Movies

The paper explores the link between the meaning of iconography in Andrei Rublev and the meaning of filmmaking in Andrei Tarkovskys creative life. The paper positions iconography as the direct reflection of pains and creative tortures of filmmaking. The paper confirms both iconography in Andrei Rublev and filmmaking for Andrei Tarkovsky as the difficult, painful, but vital instruments of their own moral and spiritual survival.

The Church possesses and uses a wealth of iconographic works, but in the history of iconography, the works of Andrei Rublev occupy a special place. Likewise, Andrei Tarkovskys movie Andrei Rublev is fairly regarded as one of the most sophisticated, most talented, and most complicated examples of the modern Russian filmmaking. The three and a half hours of philosophic journey through Andrei Rublevs life create a confusing and mostly dubious impression. On the one hand, Andrei Rublev is a talented representation of the Russian life from within. On the other hand, Andrei Rublev seeks to use the mystery of iconography as the reflection of the same mystery in filmmaking. In the context of Tarkovskys work and the role of iconography in it, it would be fair to assume that in Andrei Rublev, iconography stands out as the direct reflection of pains and creative tortures of filmmaking and positions filmmaking as a unique tool of exploring the enigmatic nature of the human being.

That Andrei Tarkovskys Andrei Rublev is included into the list of the most talented creations in the history of filmmaking is as natural as it is also obvious the three and a half hours of the painful journey through Andrei Rublevs life are equally difficult and fascinating. Not only do the viewers have to adjust to the way of thinking proposed by Tarkovsky, but they cannot but recognize the unusually peripheral role, which Andrei Rublev plays in Tarkovskys film about himself. Everything in the film is about the mystery of iconography, as well as about the mystery of filmmaking the long fluid stands and shots are used in a way that distracts the viewer from the central figure of Andrei Rublev and create an impression of Andrei Rublev being secondary to everything that takes place on the screen. The scene with the balloon, the scene with pagans, soldiers and mass slaughters  everything is shown through the prism of Andrei Rublevs impressions and eyes and as talented filmmakers use their movie creations to reflect, contemplate, and reconsider the reality, Andrei Rublev in Tarkovskys work successfully fulfills a function of the viewers eyes, which they can and are even recommended to use in the process of exploring the reality.

Needless to say, the art of iconography is as complex and painful, as the life itself. In icon is the ultimate product of pains and sufferings, through which Andrei Rublev is bound to go in his life. His decision to devote himself to silence is actually his search for redemption after killing a treason soldier that tries to rape Durochka. Whether redemption is the basic source of Tarkovskys inspiration is difficult to define, but it is obvious that both iconography and filmmaking seek to balance the negative and positive sides of human existence and to show reality as a complex enigma, which goes beyond simple definition of the good and the evil. In his movie, Tarkovsky never shows Andrei Rublev in the process of creating an icon nor is the viewer given a chance to witness the process of creating the film itself. As such, iconography in Andrei Rublev reflects the mystery of filmmaking and creates an impression of filmmaking being a sacred and secret procedure, available only to the most talented ones.

It is natural and even anticipated that iconography, although a sacred and mostly secret process, makes it possible for the audience to see the results of the long and painful iconographers work. Moreover, it is through his interaction with the environment, people, and his inner world, that a talented personality is given a unique opportunity and inspiration to create. Like Borishka succeeds in creating a wonderful bell, Andrei Rublev takes a decision to return to iconography and like his talented works survive centuries, Tarkovskys film is likely to remain one of the best and the most talented examples of film art. The epilogue which, in distinction from the movie itself, is an 8-minute-long colorful disposition signifies Rublevs icons transition to the colored eternity and positions Rublevs icons as the products of his long, painful, and sometimes unbearably difficult fight for the spiritual and moral survival. In this context, it would be fair to say that iconography for Andrei Rublev and filmmaking for Andrei Tarkovsky are equally painful, creative, and productive, and serve an effective tool of exploring the nature of the human being.

