story of Your Life</i>
by Ted Chiang — was published in 1998, almost two decades ago, which
indicates its central themes were brewing long before this year. <i>Arrival</i> is much more concerned with deep truths about language, imagination, and human relationships than any one political moment.</div>
<div id="hvRWE1">
<br /></div>
<div id="ahHJzy">
Not only that, but <i>Arrival</i> is one of the best
movies of the year, a moving, gripping film with startling twists and
imagery. It deserves serious treatment as a work of art.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<b><i>Arrival</i> is smart, twisty, and serious</b><br />
</div>
<div id="Au2Do5">
The strains of Max Richter’s "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVN1B-tUpgs">On the Nature of Daylight</a>" play over the opening shots of <i>Arrival</i>,
which is the first clue for what’s about to unfold: that particular
track is ubiquitous in the movies (I can count at least six or seven
films that use it, including <i>Shutter Island </i>and this year’s <i>The Innocents</i>) and is, by my reckoning, the saddest song in the world.</div>
<div id="Au2Do5">
<br /></div>
<div id="I0uQ1l">
The bittersweet feeling instantly settles over the whole
film, like the last hour of twilight. Quickly we learn that Dr. Louise
Banks (<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0010736/?ref_=tt_cl_t1">Amy Adams</a>)
has suffered an unthinkable loss, and that functions as a prelude to
the story: One day, a series of enormous pod-shaped crafts land all over
earth, hovering just above the ground in 12 locations around the world.
Nobody knows why. And nothing happens.</div>
<div id="I0uQ1l">
<br /></div>
<div id="Xrpzu5">
As world governments struggle to sort out what this means — and as the people of those countries react by looting, joining<b> </b>cults, even conducting<b> </b>mass suicides — Dr. Banks gets a visit from military intelligence, in the form of Colonel Weber (<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001845/?ref_=tt_cl_t4">Forest Whitaker</a>),
requesting her assistance as an expert linguist in investigating and
attempting to communicate with whatever intelligence is behind the
landing. She arrives at the site with Ian Donnelly (<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0719637/?ref_=tt_cl_t2">Jeremy Renner</a>),
a leading quantum physicist, to start the mission. With help from a
cynical Agent Halpern (Michael Stuhlbarg), they suit up and enter the
craft to see if they can make contact.</div>
<div id="Xrpzu5">
<br /></div>
<div id="jGtesp">
It’s best not to say much more about the plot, except
that it is pure pleasure to feel it unfold. The most visionary film yet
from director <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0898288/">Denis Villeneuve</a> (<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392214/?ref_=nm_knf_t1"><i>Prisoners</i></a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3397884/?ref_=nm_knf_t3"><i>Sicario</i></a>) and scripted by horror screenwriter <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2104063/?ref_=tt_ov_wr">Eric Heisserer</a> (<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4786282/?ref_=nm_ov_bio_lk2"><i>Lights Out</i></a>),
its pacing is slower than you’d expect from an alien-invasion film,
almost sparse. For a movie with so many complicated ideas, it doesn’t
waste any more time on exposition than is absolutely necessary. <i>Arrival</i>
is serious and smartly crafted, shifting around like a Rubik’s cube in
the hand of a savant, nothing quite making sense until all the pieces
suddenly come together. I heard gasps in the theater.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<b><i>Arrival</i> is interested in how language shapes reality</b><br />
</div>
<div id="ny2VWG">
The film’s premise hinges on the idea, shared by many
linguists and philosophers of language, that we do not all experience
the same reality. The pieces of it are the same — we live on the same
planet, breathe the same air — but our perceptions of those pieces shift
and change based on the words and grammar we use to describe them to
ourselves and each other.</div>
<div id="ny2VWG">
<br /></div>
<div id="jd1wAy">
For instance, there <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2976405/Could-ancestors-blue-Ancient-civilisations-didn-t-perceive-colour-didn-t-word-say-scientists.html">is substantial evidence</a>
that a person doesn’t really see (or perhaps "perceive") a color until
their vocabulary contains a word, attached to meaning, that
distinguishes it from other colors. All yellows are not alike, but
without the need to distinguish between yellows and the linguistic tools
to do so, people just see yellow. A color specialist at a paint
manufacturer, however, can distinguish between virtually hundreds of
colors of white. (Go check out the paint chip aisle at Home Depot if
you’re skeptical.)</div>
<div id="jd1wAy">
<br /></div>
<div id="jd1wAy">
Or consider <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/how-other-languages-express-emotions-and-english-lacks-the-words/article7200625/">the phenomenon of words in other languages that describe universal feelings</a>,
but can only be articulated precisely in some culture. We might
intuitively "feel" the emotion, but without the word to describe it
we’re inclined to lump the emotion in with another under the same
heading. Once we develop the linguistic term for it, though, we can
describe it and feel it as distinct from other shades of adjacent
emotions. </div>
<div id="Xrpzu5">
<br /></div>
<div id="XbDwsC">
These are simple examples, and I don’t mean to suggest
that the world itself is different for people from different cultures.
But I <i>do </i>mean to suggest that reality — what we perceive as
comprising the facts of existence — takes on a different shape depending
on the linguistic tools we use to describe it.</div>
<div id="XbDwsC">
<br /></div>
<div id="93MFdY">
Adopting this framework doesn’t necessarily mean any of us are more <i>correct</i>
than others about the nature of reality (though that certainly may be
true). Instead, we are doing our best to describe reality as we see it,
as we imagine it to be. This is the challenge of translation, and why
literal translations that Google can perform don’t go beyond basic
sentences. Learning a new language at first is just about collecting a
new vocabulary and an alternate grammar — here is the word for chair,
here is the word for love, here’s how to make a sentence — but
eventually, as any bilingual person can attest, it becomes about
imagining and perceiving the world differently.</div>
<div id="93MFdY">
<br /></div>
<div id="C5oreH">
This is the basic insight of <i>Arrival</i>: That if we
were to encounter a culture so radically different from our own that
simple matters we take for granted as part of the world as it is were
radically shifted, we could not simply gather data, sort out grammar,
and make conclusions. We’d have to either absorb a different way of <i>seeing</i>, despite our fear, or risk everything.</div>
<div id="C5oreH">
<br /></div>
<div id="gIG7Qn">
To underline the point, Dr. Banks and the entire
operation are constantly experiencing breakdowns in communication within
the team and with teams in other parts of the world, who aren’t sure
whether the information they glean from their own visits to pods should
be kept proprietary or shared.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<b><i>Arrival </i>is about more than talking to one another. It’s about the roadmaps we use to navigate the world</b><br />
</div>
<div id="9NUa69">
It’s not hard to see where this is going, I imagine —
something about how if we want to empathize with each other we need to
talk to one another, and that’s the way the human race will survive.</div>
<div id="9NUa69">
<br /></div>
<div id="vYi0sQ">
And, sure.</div>
<div id="vYi0sQ">
<br /></div>
<div id="4i8Lax">
But <i>Arrival </i>also layers in some important
secondary notes that add nuance to that easy takeaway. Because it’s not
just deciphering the words that someone else is saying that’s important:
It’s the whole framework that determines how those words are being
pinned to meaning. We can technically speak the same language, but
functionally be miles apart.</div>
<div id="C5oreH">
<br /></div>
<div id="DV4Ah5">
In the film, one character notes that if we were to
communicate in the language of chess — which operates in the framework
of battles and wars — rather than, say, the language of English, which
is bent toward the expression of emotions and ideas, then what we
actually say and do would shift significantly. That is, the prevailing <i>metaphor </i>for how beings interact with each other and the world is different. (Some philosophers speak of this as "language games.")</div>
<div id="DV4Ah5">
<br /></div>
<div id="tikpkm">
This matters for the film’s plot, but more broadly —
since this is sci-fi, and therefore actually about us — it has
implications. Language isn’t just about understanding how to say things
to someone and ascribe meaning to what comes back. Language has
consequences. Embedded in words and grammar is <i>action, </i>because the metaphors that we use as we try to make sense of the world tell us what to do next. They act like little roadmaps.</div>
<div id="tikpkm">
<br /></div>
<div id="osQnr6">
You have empathized with someone not when you hear the words they’re saying, but when you<b> </b>begin
to ascertain what metaphors make them tick, and where that conflicts or
agrees with your own. I found myself thinking a lot about this reading
Arlie Russell Hochschild’s <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Strangers-Their-Own-Land-Mourning/dp/1620972255" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><i>Strangers In Their Own Land</i></a>,
which is up for a National Book Award this year and describes the
overarching metaphors (Hochschild calls them "deep stories") that
discrete groups of Americans — in this case, West Coast urban liberals
and Louisiana rural Tea Partiers — use to make sense of the world. She
isn’t trying to explain anything away. She’s trying to figure out what
causes people to walk in such drastically different directions and hold
views that befuddle their fellow citizens.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<b><i>Arrival</i> suggests that our mental roadmaps need constant adjustment</b><br />
</div>
<div id="qSoHO5">
Part of the challenge of pluralism is that we’re not just
walking around with different ideas in our heads, but with entirely
different maps for getting from point A to Z, with different roadblocks
on them and different recommendations for which road is the best one.
