Movies

Often the term auteur director is thrown about when describing the stylistic tendencies that pervade a directors film, whether it is through material, theme, or in style.  Consequently, established directors work within a vacuum of their own previous films, in which they set the tone for the auteur to either repeat or dismantle.  Robert Altman was a prolific director who continually directed for film and television well over three decades, in the meantime, glossing over nearly every genre of cinema with the same tone that became the Altman style.  This is one that can be seen developed and crafted in early works like The Long Goodbye, only later to be casually represented in the mid-career ensemble film Cookies Fortune, and lastly a self-homage in his final piece, the quintessential Altman film A Prairie Home Companion.

The Long Goodbye is one of Altmans earlier films, and in it, he demonstrates a strong implication of style over substance.  The film tries to exist primarily as an excuse to build film techniques, possibly into a story, but more importantly into a neo-noir film.  Altmans version of Phillip Marlowe is a character out of time, living as if film noir (or the 1940s) attitudes of private investigation, let alone everyday life in the 1970s, remained relevant.  The consequences range from quaint to violent, but through it all, Altman catches the characters in a rather detached manner.  He prioritizes extreme long and medium shots, rarely focusing squarely in close up on his characters.  They compliment this by routinely acting without reason (at least to the audience), as even the protagonist seems to be alien to the world he exists in, both in narrative and filmic representation.  

Altmans camera roams throughout the film, keeping the storyline taught and moving and a brisk pace. Nevertheless, the editing appears founded in noir films of the 1940s, Altman is not prone to fast cuts or awkward, rapid editing to demonstrate action.  Instead zooms are used to reveal information catch people speak in the foreground whilst action occurs behind, in the distance.  The act of investigation and secrets that it reveals are reenacted by the camera which occasionally catches action off in the distance or stumbles upon circumstances while paying attention to something else entirely.  The effect is a semi-parody of noir, in which the protagonist stumbles across the solution to a crime by happenstance and dumb luck, but at other times, the action is deadly serious, and it becomes clear that Marlowe, and the thugs he surrounds himself with are not simply noir types, but dangerous individuals found in the real world beyond the noir film.

Cookies Fortune was completed in a time when Altman was amidst refining what would come to be known as Altman-esque.  The film features the trademarks of many of his films, a large cast of established actors, lots of intermingled plot and dialogue, and the gentile gathering of various attitudes and perceptions, to be observed and collected by the audience.  In the case of Cookies Fortune, the setting lies in a small southern town, one of those quaint villages where everybody knows everyone and social constructs like racism and classism are seemingly devoid.  The characters exist in a fantastical world where even tragic situations are handled with aplomb characters reveal trust in one another and the complexity of small town life in a manner that is not obtrusive or didactic.   The film appears divided amongst acts, with eccentric characters like Jewel Mae and Camille become defined in their quirks.  When the sign of the stage production of Salome is billed with Camilles name along with Oscar Wilde, its a subtle reminder of the quiet charm of the movie.  The act is both entirely in character, slightly off kilter, and, in a way, charming as the film in itself.

Altman continues another one of his themes in the film, particularly the overlapping dialogue that unites both characters in frame, as well uniting situational occurrence.  As Camille sets the wheels in motion for Willies arrest, it becomes clear how tight nit the community is, even the sheriff does not believe the story and lets the man stay in a loosely guarded, rather pampered cell. The quaint misc en scene of a decorated, charming prison, accompanied by other cute moments (often orchestrated to upbeat, charming, music) lends an air of whimsy and relaxed, Southern fortuity that demonstrates that Altman can attack a madcap comedy (and part mystery) in a typical Altman structure, where the film comments on itself.

A Prairie Home Companions protagonist, detective Guy Noir, may as well be a typified Marlowe, living in a different, contemporary neo-noirish, observational adventure as he proceeds into the inhabitable stories of the typical Altman characters.  The gang of singers, radio personalities, and theater hanger-ons flood to the Fitzgerald Theater for the final show performance.  The theater is to be closed and the eerie haunt of death and cascading limelight seeps through conversation, misc en scene and direction choices.  The allegory of light is strong in the film and even the haunting overtones of death are softened by the soft crackle of campfire anecdotes and the warm lights of the theater stage.  The characters, through overlapping conversations and tales of the road and stage, reveal how much of existence performance, complicated by resilience on family and loved ones is.  This is revealed in an especially poignant scene between the Jonson families where mirrors frame the family together in conversation while collapsing their space.  They reflect one another in blood and profession and reveal to the audience (who relishes in the reflectivity) the aura of candid nostalgia, as well as perseverance.

