Movies

Film theory is defined as the study of filmmaking from the technical aspects of making a movie to its relationship to other reality and art forms and its effects on society and culture. Film theory however is not an independent fieldin order to be realized, it must borrow ideas from other branches of study such as psychology, philosophy, and social and political science, among others. Film theory has branched out into several specializations because of the myriad approaches used to study it. One of the major approaches to the development of film study is feminism, thus giving rise to feminist film theory.

Feminist film theory had its beginnings in the 1960s, during the period of second-wave feminism. Scholars such as Marjorie Rosen and Molly Haskell analyzed the stereotypes of women in Hollywood and art films, and their societal implications for the female audience. At the time, movies often cast women as wicked or helpless beings or as sexual objectsfor example, madonnas, whores, vamps, scatterbrains, bimbos, gold diggers, schoolmaams, nags, and sex kittens (Stam 171).  Smelik notes that such fixed and endlessly repeated images of women were considered to be objectionable distortions that would have a negative impact on the female spectator (491). Because of this, the feminist critics lobbied for a more positive depiction of women in movies. It soon became apparent however that it required a lot more than positive images to change the basic structure of cinema. Feminist scholars thus turned their attention to patriarchy as the driving influence behind the creation of visual imagery, using psychoanalysis to better understand the dynamics of a male-dominated film industry.

Key Concepts
In the years hence, feminist film theory has grown considerably and has given rise to several major concepts that point to the portrayal of women as disempowered members of society and as objectsboth in the sense of being objectified in film and as an object of desire from a male perspective. One of the most-quoted film theorists is Laura Mulvey, who in her essay, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, introduced the concept of the gaze to describe how Hollywood cinema typically assumes a male perspective in the cinematic process. Because of this mode of viewing, the treatment of films in general and women in particular always had patronizing and erotic undertones.

According to Mulvey, there are three basic types of gazing or looking. The first is that of the camera as it records what happens in the film. The second is that of the audience as they watch the film and identify with the main character. The third is that of the characters as they deal and interact with each other in the course of the film. In all three types of looking, the look originates from a masculine point of view. This assigns the role of the active looker and storyteller to the male gender, thus giving them power or control within the movie. Women, on the other hand, are forced to take the passive and therefore powerless role of the one being looked at. They are relegated to just being the object of the male gaze.

Mulvey further elaborates that there are two ways that women can be viewed in their position as the one being gazed at. The first is the voyeuristic view wherein the women become highly sexualized objects of desire. In voyeurism, the (male) looker derives pleasure from observing the woman without being watched in return. The second is the fetishistic view wherein the woman, while still being a sexual object, has become untouchable. She has been over-glamorized and put on a pedestal, becoming a possession of the male protagonist and of the audience.

Ever since the publication of Mulveys groundbreaking essay, female filmmakers have endeavored to counter the male gaze. The next two sections will study how feminist film theories are reflected in two of the movies produced after Mulveys theories were made known to the film world.

Boys Dont Cry
Mulvey pointed out that traditional Hollywood movies are characterized by their use of the male gaze. In her analysis, Mulvey stated that the woman, and consequently her body, is the object of male desire and the source of his viewing pleasure. However, in Boys Dont Cry, the lead character Brandon Teenawho is femalebecomes stripped and exposed in a horrifying way. For example, audiences are introduced to Brandon as he looks at himself in a mirror while his cousin cuts his hair. From the male point of view, this imagery of the female character is not at all erotic nor sexually appealing. Later depictions show Brandon binding his breasts and stuffing a sock down his pants, prompting his cousin to call him deformed.  Brandon makes a conscious effort to conceal his natural female body by wearing oversize jackets and pants. This behavior is not typical biological female behavior as defined by the male gaze. Where under the traditional way of looking femininity would be flaunted and overplayed, it remains concealed in the movie.

Since the male gaze does not exist in the movie, what does In the context of feminisms advocacy for equality, some feminists have called for a corresponding female gaze in which women would be the ones objectifying men and subjecting them to their desires and pleasures. According to Enszer, Boys Dont Cry presents some modicum of the female gazethe lookers being the other female characters of the film, and their object (while not a man, biologically speaking) being Brandon Teena. The first woman viewing Brandon is Candace, whom he meets and flirts with in a bar. Enszer explains the dynamics of the scene

Candaces interaction with Brandon is counterpointed with Candaces interaction with another, older man who approaches her at the bar. Brandon, who has already told his gay male cousin that women like him as a man because he cares for them, when held up next to the older, heterosexual man, is clearly winner from a desire perspective in the heterosexual female gaze. The ensuing scene the next morning with Candace and her child, Brandon again performs his masculinity, not from his perspective, but from the perspective of Candace and her desires for a male partner.