Our A's and Z's don’t even match. We don’t even realize that our own<i> </i>maps are missing pieces that others have.</div>
<div id="qSoHO5">
<br /></div>
<div id="3WfPkn">
Presumably one of these maps is better than the others,
but we haven’t agreed how we would decide. So we just keep smacking into
one another going in opposite directions down the same highway.</div>
<div id="3WfPkn">
<br /></div>
<div id="sWZD1j">
<i>Arrival</i> takes off from this insight<b> </b>in
an undeniably sci-fi direction that is a little brain-bending,
improbable in the best way. But it makes a strong case that
communication, not battle or combat, is the only way to avoid destroying
ourselves. Communication means not just wrapping our heads around terms
we use but the actual framework through which we perceive reality.</div>
<div id="VBccPm">
And <i>that</i> is really hard. I don’t know how to fix it.</div>
<div id="VBccPm">
<br /></div>
<div id="pNNEW7">
In the meantime, though, <a href="http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/10/13575182/entertainment-matters-empathy-escapism">good movies are somewhere to start</a>. Luckily <i>Arrival</i>
is a tremendously well-designed film, with complicated and
unpredictable visuals that embody the main point. Nothing flashy or
explosive; in some ways, I found myself thinking of 1970s
science-fiction films, or the best parts of Danny Boyle’s 2007 <i>Sunshine</i>, which grounded its humanist story in deep quiet.</div>
<div id="pNNEW7">
<br /></div>
<div id="UGtZ81">
The movie concludes on a different note from the
linguistic one — one much more related to loss and a wistful question
about life and risk. This may be <i>Arrival</i>’s<b> </b>biggest<b> </b>weakness; the emotional punch of the ending is lessened a bit because it feels a little rushed.</div>
<div id="UGtZ81">
<br /></div>
<div id="3EgyEE">
But even that conclusion loops back to the possibilities
of the reshaped human imagination. And this week, especially, you don’t
need to talk to an alien to see why that’s something we need.</div>
<div id="3WfPkn">
<br /></div>
<div id="Xrpzu5">
<a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/11/13587262/arrival-movie-review-amy-adams-denis-villeneuve" target="_blank"> https://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/11/13587262/arrival-movie-review-amy-adams-denis-villeneuve</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tFMo3UJ4B4g" width="560"></iframe></div>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-34252264925054197332021-01-10T21:15:00.000-08:002021-01-11T07:55:08.482-08:00Fellini's "Amarcord" <a href="http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/18-amarcord">http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/18-amarcord</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinMrGUFTD_zMDhOGgwUDwq8rSHzhDy7MFeniPibZxTJEz7NXs8qSsAa_-Yp0pk_4aJO4mMYMfCVjgtA-8iuN3Z9Oy9doLqHg3qPpKOJENqc31ToVxs1QYkuDkZoHPxHkWuBCiVUo3RDTpH/s1600/_40430521_amarcord2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinMrGUFTD_zMDhOGgwUDwq8rSHzhDy7MFeniPibZxTJEz7NXs8qSsAa_-Yp0pk_4aJO4mMYMfCVjgtA-8iuN3Z9Oy9doLqHg3qPpKOJENqc31ToVxs1QYkuDkZoHPxHkWuBCiVUo3RDTpH/s1600/_40430521_amarcord2.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Amarcord presents a scathing satirical critique of Italian provincial life during the 1930s, the height of the fascist period (1922–43). In this era, Mussolini’s dictatorship enjoyed its greatest popular support. While Fellini’s depiction of the provincial world under fascism provides a complex political and cultural interpretation of the period, his portrayal of the everyday lives of the inhabitants of Rimini, Fellini’s birthplace, awarded him international acclaim. The worldwide magnitude of the film derives from its stylistic playfulness and ability to fluctuate between humorous images and serene depictions of human existence. Not only was the film successful at the box office, it received the Academy Award® for Best Foreign Film in 1974.<br />
<br />
The inhabitants of Fellini’s imaginary Rimini are not divided into good anti-fascists and evil fascists. Instead, all of the characters are sketched out in masterful caricatures, comic types with antecedents in Fellini’s earlier films. Fellini’s fascists are not sinister, perverted individuals but pathetic clowns, manifestations of the arrested development typical of the entire village. As Fellini himself wrote in an essay-interview entitled “The Fascism Within Us”: “I have the impression that fascism and adolescence continue to be . . . permanent historical seasons of our lives . . . remaining children for eternity, leaving responsibilities for others, living with the comforting sensation that there is someone who thinks for you . . . and in the meanwhile, you have this limited, time-wasting freedom which permits you only to cultivate absurd dreams . . .”<br />
<br />
Yet the hilarious portrait Fellini draws—of the ridiculous parades, the gymnastic exercises in uniform, and the small daily compromises necessary to live under a dictatorship—speak volumes about what life was like in that era. Through the sequences in which the Amarcordians greet a visiting fascist bigwig, and the scene in which they row out in the sea to catch a glimpse of the passage of the Rex (an enormous ocean liner that was the pride of Mussolini’s regime) coming from America, Fellini reveals the mechanism behind the mimicry of the cinematic image; he discloses film’s function as a mediator of authentic sexual desire. These scenes expose the townspeople as people dominated by false ideals and idiotic dreams of heroic feats and romantic love. Such public behavior has its direct psychological parallel in numerous scenes of daily life at home, in schools, and in church, with the clever comic touch that is Fellini’s trademark.<br />
<br />
More than any other Italian film treatment of fascism, Fellini’s Amarcord manages to explain the public lives of its characters by minute details of their private lives. The sense of intimacy and immediacy that the film creates allows the audience to recognize certain aspects of themselves in these characters. One of the most interesting stylistic features of Amarcord is the proliferation of narrative points of view. In the original Italian print, we discover a complex mixture of direct addresses to the camera by various characters, as well as voice-overs providing information or commentary on the film’s action. In a few significant instances, this voice-over presence is provided by Fellini himself, something rendered moot when viewing prints dubbed in English. To define Amarcord as merely another “political” film would fail to do justice to such a poetic work. The film’s title means “I remember” in one of the dialects of Fellini’s native province, but this does not amount to a strictly autobiographical interpretation of work. While Amarcord, as its title suggests, contains a great deal of nostalgia, Fellini’s use of nostalgia as a means of romanticizing the past serves to underline his belief that fascism was based upon false ideals, and also his recognition that regret or nostalgia is as inevitable a sentiment as refusal.<br />
<br />
Thus, Fellini offers Amarcord not just as a political explanation for a dark period in Italy’s national life, but as an important clue to the understanding of Italian national character as well. Though the film denounces the state of perpetual adolescence and illustrates Fellini’s belief that refusal of individual responsibility characterizes Italian society, it never degenerates into dogmatic treatise. Instead, Amarcord performs a certain magic that only a master of the cinema could accomplish.Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-84400017167081661512021-01-10T21:12:00.000-08:002021-01-11T07:54:44.401-08:00Trailer: Fellini's AMARCORD<div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BtG9ZM-ZHnY" width="560"></iframe>
<br /><br />
<br /><br />Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-25179602289488900382020-11-22T20:26:00.004-08:002020-11-22T20:26:58.826-08:00TOM JONES<p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmbtNTFT9wOUppZ_4qcx_vte39uBy0BHKkscFLgVKDgthXrVgo3Qv4LtUJsIOfJwMcg67MbhepH5-Aa1vs5gnBjlkEamXQ3QmxDWJLwpTS7o8z4yS3ggfPKUwuwOiDvwqDiaGuQle5xDP4/s893/tom-jones.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="893" data-original-width="700" height="500" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmbtNTFT9wOUppZ_4qcx_vte39uBy0BHKkscFLgVKDgthXrVgo3Qv4LtUJsIOfJwMcg67MbhepH5-Aa1vs5gnBjlkEamXQ3QmxDWJLwpTS7o8z4yS3ggfPKUwuwOiDvwqDiaGuQle5xDP4/w392-h500/tom-jones.jpg" width="392" /></a></div><h1 class="c-heading larva a-font-primary-regular-2xl"><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: small;">By Rich Gold</span></span><br /></h1>
<p class="o-custom-paragraph // lrv-u-font-size-14 lrv-u-font-family-secondary u-font-size-16@tablet u-line-height-small@tablet lrv-u-margin-tb-050">
</p>
<p><b>It’s been a long wait for Albert Finney’s film follow-up to
“Saturday Night and Sunday Morning.” And though “Tom Jones” is a period
piece and very different it has the same lustiness and boisterous
content with which to protect the star. It should breeze its way
cheerfully through the boxoffice figures. It has sex, Eastmancolor, some
prime performers and plenty of action. Tony Richardson has directed
John Osborne’s screenplay with verve, though, occasionally, he falls
back on camera tricks and editing which are disconcerting.</b></p>
<p>Based on Henry Fielding’s enduring novel, story is set in Somerset, a
West Country lush county, and in London during the 18th century. Hero
is Tom Jones (Albert Finney), born in suspicious circumstances, with a
maidservant dismissed because she is suspected of being his unwed
mother. He is brought up by Squire Allworthy (George Devine) and leads a
rollicking life in which women play a prominent part before he finally
escapes the gallows after a frame-up. He finds a presumably happy ending
in the arms of a neighborhood daughter, Sophie, played in rather
over-genteel style by Susannah York.</p><p>Ramifications of the plot, which enables Finney to indulge in some
considerable sexual activity with a variety of delectable dames, are too
complicated to need discussion. But the somewhat sprawling, bawdy and
vivid screenplay of John Osborne’s provides some meaty acting
opportunities and the thesps grasp their chances with vigorous zest.</p>
<p>Finney is big league. He slips through his adventures with an
ebullient gusto that keeps the overlong film on its toes for most of the
time. Hugh Griffith and Edith Evans as Squire Western and his sister
ham disarmingly. Miss Evans has some of the choicer cameos in the film.
