Monday, September 29, 2008
Apocalypse Now (1979) Analysys; The Do Lung Bridge
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mANbl6QX9okP)
In terms of cinematography, this scene is probably one of the best in the whole film. Copola's expert use of lights helps to turn the scene from a straight-up battle into a surreal, seemingly drug-induced fantasy world.
The audience's first view of the bridge, a brightly-lit outpost framed by total darkness, serves to set the scene. In addition to being framed by spotlights, flares, party lights, and explosions give the bridge a fantastical quality, almost like an acid trip. Since Lance confides to Chef that he'd just dropped a tab of acid, it's likely that this was the view that Copola was going for. The scene quickly reenters the darkness, lit only by the occasional roving spotlight and quickly alternating between light and shadow. The shadowy, buring-out husks of helecopters only add to surreal, unearthly feel the audience is experiencing.
This feeling quickly reaches it's high point in one of the best sequences of shots in the entire film, as Willard and Lance make their way into the battle zone searching for a commanding officer. They first advance through a hazy wood lit only by fires and a far-off search light, then make their way to the edge of the bridge; a broken landscape of concrete and rebar sticking wildly into the air. The entire sequence is lit only by roving searchlights, random explosions, and the Christmas lights hanging over the bridge. The effect is that the audience feels that it is the midst of a war zone, not in Veitnam, but in some desolate, post-apocalyptic future. The sequence actually reminds me of the future scenes from the first Terminator film. Even more striking is that, except for a few random seconds, Lance and Willard are seen only in shadow, rarely in the light. It's as if they aren't really there, as if none of this is really here, it's just some drug-induced fantasy and soon we'll wake up or crash or whatever and rejoin the sanity of the real world.
The use of shadows and spotlights continues throughout the rest of the scene, but the first few moments are definitely the best and most representative of this style of bizarre and unsettling. cinematography.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Apocalypse Now (1979) Review
Wow. Just, Wow. This movie has completely blown my mind. Way beyond what I was expecting it to be.
Honestly, I thought this was just another Vietnam War movie, but it is so much more than that; it quickly descends into a surreal experience, almost an examination of the human psyche.
The acting in this film is absolutely astonishing. You can actually feel the characters' sanity slowly but definitely slipping away as the boat travels up the river. It's subtle at first, but by the time the boat reaches the Do Long bridge, you have to question whether Willard will follow through with his mission to kill Col. Kurtz or wind up joining him and his "tribe."
Adding to the surreal experience is Francis Ford Coppola's expert use of light, color, and shadow, which slowly but surely takes film from a cut-and-dry Veitnam War setting to the surreal, almost fantastical, world of Col. Kurtz.
Really, this film is so much more than what I describe here. It is so incredible, and has made such a huge impression on me that I cannot find the words to adequately describe it, other than to say this is without a doubt one of the best films ever made and YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST WATCH THIS FILM BEFORE YOU DIE. It is just that amazing.
I'll leave you with my absolute favorite clip from the film: the helicopter raid on Charlie's Point with Wagner blaring in the background.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBmFvg3dYu0)
Honestly, I thought this was just another Vietnam War movie, but it is so much more than that; it quickly descends into a surreal experience, almost an examination of the human psyche.
The acting in this film is absolutely astonishing. You can actually feel the characters' sanity slowly but definitely slipping away as the boat travels up the river. It's subtle at first, but by the time the boat reaches the Do Long bridge, you have to question whether Willard will follow through with his mission to kill Col. Kurtz or wind up joining him and his "tribe."
Adding to the surreal experience is Francis Ford Coppola's expert use of light, color, and shadow, which slowly but surely takes film from a cut-and-dry Veitnam War setting to the surreal, almost fantastical, world of Col. Kurtz.
Really, this film is so much more than what I describe here. It is so incredible, and has made such a huge impression on me that I cannot find the words to adequately describe it, other than to say this is without a doubt one of the best films ever made and YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST WATCH THIS FILM BEFORE YOU DIE. It is just that amazing.
I'll leave you with my absolute favorite clip from the film: the helicopter raid on Charlie's Point with Wagner blaring in the background.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBmFvg3dYu0)
Sunday, September 21, 2008
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007) Analysis
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly tells the story of Jean-Domininique Bauby, a French magazine editor who, after suffering a massive stroke, is left with a rare condition known as Locked-In Syndrome. Completely paralyzed save for his left eyelid, Bauby decides to dictate a memoir describing his experiences with Locked-In Syndrome.