The second gaze belongs to that of Lanas mother. She scrutinizes Brandon because he is dating her daughter, and her scrutiny almost uncovers Brandons masquerade. Yet it does not. Enszer explains that this is because the heterosexual female desire for a decent man who is kind and caring transcends generations in the film. It is wanted by both Candace and Lana as well as Lanas mom. Brandon loved women and knew how to treat them, as a result earning him the adulation of the other women in the film. The scrutiny of Lanas mother did not survive this objectification of Brandon.

Lastly, there is the heterosexual female gaze of Lana. Some would argue that, toward the end of the film, it is transformed into a lesbian gaze, since Lana eventually finds out Brandons biological sex. If that is the case, writes Enszer, it is a powerful commentary on the state of lesbianism, which is one of the major female issues lobbied by feminism. Powerful in the sense that, according to Enszer, lesbians are more acceptable for the gaze to revert. Furthermore, she writes that

I think that Lana is as conflicted about her gaze as the viewer. She first wants to swear to her family that Brandon is male. She says, I know what you are, as though she can see his real self. When she is forced to look at the naked Brandon she seems to respond more to the violence of the situation than to the revelation of Brandons genitalia. Overall, I think that Lanas gaze is created by her as an adolescent female presumed to be heterosexual. Perhaps she wouldnt be perhaps she was a lesbian perhaps she was a heterosexual who would in the future partner with a metrosexual male.

What is essential, however, is that Lana also objectifies Brandon and he is a source of her pleasure.
Finally, the films role in shattering womens stereotypes cannot be ignored. Whereas women in traditional Hollywood cinema were portrayed as one-dimensional and powerless to change their fate, Brandon Teena is depicted as a complex character and therefore more reflective of how women like him are in real life. Also, Brandon did not rely on someoneespecially a manto save him he wanted to be a boy and he took measures to make his desire a reality. In this manner Brandon Teena took on the active role typically reserved for (biological) men and broke through the boundaries of classic gender roles.

Working Girls
Working Girls is a film that covers several days in the life of a madam, as seen through the eyes of her prostitute Molly. Like Boys Dont Cry, this film about prostitutes working in an expensive, high-rise Manhattan brothel presents three-dimensional female characters who thought and acted independently. While it is true that the films characters come of a sexual background, they are not the immoral people that traditional cinema would have audiences believe. They are women who are capable of making their own choices and who are in control of their lives, yet who also deal with the same complex issues encountered by women in real life. In the movie, the central character, Molly is an aspiring photographer and a Yale graduate with degrees in English literature and art history. She is also a lesbian who lives with her black lover, who does not know about her job, and her lovers daughter.

The other characters, while not as extensively drawn out as Molly, defy the prostitute stereotype as well Dawn is studying for a law degree, Gina plans on opening her own beauty salon in the future, Mary just saw an ad to be a hostess and decided to try it. April, who is much older than Molly, is dealing cocaine as a sideline and seems to be in the life mostly to prove to herself that she still has it. The women ply their trade in a pricey Manhattan bordello, where they deal with everything from the mundane to the profane while servicing all kinds of men.

What is notable about the film is that is destroys so many stereotypes other than that of the female character as presented by classic Hollywood cinema. For example, almost all of the prostitutes are content with their jobnone of the girls are victims of circumstance. Nobody forced them to become prostitutes nor were they led there because of lack of opportunities or poverty. None of them were also depicted as having suffered or as suffering from past trauma (like sexual abuse), drug addiction, or some other unfortunate circumstance. Those women chose to be in the profession because the pay is good and the working hours are manageable. The film reflects Bordens belief that if a woman decides shed rather have sex with a man three times a week instead of working 40 hours a week in a Xerox store . . . she should be allowed to make these choices.
Working Girls also destroys the stereotype of sex as just an expression of carnal desiresas a matter of fact, the sex scenes are not erotic. For the films female characters, sex is a natural resource that, as long as the society remains as it is, might as well be exploited (Canby). The women are no different from people who have regular day jobs like office workers or waitressesexcept that they strip down and have sex to earn money. Yes, the work is exhausting and can even be unsanitary, but at the end of the day, its an opportunity to pay educational and living expenses, support a child, pay for housing (Dougherty).