Lola Johnsons song towards the films end epitomizes the intersection of family, art, life and death that makes up most of ones existence.  The song is a celebration of the wonderful and the prophetic, at times an elegy, at times a sing-along.  The direction is typical Altman, graceful and fluid, constantly shifting planes between characters, high and low brow.  The style is especially reminiscent of The Long Goodbye, in which the characters are allowed to gracefully exist without competing for the cameras attention.  The effect is natural and fluid as the plot effortlessly switches amongst the stellar cast while remaining as gentle as a big band commercial.  Consequently the film can be viewed as an allegory to Altmans career, in which he encapsulates the entirely of his auteristic style, and packages it around a plot that allows his themes to flourish.

Two films have proven to be among the most memorable in the long and lauded history of the horror genre. THE WOLFMAN (1942) and SAW (2004) remain two of the most influential horror films of the past 100 years. But, what is it about these two films that allow them to standout so strongly from the thousands of horror films that have been produced over the years There are a number of reasons and that is why a close examination of the two films is necessary. Also, the two films must be put into context with horror films as an entire genre. This is why a look at the complete history of the genre is necessary as well. As such, the genre will be explored from its early days of inception and well into the modern era. From this, the two films will be examined on their aesthetical value and their place in history.

The origins of the horror genre began in the literary realm. There were popular horror novels written over the centuries prior to the 20th century including Stokers DRACULA, Shelleys FRANKENSTEIN, and Robert Louis Stevensons DR JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE. Is it no surprise that these same classics would be tapped for subject matter in the early silent films.

FRANKENSTEIN was adapted for the cinema for the first time in the Thomas Edison produced 1910 film version. The film was adapted twice more in 1915 in LIFE WITHOUT A SOUL and in 1920s THE MONSTER OF FRANKENSTEIN. Sadly, the latter two films are lost forever. Actually, prior to the DVD release of the 1910 version, only ONE print of the film existed so it came within a hairs breath of being lost itself.

Various other horror classics would be produced in the silent era including adaptations of DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE as well as original versions of films based on the legend of the werewolf. However, it would be one film and one spin on the genre that would greatly aid in the genre becoming popular. This would be the emergence of Lon Chaney Sr. as the first horror film star.

Lon Chaney Sr. was not a horror actor per se. He was a major star in a variety of genres. In fact, very few of his film appearances were in actual horror productions. However, his appearance in silent classics such as THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME and LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT made him probably the most enduring of all silent movie stars outside of the comedians of the error.
The greatest hit of Lon Chaney Sr. was the adaptation of THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA. This utter nightmare of a film featured a shockingly frightening creature to terrorize audiences. The unmasking scene of the Phantom is among the most frightening of all horror scenes in film history.

The success of THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA led to more silent era horror films including the German classic NOSFERATU. NOSFERATU was a product of the movement of German Expressionism which sought to recreate a nightmare scenario in the form of film. This (unauthorized) adaptation of the Stoker novel further aided in enhancing the popularity of the genre into the sound era. The 1931 version of DRACULA capitalized on the success of the Broadway play adaptation and helped launch the sound era of horror. But, do not assume that the road to success of the horror genre was one that was without any bumps in the proverbial road. History shows us this is not the case.

Unfortunately, the horror genre is not one that is commonly praised by critics. Often, classics of the horror film are not dubbed classics until many years after their release. This is because through the prism of history the effective impact of the film becomes clearly visible. However, at the time of their release, horror films are often treated with contempt.

James Whale and Boris Karloff brought the world FRANKENSTEIN in 1932 and it was a tremendous box office hit grossing in the millions at a time when films would have a very difficult time doing so. (Tickers were in the ten cent --range during the era) Criticism of the film was enormous and its amazing artistry was commonly ignored by those that felt it was just too horrifying and garish a film to take seriously. It was also considered too over the top of frightening to be of any commercial value. Most critics looked past the artistry of the film and centered on its more  at the time  salacious components. Such criticism was also levied at the 1932 DRACULA and THE MUMMY. Both were brilliant films and these three  along with BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN  opened the doors for the horror genre to explore into the mainstream even beyond their ability to draw audiences during the silent era.

Unfortunately for the horror genre, there was no first amendment or constitution in Great Britain. In 1933, the British Board of Film Censors banned horror movies in their home country in the interest of the public good. Due to the loss of such a vital export market, Universal shut down its horror movie line sending many actors (Bela Lugosi most notably) into unemployment. The horror genre, for all intents and purposes, was killed off. But, like the monsters it is films, it would eventually rise again as Universal put SON OF FRANKENSTEIN into production in 1939. The success of the film led to further horror productions that were wildly successful in the 1940s. The seemingly most popular of these films were FRANKENSTEIN and MUMMY sequels that were far more cartoonish than their predecessors. Also cartoonish were the monster rallies that featured an entourage of monsters in what were more fantasy-adventure pulp tales than serious horror films.