In the context of Andrei Tarkovskys Andrei Rublev, iconography stands out as a painfully creative process and an effective element of Andrei Rublevs journey through the depths of the human being. In the same way, filmmaking for Andrei Tarkovsky is the result of creative tortures and pains, through which a talented personality is bound to go in the process of investigating the enigmatic nature of life. That Tarkovsky never shows Andrei Rublev in the process of creating an icon positions both iconography and filmmaking as the two sacred and mostly secret processes, the products of which usually survive centuries. As such, it would be fair to assume that iconography in Andrei Rublev and filmmaking for Andrei Tarkovsky represent the two equally important dimensions of human existence and position both as long, painful, but inevitably necessary tools of ones moral and spiritual survival.

Coppola, born in  April 7th 1939, graduated the Hofstra University where he studied theatre. Afterwards he enrolled himself in the UCLA Film School and graduated with a M.F.A. in film directing. During his time at Hofstra he had written various plays and musicals for the performing students. While attending UCLA he had directed a number of shorts, including  the horror film The Two Christophers which was inspired by Edgar Allen Poes short story William Wilson. Francis had his most significant break when he became the apprentice of Z-movie filmmaker Roger Corman. After proving his worth in many of Cormans projects, Coppola was allowed to make his own project.

In 1963 he wrote, directed and produced with just a few thousand dollars and a crew of nine people, his first feature, Dementia 13. After graduation he started to grow in the eyes of the Warner Brothers and spent the next years working as a screenwriter. While making his way up in Hollywood, Coppola visualized a utopia for young filmmakers yearning for creative freedom in the making of their films. Coppola and his friend, George Lucas,  created American Zoetrope in San Francisco, California. Despite their united talent, their first production, in 1971, was a major box office disaster, albeit critically successful. With a budget of almost 800 thousand dollars the movie, THX 1138, only grossed 5,000 dollars in the US. After the enormous financial loss, Coppola needed employment. Paramount Pictures offered him the task to do an adaptation of Mario Puzos The Godfather. He, reluctantly, accepted the offer, mostly just because he needed money. This was, of course, a very good decision as The Godfather proved to be one masterpiece of a movie, being a success critically and financially. Coppola demanded creative power over the making of the film, and eventually got his own way of depicting the Mafia without disrespecting his Italian heritage.

Francis Ford Coppola finished shooting The Godfather in just seven days, having over 90 hours of footage. In his initial cut of the film he had it down to just a bit over two hours, but under the suggestion of the Vice President of production from Paramount, he re-edited, adding one extra hour to the film. This was the finishing touch to what would be later known as one of the best films ever made. The Godfather has a place for itself engraved for many years to come, in the film industry. Studied and analyzed by film students everywhere, The Godfather made the world see what Francis Ford Coppola has contributed to filmmaking, being only the first of many great films to be done by this promising, rising new director.

Not two years after the release of The Godfather, Coppola had given us its sequel The Godfather Part II. Wanting full creative power over the movie, he produced it himself. Unlike its predecessor this one took Coppola nine months to film, something he did all over the globe, from Sicily to the Dominican Republic and in the United States. Financial success was already expected, but this film surprised everyone with its unbelievable quality, making it probably the best sequel ever done, putting it in the same ranks as the first film. By this point, Coppolas name was gold. The Godfather Part I and Part II both won Oscars for Best Picture.

In the same year as The Godfather Part II, in 1974, Coppola also made another amazing film, which is also his most personal. The Conversation, inspired by his childhood passion of eavesdropping on his parents conversations, especially his attempts at finding out what he was going to receive for Christmas. Critically successful, the movie was amazingly received at the Cannes Festival, and was only outdone, by his other release of the year, the already mentioned Part II of The Godfather.

These three movies, and their amazing success, overshadowed Coppolas other releases which were very disappointing both financially and critically. His next movie was released in 1979, Apocalypse Now, a movie that was so grueling to everyone in production, taking up one year and a half to finish shooting instead of the scheduled six weeks. Francis was under such stress that he threatened to commit suicide and one of the main cast, Martin Sheen aged 36, suffered a heart attack. Apocalypse Now was amazingly successful and greatly received by critics and audience. The film had put Coppola through physical and emotional suffering, so much that he needed a break from war movies and violent gangster films which had made him famous. Thus, he took a new approach for his newest film, a romantic musical.