The silver screen of Hollywood has been the battleground of the sexes for many years. Feminist film theory claimed that men and women are differently positioned by cinema men as subjects identifying with agents who drive the films narrative forward, women as objects for masculine desire and fetishistic gazing (Freeland). Laura Mulvey, one of the leading theorists of the time, believed that radical change was the only way to redefine the portrayal of women in film and in society. Feminine film theorists also encouraged women filmmakers to create alternative film aesthetics, so that women stereotypes and the limitations of established gender roles could be broken.


Feminist film theory has come a long way since it began in the 1960s. While there are still significantly less female directors in the film industry, the concepts of feminist film theory have made a deep impact on the realm of filmmaking. Women filmmakers have become more active in the practice of filmmaking, even without access to the funding and distribution of Hollywood film production. They turned to independent cinema, making documentaries and experimental films to reflect their real experiences. Because there were no major studios and production companies telling them what to do, these women directors retained artistic control of their films, thus enabling them to focus on issues relevant to women or attack the typical patriarchy that is the world of film. They also offer alternative characterizations of femininity. Films like Boys Dont Cry and Working Girls examine important female issues lesbianism, sexuality and prostitution. These kinds of films not only offer more complex representations of women, they also address womens issues and concerns.

    The film Precious is about a 16 year old girl named Precious and her struggles in life. Precious is a junior high school student suffering from immense poverty, coupled with her illiteracy and obesity. Set in 1985, this film tackles the hardships being endured by this girl from her abusive parents and from the society as a whole. Her failing grades is the least of her concerns, because she also has to deal with the abuses from both her parents. She already has a daughter who is suffering from Down Syndrome, and another child on the way. Both her pregnancies are the result of her fathers sexual abuse. This film is talks about hard-hitting issues that African Americans suffered back in the 80s, and the truthfulness and the harsh realities depicted in this film makes it a very compelling movie to watch.

    The biggest challenge of the marketing campaign of this movie is its theme. According to Duayne Byrge of the website, HollywoodReporter.com, Precious is a hard-forged film with a story line so grim and abhorrent  a 16-year-old black girl has been impregnated twice by her father  that marketing will be tough. With this kind of theme, it immediately eliminates minors as a possible viewer, so the marketing would have to be focused to adults. It also means that its hard to employ mainstream marketing since it is not for a general audience. It is really a marketing challenge because it is hard to get people interested in it.

    Given that the film is indeed a marketing challenge, the distributors used various tools and strategies to develop audience awareness and generate interest for the film. One strategy employed by the distributors is to have advance screenings for the film. It was entered in the 25th Sundance Film Festival of 2009 and was screened from January 15 to 25 in Park City, Utah. Likewise, it was also entered in the 62nd Cannes Film Festival later in May. It was well received in both film festivals and the screenings were enough to generate interest through word of mouth passed down by satisfied viewers who were able to watch it in advance.

    Another strategy used to generate interest for the film is the endorsement of talk show host Oprah Winfrey. Winfrey was a producer of Precious and through her celebrity status she was able to give the film a much needed marketing boost. She owned several media outlets, like her television show, her magazine, and her own satellite radio channel, all of which are used to promote the film.

    After watching Precious, I feel that every step and strategy used to generate interest and awareness for this film really paid off. After hearing about this film and knowing that a person like Oprah endorses this film, I immediately became interested in viewing it. Somehow, these strategies didnt tell much about the film so the whole film itself is a surprise for the viewer. It was able to generate enough interest from the people without really divulging much information that may give away the plot or the films entire content. After watching it, I feel that the marketing strategy didnt really prepare me for what Im going to see. Indeed, it was able to catch my attention, but still I really didnt know much about the film.

The film Precious was a very compelling story and I think that it was able to live up to the hype it generated from the various marketing strategies it employed. Despite all the marketing challenges that it faced, it was able to attract the interest of the viewers, and I think watching it is a worthwhile experience.

The films Psycho and Strangers on a Train, two of the very best movies by Alfred Hitchcock, display the characteristic concerns and methods of the Master of Suspense, including his perennial treatment of themes such as innocence and guilt.

In Psycho, Marion Crane takes off with lots of money so that she can be married with her boyfriend. When she is caught in a storm, she chooses to check in at a motel. The administrator is a young man who likes to stuff birds. After having dinner together, the woman returns to her room sorry about what she did with the money. She resolves to return home and give the money back. She takes a shower and the man watches her through a peephole. Then she is murdered.