Joan Greenwood, George Devine and Wilfrid Lawson are others who get top
credits for their work. Angela Baddeley, Rosalind Knight, Rachel
Kampson, Jack MacGowran, Freda Jackson and Joyce Redman are others and
rate benevolent nods. David Tomlinson with a brief but effective comedy
appearance in a guest role as an aristocratic heel, and Diana Cilanto
have limited roles but nevertheless prove that it makes sense to bring
stars with knowhow to do brief jobs.</p>
<p>Eastmancolor captures some good location and period stuff, lensed
well by Walter Lassally, particularly in the Newgate Prison sequence as
well as a fox hunting episode.</p><p>Director Richardson has occasionally pressed his luck with some
over-deliberate arty camera bits. The music of John Addison is a trifle
obtrusive and lacking in period style. However, “Tom Jones” measures up
as a genial energetic comedy, with an added bonus is Micheal MacLiammoir
putting over occasional narration with smooth wit and perception.</p>
<p>Rich.</p>
<p>1963: Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay, Original Music Score.<br />
Nominations: Best Actor (Albert Finney), Supp. Actor (Hugh Griffith),
Supp. Actress (Diane Cilento, Dame Edith Evans, Joyce Redman), Color Art
Direction</p><div class="review-meta // u-padding-t-150 lrv-u-padding-b-050 u-border-tb-1 u-border-color-loblolly-grey u-margin-b-150 u-margin-t-150 u-margin-b-2@tablet u-margin-t-2@tablet">
<h3 class="c-heading larva lrv-u-font-family-secondary u-color-black lrv-u-font-size-14 u-font-size-15@tablet lrv-u-margin-b-1" style="text-align: left;">
Tom Jones</h3><h3 class="c-heading larva lrv-u-font-family-secondary u-color-black lrv-u-font-size-14 u-font-size-15@tablet lrv-u-margin-b-1" style="text-align: left;">UK
</h3><ul class="o-meta-list // lrv-u-font-family-secondary u-color-black lrv-u-font-size-14 u-font-size-15@tablet lrv-a-unstyle-list"><li class="o-meta-list__item // lrv-u-margin-b-1">
<b>Production:</b>
Woodfall. Director Tony Richardson; Producer Tony Richardson; Screenplay
John Osborne; Camera Walter Lassally; Editor Antony Gibbs; Music John
Addison; Art Director Ralph Brinton. At London Pavilion. </li><li class="o-meta-list__item // lrv-u-margin-b-1">
<b>Crew:</b>
(Color) Available on VHS, DVD. Original review text from 1963. Running time: 128 MIN. </li><li class="o-meta-list__item // lrv-u-margin-b-1">
<b>With:</b>
Tom Jones - Albert Finney
Sophie Western - Susannah York
Squire Western - Hugh Griffith
Miss Western - Edith Evans
Lady Bellaston - Joan Greenwood
Molly Seagrim - Diane Cilento
Squire Allworthy - George Devine
Lord Fellamar - David Tomlinson
Mrs. Miller - Rosalind Atkinson
Black George - Wilfrid Lawson
Mrs. Fitzpatrick - Rosalind Knight
Partridge - Jack MacGowran
Mrs. Seagrim - Freda Jackson
Blifil - David Warner
Mrs. Waters (Jenny Jones) - Joyce Redman
Parson Supple - James Cairnososs
Bridget Allworthy - Rachel Kempson
Thwackum - Peter Bull
Mrs. Wilkins - Angela Baddeley </li><li class="o-meta-list__item // lrv-u-margin-b-1">
<b>Music By: JohnAdison</b>
</li></ul>
</div><p><a href="https://variety.com/1963/film/reviews/tom-jones-2-1200420461/">https://variety.com/1963/film/reviews/tom-jones-2-1200420461/ </a></p><p><br /></p>
<div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/C0DDuzX2bjM" width="560"></iframe></div>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-88748957726758395222020-11-01T11:33:00.010-08:002020-11-01T11:33:58.547-08:00I AM NOT YOUR NEGRO - DISCOVERING JAMES BALDWIN<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9erhyFm6DYrvhmnKFN6PNOQ5NUkv4XoNHvtZMaeBRFYp_SQ6zPbTinIrDwIrVaPyCW1jWP9lEhF0rgJbjxrVsW-9uVHH1OlJB4p8PyM6tKfNvFg6fgLNk6ZegyJ-4_83DaDeOhnEGn0sm/s1240/1667.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="744" data-original-width="1240" height="319" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9erhyFm6DYrvhmnKFN6PNOQ5NUkv4XoNHvtZMaeBRFYp_SQ6zPbTinIrDwIrVaPyCW1jWP9lEhF0rgJbjxrVsW-9uVHH1OlJB4p8PyM6tKfNvFg6fgLNk6ZegyJ-4_83DaDeOhnEGn0sm/w531-h319/1667.jpg" width="531" /> </a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="inline-triangle inline-icon "></span> Devastatingly eloquent … James Baldwin. Photograph: Allstar/Brittany House Pictures <br /></div> <br /><p></p><p><i> Raoul Peck dramatises the author’s memoir of Malcolm X, Martin Luther
King Jr and Medgar Evers, in this vivid and vital documentary.</i></p><p>Raoul Peck’s outstanding, <a class="u-underline" data-link-name="in body link" href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/oct/20/i-am-not-your-negro-review-james-baldwin-raoul-peck">Oscar-nominated documentary</a> is about the African American activist and author James Baldwin, author of Go Tell It on the Mountain and <a class="u-underline" data-link-name="in body link" href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/apr/04/james-baldwin-the-fire-next-time-steve-shapiro">The Fire Next Time</a>.
Peck dramatises Baldwin’s unfinished manuscript Remember This House,
his personal memoir of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr and civil rights
activist Medgar Evers, <a class="u-underline" data-link-name="in body link" href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/medgar-evers-civil-rights">murdered by a segregationist in 1963</a>.
Baldwin re-emerges as a devastatingly eloquent speaker and public
intellectual; a figure who deserves his place alongside Edward Said,
Frantz Fanon or Gore Vidal.</p><p>Peck puts Samuel L Jackson’s steely narration of Baldwin’s words up
against a punchy montage of footage from the Jim Crow to the Ferguson
eras, and a fierce soundtrack. (It’s incidentally a great use of Buddy
Guy’s <a class="u-underline" data-link-name="in body link" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hjqqa5tq5k">Damn Right I’ve Got the Blues</a>,
which never sounded so angry or political.) There is a marvellous clip
of Baldwin speaking at the Cambridge Union Society, and another on the
Dick Cavett Show – the host looking sick with nerves, perhaps because he
was about to bring on a conservative intellectual for balance, whom
Baldwin would politely trounce. </p><p>Baldwin has a compelling analysis of a traumatised “mirror stage” of
culture that black people went through in 20th-century America. As kids,
they would cheer and identify with the white heroes and heroines of
Hollywood culture; then they would see themselves in the mirror and
realise they were different from the white stars, and in fact more
resembled the baddies and “Indians” they’d been booing. </p><p>The film shows Baldwin refusing to be drawn into the
violence/non-violence difference of opinion between King and Malcolm X
that mainstream commentators leaped on, and steadily maintaining his own
critique – although I feel that Peck’s juxtaposition of Doris Day’s
mooning and crooning with a lynch victim is a flourish that approximates
Baldwin’s anger but not his elegance. There is a compelling section on
Baldwin’s discussion of dramatist Lorraine Hansberry, author of A Raisin
in the Sun. It is vivid, nutritious film-making.</p><p> </p><p class="byline" data-component="meta-byline" data-link-name="byline">Written by <span itemprop="author" itemscope="" itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"><a class="tone-colour" data-link-name="auto tag link" href="https://www.theguardian.com/profile/peterbradshaw" itemprop="sameAs" rel="author"><span itemprop="name">Peter Bradshaw</span></a></span><time class="content__dateline-wpd js-wpd content__dateline-wpd--modified" data-timestamp="1491544802000" datetime="2017-04-07T02:00:02-0400" itemprop="datePublished">, Fri 7 Apr 2017 </time><time class="content__dateline-lm js-lm u-h" data-timestamp="1543850480000" datetime="2018-12-03T10:21:20-0500" itemprop="dateModified"><span class="content__dateline-time"></span>
</time>
</p><div class="meta__extras"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/apr/07/i-am-not-your-negro-review-james-baldwin-raoul-peck-documentary">https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/apr/07/i-am-not-your-negro-review-james-baldwin-raoul-peck-documentary</a><br /></div><p> </p><p> <br /></p>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-62637098200448211012020-09-01T10:15:00.001-07:002020-09-11T10:22:32.321-07:00Welcome to Intro Film & CinemaVIEW for Fall 2020<p>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10.0pt;">This course provides an introduction to the
development of film forms, styles, and theories providing a basic aesthetic and
social understanding of film as both a mode of communication and a means of
artistic expression. It explores the interrelationship of the diegesis, visual
design, motion, editing, and thematic significance, helping students develop
the foundational skills with which to interpret and articulate the myriad ways
in which films create meaning, and elicit responses within viewers. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The
ultimate objective of the course is for students to become acquainted with a
variety of film forms/styles, while developing the basic skills necessary to
analyze and evaluate the cinematic presentations. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><i> </i></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 22.5pt; mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;"><span style="font-family: "Century Gothic"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><i>Fulfills a course
requirement in the FILM</i> <i>STUDIES minor and CORE CONCENTRATION.</i></span></p>
<p><style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Times;
panose-1:2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-alt:"Times Roman";
mso-font-charset:77;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-format:other;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"MS 明朝";
mso-font-charset:78;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:1 0 16778247 0 131072 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Century Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 4;
mso-font-alt:"Century Gothic";
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-alt:"Times New Roman";
mso-font-charset:77;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-format:other;
mso-font-pitch:auto;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"MS 明朝";
mso-ascii-font-family:Times;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-hansi-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:"MS 明朝";}size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}</style></p>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-39244165349617370042020-02-28T20:11:00.004-08:002020-02-28T21:11:08.379-08:00PARASITE<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1958014394894432239" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhS8YKp9ava9pS8nT1fIskKHnCB9pEMYggmLxFNYn4eP7n5ve-XiEX6a7eCow8RFXOFygK8IimnclxDsI8c0_Xg-3DdHpULM2A4TATb-fMSyzIi87IMHmwhT4WWHSHh1UICCCL6dJ_kTY8d/s1600/hero_parasite-movie-review-2019.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="1200" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhS8YKp9ava9pS8nT1fIskKHnCB9pEMYggmLxFNYn4eP7n5ve-XiEX6a7eCow8RFXOFygK8IimnclxDsI8c0_Xg-3DdHpULM2A4TATb-fMSyzIi87IMHmwhT4WWHSHh1UICCCL6dJ_kTY8d/s640/hero_parasite-movie-review-2019.jpeg" width="640" /></a></div>