Why did this happen In the 1940s, World War II was raging across the globe and people were looking for escapist entertainment. The silliness of an Egyptian Mummy showing up in Louisiana (obviously, the bayou is cheaper to remake than ancient Egypt) provided an increasingly younger audience with cheap thrills. It also set the stage for the proverbial cancer that impacts the genre well into the modern era. That cancer would be the crank em out style of filmmaking that plagues horror films.

It is, however, important to point that some of the criticism of horror movies was well founded. Since audiences wanted cheap thrills in a number of instances, poor quality horror films could prove to be very successful at the box office regardless of how awful they were. Such an approach became common in the late 1950s and has remained a poison on the genre to this very day. So, for every one quality horror film, 20 or so extremely awful ones find their way into production.
Does that mean that all horror films of the 1940s were of middling quality No, there was one astounding classic that is actually far superior then a number of the serious horror films of the 1930s and 1920s. This film would be the 1942 classic THE WOLFMAN.

In older TV GUIDE publications, reviews would give THE WOLFMAN and would read The real deal. You could not ask for a more hulking and fearsome werewolf than Lon Chaney Jr. This is true and it is because the film is not so much about the wolf as much as it is about the man.

THE WOLFMAN is not a film about a menacing, rampaging creature. No, it is about the wayward prodigal son realizing he has abandoned his family. It is also about the inability for a father to love his son in the way a father should. This creates a dysfunction in the family that expands and comes to life in the form of the fearsome and menacing werewolf Lawrence Talbot turns into.

In the film, Lawrence Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr.) returns to his home estate to be by his fathers side (Claude Rains) after the unfortunate death of his brother. Lawrence realizes his lack of responsibility led him astray but even as he tries to make amends, the playboy in him causes his amorous advances toward a woman that is engaged. Gwen Conliffe (Evelyn Ankers) ignores his advances but Lawrence persists. This leads to the scenario where he places both of them in danger  they are attacked by a werewolf. Lawrence kills the beast but is bitten and becomes a werewolf himself. Now, when the moon rises, he loses control of himself and becomes a rampaging beast. He tries to convince his father of the problem but his father will not listen or believe.

While it is understandable a father would be skeptical of tales of werewolves, the image of the Wolfman in the father-son dynamic clearly is symbolic of dysfunctional relationships. You could easily replace the image of the werewolf with drug addiction, gambling, or mental illness. Essentially, the werewolf becomes the symbol of anxiety and stress that threatens to tear apart the solidity of the family unit.

It is this component that remains one of the most common motifs in the horror film  anxiety. The cathartic experience found in horror films is anxiety, stress, and despair. And no modern horror film typifies this more than the original SAW (2004) was able to deliver in its presentation.

With the detonation of the atomic bomb to end WWII, the horror genre died. The fear of atomic attack rendered the horror genre irrelevant. The era of horror died and the realm of science-fiction emerged. Of course, like the mythical creatures in the horror film, the genre would not stay dead.
In the late 1950s, three events would occur that would bring the genre back Hammer Films released full color frightening adaptations of DRACULA and FRANKENSTEIN delivering a level of shock never seen in horror films before AIP Films released the films I WAS A TEENAGE FRANKENSTEIN and I WAS A TEENAGE WOLFMAN which opened the door for a teen audience and the classic horror films of the 1930s and 1940s were released to television capturing a kids audience launching a horror boom that only abated for a brief time in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Unfortunately, the new explosion of horror films saw a significant rise in exploitation. Benignly sleazy during the 1960s, as censorship codes dissolved the horror genre would become far more exploitative than it ever had been before. Films such as THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (1974), HALLOWEEN (1978), DAWN OF THE DEAD (1979), FRIDAY THE 13TH (1980) among others made the horror genre a violent, R-rated realm that boosted shock and anxiety levels in audiences. So, the experience of the cinema attending audience was one of shock and awe. This is why the success of SAW is not surprising. The film greatly boosted the shocking experience through putting the audience through a bizarre psychoanalytical world of serial killer that takes the guise of a savior of sorts.

The film SAW (and its uneven sequels) revolves around a psychotic murderer who places people in various traps designed to teach moral lessons. Those that do not truly look deep into themselves and change who they are cannot survive the traps. That would be about 99 of the people finding themselves in such traps. The stress and the anxiety such victims face carries over into the audience in a dually interactive manner. How is it interactive Basically, the audience will be placed in a position where they can identify with both the victim and the killer in the proceedings.

In terms of identifying with the victim, the audience understands that they all have their own unique flaws and problems. Seeing the victims on display in the film SAW leads them to realize their own problems and their own frailties. This is much like the anxiety that Lawrence Talbot feels in THE WOLFMAN although the absurdist world of SAW is decidedly more realistic since the antagonist is one that is rooted in reality as opposed to a fantasy creature such as a werewolf.

