Year: 2019

This is one of the best silent films I have seen ever before. The English subtitles and the silent dialogue between the characters all pave a good way for the whole story. First of all, this silent film enables me to experience how lust, love, fear, and loyalty are intersected together to shape the Man called George’s life. Director Murnau gives the man Gorge a complicated motivation and look. He is seduced by the woman from the city and gets into the murder plan to her wife. The twist of his expectations of the better city life conjured by the city woman and his series of redemption behaviors such as begging for his wife’s forgiveness and tie the bundles of reeds around his wife, the audience is forced to predicate what the man will do between his wife and the city woman. By constantly rekindling the love between the man and woman,  Murnau does not let down the audience because the man always could identify himself in the crossroads of city life and love.

One of the most striking elements of this film is the mise-en-scene because it always makes the plots and characters so predictable to the audience. Murnau gives a realistic setting to the story such as the farm and the busy city roads and the lake, all of which make the performance of the characters so believable and natural. when the settings of the couple transfer from the farmhouse to the hectic and eventful life of the city, the audience feel natural to juxtapose the life of woman, man, and the city woman who persuades the man to sell his farm and kill her wife. Of course, the use of tracking shot contributes a lot to the imagination of the audience about the relationships between the man and woman after their trust crisis.

One of the critics I have read about the film is from James Blake Ewing. He describes that Sunrise is not simply about the depravity of life but the joys of life. I do agree with that because Murnau offers a lot of visual clues to shift the story by slowly rekindling and reuniting the man and woman. This resonates with both me and the other audience’s expectations of the transition of the story.

What makes this film a great film is largely associated with the performance of the two leading characters, the universality the film achieves by its realistic portraits of the city life during the 1930s, and the incidental music that blends smoothly throughout the movie. The emotions of the characters, the context of each shot, and the direction of the storyline are mainly built upon the setting of the city, which also drive Murnau to seek a depth of the city’s look and chaos that shape the man and women’s life during the early era.

“My favorite film-Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans” the guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2011/nov/16/my-favourite-film-sunrise

https://creativecriticism.net/?p=1612

 

                         

The American Friend, otherwise known in German as Der Amerikanische Freund, is a crime film.  Although in France it would be considered a neo-noir film. A neo-noir film is the new version of the genre “film noir”.  Film Noir came about in France in 1955 and was used to describe a movie that had more sinister story lines. The term film noir translates in English to “dark movie”.  Typically in Neo-noir films they like to use slightly tilted camera angles for an unsettling feel or even unbalanced frames. Typically the line between good and bad is blurred and the common theme is revenge.

The American Friend is an adaptation of a book written by Patricia Highsmith, it was called Ripley’s Game.  The movie itself is about a man named Tom Ripley. Ripley is a very wealthy American living in Germany. Ripley makes a living by scamming people at auctions for fake art.  His partner would bring out some forged paintings and Ripley would be in the crowd raising the price in the auction. While doing his usual scheme he meets a very sick man named Jonathon Zimmermann.  Zimmermann is a picture framer and doesn’t have much respect for Ripley. The movie goes on to tell a twisted tale of Ripley making Zimmermann believe that he’s far more ill than he really is. He even went so far as to forge medical results to make Zimmermann desperate and more open to living a life of crime.  Zimmermann is actually unaware of Ripley’s part in falsifying his medical records and forms a kind of bond with him. This leads to Ripley protecting Zimmermann in a way from a gangster that wants to use him in a murder. Zimmermann begins to think that the mafia wants to kill him so him and Ripley set up in his mansion to wait for their attackers.  Zimmermann and Ripley kill their almost-assassins and then load their bodies up into an ambulance for disposal. In the end Zimmermann does find out that his medical records were faked and ends up abandoning his partner Ripley. Zimmerman ends up dying from some unknown reason while he’s driving away and that’s the end of the movie.