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1958014394894432239" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a><a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/contributors/brian-tallerico"><span itemprop="author" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"><span itemprop="name">Brian Tallerico</span></span></a>
<time content="2019-09-07T08:31:00-05:00" datetime="2019-09-07T08:31:00-05:00" itemprop="datePublished"> </time><br />
<time content="2019-09-07T08:31:00-05:00" datetime="2019-09-07T08:31:00-05:00" itemprop="datePublished">September 7, 2019</time>
<br />
<br />
It’s so clichéd at this point in the critical conversation during the
hot take season of festivals to say, “You’ve never seen a movie quite
like X.” Such a statement has become overused to such a degree that it’s
impossible to be taken seriously, like how too many major new movies
are gifted the m-word: masterpiece. So how do critics convey when a film
truly is unexpectedly, brilliantly unpredictable in ways that feel
revelatory? And what do we do when we see an actual “masterpiece” in
this era of critics crying wolf? Especially one with so many twists and
turns that the best writing about it will be long after spoiler warnings
aren’t needed? I’ll do my best because <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/bong-joon-ho">Bong Joon-ho</a>’s “Parasite” is unquestionably one of the best films of the year. Just trust me on this one.<br />
<br />
<br />
<section class="main fixed-rail"><article class="pad entry" style="min-height: 1906.65px;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1958014394894432239" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1958014394894432239" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1958014394894432239" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a><div itemprop="reviewBody">
Bong has made several films about class (including "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/snowpiercer-2014">Snowpiercer</a>" and "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/okja-2017">Okja</a>"),
but “Parasite” may be his most daring examination of the structural
inequity that has come to define the world. It is a tonal juggling act
that first feels like a satire—a comedy of manners that bounces a group
of lovable con artists off a very wealthy family of awkward eccentrics.
And then Bong takes a hard right turn that asks us what we’re watching
and sends us hurtling to bloodshed. Can the poor really just step into
the world of the rich? The second half of “Parasite” is one of the most
daring things I’ve seen in years narratively. The film constantly
threatens to come apart—to take one convoluted turn too many in ways
that sink the project—but Bong holds it all together, and the result is
breathtaking.<br />
<br />
Kim Ki-woo (Choi Woo-sik) and his family live on the edge of poverty.
They fold pizza boxes for a delivery company to make some cash, steal
wi-fi from the coffee shop nearby, and leave the windows open when the
neighborhood is being fumigated to deal with their own infestation. Kim
Ki-woo’s life changes when a friend offers to recommend him as an
English tutor for a girl he’s been working with as the friend has to go
out of the country for a while. The friend is in love with the young
girl and doesn’t want another tutor “slavering” over her. Why he trusts
Kim Ki-woo given what we know and learn about him is a valid question.<br />
<br />
The young man changes his name to Kevin and begins tutoring Park Da-hye
(Jung Ziso), who immediately falls for him, of course. Kevin has a much
deeper plan. He’s going to get his whole family into this house. He
quickly convinces the mother Yeon-kyo, the excellent Jo Yeo-jeong, that
the son of the house needs an art tutor, which allows Kevin’s sister
“Jessica” (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/park-so-dam">Park So-dam</a>)
to enter the picture. Before long, mom and dad are in the Park house
too, and it seems like everything is going perfectly for the Kim family.
The Parks seem to be happy too. And then <i>everything</i> changes.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1958014394894432239" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a>The script for “Parasite” will get a ton of attention as it’s one of
those clever twisting and turning tales for which the screenwriter gets
the most credit (Bong and <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/han-jin-won">Han Jin-won</a>,
in this case), but this is very much an exercise in visual language
that reaffirms Bong as a master. Working with the incredible
cinematographer Kyung-pyo Hong (“<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/burning-2018">Burning</a>,”
“Snowpiercer”) and an A-list design team, Bong's film is captivating
with every single composition. The clean, empty spaces of the Park home
contrasted against the tight quarters of the Kim living arrangement
isn’t just symbolic, it’s visually stimulating without ever calling
attention to itself. And there’s a reason the Kim apartment is halfway
underground—they’re caught between worlds, stuck in the growing chasm
between the haves and the have nots.<br />
<br />
"Parasite" is a marvelously entertaining film in terms of narrative,
but there’s also so much going on underneath about how the rich use the
poor to survive in ways that I can’t completely spoil here (the best
writing about this movie will likely come after it’s released). Suffice
to say, the wealthy in any country survive on the labor of the poor,
whether it’s the housekeepers, tutors, and drivers they employ, or
something much darker. Kim's family will be reminded of that chasm and
the cruelty of inequity in ways you couldn’t possibly predict.<br />
<br />
The
social commentary of "Parasite" leads to chaos, but it never feels like
a didactic message movie. It is somehow, and I’m still not even really
sure how, both joyous and depressing at the same time. Stick with me
here. "Parasite" is so perfectly calibrated that there’s joy to be had
in just experiencing every confident frame of it, but then that’s
tempered by thinking about what Bong is unpacking here and saying about
society, especially with the perfect, absolutely haunting final scenes.
It’s a conversation starter in ways we only get a few times a year, and
further reminder that Bong Joon-ho is one of the best filmmakers working
today. You’ve never seen a movie quite like “Parasite.” Dammit. I tried
to avoid it. This time it's true.<br />
<br />
<i>This review was filed from the Toronto International Film Festival on September 7th.</i><br />
<br />
<i><a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/parasite-movie-review-2019" target="_blank"> https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/parasite-movie-review-2019</a></i></div>
</article></section>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-13561900652408289932020-02-21T20:43:00.002-08:002020-02-21T20:51:18.310-08:00George Roy Hill's Visualization of "Slaughterhouse-Five"<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilhdx1_X_fI9GpljEzZeFiYvNdEXKg7dBny2cio69LbieN1sR4Zdzp7MrIS8x6Q5BpfrKI9MooOKbMkVeZr2sOKhZXimP_2Wn8Fqr2uKR1bsz-OWDi6Ke50z77w1_YW0TBb_ta1XAzKy8-/s1600/Slaughterhouse-Five.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="576" data-original-width="768" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilhdx1_X_fI9GpljEzZeFiYvNdEXKg7dBny2cio69LbieN1sR4Zdzp7MrIS8x6Q5BpfrKI9MooOKbMkVeZr2sOKhZXimP_2Wn8Fqr2uKR1bsz-OWDi6Ke50z77w1_YW0TBb_ta1XAzKy8-/s640/Slaughterhouse-Five.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Slaughterhouse-Five</b> is a 1972 <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Science-fiction-film" target="_blank" title="">science fiction film</a> based on <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Kurt-Vonnegut" target="_blank" title="">Kurt Vonnegut</a>'s <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Slaughterhouse%252DFive" target="_blank" title="">novel of the same name</a>
about a writer who tells a story in random order of how he was a
soldier in World War II and was abducted by aliens. The screenplay is by
<a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Stephen-Geller" target="_blank" title="">Stephen Geller</a> and the film was directed by <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/George-Roy-Hill" target="_blank" title="">George Roy Hill</a>. It stars <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Michael-Sacks" target="_blank" title="">Michael Sacks</a>, <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Ron-Leibman" target="_blank" title="">Ron Leibman</a>, and <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Valerie-Perrine" target="_blank" title="">Valerie Perrine</a>, and features <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Eugene-Roche" target="_blank" title="">Eugene Roche</a>, <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Sharon-Gans" target="_blank" title="">Sharon Gans</a>, <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Holly-Near" target="_blank" title="">Holly Near</a>, and <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Perry-King" target="_blank" title="">Perry King</a>. The scenes set in <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Dresden" target="_blank" title="">Dresden</a> were filmed in <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Prague" target="_blank" title="">Prague</a>.[1] The other scenes were filmed in Minnesota.<br />
<br />
Vonnegut wrote about the film soon after its release, in his preface to <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Between-Time-and-Timbuktu" target="_blank" title="">Between Time and Timbuktu</a>:<br />
<br />
<dl><dd>"I love George Roy Hill and Universal Pictures, who made a
flawless translation of my novel Slaughterhouse-Five to the silver
screen ... I drool and cackle every time I watch that film, because it
is so harmonious with what I felt when I wrote the book."</dd></dl>
<b>Plot</b> The film follows the novel in presenting a <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/First%252Dperson-narrative" target="_blank" title="">first-person narrative</a>
from the point of view of Billy Pilgrim (Sacks), who becomes "unstuck
in time" and experiences the events of his life in a seemingly random
order, including a period spent on the alien planet of <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Tralfamadore" target="_blank" title="">Tralfamadore</a>. Emphasis is placed on his experiences during World War II, including the <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Bombing-of-Dresden-in-World-War-II" target="_blank" title="">firebombing of Dresden</a>, as well as time spent with fellow <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Prisoner-of-war" target="_blank" title="">prisoners of war</a> Edgar Derby (Roche) and the <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Psychopathy" target="_blank" title="">psychopathic</a>
Paul Lazzaro (Leibman). His life as a husband to Valencia (Gans) and
father to Barbara (Near) and Robert (King) are also depicted, as they
live and sometimes even enjoy their life of affluence in <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Ilium-(Kurt-Vonnegut)" target="_blank" title="">Ilium, New York</a>.