One From The Heart was released in 1982. Having enough of filming on location, he decided to do this project entirely in a studio. Coppola even added to the feel of the movie by filming it in 1.371 aspect ratio like in the 40s and 50s. Coppola hired Gene Kelly as technical advisor for the film. In the end, the movie production cost was severely high, the quality of the film low and was a major disappointment in all departments despite Coppolas serious attempt in making a musical. Following all his previous financial flops, the failure of One From The Heart severely crippled Coppolas bank account. In 1983 he took on another project The Outsiders based on the novel by Susie Hinton. Coppola didnt have enough money to pay Hinton, but he offered her a percentage of  the profits. Hinton had faith in Coppola and she agreed to let him make the film. Luckily, the movie did great at the box office. This movie was just what Coppola needed to get back on his feet. Following the success of this movie, Coppola did another Hinton adaptation, Rumble Fish, in the same year.  He started filming right after finishing The Outsiders.

Coppola chose a different touch on this film. Filmed in black and white with only two symbolic images presented in color, it was meant as an art film for kids. Unlike The Outsiders, this one was another flop. However thanks to the highly successful box office that The Outsiders received, American Zoetrope managed to live on. Becoming a major name in the film industry in the 70s, Coppola had a steady downfall in the 80s. He had strived to present new material with experimental techniques, but in the end he was left questioning his future in the movie business. Coppola was the third director behind Jonathan Demme and Penny Marshall to be involved with Peggy Sue Got Married, the title of which is lifted from a Buddy Holly song, but eventually he was thought to be the best choice for this project. Production started in 1985 and was finished eight weeks later. Trying to get his reputation back, Coppola kept the production under budget and time limits. Released in 1986, Peggy Sue Got Married was an instant hit, rumored to have surpassed its predecessor, and it was Coppolas best movie of that decade. Paramount Pictures had been trying to get Francis Ford Coppola to finish the Godfather Trilogy for years, but he was no longer interested in gangster movies. Mario Puzo had written scripts for a third installment twice, without success. Being tired of gangster movies, Coppola chose to spend the 80s and millions of dollars on experimental projects, bringing his visions to the big screen. Sadly, most of them were disasters that cost him a great amount of his money bringing him to increasing fear of bankruptcy and losing American Zoetrope. In 1990 he decided to return to the franchise that made him famous. Coppola had written and directed The Godfather Part III. The title Coppola gave to his film was originally The Death Of Michael Corleone but, despite his protest, the title was changed to its final form.Most of the significant cast and crew returned for the sequel, but the production was troubled. When the film was finally released to its overly eager public, it was generally well received. He gave his daughter Sofia, the role of Michael Corleones daughter. Her performance being heavily criticized, criticism that Coppola insists is misdirected towards him.Two years after its release, Coppola edited all three parts of the trilogy into a 583 minute epic which he released on video. He also re-released Apocalypse Now, years later after its theatrical run.Coppola often casts his real-life family members in his films. In the Godfather Trilogy, their characters relationships to Michael Corleone often paralleled their real-life relationship to Coppola. His sister, Talia Shire, played Michaels sister Connie, and his daughter, Sofia Coppola, had the role of Michaels daughter Mary who was named for Coppolas other daughter.

In 1992 Coppola made Bram Stokers Dracula. The film has its strengths and its weaknesses. Of its strengths, the most impressive is Coppolas use of complimentary old and new filmmaking technologies. In homage to vintage vampire films like Nosferatu (1922) and Dracula (1931), Coppola used many of the techniques popular in the early years of filmmaking (for example using irises to cut from one scene to the next) and even used an old Path camera to shoot some footage. And then seamlessly tied in are some of the most cutting edge special effects and make-up technologies available. On top of that youve got beautiful period costumes and sets that add to the amazing visuals of the picture. The film made over eighty million dollars in its US theatrical run and much more abroad. Coppola now had two consecutive hits with this and The Godfather Part III. This brought Zoetrope back in business. Since he first started directing up until the present day, he has done 32 films in total. In the 2000s he has not been as active making only 3 movies in 10 years. Although his skills have not faded and we can still see Coppola in his new films, in each he gives us his own vision. In 2007 he made a film adaptation of Romanian writer Mircea Eliades novel Youth Without Youth after he received the book, read it and liked the story, he decided he wanted to put it on the big screen. Francis Ford Coppola is and will be one of the greatest directors the film industry will ever have, opening eyes to everyone who sees his films, his talent remarkably distinct. His latest movie Tetro was released in 2009, greatly received by audiences and critics.