The cinematography in the film is excellent, with much of the movie being shot from Jean-Do's first-person perspective. This unusual choice allows the audience to literally get inside Bauby's head and offers a unique perspective: inside the mind of a person who is all but cut-off from the outside world. The position, along with hearing Bauby's thoughts, also convey the powerful sense of isolation Bauby felt at not being able to move or even effectively communicate with the outside world. In addtion, the first-person scenes were all shot with a hand-held camera, giving them a rawer, more natural feel and bringing the audicence closer to being inside Bauby's head.
Even when the camera shoots from the third-person, Bauby's feelings of isolation are still clearly highlighted. Many shots of him in his wheelchair only show him, often set against the wide-open background of the sky or coastline. There is at least one memorable shot of him in his wheelchair sitting on an isolated platform raised above the crashing waves of the incoming tide, literally cut off from the outside world.
What are probably the most memorable shots in the entire film are scenes of Bauby floating in an old diving suit (the titular Diving Bell) completely alone in a featureless, noiseless sea. While these scenes may not make sense at first to the audience, they are actually Bauby's own depiction of his situation: complete and total isolation from the rest of the world.
The superb cinematography in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, in addtion to providing the audience with a unique viewing experience, also serves to expertly highlight and depict the massive isolation that Jean-Do Bauby experienced during his struggle with Locked-In Syndrome.
The cinematography in the film is excellent, with much of the movie being shot from Jean-Do's first-person perspective. This unusual choice allows the audience to literally get inside Bauby's head and offers a unique perspective: inside the mind of a person who is all but cut-off from the outside world. The position, along with hearing Bauby's thoughts, also convey the powerful sense of isolation Bauby felt at not being able to move or even effectively communicate with the outside world. In addtion, the first-person scenes were all shot with a hand-held camera, giving them a rawer, more natural feel and bringing the audicence closer to being inside Bauby's head.
Even when the camera shoots from the third-person, Bauby's feelings of isolation are still clearly highlighted. Many shots of him in his wheelchair only show him, often set against the wide-open background of the sky or coastline. There is at least one memorable shot of him in his wheelchair sitting on an isolated platform raised above the crashing waves of the incoming tide, literally cut off from the outside world.
What are probably the most memorable shots in the entire film are scenes of Bauby floating in an old diving suit (the titular Diving Bell) completely alone in a featureless, noiseless sea. While these scenes may not make sense at first to the audience, they are actually Bauby's own depiction of his situation: complete and total isolation from the rest of the world.
The superb cinematography in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, in addtion to providing the audience with a unique viewing experience, also serves to expertly highlight and depict the massive isolation that Jean-Do Bauby experienced during his struggle with Locked-In Syndrome.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007) Review
Honestly, I'm really split over this movie.
On the one hand, I found it quite boring. It's the story of a paralyzed man in a wheelchair who decides to write a book about his experience. I'm an action movie fan; how interesting could this really be?
However, the film's stunning cinematography is what makes this film worthwhile. A goodly majority of the film is shot from the first-person perspective of Jean-Do, chronicling his condition - and his innermost thoughts - in an incredibly unique way.
Really, it is this first-person perspective that makes the film work. If told from the traditional third-person view, it would most likely have been a singularly boring two-hour snorefest. Instead, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly immerses viewers in the unique perspective and situation of a man who can only communicate with his left eyelid. Truly an eye-opening experience for the audience, I definitely must reccomend it, if only for the truly magnificent cinematography.
On the one hand, I found it quite boring. It's the story of a paralyzed man in a wheelchair who decides to write a book about his experience. I'm an action movie fan; how interesting could this really be?
However, the film's stunning cinematography is what makes this film worthwhile. A goodly majority of the film is shot from the first-person perspective of Jean-Do, chronicling his condition - and his innermost thoughts - in an incredibly unique way.
Really, it is this first-person perspective that makes the film work. If told from the traditional third-person view, it would most likely have been a singularly boring two-hour snorefest. Instead, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly immerses viewers in the unique perspective and situation of a man who can only communicate with his left eyelid. Truly an eye-opening experience for the audience, I definitely must reccomend it, if only for the truly magnificent cinematography.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Psycho (1998) Review
Honestly, I don't even know where to begin with this movie, aside from the fact that I thought it was awful.