The audience also has a tendency to identify with Jigsaw since many will be somewhat envious of the power that the killer wields. Yes, this may sound like a garish indictment of the audience but there is a segment of it  possibly larger than some assume  that have a desire to crave the power that Jigsaw possesses over others. This does not mean that they wish to harm others. It can often mean that they simply wish to control the destiny of themselves and others. The grim nature of a film like saw presents such control in an explicit manner and THE WOLFMAN presents a decided lack of control in a very detailed manner. However, this notion of power, release, and control is a common convention in all horror films. A powerful monsterantagonist is one that has some control over others. This can prove to be very attractive to a certain segment of the audience.

The same could even be said of those that find the victim component of the film since it provides a visual experience that complements the helplessness people may feel in their life. This is a perpetual convention that has been with the horror genre since its inception and will stay will it for decades to come. Films genres all produce emotional responses of some sort. Comedies can make you laugh, dramas can make you sad, and horror films evoke fear. Fear is a form of anxiety and the rush of anxious helplessness and anxious dread aids in making the genre perversely popular. Perhaps it is this garish emotional response that is the reason why so many critics fail to take the genre seriously.

Whether or not most critics take the genre seriously or ignore it is irrelevant. The key here is that the genre has proven wildly successful. Some films have even emerged as all-time classics as evidenced with THE WOLFMAN and SAW. Of course, there will be many more classics to come and the horror genre will live forever like many of its undead brethren.

World history is rich with stories of struggles in power, both in the positive and negative sense of the word. Power can appear in a constructive way, as a means of productivity or development, but it could also be negative, like in the form of domination and coercion. The struggle for this power and authority is very evident especially in historical accounts of decolonization, which is a violent phenomenon that takes place with the meeting of two forces, opposed to each other by their very nature where one group intends to impose power and influence over the other while the latter fights to resist this imposition in order to keep its liberation (Fanon). In these events, the world becomes oriented with violent and transforming political acts participated by a colonizing group and a native group who commit acts of insurgencies, or the condition of revolting against the government, and counterinsurgencies, wherein government strikes back to eliminate the root causes and strengths of the insurgent groups.  Two films with plots that significantly represent the culture of decolonization are Braveheart (1995) and V for Vendetta (2006). The stories of these movies narrate the struggle for power and liberation of the natives against oppressive rulers that leads to violent acts of insurgencies and counterinsurgencies.

V for Vendetta is set on a suffering future version of Great Britain that is being ruled by the totalitarian government Chancellor Adam Sutler (John Hurt) and his fascist group known as the Norsefire. The film is about a character named V (Hugo Weaving), an extraordinary kind of hero who planned to liberate his nation from this corrupt and cruel government through his violent tactics and by encouraging the people to join him in the insurgency and rebellion. He wears a Guy Fawkes mask that serves as a tribute to the Catholic activist who planned to blow up the Parliament in 1605. He is also aided by an unlikely accomplice in the person of Evey (Natalie Portman) whom he rescued and later oriented on his ideology and plan of destroying the government that manipulates and destroys their lives. These main protagonists of the story are two unique characters that create the most impact in the film. The movie is violent and brutal cinematically, as the acts of V are most likely seen as terroristic tactics, but are not necessarily so. Vs intentions are clearly motivated and are not only done for terroristic purposes but he uses destructive attacks like merciless killing and bombing of buildings to get his message across.

On the other hand, the film Braveheart follows the adventure of a man named William Wallace (Mel Gibson) and how he began a rebellion against the cruel rule of the English in Scotland. He was a man who dreamed to live a simple life but experienced grave losses because of Englands cruel King Longshank (Patrick McGoohan). One of these losses is the death of his wife. As a result, he organized an army to fight for the liberation of Scotland. He initiated the rebellion and successfully persuaded Scotsmen to join him in the hope of freeing the Scotland from the English rule. The movie presents its message in an equal balance of violence and honesty that makes following Wallaces ideologies in the movie very easy.

Insurgencies in the two films are depicted as liberating efforts against cruel rules of their government. V and William Wallace are two warriors with the same goal of toppling down their current government and freeing the people who have greatly suffered. Yet, they are also both motivated by their own losses and the destruction of their lives. They chose to revenge through a war wherein they encouraged the people of their nation to fight for freedom together with them. Vs ideology is that people should not fear the government rather it is the government who should fear the people. Wallace, on the other hand, believes that they can never have the life they are dreaming of unless they experience real freedom. These are the motivations they used to encourage the people to rebel against the cruel governments. Wallace was fighting to remove the colonizing English from his land while V engaged on his mission to destroy the ruling government of Britain during his time. The difference of the two insurgent plans was that Wallaces attack happened in a real battlefield against the English while V relied on creating an ambiance of terror before engaging on his attacks. Another difference would be the characteristics that V and Wallace posses. V is a dark image, a troubled hero, a mysterious propagator of liberation who never showed his face in the whole film and never revealed explicitly why he is doing such actions. Wallace on the other hand is a very transparent character and has served as an inspiration to many because of his clear and honest intentions. Also, Counterinsurgencies were portrayed in the form of defensive attacks against the insurgents through military and political tactics. Both V and Wallace died in the end of their stories and their deaths were hard to miss. But their goals lived on and where successfully continued by those people they have influenced.