The Godfather films are personal. And they are, even though our family were never gangsters, and we only heard about somebody who knew a gangster. But still, the real day-to-day reality of the Italian family that was put into the gangster film was based on my family and what I remember as a kid. You cant make films without them being personal to some extent.

I think Tetro is the most beautiful film Ive ever done in terms of how it was made. I dont know what people will make of the picture, but just the filmmaking part of it, Ive learnt to put it together beautifully.- Francis Ford Coppola.

Thesis Statement The dominance of the industrialized West is a recurring theme and ideology in the following movies.

Although hidden and subtle, the ideology of the superiority of the industrialized West has taken over other equally legitimate knowledge systems and considered them to be second class and unimportant. Thus, the black color of skin is associated with ignorance, the lack of sophistication, underdevelopment and primitivism. Other cultures of colonized peoples are portrayed as possessing fewer rights. And the primal wisdom of aboriginal cultures and their harmony with nature are treated as something to be laughed at.
A film, in its most basic sense, is a series of shots that portray a story that the scriptwriter made and the director gave life to. There are various factors that identify what a film should be. It is grounded by production techniques, camera angling, lighting, music and sound effects, dialogues, and many more. Nothing is more important than the other element. Even so, after the whole film is created, the synchronization of the parts will come up with a totally novel whole. Inherent within the creation of the film itself is a certain ideology which makes up the whole picture, which is actually something more considerable than the sum of its parts. Therefore, to fully understand the effect of mixing these elements together, people must know how to critically assess a certain film. The true meaning of this audio-visual story will only unfold before you if you know how to ask the question why

In the film Instinct, where Anthony Hopkins played the character of Dr. Ethan Powell and Cuba Gooding Jr. played Dr. Theo Clauder, the supposed mentally-deranged Dr. Powell was detained in a mental asylum for the murder of two men. This is the starting point of the analytical process. Why was Dr. Powell in Rwanda Why in that specific place Why not anywhere else in the world Does the place symbolize anything Are the apes vital to the story And how important are Dr. Clauders discoveries about the human behavior
Every story is made for a certain purpose, and in this case, it is made to evoke the sense of mystery of what happens in the mind of a person. Because no matter how much we study the perception and behavior of people, it is still a complex thing to master. As the tagline of the movie goes one mans mind is another mans mystery. The characters were only used as metaphoric impressions (Baker) to give the film some depth.
Since times immemorial, we have already been exploring the minds of animals and people. We have been trying to crack the code of life and play God regulating all processes in the world. But these are the mysteries that the film Instinct tries to impart to the viewers sometimes, our personality, our whole being is just beyond our ability to analyze and reason out.

Yet there is a deeper and more subtle symbolism that is hidden in the film itself. There are background assumptions that will be unnoticed if one is not critical enough. Following the plot, one seldom notices that those who play the roles of doctors and intelligent people are most often Caucasians. This is against the backdrop of an underdeveloped country populated predominantly by black and relatively ignorant people as compared to the stars in the film. Unconsciously, the ideology of whites being superior to blacks is revealed in the plot of the film itself. Although this is not actually the main point in the film, this kind of ideology is continually reinforced as one views different films with the same veiled assumptions.