 But whoever committed the murder is yet to be known.
In Strangers on a Train, Guy Haines is on a train to a small town to meet his wife Miriam, who had been unfaithful to him. On the train he meets Bruno Anthony, who recognizes Guy as a known tennis star. Apparently Bruno knows from the newspapers her being unfaithful, and that Guy wants to marry Anne, a senators daughter. However, Miriam does not want to be divorced because she is after his money.
Then Bruno tells Guy about what he thinks will be a perfect murder He will kill Miriam, and in return Guy will kill Brunos father. Because they are strangers to each other, no one will suspect that each did the murder for the other. Guy leaves, but Bruno is left thinking they had struck a deal. 
Bruno goes to the small town to kill Miriam, and then intrudes into Guys life to forcefully tell him that he is bound to kill Brunos father.
In approaching the themes of innocence and guilt, it is best to capture the essence of these films in their key scenes. It is useful to evaluate Hitchcocks presentation of his movies through such crucial elements as action, camera work, setting, and sound.
The shower scene in Psycho is one of the most indelible moments in movie history. It is only a few minutes long, but it is made potent by a succession of shots arranged effectively. Most shots are extreme close-ups in quick succession, making the scene seem longer and more brutal than it actually was, or if they were presented as stand-alone shots. 
Mixed camera angles present Marion and the shower in ways that become increasingly unsettling. The camera focuses on the wall, the water, the shower head, and the drain to show that she is taking a shower, and to imply that she has to cleanse herself. The bathroom door is shown through the shower curtain, and it suggests impending doom while mindful of the fact that she is still taking a bath in the shower.
It is interesting to consider the extent by which Norman and Marion are individually guilty or not. Normans transvestism is already at play in the shower scene, although it is not shown onscreen.
The psychiatrist in the movie explains that his transvestism was brought on by denial, and that the murders (including the others committed by Norman but not shown in the period covered by the movie) are a demonstration of a bold, crazy rebelliousness. It may be added that Norman is somebody who secretly looks for pleasure and thrill to go above life itself.
Religion-based imagery can be traced in the scene Marion dies. Going into the bathtub can be read as going into the water to be baptized. By taking a bath, she is cleansed of her sins and her guilt.  By being pure again, she has become unadulterated, and therefore virginal.
With the color white, she strangely looks luminous and virtuous. It is as if she has been transformed from a thief to an angel. Therefore, her place or status in the narrative has changed by the time she takes her shower.
One of the set pieces in Strangers on a Train is the one in which Bruno follows Miriam, and then strangles her. Because it is dark in the small island, the scene is already scary. But it becomes even more awfully scary because of how the scene was shot.
To establish the secure condition in which we first find Miriam, Hitchcock uses a safe medium shot. Miriam and her two male companions move from the right to the left. The surrounding background lends itself well to boding evil. There are bright lights afar, and the rest is in black- including the ripples in the lake. The pace quickens significantly, with leaps and runs across the frame. There is tautness between the irrepressible action and the sprawling yet narrow space within which this action takes place.
The visual design and energy is altered with the changes in the movement of the characters in relation to the camera. Suddenly Miriam goes toward the camera, and it is apparent that the point of view has shifted to Brunos. With it voyeurism and flirtation are suggested. When Bruno strangles her, he moves from right to left. These positions are a clue to whether the character- or what they are about to do- is good or evil, or strong or weak.
When her glasses drop, Hitchcock gives the audience a shot that resembles a concave mirror. Miriams death can be seen in her glasses, as if the glasses serve as a mirror. The face of the murderer is a little distorted and then blacked out. Bruno and Miriam are obscured into a blur and they seem to fuse. Bruno gets up to pick up the glasses with his hands, which appear like claws because of the distortion of the glasses as an image. In the same frame can be seen Miriams and Brunos feet- which echoes the opening of the movie, in which Brunos and Guys feet are walking toward the train station.
Subsequently, the chatter and the laughter of her friends are juxtaposed against the stirrings of the pipe organ. Hitchcock implies that her friends do not know what happened to Miriam, even though she is nearby. He uses sound to contrast two situations, not only to communicate dread, but also to indicate visually that Bruno has a twisted mind and a warped perspective. It also is a visual correlative for Miriams slow death. Finally, Hitchcock strips the scene of sound, aside from that of the carousel- which is used to emphasize the horrendousness of the crime.