The explicit and implicit political message of V for Vendetta and Braveheart are indeed influential in making people think and reflect of the current political situation of the world. The presentation of the needed violence as a result for properly motivated insurgencies has a big and controversial impact on assessing the reality of todays politics. These powerful, well-directed films indeed represent the violent measures that are taken by natives that were oppressed and have greatly suffered in the hands of their colonizers in order to achieve liberation and freedom.

Surrealism is considered a 20th century invention. From painting to literature, self-exploration of ones dreams and psyche formed the basis of creative thought. In film, a relatively new medium of expression, the concept of an auteur had just begun to develop in the late 1950s in Europe. Autobiographical expressionism was an experimental approach in film and someone like Federico Fellini was egotistical enough to want to exploit it.

In 8, we are bombarded with Fellinis innermost thoughts and desires juxtaposed against a mis en scne that is claustrophobic and disturbing. The opening sequence sets the precedent for what we as the audience feel towards the character Guido (Marcello Mastroianni), a film director suffering from a creative block. The films first scene is set in darkness where the characters are frozen in shock. For the audience watching the film, the disturbing act of voyeurism makes us want to walk away, but find that we cannot. We soon see that traffic is at a standstill the grunts of a man trapped in the car appear to provide titillating entertainment for the trapped commuters. As he struggles to escape, the darkness closes in and the shadows deepen we feel as trapped as Guido. All too soon, Guido is flying above the parked cars and escape into the light for the films first dream sequence.

I could not decide what disturbed me more being trapped in the car or the surrealism in the Guidos dream. Even as he escapes I feel that nothing good will come out of it, but am compelled to follow Guido. On the beach he struggles and eventually falls down into the waves. I found myself falling with him, willing myself to stop, and then being jolted awake when the doctor walks through the door. I was almost relieved when I realized that all that happened before was a dream, but at the same time, I know that the dream was really a premonition. Will Guido fall to his doom in real life or will he manage to escape that fate by acknowledging his failings as a person and strive to change
The opening scene of 8  encapsulates the plot of the film and Fellinis style of filmmaking. Guido is helpless in the face of his directors block and while he may escape, there is no closure. He is trapped not only by his mental block, but also by the relationships in his life. In the scene that follows at the doctors office, the sound of the typewriter in the background appears to taunt the protagonist about his creative block. He moves from the shadows of the office to the bright lights of a bathroom and then an even brighter open space. We walk by smiling faces and twirling umbrellas, confused about how Guido fits into this scene. I wondered if this was real or another dream. I found out that it was both as there is a moment when we see Guidos wife bring him a glass of water before we realize that it is actually one of the staff at the spa who is handing it to him. This sequence, like all others in this film, ends abruptly as if we are told that it is time to come back to reality.

Fellini navigates the physical landscape as easily as he navigates the human psyche through flashbacks and dreams. The real life scenes are mostly shot in tight frames while the dream sequences have long shots and panoramic backdrops. Neither provides a familiarity that we need to associate with the narrative. Typically when you watch a film, you expect to reach closure by the time the closing credits roll. I dont think Fellini intends for us to reach a resolution and is content to leave the field open for further exploration. As an audience of this film, his cest la vie attitude conflicts with our need to understand the character and reach closure. Fellini has other plans for us.

The narrative of the film does not follow a linear path. It is broken in places, going off on tangents before bringing us back to the place where we started. This place should be familiar, but because of our journey into Guidos head, the familiar takes on a surrealism that is unknown. Childhood memories, fantasies and day dreams dominate the protagonists life. We know that Guido is trying to put together a science fiction film but is unsuccessful. It is not his health that is holding him back on the contrary it is the noise in his life. The demands of his harem, mistress and wife, his own anxieties, his need to reach a specific time in his childhood when the world made sense, these are the impediments to his self-expressionism.