Another example is the film Lamant. In relation to the symbolisms incorporated in movies, the film Lamant (translated as The Lover) is a very symbolic not only concerning love between two unlike people, but also concerning the ongoing contention between the warring countries. Lamant has two nameless characters in the person of the French girl and the Chinese man, who fell in love with each other when they were riding in the same boat on their way to Saigon. If a person views this film on the superficial level, heshe will only see an unusual love story that budded between two unlike lovers with a wide age gap and different cultural backgrounds. But, if a person looks more closelycritically heshe will begin to ask why the producer of the film made the French girl poor and the Chinese man rich. Considering that the setting was time when the southern part of Vietnam was under the French colonial rule, it was unexpected to see the Chinese people being prosperous. Here, we can already see a reversal of the social status the colonized is dominant while the colonizer is subdued. And in these particular circumstances, we are able to see the structural binary opposition in the definition of colonizer and colonized. The deconstruction was taken a little further which ultimately transformed it the other way around.

There is also more that can be noticed in their love affair besides the forbidden love scenes that were shown. Although it was also used to create a mood and to communicate his vision (Baker), it was more than that. Their act of making love was for a purpose other than intimacyor that is how we perceive it to be. It symbolizes how each of the two persons use the other one to satisfy their needs love for the Chinese man and pride for the French girl. But this transcends to a deeper level when we think about it. The film actually shows the paradox that exists between the Chinese man penetrating the French girl and France penetrating China. The French girl was hurt during the first time that they made love. But as the days pass by and they made love again, it became more natural, more accepted. Gradually, a point was reached where the French girl is the one initiating the sexual encounter. This reflected China having just decided to deal with its fate of being colonized by a more powerful country it became more natural as the time passed by.

Besides, the girl used to claim that he did not like the Chinese. The main hero said, after they first made love, that he cannot marry the girl because she is not a virgin anymore. In here, the lines were dedicated to show the kind of culture they grew up in and how much they have imbibed these practices. But this is a problem created due to words. For people who do not know when to spot what is faux and what is real, dialogues can easily blur the whole essence of the story and they are likely to be completely lost throughout the film.
The movie The Gods Must be Crazy is another film laden with symbols. If someone really needs to study the art of identifying symbols then this film is a good place to start. Coke bottles are items which our current society perceives as nothing more than a container for soda. But what does soda even mean to these natives How important is a soda bottle to their daily lives It was used for a variety of ways that we have never thought of before. We have never though of using it as a back scratcher or as a hammer-like tool because we were limited by its traditional use. We were taught that soda bottles were containers, which is the knowledge preventing us from doing things that are contrary to what we know and being creative.

Although the film is couched with humor, one seldom notices the binary opposition presented between the superior white and primitive black people. As one laughs at the ways of the latter, the battle inside ones head becomes civilization versus primitive ways, modernity versus tradition, the Western knowledge versus the African ignorance, and so on and so forth revealing a deep seated ideology and Messiahnism of the West.
John Fraim supported this by saying that America is as much a prisoner of its own symbols as the rest of the world (Fraim). If we can really understand a culture from their own perspective and not from our perspective, then the plot would be reversed into a stinging criticism of the failures of our own culture in terms of community spirit, ecological practices, and spiritual fulfillment.

Similarities of the Films
In the three films presented in this thesis, it is clear that each one of them has a purpose why they were put in that certain story. The characters, the setting, the plot, the angling of the cameras, everything has a purpose. Every element represents an ideology. For the film Instinct, Dr. Powell was the mind that Dr. Clauder tries to understand. But they are more than characters in a story because they are representative of the society as a whole.  The two personas are representative of the researchers who tries to figure out what the other one has been doing all along. And while he thinks he is right, the researched thinks this researcher is the one who must be detained for insanity. But the real binary which represents a deeper ideology is between the black and white, the industrialized West and undeveloped Africa, civilization and the rest of the world.
The same goes with Lamant, which represents not only two lovers who fell in love or used each other for anything other than love. They were used to represent two characters, but also two countries.

And, the third film clearly speaks about how modern culture is superior and makes a laughing stock of traditional cultures. It is all about people who strive to make their lives easier, but in the process even makes it more complicated. How are we supposed to compare life today and life 100 years earlier In what ways were our lives complicated by the inventions that will supposedly make it a lot easier
Thus analyzing those 3 films with seemingly different plots and settings, one cannot help but realize the hidden ideology being repeated incessantly in the films that of white superiority, European or American modernity and sophistication, in contrast with the ignorance and helplessness of traditional and colonized peoples. These films clearly demonstrate the power of the West over the rest of the world. Viewed separately, the representations and the stereotypes in these films will play incessantly this hidden ideology leaving no space for a black criticism of the white, a colonized peoples criticism of the colonizer, and a traditional peoples criticism of modernity.