When Bruno reveals himself to Miriam, his hands quickly go to her throat. The reflection on one lens shows two figures that are struggling. We are refused to see what actually happens when he strangles her.  The view then becomes something like a carnival or a funhouse. However it is still evident that he overwhelms her. Hitchcock seems to mask the murder with the jingle of the organ from the carnival. He also does this masking while indicating his strength and the inescapability of her death. All of this is achieved with the absence of the actual sounds in the struggle, the distorted images, and the camera angles. Consequently, his power is increased exponentially.
This veiling of a murder is also evident in Psycho. The bathroom door opens and a figure obscured by shadow gets near the curtain. When this figure opens the curtain, a knife is shown at shoulder height. About 40 seconds after the shower is turned on, there are about 28 cuts in a span of 20 seconds. Interestingly, there is not a single scene of spurting blood.
In treating innocence and guilt in these scenes, Hitchcock uses motifs and devices which are typical of the individual film as a whole.
Both movies show how cruel man can be, or how one man can meet a cruel twist of fate. For example, taxidermy may have been only a hobby for Norman in Psycho, but a glass case of stuffed birds does not translate to mercy.
Marions very death in an ordinary setting is an intrusion into everyday living. It is certainly unkind to kill somebody while she is doing something as ordinary as taking a bath. Even if it is granted that it is extraordinary in that it is equivalent to a spiritual reawakening, it is heartless to deprive her of carrying out her redemption.
There is a foreboding of the nastiness that was about to befall Marion In the scene in the hardware store, a customer picks up a can of pesticide and says, Insect or man, death should always be painless. Cruelty can also be found in Hitchcocks other movies, such as Foreign Correspondent and The Birds.
The color white figures in the shower scene, as it does again at the end of the movie. In the end Norman is at a jail cell, thereby suggesting that his imprisonment is also a form of death.
Strangers on a Train is a movie rife with images of doubles. This is perhaps not surprising, given that this is a movie about crisscross and its permutations double-crossing, and crossing ones double. Among them is a sequence in which there are two pairs of feet moving into the train station at the beginning of the movie. The men are also similarly well-dressed. There are characters that happen to be doubles for other characters, such as Barbara for Miriam.
It can be argued that the world order of business, sports, and marriage is contrasted with the underworld of death, sin, and divorce. Additionally, Bruno is a representation of Guys wish to have Miriam killed. It is like a wish-fulfillment fantasy writer.
When considering both scenes, the two movies show how Hitchcock masterfully manipulates the emotions and expectations of the audience.  He taps into archetypes, such as the influence of The Picture of Dorian Gray, a book depicting a murder done with a knife. His characteristic concerns and methods envelop these scenes- and the movies as a whole- and they have been responsible for the development of his career.  Perversion and voyeurism are staples in his projects, and suspense and terror are central to his entire body of work.
He used his actors very well and he was always mindful of their function in the movie. This is especially significant in the light of the fact that the movies are a visual medium. They are meant to be looked at. Proof to this is how he had elected to kill Janet Leigh early in the movie. However, even though they are actors or celebrities, they put them in their place. He uses them for a most striking effect.
 It goes to show that even the big stars can be used to advance the plot and the theme of the movie- and that there is no sacred cow to him. This may also be said to be another form of cruelty.  His movies have a tendency for androgyny and he admonished his actors to be both masculine and feminine to understand their character.
He also had a taste for alluring women- sensational not only because of their glamour, but also because of a strain of kink that runs through them. Their personality is intensified and fetishes are indulged. He plays his audience as well when it comes to sexuality. In Strangers on a Train, for example, Bruno propositions Guy, and the possibility of a homosexual attraction is suggested. Other ambiguous deals that touch on homosexuality include such Hitchcock movies as Rope and Under Capricorn.
These two films (and the scenes discussed above) have similar approaches to the theme. These may be different stories, but they are essentially the same. The narrative situations have similarities beyond a sinful woman being attacked by a vicious man. By employing shadows, tilt shots, and dutch camera angles, Hitchcock makes the proceedings look and feel like a film noir. These elements carry great weight, and effectively convey mood and suspense.
Although the victim is up on the screen, the audience is also subjected to battery visual and aural cues attack the senses as if the audience is a participant in the scene itself. In a way, he lets the audiences imagination do the work for him. Relentless camera and editing techniques have effectively cloaked the violence. This violence resides only in the imagination of the audience, as it is not in direct view.
Hitchcocks filmmaking skills, when at their very best, create an almost unbearable tension between appearance and reality, especially when mixed with macabre humor.