Fellini demonstrates these psychical impediments by way of placing Guido in narrow spaces such as hotel corridors, behind columns, between buildings and even in a cemetery where he is surrounded by ancient walls. In the scene where Guido picks up his mistress Carla from the railway station, we first see him sitting on a bench, an insignificant figure under the large iron gates. When he hears the whistle of the train, he moves towards the railing fence. The iron bars of the gate and the iron bars of the railing fence trap him inside. Next we see a close-up of Guidos face next to a pillar. He steps away to walk towards the platform. For a minute he is juxtaposed against the train before he sees Carla waving at him. He stays in that space even as the train moves away. The narrow camera shot reinforces the feeling that Guido is a trapped soul.

I think Fellinis ability lies not in his cinematic approach but rather in his theatrical one. I felt that there was a deliberate attempt by Fellini to place his characters in such a way that they define the scene and therefore convey the meaning of the narrative as well as the characters frame of mind. In the previous scene at the railway station, Guido looks back when Carla waves to him before stepping towards her. He then walks her out the station while moving to her left then right and then left again, all the while looking around to see if anyones noticed him. This made me think that Guido is not entirely comfortable with the idea of being seen with his mistress and would prefer to move out of the open as soon as possible. Next, when we see them in the bedroom, his confidence is restored behind closed doors where there are no prying eyes.

There is a similar situation where a traditional theatrical devise is subverted. In the scene where Guido is speaking to his father, we see Guido, his back to us, in the bottom right corner, a place normally reserved for characters who feel helpless and vulnerable. On the other hand, his father is facing him, and us, in the top left corner where you would typically find the stronger character.
The production design further invokes the theatrical element. I found myself noticing how the function of the background complemented the purpose of the characters actions. The high painted walls of the spa reminded me of a theater backdrop even as the scene unfolding during a dinner played out like a melodrama. Similarly, the scene from Guidos childhood where he is being bathed and dressed by his aunts is too stark to resemble real life. It has a set-like quality as if Guidos life is playing out on a stage and each character is there to play a part in his formation as a director, nothing more.

The lighting too is theatrical with each scene shot in either shadows or highlights. The interior scenes are mostly dark with the characters faces in shadows, hiding them from the audience. In the exterior scenes, the harsh sunlight washes out the shadows and puts everything in stark perspective. When we first meet Guido he is trapped inside a dark car before being liberated to a sun-drenched beach. In another scene, Guido walks into his hotel room where his wife is waiting. From the shadows of the corridor to the shadows of the room, his wife is hidden from us initially due to the darkness inside. When Guido opens the door to the bathroom, the light from inside doesnt penetrate the darkness of the hotel room. When Guido steps inside the bathroom, the walls are stark white and he is darkness personified in his dark suit.

The entire film is an education in the relationship between the space and character. All the characters denote some element of confusion and deceit, and Fellini uses placement to convey these feelings. This is all the more noticeable when we study Guidos reactions to the situations in which he finds himself. While watching the film, I often found myself thinking that Guido was ambivalent about his life and not just the film he wants to make. The expressions on his face, the way he bites his fingernails and adjusts his glasses, I found these to be symbols of his inability to move forward.

There is something interesting going on in Guidos life, or rather in the way that Fellini plays with Guidos psyche. The film itself is a collection of different episodes that do not appear to have anything in common at first. However, when you look closely you realize that in each situation, Guido is placed in a position of having to face a difficult situation, but he comes out of these in a way that reduces those situations to comedic levels. Almost every scene ends in a playful manner, saturating the real and imaginary worlds of Guidos life and his dreams.

A case in the point is the dinner scene in the spa. The scene begins with Guido shrouded in darkness, walking down the poorly lit corridor towards the elevator. Inside the elevator, he is crowded with other spa patrons before being set free in the open space of the dining area. Here he engages in a tense political discussion, light flirtation, and even takes to the dance floor with his friends mistress. Before this episode ends, the patrons are treated to a magic show that appears to wipe clean the seriousness of the events that occurred earlier. The patrons, dressed in fur and diamonds, are treated to a comical magician that belongs in a circus rather than the moneyed surroundings of the spa. Even the entrance of the magician is incongruous to the setting. In the darkness we see a spotlight behind a man who is in shadows. At first I thought it was Guido the tilt of the hat, the ominous music overture, the posture, all seemed to indicate Guidos state of mind.

As the film had so far moved so seamlessly between dream and reality, I also wondered if this was perhaps another dream. All too soon it becomes clear that this is no dream from the old dame in diamonds wearing a blindfold to the way the magician evokes Guidos childhood memories, we find ourselves wondering what role the magician plays in shaping Guidos destiny. The answer to this question is not readily answered. In fact we have to wait until the end of the film where a carnival-esque conclusion sees the return of the magician and Guidos resolve towards his life.