A "sink-or-swim" scene with Pilgrim's father is also featured. The
scenes of extraterrestrial life on Tralfamadore feature Hollywood
starlet Montana Wildhack (Perrine).<br />
<br />
<b>Cast</b> <br />
<ul style="opacity: 1;">
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Michael-Sacks" target="_blank" title="">Michael Sacks</a> as Billy Pilgrim</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Ron-Leibman" target="_blank" title="">Ron Leibman</a> as Paul Lazzaro</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Eugene-Roche" target="_blank" title="">Eugene Roche</a> as Edgar Derby</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Sharon-Gans" target="_blank" title="">Sharon Gans</a> as Valencia Merble Pilgrim</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Valerie-Perrine" target="_blank" title="">Valerie Perrine</a> as Montana Wildhack</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Holly-Near" target="_blank" title="">Holly Near</a> as Barbara Pilgrim</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Perry-King" target="_blank" title="">Perry King</a> as Robert Pilgrim</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Kevin-Conway-(actor)" target="_blank" title="">Kevin Conway</a> as Roland Weary</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Friedrich-von-Ledebur" target="_blank" title="">Friedrich von Ledebur</a> as German Leader</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Ekkehardt-Belle" target="_blank" title="">Ekkehardt Belle</a> as Young German Guard</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Sorrell-Booke" target="_blank" title="">Sorrell Booke</a> as Lionel Merble</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Roberts-Blossom" target="_blank" title="">Roberts Blossom</a> as Wild Bob Cody</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/John-Dehner" target="_blank" title="">John Dehner</a> as Professor Rumfoord</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;">Gary Waynesmith as Stanley</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Richard-Schaal" target="_blank" title="">Richard Schaal</a> as Howard W. Campbell Jr.</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Gilmer-McCormick" target="_blank" title="">Gilmer McCormick</a> as Lily Rumfoord</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;">Stan Gottlieb as Hobo</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Karl%252DOtto-Alberty" target="_blank" title="">Karl-Otto Alberty</a> as German Guard - Group Two</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Henry-Bumstead" target="_blank" title="">Henry Bumstead</a> as Eliot Rosewater</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Lucille-Benson" target="_blank" title="">Lucille Benson</a> as Billy's Mother</li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/John-Wood-(English-actor)" target="_blank" title="">John Wood</a> as English Officer, credited as Tom Wood</li>
</ul>
<b>Music</b> <br />
Slaughterhouse-Five is the first of two <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Feature-film" target="_blank" title="">feature films</a> for which <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Glenn-Gould" target="_blank" title="">Glenn Gould</a>
supplied the music; Bach Concerto #5 in F Minor, BWV 1056, and Concerto
#3 in D Major, BWV 1054 were recorded at Columbia Studios with the
Columbia Symphony orchestra; some selections came from existing
recordings, and two featured other artists, including Rudolph Serkin,
piano, with Casals conducting Brandenburg Concerto #4 in G Major, BWV
1049, III Presto. The film used such a small amount of music that the
soundtrack album added atmospheric excerpts from <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Douglas-Leedy" target="_blank" title="">Douglas Leedy's</a> synthesized triple album Entropical Paradise.<br />
<br />
The prolonged rendition of the final movement of Bach's fourth <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Brandenburg-concerto" target="_blank" title="">Brandenburg concerto</a> accompanies a cinematic montage as the main character first encounters the city of Dresden.<br />
<br />
<b>Awards</b> The film won the <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Jury-Prize-(Cannes-Film-Festival)" target="_blank" title="">Prix du Jury</a> at the <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/1972-Cannes-Film-Festival" target="_blank" title="">1972 Cannes Film Festival</a>,[2] as well as a <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Hugo-Award-for-Best-Dramatic-Presentation" target="_blank" title="">Hugo Award</a> and <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Saturn-Award-for-Best-Science-Fiction-Film" target="_blank" title="">Saturn Award</a>. Both Hill and Geller were nominated for awards by their respective guilds. Sacks was nominated for a <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Golden-Globe" target="_blank" title="">Golden Globe</a>. <br />
<br />
<b>See also</b> <br />
<ul style="opacity: 1;">
<li style="opacity: 1;"><a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-American-films-of-1972" target="_blank" title="">List of American films of 1972</a></li>
</ul>
<b>References</b> <br />
<div class="reflist clear">
<div class="mw-references-wrap">
<ol class="references">
<li id="cite_note-1" style="opacity: 1;"> <span class="reference-text"><cite class="citation news">Canby, Vincent. <a alt="" class="external text" href="https://movies.nytimes.com/movie/45118/Slaughterhouse-Five/overview" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">"New York Times movies pages"</a>. The New York Times<span class="reference-accessdate">. Retrieved <span class="nowrap">2010-05-23</span></span>.</cite></span> </li>
<li id="cite_note-festival-cannes.com-2" style="opacity: 1;"> <span class="reference-text"><cite class="citation web"><a alt="" class="external text" href="http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/2342/year/1972.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">"Festival de Cannes: Slaughterhouse-Five"</a>. festival-cannes.com<span class="reference-accessdate">. Retrieved <span class="nowrap">2009-04-13</span></span>.</cite></span> </li>
</ol>
</div>
</div>
<b>External links</b> <br />
<ul style="opacity: 1;">
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="external text" href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069280/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">Slaughterhouse-Five</a> on <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/IMDb" target="_blank" title="">IMDb</a> </li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="external text" href="https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/slaughterhouse_five" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">Slaughterhouse-Five</a> at <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Rotten-Tomatoes" target="_blank" title="">Rotten Tomatoes</a> </li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="external text" href="https://www.allmovie.com/movie/v45118" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">Slaughterhouse-Five</a> at <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/AllMovie" target="_blank" title="">AllMovie</a> </li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="external text" href="https://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9E04E3D91E3EE63BBC4B51DFB5668389669EDE" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">Review of the film</a> by <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Vincent-Canby" target="_blank" title="">Vincent Canby</a> </li>
<li style="opacity: 1;"> <a alt="" class="external text" href="https://archive.is/20051018005357/http://www.sonyclassical.com/music/66531/main.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">Glenn Gould at the Movies</a>, a <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Sony-BMG-Music-Entertainment" target="_blank" title="">Sony Classical</a> recording with music from the film (including this <a alt="" class="external text" href="http://www.sonymusic.com/clips/selection/30/066531/066531_01_04_30.wav" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" title="">46-second clip</a> in <a alt="" class="info_link" href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/WAV" target="_blank" title="">WAV</a> format)</li>
</ul>
<a href="https://www.revolvy.com/page/Slaughterhouse%252DFive-%28film%29?cr=1">https://www.revolvy.com/page/Slaughterhouse%252DFive-%28film%29?cr=1</a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EhkaL_IXPBI" width="560"></iframe>
</div>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-61506121037053331912020-02-16T19:12:00.001-08:002020-02-16T19:14:01.092-08:00The Joker - a Fresh Take on a DC Legend<div class="c-entry-hero__header-wrap">
<h1 class="c-page-title" style="max-width: 839px;">
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"><span style="font-weight: normal;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"><span style="color: #cc0000;">Love it or hate it, the Joker movie presents a tempting fantasy</span></span></span></span></span></h1>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaWoSvQuhhsxvRrivg4yIs8rEUd0yJZFOWPY2tABrOSEIU2j3qvCtiaJpMtgoiNOf6etkA3eJwFwangYil5fc_9N6IlRgxtapYkcnFnyEpi03P2I7pRXKTqW2OzRGsOSRrdIwH0w9j-6L_/s1600/hero_joker-movie-review-2019.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="1200" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaWoSvQuhhsxvRrivg4yIs8rEUd0yJZFOWPY2tABrOSEIU2j3qvCtiaJpMtgoiNOf6etkA3eJwFwangYil5fc_9N6IlRgxtapYkcnFnyEpi03P2I7pRXKTqW2OzRGsOSRrdIwH0w9j-6L_/s640/hero_joker-movie-review-2019.jpeg" width="640" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="c-entry-summary p-dek" style="max-width: 719px;">