This is an unforgettable excerpt of the novel The Road stated as With the initial gray beam he rose and left the boy resting and walked out to the road and squatted and calculated the country to the south.   It was desolate, soundless, and godless.   He reflected the month was October but he was not sure.   He had not set aside a calendar for years.   They were moving south. There will be no ongoing another winter here.   With that, from the author of the Oscar-winning adaptation of No Country for Old Men, arrived another best-selling novel and winner of 2007 Pulitzer Prize for Literature by Cormac McCarthy entitled The Road (Maslin, 2006). The story is an extraordinary voyage of a father and son, off in search of development after a post-traumatic apocalypse which reduces America to a cannibalistic barbarism.  This is also a very horrendous version which comes to the big screen to spur you on each and every scene. The viewers must get ready to be shocked, sensitively devastated and heart-broken with their precarious adventure and their great effort to surpass all who come their way
   
In the novel, Viggo Mortensen (the unidentified man) played a loving father to his son (Kodi Smit-McPhee who is the anonymous boy) who had never-ending bleak questions and searching for adamant answers (Maslin, 2006). Charlize Theron plays as the charming wife who will be seen for the most part through flashbacks as she committed suicide before they all experience this unexpected earth-shattering incident.  Robert Duvall as the old and failing man astonished to see a boy alive and had survived a disastrous happening (Maslin, 2006).  Guy Pierce portrayed a father traveling with his family in search of other survivors.  The story is about a father and son besieged to get to the coast without knowledge of what awaited them there.  Set in a weather-beaten and deserted America, they both worked on a voyage without anything but a three-bullet pistol to defend them from other survivors who were rowdy and have resorted to cannibalism. It is also about the unflagging love of a father to his son.   His son has become his motive and inspiration to get to their target as their common goal while they fought each moment to live on and live longer than they could probably be.  As they travel, they scrounge for food and seek out for safe sanctuary to survive winter and the lawless people they bump into from time to time.  They wear reeking clothes and shoes.  They also slept on in damped blankets with a lamp between them to keep them warm in the cold and mysterious nights and wandering if God has really abandoned them.  Both father and son tried to keep themselves sane for they knew that the father is dying and his sickness will not make him stay longer with his son as he crouched coughing.  In the end, after their incredible ascending effort they reach the south but did find the deliverance they had hoped for.  The father died and the despondent child was left on his own.  One family found him and took him as one of them to perhaps generate an upcoming human race.

Moreover, Joe Penhall had written the script as in the book which is very loyal to the novel however it missed McCarthys biblical description style of writing.  The movie was directed by John Hillcoat who is an Australian director best known for the hit film The Proposition and who believed that he can produce reality in McCarthys craft but the relationship between the father and the son would have come out of Viggo and Smit-McPhees performances.  Hillcoat has captured McCarthys creative writing and illustrious imagination by showing it in the entire scenes.  It was so believable that he wanted it to reveal sensitive pragmatism. We also remember one part of the novel, which stated as Dark and dreary, spine-tingling and very unpredictable.  For so many times, we will see disgusting scenes like babies being cooked and people in cages as their bodies are being detached by others. We will also view corpse at the doorway and in plain field. The roads was caked with ashes and plants all burned and withered.  Besides, there were no signs of animals or other living effects that can be frenzied in order to recuperate force and stability as they march to their destination.  Hence, the film was set in a landscape with absolute sadness and lifeless scene.  With that, the only positive thing is the love of a father to his son which is all that matters.

Essentially, we will be interested to know more excerpts from McCarthys exceptional novel.  The book itself is a page turner and most definitely the film will also be.  It has lived up to McCarthys novel and it has been reiterated here that without the impressive talents of the cast, this movie would not have been a success. It is again an impeccable film by Hillcoat and we could salute him for that.  The cast and crews are to be recognized as well as they have captured the imagination of an outstanding novelist who continues to engage his thoughts in the minds of his readers.  Be ready to be awed and impressed with this never-to -be-repeated experience.  We might know more of the twist and turns of the movie as it unravel the truth of civilization after an unanticipated catastrophe.  We may also feel the love and grief of a father whose sole concern is the protection of his son from the starvation, cold, trauma and attacks from remaining lawless people who used to be sane. Thus, this movie has shown love and hope when there is nobody left in the world and has demonstrated that no matter what lies ahead to keep on marching and reach your destination. Hence, we need to connect with the taunting yet riveting journey of a father and his young son as they struggle to see what is at the other side of the road.