A defining moment in the film is the scene with the dancer Seraghina. When the scene begins, we are staring down at a young Guido from behind a large statue of a religious figure. The phallic symbol of the raised finger is a precursor to the scene that follows. Guido is invited by his friends to the beach where they watch Seraghina perform the Rhumba I found her dance to be frightening rather than seductive, as was her facial expression. Two priests catch up with the truant boys and Guido is singled out for punishment. In a way, this is Guidos first sexual experience and defines his attitude towards women. Just like the use of the lighting, there are no shades of gray here either. In Guidos mind, women are whores or mothers, but never both. I felt that Guido would not find salvation until he found a way to resolve his feelings in this respect.

The final scene of the film is just as powerful as the opening one. While the latter was rooted in dreams, the former is pure realism. Guido abandons his film project the space ship set is dismantled and the scaffolding begins to fall as Guido walks away. The imagery of the large steel structure above Guidos much smaller frame as it deconstructs evokes similar visual cues throughout the film. In an earlier scene of an outdoor auction, Guido and the guests are dwarfed by a large cathedral. In another scene, Guido is overshadowed by a large statue of the pope. Guido is impotent in the face of lifes challenges, but he is able to walk away from the difficulties that he has created as a result of his complicated relationships with the women in his life.

The magician returns in the final scenes as if to create the resolution. With a wave of his magic wand, we see a photo montage of Guidos wife, his parents, Seraghina, Guidos aunts, his mistress and others from his life. It was not clear to me what the purpose of this scene was. In a way it is Fellinis attempt to reconcile the narrative, but I find it to be a confusing ending. The people in Guidos life are not as we saw them throughout the film they are a stylized version with their perfect hair, big smiles and white costumes. In other words, they do not appear to be real but rather part of another elaborate dream sequence. The voice over about Guido learning from his mistakes and things making sense is too deliberate. He admits that he is still confused and does not know what he is seeking. Guido is staring outside the car window and running his hand through his hair when he makes this confession. It made me wonder what the purpose of the film was if it was not Guidos ability to discover himself through an exploration of his psyche. However, Guido is resolved to being a better person this means reconciling with his wife and his life. I feel that Guido has reached a point where he does not need the comfort of his dreams and can in fact survive in reality.

Fellinis 8  is a thought provoking film, but it leaves the audience as confused as the main character. The closing scene belays Fellinis fascination with psychoanalytical theories, something that is subconsciously part of the narrative. I believe that Fellini deliberately created a film that would allow him to explore his inner self through the characters that he has developed. It appears to be a case of art imitating life or at the very least, real life being an inspiration for art.

American Beauty, the 1999 film starring Kevin Spacey, tells the story of Lester Burnham, a seemingly ordinary,  middle-aged, suburban man and his family.  On the surface, it is the story of a husband and father who undergoes a sort of mid-life crisis.  Lester is unhappy with the drudgery and misery of his boring office job.  And, he is also very unhappy in his home life.  He has a strained relationship with his teenaged daughter, Jane, and his relationship with his wife, Carolyn, a materialistic real estate broker has become stale and lifeless after years of marriage.   Lester loses his job and becomes sexually obsessed with one of his daughters schoolmates, setting into motion a series of events which ultimately lead to his death.  However, American Beauty isnt just about Lester and his family.  The movie is making a larger statement about American life, pointing out both the good aspects and the aspects which are not so appealing.

There are many complex themes in the film, but one which really stands out is the idea that there is a very different reality that lies beneath what we sometimes see.  In the film, there is a very memorable moment when Rickey, a next door neighbor and schoolmate of Janes, talks about why he filmed footage of an ordinary plastic bag being tossed about in the wind.  He says he filmed the bag because he realized there is an entire life behind things, and found that to be beautiful. The idea that Rickey finds this plastic thing so beautiful parallels what the viewer is meant to see in the film.  The suburban lives the Burnhams lead is also very superficial and plastic, in a sense.  It is full of perfectly manicured lawns and the appearance of a happy American families.  But, behind the faade, a much pristine reality exists. Draw back the curtains on their perfect existence, and the Burnhams are really a mess. Their relationships are dysfunctional and they are each, in their own way, deeply troubled.

The Burnhams are not the only ones in the movie who are not what they seem.  Almost every single character is revealed as a sort of fraud, not in a bad sense, but more in the sense that they protect their vulnerable true identity with a social mask, in order to avoid being hurt.  Rickeys father Frank, for example, is not what he seems. On the outside, he is a homophobic, heterosexual Marine Corp Colonel, but he is actually hiding deep seeded homosexual inclinations that he is unable to accept.  Rickey, himself, puts on a pretense for his father.  He plays the role of the dutiful son he thinks his father wants him to be. He pretends he works at a catering service when in reality he is making money selling marijuana.  Also, Janes friend, Angela, pretends to be a super confident and sexually active blonde cheerleader type.  However, it is revealed that, for all her supposed sexual bravado, she is actually a very inexperienced young virgin, scared to let the world see that she is still a frightened little girl in a lot of ways.