The director Wim Wenders originally wanted John Cassavetes to play the part of Ripley but he said no and suggested that Dennis Hopper be used instead.  Dennis Hopper was a very well known actor with a reputation “as a Hollywood enfant terrible” which means that he was a bit unconventional and controversial.  It’s been said that Wim Wenders has a very keen fascination with everything American and that’s very apparent in this movie as Ripley is a cowboy hat-wearing American.  At the time of production Hopper was having a particularly hard time in life but that only enriched his performance in The American Friend. At one point he even improvised a scene where he takes pictures of himself with a Polaroid camera while he’s crying.  He also uses a decent amount of other American symbols such as “a yellow New York taxi, a Thunderbird car, his jeans trousers and jacket, his cowboy hat, his jukebox and Coca-Cola machine, the pool table and Marlboro cigarettes. These numerous extra-filmic echoes add an additional dimension to Wenders’ portrayal of the impact of America on European culture (senses of cinema).  

The protagonist in this film is Zimmerman while the antagonist is definitely Ripley.  I personally really enjoyed the movie, however that could just be because I’ve never read the book it was based off of.  It turns out that when Patricia Highsmith first saw the movie she was incredibly disappointed in the adaptation of the characters.  In fact, Ripley was hardly shown for a good part of the movie. People also didn’t seem to be a fan of Ripley wearing a cowboy hat for most of the movie.  There also seemed to be some plot holes as well that left viewers feeling a little disappointed in the story line. According to Roger Ebert, a movie reviewer, Wenders had purposely thrown out parts of the story that would’ve made it more cohesive and would’ve made more sense all to prove a point: “that we watch [and read] thrillers as much for atmosphere as for plot” (rogerebert).  I can agree with his statement that people are often more intrigued by things at face value than what really lies beneath them. I think that this fact makes The American Friend an art piece or even a social experiment to see how well the movie would do without having to make the most sense. 

 

https://film.avclub.com/the-american-friend-is-a-tom-ripley-movie-that-doesn-t-1798186176

http://sensesofcinema.com/2012/cteq/american-friend/

https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/3866-the-american-friend-little-lies-and-big-disasters

https://www.rogerebert.com/scanners/opening-shots-the-american-friend

 

The Godfather Part II is a crime film and the sequel to The Godfather.  It was nominated for twelve Academy Awards and ended up winning six of them, two being Best Picture (again) as well as Coppola’s award for Best Director.  

The Godfather Part II takes place in Nevada and some parts are even in Tahoe.  I found this sequel to be a lot more intense than the first movie. The opening scene is a beautiful church gathering for Michael’s son’s communion.  It pans over the guests and you can hear the priest blessing Michael’s son. It then flashes to scenes of great violence — Michael did what his father wouldn’t and ordered hits on the heads of the other five families that they are competing with.  There are also quite a bit of scenes in a court setting where Michael Corleone is under scrutiny by the FBI for his actions.

This sequel was a bit different in the narrative as they used flashbacks to give a look into Vito Corleone’s coming into power.  The interesting thing about the storytelling technique in this sequel is that Vito Corleone’s story kind of correlates with his son, Michael Corleone, and his rise to being the head of the Corleone family.  I was impressed with the manner in which Coppola did the flashbacks.  I imagine that there’s not a lot of room for error when it comes to organizing a plot in a way that the audience can easily follow.  I found that even with all the flashbacks and different family members to keep track of that it was still relatively easy to stay engaged and not become too confused.

     

There are two protagonists in the film, as they kept switching between Michael’s present day life and his father’s past life.  Both men are beginning to realize the lengths of their power and both want more of it. Just like the first film the goal at hand was being the most powerful family in the area by doing whatever they had to to get there.  It was apparent, however, that Vito Corleone seemed to have more of a moral compass than his son. In the first film Vito makes it clear that he won’t get involved in selling narcotics and only wants to stick with casinos.  He also promises to keep peace with everyone around. Michael had no qualms about getting into the drug industry and also ordered a hit on the heads of all five mafia families.

In this sequel there are a lot of close up shots of the characters.  The purpose of this is to give the audience a chance to see the actor’s emotions more clearly (eportfolios).  An example of this, along with angle choice is when Connie, Michael’s sister, is begging him to forgive their other brother Fredo.  While the camera is on Connie it’s kept at a somewhat high angle to give the sense of vulnerability on Connie’s part. When the camera was on Michael it was filmed directly at eye level.  This really emphasized the fact that Michael was above Connie both physically and in terms of power.