It is a good point to note how the directors of the film visualized the elements as carrying dual meaning in the film. The concept of the director can be commended for creating viable characters, who can represent greater issues at hand. But, as Frank Baker puts it for a symbol to be truly a symbol, it must be repeated throughout a work. And all the three films have succeeded in doing so. All who are involved in the production of the film know that they will be able to reach a wide range of audience and it is therefore important to send a strong message that their film is worthwhile. Every piece of art is made for a certain purpose. And more than expression of ones feelings and intentions, a work of art like that of film-making is very important for the promotion of cultural awareness, of deeper meaning subdued by seemingly shallow lines, and the symbolisms in the elements incorporated within a motion picture (Baker).

What specific visual film techniques do you see utilized in contemporary television
The visual techniques used by film and television are similar to the point that they  trade  or  interchange  techniques.   One is the use of the camera.  Besides the angle and perspective of capturing images with the aid of the cinematographer, there is also technology to take into consideration as newer models of cameras are now digital, replacing the older celluloid and analog models (Mitchell, 2004).  In addition there is also the use of the technique called  mise en scene  which entail the organization of the elements seen onscreen which consist of costume or wardrobe, setting or backdrop, action and the use of light to capture the best image possible (Stadler and McWilliam, 2009).   This is very evident is some television shows like Dexter and 24 which makes use of various  plays  of the camera to set the mood to make the television viewer feel they are watching a movie.  The same can be said of the television reality series like Survivor and its derivatives where camera angle captures the best image of the participants as they do through the motions.  It is the visual techniques employed that made these seemingly  natural  actions more dramatic and appealing (Thompson, 2003).

What specific television visual techniques do you see utilized in contemporary films  
Film is also influenced by television in the use of equipment.  Before, filmmakers used to employ the  ancient  cranked camera and the use of analog projectors using celluloid film.   In keeping with the times, film outfits now make use of digital models of cameras to record movies which have proven to be easier to use and more efficient in terms of editing and shortens the time in processing the film before it it released (Midnightanjel, 2009).In what ways have film and television influenced each other during their shared history  
Film and television have both influenced one another. It would be erroneous to think that television is the  poor cousin  of film as  shown by the way television has influenced film in terms of the technology used and it is through technology that they are becoming closer to the point of being intertwined.  Chronologically, films were first and before television came into being, filmmakers have developed and perfected various techniques in getting the best out of their resources whether it is the equipment they use or the quality of performance of the actors.  When television started becoming available in almost every household, the cinematic techniques of film was applied here.  In addition, popular actors such as Tom Hanks (Bosom Buddies), John Travolta (Welcome Back, Kotter) and Jennifer Anniston (Friends) started out by appearing on television shows before  graduating  to the big screen.  If it were not for the influence of film on television with regard to the cinematic techniques used, these actors would remain unknown to us.  It is no surprise that the transition from television to film was not that hard for them.  The same can be said with the directors who alternate between television and film.

These instances show that film and television are headed to a point where they would be difficult to distinguish in terms of the visual techniques despite other aspects that sets them apart such as aspects of production that includes budgeting, format, shooting or taping schedules and locations.

Gangster films, particularly those produced in Asia, are typically based on cult culture prototypes that involve socio-political factors indigenous to the country of production. Film industries in India and Hong Kong have been exploring themes involving the underworld and mafia for decades. These films are known to be stylistically outlined, with a firm directorial focus on weaving congruent plots ably supported by succinct narratives. Albeit sometimes politically motivated to endorse certain subjective viewpoints, the vast majority of these films do churn out impressions of a far greater sensibility lying beneath the violent conflicts and interpersonal crises depicted on screen. This paper is going to critique two such films, namely, Company and Infernal Affairs III, which hit the theaters in 2002 and 2003 respectively. While the former explores the notorious underworld of Mumbai, India, the latter is based on Hong Kong.