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><b>It’s a persecution complex turned into a wish-fulfillment power trip</b></span></div>
<div class="c-entry-summary p-dek" style="max-width: 719px;">
<br /></div>
<span class="c-byline-wrapper">
By
<span class="c-byline__item">
<a data-analytics-link="author-name" href="https://www.theverge.com/authors/tasha-robinson"><span class="c-byline__author-name">Tasha Robinson</span></a><span class="c-byline__item"><a class="c-byline__twitter-handle" href="https://www.twitter.com/TashaRobinson">@TashaRobinson</a></span>
</span>
<span class="c-byline__item">
<time class="c-byline__item" data-ui="timestamp" datetime="2019-10-04T22:43:56">
Oct 4, 2019, 6:43pm EDT </time></span></span><br />
<br />
<time class="c-byline__item" data-ui="timestamp" datetime="2019-10-04T22:43:56"></time><br />
<div id="46DA0t">
Todd Phillips’ standalone supervillain origin story <i>Joker </i>is
arriving in theaters amid so much controversy and concern about the
potential for copycat violence that the debate has largely overwhelmed
the film itself. It’s been fascinating to watch the discussion around
the movie shift from “Do we really need another Joker story so soon
after <i>Suicide Squad</i>?” to “Is <i>Joker</i> full of dangerous ideas that will spur its <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/10/3/20884104/joker-threats-cancel-phillips-art">worst fans</a> to murder?” The initial worries around <i>Joker </i>assumed
the movie would be unnecessary, its impact negligible. The current
questions ascribe it with too much importance, as if it might incite
full-blown anarchy just by existing.</div>
<div id="46DA0t">
<br /></div>
<div id="Vzh6JF">
As usual in a case where people leap to extremes, the truth is somewhere in the middle. <i>Joker </i>may
make some people who feel marginalized feel more seen and more
powerful, and they may act out in response. There are some ugly,
self-serving messages in the movie, which is incongruously bent on
creating sympathy for Batman’s worst enemy and one of DC Comics’ most
notoriously callous mass murderers and atrocity architects. But love it
or hate it, the film does spin up a tempting fantasy of persecution and
relief, of embracing nihilism as a means of complete escape from a
terrible world.</div>
<div id="Vzh6JF">
<br /></div>
<div id="snuhex">
It’s a self-pitying fantasy, certainly. Phillips and
co-writer Scott Silver follow in the footsteps of Joel Schumacher’s 1993
drama <i>Falling Down</i> in portraying the world as a cartoonishly
dark and uncaring place, an almost comically vile carnival where the
protagonist can’t find a hint of comfort or relief. In a thoroughly
immersed performance that’s being seen as a guaranteed awards-season
attention magnet, Joaquin Phoenix plays Arthur Fleck, a part-time
rent-a-clown working for a seedy talent agency full of exaggerated
grotesques. Arthur is mentally ill and coping via meds and court-ordered
therapy, which don’t offer comfort or represent caring. He’s devoted to
his sick mother Penny (Frances Conroy), who’s encouraged him to see
himself as a joyous light in the world, bringing laughter to the people.</div>
<div id="snuhex">
<br /></div>
<div id="vTBJOK">
The problem is that he isn’t particularly funny. He’s
painfully awkward, the kind of twitchy, social incompetence people shy
away from in public because his erratic behavior feels like it could
turn dangerous — or at least uncomfortable for them. It’s easy for
viewers to empathize with his desire to be loved, without necessarily
loving him. When he says he feels invisible, it’s clear why: he’s the
kind of person people look away from on the street, out of apathy or
active discomfort.</div>
<span class="e-image__inner">
<span class="e-image__image " data-original="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19260703/rev_1_JOK_18929_High_Res_JPEG.jpeg">
<source type="image/webp"></source>
</span></span><br />
<div id="Vzh6JF">
<br /></div>
<span class="c-byline-wrapper"><span class="c-byline__item"><time class="c-byline__item" data-ui="timestamp" datetime="2019-10-04T22:43:56"> </time></span></span><time class="c-byline__item" data-ui="timestamp" datetime="2019-10-04T22:43:56"></time>That tension between sympathy and revulsion is one of the most honest things about <i>Joker</i>,
which mostly goes out of its way to make the world awful. While working
as a sign-twirler, Arthur is randomly beaten by a handful of kids, who
steal his sign and then break it over his head. His boss not only
doesn’t believe his story, he demands Arthur pay for the missing sign.
The dramatic ironies and injustices compound throughout the film, until
it’s clear that Arthur isn’t paranoid, the world really is out to get
him. And then he takes violent, irrevocable action.<br />
<br />
For much of its runtime, <i>Joker</i> is a consciously ugly film,
visually and emotionally. Arthur starts with close to nothing, and loses
it all incrementally, in ways designed to hurt empathetic viewers.
Phillips and cinematographer Lawrence Sher (who also DP’d for all three
of Phillips’ <i>Hangover </i>movies) give the film a sickeningly
grungy, underlit, David Fincher-esque look, especially in Arthur’s
squalid home. Everything about the storytelling — the ominous, booming
score; the gritty darkness; the invasive sound design — is designed to
be oppressive, and to push the audience toward Arthur’s point of view as
the primary victim of all the oppression. It’s hypnotic just how
horrifying Arthur’s existence is, just as Phoenix’s performance is
hypnotic as he spirals from fragile hope into increasingly outsized and
confident acts of destruction.<br />
<br />
<div id="ccnKlG">
And then he escapes it all, by learning not to care — not
about how or whether other people see him, not about whether he hurts
or frightens or kills them, not about whether his final-act manifesto
makes any sort of coherent sense. The important part of Arthur’s story —
and the cause for so much of the concern around <i>Joker</i> — is
that when he embraces his most nihilistic and destructive impulses, he
suddenly earns the praise and attention he’s been lacking. That may not
fully motivate him, but it’s meant as a message for the segment of the
audience that feels closest to Arthur, those who feel most unseen and
unloved: <i>plenty of people agree with you that the world is unfair and ugly, and if you did something about it, they’d back your play.</i></div>
<div id="ccnKlG">
<i> </i> </div>
<div id="ZAy4KL">
Like <i>Falling Down</i> — and Martin Scorsese’s <i>Taxi Driver</i>, which Phillips openly emulates and references — <i>Joker </i>suggests
that when the leading man loses his mind, it’s an understandable, even
natural reaction to an equally mad world. Viewers who aren’t already
inclined to see humanity as a seething cesspit may not resonate with
that level of cynicism. But to viewers who feel as abused and overlooked
as Arthur Fleck, or even who harbor smaller, more rational resentments
about society, <i>Joker </i>is a deliberate and fine-tuned provocation and promise: <i>you aren’t alone, the people you hate really are awful, and it would be okay to act against them in any way you want</i>.</div>
<br />
<div id="B4ehmT">
Phillips has made it clear that he doesn’t believe <i>Joker</i>
is anything as small and dismissible as a mere comic-book movie. But
while his film is grimmer and more harrowing than anything in the Marvel
Cinematic Universe, it’s offering up a fantasy just as clearly as any
superhero wish-fulfillment power trip: the fantasy of being a hero to
some, of going from powerlessness to power, of being feared and beloved
at the same time. Phillips delivers that message in a
self-congratulatory way, largely by setting the film in a world where
Arthur has no choice but violence, and no escape but madness. He’s
portrayed as a kind of dark truth-teller because he’s learned that the
world is a joke and nothing matters.</div>
<div id="B4ehmT">
<br /></div>
<div id="KbcUtY">
That’s a fairly adolescent outlook, which Phillips
embraces in the same persecution-complex spirit that recently led him to
complain that he had to make <i>Joker</i> because <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/10/joaquin-phoenix-cover-story">the world is now too sensitive and woke</a> for his previous brand of destructive-bro comedy. But <i>Joker</i>
would probably be raising much less social concern if it wasn’t such a
technically compelling movie, if its final moments weren’t so outsized
and joyous and purposefully insane.</div>
<div id="KbcUtY">
<br /></div>
<div id="2W4cfX">
Because <i>Joker </i>does play — not just to its most
put-upon, angry, repressed viewers — but to the entire audience’s
darkest hearts. It shows someone suffering when he lets society have its
way with him, and freed when he has his way with society. It shows him
weeping alone when he plays by the rules, and dancing wildly in public
when he decides to break those rules. The story hurts and harms him, but
Phillips suggests in the end that everything he went through was
necessary to bring him the power and recognition he deserves. It’s a
tempting fantasy, crafted with utter conviction. </div>
<div id="2W4cfX">
<br /></div>
<div id="PD9arA">
Many critics and early viewers have responded to <i>Joker</i>
with loathing, because that fantasy is so selfish and solipsistic. By
dismissing the world as imbalanced at best, outright malicious at worst,
Phillips is enabling his viewers’ worst and most destructive impulses.