The use of light was interesting in this movie as well.  Oftentimes when they would show Michael Corleone the scene would be dark and gloomy.  It continues to get worse as the movie progresses and Michael’s life gets more and more difficult.  The purpose of this is to give the audience a sense of foreboding as they watch Michael struggle (reelviews). 

All in all, this sequel had outstanding reviews, just as the first The Godfather did.  It was with resounding agreement that people said this movie “represents the apex of American movie-making and the ultimate gangster story.  Few sequels have expanded upon the original with the faithfulness and detail of this one. Beneath the surface veneer of an ethnic period piece, The Godfather is not so much about crime lords as it is about prices paid in the currency of the soul for decisions made and avoided. It is that quality which establishes this saga as timeless” (reelviews).  I can wholeheartedly agree with this statement. I found The Godfather Part II to be even more intriguing than the first and I definitely look forward to watching the third one.

 

http://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/godfather-part-ii-the

https://www.indiewire.com/2012/04/5-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-the-godfather-part-ii-252707/

https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/murphy16/2016/03/14/the-godfather-part-ii-camera-technique-scene-analysis/

Fantasia was released in 1940, following the successes of Walt Disney’s beloved Mickey Mouse, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, and Pinocchio. It is a story combination of stunning animation that is complimented with as one would consider elites scores.

With his name established, Walt had other plans to pursue. With Fantasia, Disney hoped to achieve something else. Something greater. He once told his staff, “we’ve got more in this medium than making people laugh.” The new film, he said, would “change the history of motion pictures.” And despite its initial box-office failure and high criticisms, Fantasia grew to be one of Disney’s greatest creations in getting audiences to view animation in a different art medium. A respected one.

Now, mentioned above, why would someone believe the music in this particular film to be elites? Well, all the scores are classical pieces. With the rise of classical music during the renaissance, it has been heavily believed that the classics were made exclusively for the higher class and the educated. However, I believe Walt had no intentions for exclusivity and hoped for new listeners to experience classical music in a different way. The film was being developed just in the year before World War II, already taking a big risk for and early Disney movie. Having a film with animated visuals to complement classical scores was not exactly what audiences were expecting from young Walt Disney’s work history.

After Fantasia’s release, there were many mixed reviews. It was even considered to be a box-office failure. Before the movie’s release, Disney devised a first-of-its-kind, surround-sound system he called Fantasound, to be installed in first-run theaters. Disney imagined adding new segments in the future, so the film could be released again and again. But Fantasound turned out to be too expensive to install in every theater. The film had to be substantially cut. After early critical enthusiasm, NewYork Times even calling it a” delightful and exciting” creation, audiences seemed baffled or bored by it. It lost more than the modern equivalent of $15 million and nearly drove the company into bankruptcy.

Many were amazed by the advancement in using Fantasound in earlier theaters only. However, many others were also appalled by the visuals. It was deemed even as a far as wild and brutalizing. I believe it was greatly criticized merely from the fact that the audiences were expecting films such as Pinocchio and Snow White again. But many at the time seemed to not understand the actual significance of the tools used in creating the story, making it a great film and in fact very similar to Snow White.

The combination of classical music and vibrant and bouncy visuals create a sense of fantastical realism. It is the same pattern that Walt has done within Snow White and MGM’s The Wizard of Oz. Walt always knew that in order to change the value of animation as an art form, the audience first needed to be grounded into the story and characters while also enjoying the lively art animation was supposed to be. Just how Walt brought realism to Snow White’s features and life struggles and just how Victor Fleming wrote deep relatable themes in the relationship of Dorothy’s friend group, bridging the “elites” classical music to playful animated characters helped ground the genre of animation and allowed all classes and social groups to experience, essentially animated classical music in a new way.

The movie itself did not bring Disney to the high class status Walt Disney was hoping for but it opened a long bridge of utilizing classical music within animated pictures for generations to come.