Infernal Affairs III, directed by Andrew Lau and Alan Mak, recounts the tale of undercover intelligence in the Triads, the mafia world in Hong Kong. One of the key cinematic techniques adopted in this crime thriller is interplay of time. This may be noticed in the storytelling itself. Albeit the narrative of the movie is set in continuation with the 2002 film Infernal Affairs, it sometimes breaks away from the past and meanders into the future. Again, a number of characters are retained in the sequel, which implies temporal shift from events shown in Internal Affairs. Senior Inspector Lau Kin-Ming, police officer Chan Wing-Yan and mafia kingpin Hon Sam feature in Internal Affairs III, highlighting a creative use of cinematic time. Chan Wing-Yan, the police officer who struggles with his own identity after disguising himself as a mafia member for ten years to investigate into the modus operandi of the Hong Kong underworld, dies at the end of Internal Affairs, but only to be reintroduced in flashback in the beginning of the latter film. Once again, the films narrative switches ahead of time following the death of Yan. Hence, the narrative discontinuity, which serves both as a filmic device and thematic linkage, marks a deliberate departure from classical flashbacks where time is treated in a linear manner (Marchetti 6).

Time and narrative take a similar course in Company, the 2002 Bollywood film directed by Ram Gopal Varma. Like Infernal Affairs III, Company too depicts the dire consequences of criminal involvement over a lengthy period of time. In this regard, the character of Chandu in Company may well be compared to that of Yan in Infernal Affairs III. Both in the beginning harbor aspirations for making progress in life and both get disillusioned at a point when there is no turning back from the darkest world of crimes. However, the case with Chandu is a lot grimmer than that with Yan. He is at once a mastermind and victim of his self-induced machinery, which is inescapable and unforgiving. While Yan, as a mole, is driven by a singular goal to unmask the world of crimes, Chandu wittingly joins it. Chandus association with Malik, the indisputable don of the Mumbai underworld, marks the beginning of his own end. The crucial theme Varma wants to project through the rift between Chandu and Malik is crisis of subversive values. The same thematic aspect is also included in Infernal Affairs III, but not through the actions carried out by the seemingly good characters.
As regards the treatment of time, Company focuses primarily on interpersonal romantic relations of both Malik and Chandu. In the course of the plot, both fall out with each other and seek vengeance for what they believe to be violation of ethical codes of the criminal world. Subsequently, their spouses undergo tremendous emotional turmoil and look back despairingly at the good times they shared as a unified gang. The utter despotism of the two rival kingpins is presented in sharp contrast to the tender sentiments of the female leads.

Themes concerning identity crisis, corruption, and disguise dominate both films. Characters such as Ming and Chandu experience a sense of helplessness when their self-identities are put on stake at the cost of their assigned roles. Moreover, both films deliver strong socio-political messages relevant to their respective countries. The real context of Mumbai economy is shown in Company. Malik and his gang stand for an inviolable dictatorship induced by fear, which is attained by surreptitious flow of black money. This calls for a cultural interpretation of the contemporary middle-class society as well. Inspector Sreenivasan may be seen as a mitigating agent trying to make amends for the massive losses of lives and properties in Mumbai and elsewhere in the country and abroad. His primary concern is to restore order in the society. But when the rift between Malik and Chandu goes out of his hand as both of them flee India, he changes his modus operandi and becomes a force element uncaring for the basic humane values. As a result, Sreenivasan turns out to be a social representative-turned-legal manipulator. Similarly in Infernal Affairs III, Lau Kin-Ming turns violent on Lee Sum-Yee when the formers secrecy becomes exposed to the latter. However, it may also be noted that Sreenivasan is portrayed as a much more assured individual than Lau Kin-Ming.

The triumph of justice over greed for power and money is a recurrent theme in many contemporary gangster films and Company is no exception either (Nochimson 273). But this theme is presented as a subordinate cultural coefficient in Internal Affairs III, thus taking the wind out of its relevance on a more widespread ethical scale.