“I just don’t want to feel so bad anymore,” Arthur says plaintively at
one point. He’s a relatable kind of villain, harmless and sad — not an
Everyman, but an audience avatar for the downtrodden. And then he models
a way to not be harmless anymore. That doesn’t necessarily make <i>Joker</i>
a call to action, or an invitation to real-life violence. But it does
represent a horrifying form of invitation — not just a call to
sympathize with the devil, but a full-blown justification for the hell
he creates.</div>
<div id="PD9arA">
<br /></div>
<br />
<span class="c-byline-wrapper"><span class="c-byline__item"><time class="c-byline__item" data-ui="timestamp" datetime="2019-10-04T22:43:56"></time> </span><a href="https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/4/20899422/joker-movie-review-todd-phillips-joaquin-phoenix-incel-violence-dc-comics-batman">https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/4/20899422/joker-movie-review-todd-phillips-joaquin-phoenix-incel-violence-dc-comics-batman</a></span>Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-56393183671184234482020-02-09T13:58:00.000-08:002020-02-10T15:16:40.873-08:00"Searching" and the Future of Film<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><a href="https://www.indiewire.com/2018/12/john-cho-searching-colorblind-casting-1202026901/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">https://www.indiewire.com/2018/12/john-cho-searching-colorblind-casting-1202026901/ </span></a></span></span></span></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZofs2wx1XJKo_CYngOZ7hBJPwt56p66ly-9wisr9DcO83Lpn9km-A4-TGW2FRCmzoOJovhGpNN0xBMPvvX5Jw68_I1xTwRnbtb-Quscfli3KTeh3j4o2ImDcbfGuiMsJ8NlElVQ1w37jo/s1600/search.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZofs2wx1XJKo_CYngOZ7hBJPwt56p66ly-9wisr9DcO83Lpn9km-A4-TGW2FRCmzoOJovhGpNN0xBMPvvX5Jw68_I1xTwRnbtb-Quscfli3KTeh3j4o2ImDcbfGuiMsJ8NlElVQ1w37jo/s640/search.jpg" width="640" /> </a></span></span></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "arial";">John Cho
Sees the Future of Film in ‘Searching’ and Its Colorblind Casting</span></b><span style="font-family: "arial";"></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: "arial";">The Indie
Spirit nominee is still taken with Aneesh Chaganty's clever screen-centric
thriller, but its forward-thinking goes beyond just cool technology. </span></i><span style="font-family: "arial";"></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
<a href="https://www.indiewire.com/author/kate-erbland/"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi;">https://www.indiewire.com/author/kate-erbland/</span></a></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><a href="https://www.indiewire.com/author/kate-erbland/">Kate Erbland</a> </span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";">Dec 13, 2018 2:00 pm </span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><a href="https://twitter.com/intent/follow?screen_name=katerbland">@katerbland</a></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";">The technological demands of Aneesh Chaganty’s
feature directorial debut “<a href="https://www.indiewire.com/t/searching/">Searching</a>”
were profound. A computer-screen thriller that unfolds on various displays,
zinging from laptop to laptop and back again, Chaganty’s film required a canny
handle on technology and the way it looks and moves, but it also needed an
actor able to root the family-centric film in emotion and humanity.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
That came from the inspired casting of the always-reliable <a href="https://www.indiewire.com/t/john-cho/">John Cho</a> as David Kim, a
recent widower who must use all his smarts (and a ton of literal screen time)
to find his missing teenage daughter Margot. The “Star Trek” and “Columbus”
actor delivered, turning in a nuanced performance in a film that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">could</i> have been dominated by on-screen
wizardry.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
While a film like “Searching” could impress by virtue of craftsmanship and
technology that makes it feel so contemporary and true-to-life — this is
the rare internet-centric film that utilizes existing apps and websites, no
weird “Facebook” knockoffs here — the casting of Cho allowed Chaganty’s
feature to tap into modern sensibilities in another way. Cho, a Korean-American
actor, has always mixed up his roles, from those that hinge on his cultural
background (from the “Harold and Kumar” films to Justin Lin’s “Better Luck
Tomorrow”) and those that don’t (like Kogonada’s “Columbus” and his early
supporting work in the “American Pie” series).</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“Searching” fell under the latter categorization, a film in which Cho’s race
wasn’t baked into the narrative and a colorblind casting that he’s hoping to
see more of in Hollywood.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“When you’re shooting, it’s all about, ‘Does this moment work? Will people
understand this? Are we telling that story correctly?,'” said Cho. “But,
particularly after Sundance, I began to think about what this movie meant. For
me, it’s like the movie behaves as if we’re past all the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">firsts</i>, you know what I mean? We’ve sort of had the discussion and
we agreed that it’s okay for an Asian to be in any kind of movie and this is
the movie that’s been made. To me, it’s like a movie from the future in
that regard.”</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
The film premiered under the title “Search” at the 2018 Sundance Film Festival,
where it was quickly picked up by Sony’s Screen Gems arm. The studio released
the indie in late August, where it went on to make more than $70 million
worldwide. Not bad for a film that reportedly cost about $1 million to make.
Cho’s recent Indie Spirit nomination for Best Male Lead, pitting him against
contenders like Ethan Hawke and Joaquin Phoenix, took him by surprise, but it
also reminded Cho of just how exceptional the film has proven to be.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“I didn’t know that I was in the mix, I didn’t know that was possible,” he
said. “So that was a total surprise. I feel like it legitimized our film, which
could be seen as sort of adjacent to horror, which I think is a completely
legitimate genre but also sort of ignored by critics. Our movie is so unusual
that it might not even look like a traditional independent film. It certainly
doesn’t look like a traditional studio film, but it’s so unusual in its look
that I didn’t think people would see it as what we’re supposed to expect of
independent cinema.”</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
For Cho, who has long moved between indie films and studio pictures, the expectations
that scared him about the role were rooted in the demands of making a film that
takes place on computer screens. For the majority of the feature, his David is
stuck staring into his and Margot’s laptop screens, only occasionally
interacting with others through chats, emails, and “live” videos. It’s insular
work.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“The problem was I didn’t have any people to look at for the most part, and
that was extremely difficult for me, to feel like I was connected,” Cho said. “I
think you rely on looking into another soul to verify that you’re connected
with that person and make the scene authentic. … I felt like I had to develop a
much more intimate relationship with the director. I had to rely on him for the
geography of the screen, because they were all plot points and everything was
all these micro movements that were so important. Whereas on a traditional set,
I think my strongest relationships are with the actors, on this one my
strongest relationship was with the director. We just had to become very close.”</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
Cho is eager to deflect praise to not only Chaganty, but also to the rest
of the creative team that made his performance look so good inside a universe
that was created and constructed long after he had filmed his scenes.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“There’s a world in which all of the graphics don’t look that good,” he said. “I
was very happy when I saw the film, it was so thought out. I was really so
deeply impressed the time put into those web pages and the depth of
characterization. A really glancing scroll through Facebook represented so much
thought, because you’ll see five profiles and each profile was a different
photograph they had to take and they had to decide on a pose and different
likes and dislikes and all that stuff. It just has a real respect for
characters.”</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
While computer-screen films haven’t yet exploded as a singular genre, there
have been other success stories, like the horror franchise “Unfriended” and Timur
Bekmambetov’s thriller “Profile.” </span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
(Bekmambetov also produced “Searching” and has been vocal about his dedication
to making a ton more screen films in the coming years.) For Cho, the recent
uptick in such films has been a matter of not only technology catching up, but
also the public understanding how it can all work as entertainment.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“I don’t think we could’ve made this movie even five years ago, because there
was like the collective vocabulary of the public wasn’t there when it came to
our computer literacy,” Cho said. “Now it’s there, but because we’re all caught
up, you have to be sharp and you have to be real and you can’t do anything
false. You can’t make false movements in that zone. … I feel like moving
forward, there will be so many more screens presented in films. I think it’ll
be a separate department.”</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
Cho also thinks the tide is turning when it comes to the other kind of
on-screen representation that “Searching” so easily utilized. Recent
blockbuster successes like “Black Panther,” “Get Out,” “Hidden Figures,” and “Wonder
Woman” prove that diverse films can make a lot of money, <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-caa-diversity-study-exclusive-20170622-story.html">while
a 2017 study crunched the numbers</a> and came to the same conclusion.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“I think it’s just the age, this is a guess, but it’s the age of the people who
control the pursestrings,” he said. “I think with the fracturing of the film
business’ economy, there’s not really an incentive to be false about
representation. I think the incentive is to be more authentic, more real, and
represent more accurately what’s happening in society. I’m kind of bullish on
the future now in a way that I wasn’t even five to 10 years ago.”</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
With over 20 years of acting experience, Cho resists the idea that he’s gotten
more picky as his star has risen. Instead, he offers that his success comes
from something more personal, the kind of emotional intelligence that made his
work in “Searching” so compelling.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial";"><br />
“I feel like it’s more being older and being comfortable with leaning into my
instincts and looking for things that speak to me on a personal level,” he
said. “That’s what it is now. It’s not so much being choosy as it is following
my heart on these things. Sounds false, but it really isn’t. I’m trying to be
less strategic about things and not ask the question, ‘What should I be doing
next?,’ but I find myself asking the question, ‘What connection do I have to
this material? How can I contribute?’ “He added with a laugh, “I’m gratified to
say that I feel like that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i>
thinking about the career has paid off in the sense that it’s been good for my
career.”</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .1pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: .1pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Arial;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Times;
panose-1:2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-alt:"Times Roman";
mso-font-charset:77;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-format:other;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
p
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Times;
mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
</style>
-->Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-14851841516752179032020-02-09T10:53:00.000-08:002020-02-10T15:17:11.713-08:00"Searching" Fall 2019<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3Ro9ebQxEOY" width="560"></iframe></div>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1958014394894432239.post-27321970951299507052020-01-31T18:43:00.002-08:002020-01-31T18:52:25.962-08:00Goldfinger<span style="color: #3d85c6;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>GREAT MOVIES</b></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b></b></span></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSlaNEfD8BIimW7EJfbr1LDZRoMNzhp82C-5X8RGbZUhnWvdRvLN138qYIh6yyKBkJ5diIpw4gFxG75Sg9lMMllhARDWiJ3278L3nRoneNwqah1dAyBtxgMWNaRAygERnYtE0wLfQuZ5_Z/s1600/Goldfinger.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="1200" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSlaNEfD8BIimW7EJfbr1LDZRoMNzhp82C-5X8RGbZUhnWvdRvLN138qYIh6yyKBkJ5diIpw4gFxG75Sg9lMMllhARDWiJ3278L3nRoneNwqah1dAyBtxgMWNaRAygERnYtE0wLfQuZ5_Z/s640/Goldfinger.jpg" width="640" /></a></b></span></div>
<br />
<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/contributors/roger-ebert"><span itemprop="author" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"><span itemprop="name">Roger Ebert</span></span></a>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<section class="meta">
<time content="1999-01-31T00:00:00-06:00" datetime="1999-01-31T00:00:00-06:00" itemprop="datePublished">January 31, 1999</time>
</section><section class="meta"><a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-goldfinger-1964" target="_blank">https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-goldfinger-1964 </a></section><br />
<span style="line-height: 1.45em;">Not every man would like to be
James Bond, but every boy would. In one adventure after another, he
saves the world, defeats bizarre villains, gets to play with neat
gadgets and seduces, or is seduced by, stupendously sexy women (this
last attribute appeals less to boys younger than 12).</span><br />
<br />
He
is a hero, but not a bore. Even faced with certain death, he can cheer
himself by focusing instead on the possibility that first he might get
lucky. He's obsessed with creature comforts, a trial to his superiors, a
sophisticate in all material things and able to parachute into enemy
territory and be wearing a tuxedo five minutes later. When it comes to
movie spies, Agent 007 is full-service, one-stop shopping.<br />
<br />
James Bond is the most durable of this century's movie heroes, and
the one most likely to last well into the next--although Sherlock Holmes
of course is also immortal, and Tarzan is probably good for a retread.