Sources:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/922891.pdf?ab_segments=0%252Fdefault-2%252Fcontrol&refreqid=excelsior%3A69b82aeb1bae6f3166e18a1141fe02bd

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/disney-fantasia-critical-box-office-failure-180956963/

The Godfather is an American crime film from 1972.  It was directed by Francis Ford Coppola and won a total of four Academy Awards such as “Best Picture” and “Best Actor” in regards to Marlon Brando (Geeks).  The story itself is set in 1945 New York and follows the Corleone family. The Corleone family is made up of quite a few Sicilian mobsters and the dad, Vito Corleone, is the famous “Godfather”.  

 

The opening scene of The Godfather is the day of his daughters wedding, where it’s tradition to not turn down any requests.  It shows The Godfather in his office talking to various men about their troubles and really gives you an idea to just how powerful he is.  At one point it showed a man sitting by himself during the celebration of The Godfather’s daughter’s wedding and he was just practicing his introduction and thank you to The Godfather over and over; he was so nervous about the meeting that he didn’t seem to even notice the bystanders that were watching him with concern.

At first the protagonist seemed to be The Godfather as that is the title of the movie and that was the focus in the beginning of the film.  However, at some point during a feud with another Italian family Vito Corleone is shot and hospitalized. While he is laid up in the hospital, unable to defend himself, another mobster plans an attack on him and orchestrates it with the local police.  Michael Corleone, The Godfather’s son, shows up at the hospital just at the right time and saves his father from being murdered. From that point on the protagonist becomes Michael and the plot is about his rise to being the head of the family company as well as a vicious mob boss — arguably more ruthless than his father.

 

There’s one goal in the movie and that’s power.  There are 6 powerful families that are referenced and always seem to be taking pot shots at each other.  One family would act, the other would retaliate, wash, rinse, and repeat. While that’s a very basic overview of the goal at hand, there’s a reason the film won the awards that it did, it’s very good.

 

The production of The Godfather was very interesting to me.  Coppola estimated that the first film was made using around 6.5 million dollars.  Coppola also said that today a studio probably wouldn’t be willing to take a risk on The Godfather the way they did back in 1972.  Another interesting tidbit is that Al Pacino, the actor that played Michael Corleone, wasn’t really wanted for the part. The Paramount studio executive, Bob Evans, didn’t want to use Al Pacino as he felt he was too short for the character.  This led to Al Pacino auditioning for the same part over and over because Coppola really wanted him but Bob Evans did not (nofilmschool).

 

The actors in the movie were both well known stars and lesser known stars.  Marlon Brando was already an iconic actor, but that came with some consequences.  The president of the studio absolutely did not want Marlon Brando to be a part of the production and in an attempt to dissuade Coppola he said that Brando would have to put up a million dollar bond stating that he wouldn’t cause any problems during the production (nofilmschool).  Coppola accepted with no hesitation and didn’t tell Brando about the interesting deal. Brando ended up knocking it out of the park. Al Pacino and Robert Duvall were both somewhat new to Hollywood and The Godfather seemed to launch them into fame (geeks).

 

The special effects for the movie were pretty cut and dry.  I felt like they did a good job with fight scenes or shooting scenes.  One interesting thing I found about the film, however, is that they had to make two different sets of prints with varying light levels.  When this movie was released it was really popular to go to drive in movie theaters and to prevent the image from being too dark because it’s nighttime during the showing the producers would go overboard and overlight everything.  They made the darker films for theaters. I just found it interesting how much thought goes into the little details of the movie. Lighting isn’t something I would normally take into consideration, however, I do know that when a movie’s lighting is off it makes me not want to watch the movie altogether.

 

The overwhelming majority of reviews of The Godfather all said that the movie was excellent; after watching the film for myself, I can agree with that statement!  

 

https://www.tested.com/art/movies/463501-filming-light-and-dark-side-godfather/

 

https://geeks.media/the-godfather-film-review-and-analysis

 

https://nofilmschool.com/2017/05/godfather-production-cast-reunion-panel

 

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-godfather-1972