The fact that state-controlled law enforcing agencies in all nations invariably resort to counter-intelligence tactics to trace organized activities against the internal security interests of the country is underscored by the intervention of Internal Affairs and Mumbai Police in Infernal Affairs III and Company respectively. Internal Affairs is a security wing in Hong Kong investigating into the activities of organized Triads (Nochimson 212). On the other hand, the Company indirectly refers to the notorious real gang comprising underworld boss of Mumbai Dawood Ibrahim and his rival Chotta Rajan (Nochimson 273), who once created panic in India through a series of blasts and mass killings in Mumbai. Hence, both films take a referential stance to organized crimes in real world.

Citizen Kane is regarded as one of the most significant movies ever to be made in the history of Hollywood. Most of the movie critics and personalities agree and believe that this is one of the most important American films of all time. Why not With the kind of work and artistic ability dedicated on this movie, it is, without a doubt, worthy of all the praises and positive comments from different people around the globe.

In a sense, one of the greatest characteristics of Citizen Kane is its ability to present an idea in the most creative and meaningful way. Orson Welles, a great and reputable movie director, has done a great job in utilizing the cameras ability to present and depict ideas and themes in different approaches, which may vary from being obvious to a more concealed way.

In the scene wherein the lead character, Foster Kan (played by Orson Welles), is giving his speech in front of many people, Welles has creatively utilized the camera in presenting the films primary theme and the scenes main meaning. In this specific part of the movie, the camera is positioned on the lower part of Kanes image in front of the podium while delivering his speech, which supports the scenes theme with regard to hierarchy and supremacy in the society. The angle or position of the camera, which looks up to Kanes strong body movement and facial expression, uplifts the idea of dominance by those who are seating and aspiring to grab a position in the politics. Lastly, the long shot or wide angle of camera in the start of Kanes speech, which clearly presents his huge still-photo in the backdrop of the stage, reinforces the scenes theme of greediness and Kanes huge desire for power in the local politics.

The film consisted of four distinct but parallel stories that showed mans intolerance during four difference ages in history. The film covered 2, 500 years of history. Here are the stories

The Babylonian Era. This part of the film depicts the fall of Babylon as a consequence of intolerance arising from a conflict between religious fanatics within the empire

The Judean period (27 A.D.). This discusses the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ. Emphasis is given to the rise of the Christian religion  the outcome of Jewish intolerance

St. Bartholomews Day Massacre (1572). The queen mother of France ordered the massacre of Huguenots in the city of Paris, as a result of the failure of the Edict of Toleration
Modern America (1914). This part discusses the inherent conflict between capitalists and workers. Crime, moral degradation, and violence as results of social intolerance. Man is presented as a selfish being, capable of destroying the lives of other individuals. Man is also a good being, capable of loving a cruel world.
The stories are not told separately. Instead, the film constantly cuts between each scene, setting up moral and psychological connections among the different parts. D.W. Griffith wants to create a single thematic arrangement of the film. As the four stories reach their climaxes, the cuts become more rapid. This means that the stories are merging under a single theme. For example, the transition from the third to the fourth story is abrupt. This is followed by an abrupt exaggeration of a problem (the inability of the Dear one appeal to the governor is fruitless). A sense of urgency is evident both in the film and the individual stories. It is possible that mans intolerance is becoming more and more rampant (manifested in many forms)  primarily in the form of indifference (the scene of the governor leaving the building and failing to help the woman).

Thus, the film achieves thematic and constructive continuity. The stories merge rapidly, as the theme reach its climax.

Griffith uses sentimental color techniques to emphasize the solitary nature of mans history. This also emphasizes the imprudence of intolerance as it relates to the development of ideas and concepts. Griffith apparently does not give the characters of the film names. This is because Griffith wants them to be generic symbols of mans fortunes and values. Today, this technique is used primarily in filming radical independent films. Note that the focus is not on the character but on what the character represents.

The movie was born at a wrong period of world history. Its theme was a contradiction of existing social, economic, and political conditions. The outbreak of the First World War is an indication of mans ineptness to the good. Indeed, when the movie was released, it became a flop at the box-office. Triangle Studios went bankrupt. Politicians of that time did not want the United States to participate in the war (participation was a means to attain tolerance). The world simply did not care of the consequences of intolerance as long as the society survives.