(The "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-star-wars-episode-iv-a-new-hope-1977">Star Wars</a>" (1977) and "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/star-trek-2009">Star Trek</a>" movies are disqualified because they do not have a single hero or a continuous time frame.)<br />
<br />
One
reason for Bond's longevity among series heroes is quality control;
while almost all the Bond films have the same producing team, Tarzan has
been the hero of films of wildly divergent quality. And while Holmes
has inspired more revisionist interpretations than Hamlet, Bond is
consistently Bond: He remains recognizably the same man he was in 1962,
when "Dr. No" first brought Ian Fleming's spy to the screen. Even the
crypto-Bonds, like the oddball <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/david-niven">David Niven</a> hero of the maverick "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/casino-royale-1967">Casino Royale</a>"
(1967), or the spoof Bonds, like Our Man Flint and Matt Helm, follow
the general outlines of the Fleming legend. He is an archetype so
persuasive that to change him would be sacrilegious.<br />
<br />
Of all the
Bonds, "Goldfinger" (1964) is the best, and can stand as a surrogate for
the others. If it is not a great film, it is a great entertainment, and
contains all the elements of the Bond formula that would work again and
again. It's also interesting as the link between the more modest first
two Bonds and the later big-budget extravaganzas; after this one,
producers Albert "Cubby" Broccoli and <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/harry-saltzman">Harry Saltzman</a> could be certain that 007 was good for the long run.<br />
<br />
At 111 minutes, "Goldfinger" ties with "Dr. No" as the shortest of
the James Bond films, and yet it probably contains more durable images
than any other title in the series: the young woman killed by being
coated with gold paint; the steel-rimmed bowler of the mute Korean
assassin Odd Job (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/harold-sakata">Harold Sakata</a>); the Aston-Martin tricked out with deadly gimmicks and an ejector seat; Bond's sexy karate match with Pussy Galore (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/honor-blackman">Honor Blackman</a>);
the villain Goldfinger with his gold-plated Rolls-Royce, and of course
the laser beam pointed at that portion of Bond's lower anatomy that he
most required if he were to continue as hero of the series.<br />
<br />
The
Broccoli-Saltzman formula found its lasting form in the making of
"Goldfinger." The outline was emerging in the first two films, and here
it is complete. First, the title sequence, establishing Bond as a sex
hound while linking him with a stunt sequence or a spectacular death.
Then the summons by M, head of British Secret Service, and the briefing
on a villain obsessed by global domination. The flirtation with
Moneypenny. The demonstration by Q of new gimmicks invented especially
for his next case. Then the introduction of the villain, his murderous
and bizarre sidekick, and his female assistant/accomplice/mistress.
Bond's discovery of the nature of the villain's evil scheme. Bond's
capture and the certainty of death. Bond's seduction of the villain's
woman. And so on, leading always to a final scene in which Bond is about
to enjoy his victory reward: the sensuous fruits of his latest
conquest.<br />
<br />
"About to enjoy." An essential phrase. There are no extended sex
scenes in the Bond pictures, only preludes and epilogues. "Bond sex is a
special movie style," observes the critic Steve Rhodes. "It consists of
a quick but intense kiss followed by a cutaway to later. The sex is
hinted at with cute puns and sexual innuendo, but never discussed
explicitly." Starting with the Venus-like appearance of <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/ursula-andress">Ursula Andress</a>
from the sea in "Dr. No," all of the Bond movies have featured
beautiful women, but in a publicity tradition, they appear nude not in
the movies, but in an issue of Playboy that hits the stands right before
the premiere.<br />
<br />
"Goldfinger" contains a classic example of the
Talking Killer Syndrome, one of the entries in my Little Movie Glossary.
Auric Goldfinger (<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/gert-frobe">Gert Frobe</a>)
has captured Bond and has him under his complete control. Indeed, all
he has to do is remain silent and the laser will slice Bond from stem to
sternum. But Bond dissuades him with some quick thinking, and is
released to become Goldfinger's prisoner.<br />
<br />
Goldfinger, like many
another Bond villain, seems to have the makings of a frustrated host: It
must be galling to have the most elaborate secret hideaways on earth,
and no way to show off. So Goldfinger flies Bond to his horse farm in
Kentucky, where Bond is able to eavesdrop on the outlines of a
Chinese-Goldfinger scheme to assault Fort Knox--making the gold baron
Goldfinger the most powerful man in the world, while the Commies benefit
from world chaos. Later, in a pleasant chat, Goldfinger foolishly
answers all of Bond's remaining questions, such as, how he could
possibly remove those tons of gold?<br />
<br />
This stretch of the film is founded on a fundamental absurdity.
Goldfinger has assembled the heads of all the Mafia families of America
at his Kentucky farm. He pushes buttons, and the most elaborate
presentation in movie history unfolds. Screens descend from the ceiling.
Film of Fort Knox is shown. The floor itself rolls back, and a vast
scale model of the fort rises on hydraulic lifters (with Bond hidden
inside). Goldfinger tells the mobsters what he plans to do, Bond listens
in, and then shutters fall to lock the Mafioso in the room, and they
are immediately killed with poison gas. My question: Why bother to show
them that expensive presentation if you're only going to kill them
afterward? My best guess: Goldfinger had workmen crawling all over the
place for weeks, constructing that presentation, and he wanted to show
it to somebody.<br />
<br />
Bond is played in these early films, of course, by <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/sean-connery">Sean Connery</a>, who took the bloom off the role for all of his successors (George Lazenby, <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/roger-moore">Roger Moore</a>, <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/timothy-dalton">Timothy Dalton</a>, <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/cast-and-crew/pierce-brosnan">Pierce Brosnan</a>)
while simultaneously sidetracking his own film career. For several
years no one could think of Connery as anyone but Bond, and he left the
series after "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/you-only-live-twice-1967">You Only Live Twice</a>," in 1967, returning for "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/diamonds-are-forever-1971">Diamonds Are Forever</a>" after the Lazenby fiasco, and a last time in "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/never-say-never-again-1983">Never Say Never Again</a>"
(because he owned the rights to that property). The other Bonds were
not wrong in the role (even Lazenby has his defenders), but they were
not Connery, and that was their cross to bear.<br />
<br />
Connery had the
sleek self-assurance needed for the role, and a gift with deadpan double
entendres. But he had something else that none of the others, save
perhaps Dalton, could muster: Steely toughness. When his eyes narrowed
and his body tensed up, you knew the playing was over and the bloodshed
was about to begin.<br />
<br />
Fleming's James Bond novels took off in the
states only after it became known that they were President Kennedy's
favorite recreational reading. Indeed, the more we learn about JFK, the
more we see how he resembled Bond, or vice versa.<br />
<br />
At a time when
"Swinging London" was overtaking pop culture, the Bond series was
perfectly positioned (although Bond makes a rare lapse of taste in
"Goldfinger" when he recommends listening to the new Beatles with
earmuffs on). But Swinging London has swung, and Bond stays on. He has
reinvented himself now for 37 years, through all the changes in
geopolitics and lifestyles, and a new Bond film just went into
production: "<a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-world-is-not-enough-1999">The World Is Not Enough</a>." If you count "Casino Royale," it is the 21st Bond film, not that 007 will ever really come of age.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MA65V-oLKa8" width="560"></iframe>
</div>
Flickers: RI Film Festivalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395615364409919200noreply@blogger.com0