The biggest thing I noticed was the overall lack of tension in the film. Whereas Hitchcock expertly built up the tension through the first 40 minutes of the film, Van Zant apparently made no effort to do the same. Even though I'd watched the original several times before viewing the remake, I could still feel that element of tension in the film. In the remake, I don't think there was any sense of tension until the conversation between Marion and Norman. I think this is primarily because in the original, Marion (and the audience) saw everyone but Norman as a threat to her, whereas in the remake Norman is the only threatening figure.
Part of this has to do with the acting. In the original, Janet Leigh portrayed Marion as a scared, almost paranoid woman who was certain she'd be caught at any moment. Anne Heche's Marion, on the other hand, seems almost bored with the situation and is not frightened when she is stopped or questioned. Rather, she feels frustrated, as if she just wants whoever is bothering her to shut up so she can go and get away with things.
Probably the biggest letdown, in my opinion, was Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates. Contrasing his performance with Anthony Perkins, I feel that Perkins' Norman was like the awkward prepubescint boy who fell in love with his best friend's mother, whereas Vaughn's Norman was the creepy high school nerd hitting on the captain of the cheerleader squad. It is immediately apparent that Norman is crazy in some form or another; the peephole seem only serves to confirm that he's a pervert and the most likely candidate in the film of being the psycho.
I also feel that the use of color ruined the film. This is not to say that shooting the film in color vs. black and white was a bad choice. Rather, I feel that Van Zant's use of color was inappropriate. Everything in the film was very bright, almost to the point of being garish. I have never once seen a horror film where everything was all bright and happy. It just doesn't work; it ruins the tone of the film. On a similar note, every constume used in the film, especially Marion's dress, should be tracked down and burned in the name of good fasion.
The last thing that bothered me were the random shots of stormclouds and other nonsensical things whenever "Mother" attacked. I cannot for the life of me figure out what Van Zant was thinking when he put those in.
Final verdict: Watch the original. Please watch the original. Don't even give this film a passing consideration, especially if you've never seen a Hitchcock film before - you'll never want to see one if you do. It's just that bad.
EDIT 9-11-08:
P.S. Did California Charlie remind anyone else of Jerry Seinfeld?
The biggest thing I noticed was the overall lack of tension in the film. Whereas Hitchcock expertly built up the tension through the first 40 minutes of the film, Van Zant apparently made no effort to do the same. Even though I'd watched the original several times before viewing the remake, I could still feel that element of tension in the film. In the remake, I don't think there was any sense of tension until the conversation between Marion and Norman. I think this is primarily because in the original, Marion (and the audience) saw everyone but Norman as a threat to her, whereas in the remake Norman is the only threatening figure.
Part of this has to do with the acting. In the original, Janet Leigh portrayed Marion as a scared, almost paranoid woman who was certain she'd be caught at any moment. Anne Heche's Marion, on the other hand, seems almost bored with the situation and is not frightened when she is stopped or questioned. Rather, she feels frustrated, as if she just wants whoever is bothering her to shut up so she can go and get away with things.
Probably the biggest letdown, in my opinion, was Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates. Contrasing his performance with Anthony Perkins, I feel that Perkins' Norman was like the awkward prepubescint boy who fell in love with his best friend's mother, whereas Vaughn's Norman was the creepy high school nerd hitting on the captain of the cheerleader squad. It is immediately apparent that Norman is crazy in some form or another; the peephole seem only serves to confirm that he's a pervert and the most likely candidate in the film of being the psycho.
I also feel that the use of color ruined the film. This is not to say that shooting the film in color vs. black and white was a bad choice. Rather, I feel that Van Zant's use of color was inappropriate. Everything in the film was very bright, almost to the point of being garish. I have never once seen a horror film where everything was all bright and happy. It just doesn't work; it ruins the tone of the film. On a similar note, every constume used in the film, especially Marion's dress, should be tracked down and burned in the name of good fasion.
The last thing that bothered me were the random shots of stormclouds and other nonsensical things whenever "Mother" attacked. I cannot for the life of me figure out what Van Zant was thinking when he put those in.
Final verdict: Watch the original. Please watch the original. Don't even give this film a passing consideration, especially if you've never seen a Hitchcock film before - you'll never want to see one if you do. It's just that bad.
EDIT 9-11-08:
P.S. Did California Charlie remind anyone else of Jerry Seinfeld?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