Time and again, throughout American Beauty, the characters hide behind the masks of their daily lives. From the other phony real estate agents Carolyn works with, to the pretentious co-workers at Lesters office, everybody is playing a part.  The gay male couple, another of the Burnhams suburban neighbors, are probably the only two characters who come close to being honest about who they really are.  Overall,  American Beauty seems to be saying that we must look beyond the first impression of what we see, if we truly want to see the beauty in most human beings because most of us spend so much time pretending to be something or someone we are not.

Avatar is an exclusive movie fueled by imagination and fantasy, executed perfectly by a team of talented artists, designers, scientists and technologists. The director of the movie James Cameron states that Avatars design is to mix the familiar and the alien in a unique way.  The film is set in 2154. The title Avatar is a subconscious reference to Hindu mythology. One life ends where another begins. At the end of the film one character moves from the world of science fiction to that of fantasy. It is Camerons original story of genetically altered life forms. Avatar is a story about the battle between fantasy and science fiction. Fantasy triumphs at the end.

Science makes its absolute presence in the movie and is obvious through the Valkyrie shuttle and the Samson utilitarian vehicle designed impressively. The biological vision of Cameron is reflected in each and every frame of the movie and especially through the flora and fauna in the moon. Avatar amplifies the fact of how mechanical warfare is destructive in nature.

The bio-lab where the incubator tubes are present are given due attention and this tells us about the professionalism of the movie makers.

Pandora, a distant moon of the Alpha Centauri has been imagined creatively and shown spectacularly evoking splendid memories in audience. The audience have a real feel of the star system that is 4.4 billion light years away from earth. Virtualization of Pandora is the greatest effort of James Camerons 3D team.

Pandora is spectacular with thick forest, myth, spirituality surrounding the aliens Navi. The Navis connection to their living environment is religious.

The computer generated imagery could not perfectly represent human expressions for long in the film industry.  Avatar is a movie first of its kind to bridge the gap between computer generated imagery and human expressions. This is a giant leap in technology and the credit goes to Cameron for developing an image based facial performance. This has given the characters, especially the Navis (the aliens) a chance to convey their expressions thereby giving an artistic touch to the characters.
When many movies are struggling to convince the audience with CGI, Cameron had made it a successful venture. Unless told, it is very difficult to differentiate CG-generated imagery from photo-realistic one in Avatar.  In other words, the animation renderings in Avatar have been transformed into photo-real images. This makes the audience believe that the animated images are actors in makeup.  The academy award winner Richard Taylor and his team are behind this success. The creation of Navis is fascinating for the audience to watch every movement of them in a surreal atmosphere. The characters in Pandora can move, behave and convey emotions through facial expressions in a way no other characters in any other movie have achieved so far. All these characters in Avatar are CG created characters and so the groundbreaking technical achievement deserves great praise.

Clarity and precision have taken shape in Avatar depicting a new evolution in technical development. The advanced SD fusion camera successfully merged live action scenes and CG scenes.  Avatar is the first movie in which a unique way of mixing 3D and CG technology has been handled. This invention of virtual camera and simulation camera allowed Cameron to direct virtual sceneries on Pandora the same way he would a live action scene.

One has to understand the fact that science and technology alone cannot represent heartrending scenes in a movie. Having experienced this, Cameron has rightly imbued life into the movie by appointing renowned artists like Rob Stromberg, Wayne Barlowe, Ryan Church, etc. for preparing the script and commentary. The script and language play a vital role in giving an artistic touch to the movie. The language spoken by Naavi humanoid tribe is the result of many years of research by linguists to make it more realistic. The character names, the names of animals, the sound, grammar and syntax also make the Navi tribe more realistic. Ultimately, it is the artist behind technology that makes the images in the movie so remarkable.

Avatar is a movie so creative that it transcends cultural barriers and captures a unique place in the minds of audience. It is a world we have never seen before. It is a first step on the new world. The movie will be remembered for its special effects. The characters in the movie are passionate enough to move the audience. Both the hero and the heroine running in the forest, the perfect ambience, the secret tree, signs from Eywah, the spirited animals, eye catching mountains, the indigenous peoples deep connection to the forest, the network of energy borrowed, etc are difficult to describe to in words. One has to experience the effect in the theater.

The mysterious and awe inspiring scenes shot in bioluminescent forests and fluorescent foliate are truly magical in the hands of Cameron. In fact, precision is the watchword he would have had in mind while making the movie. Right from introducing Tyrannosaurus like behemoth to dragon-horse-eagle hybrid, Cameroon had vividly researched along with his teammates for years before making the movie.

The rich scenes in the movie include an auspicious sign from the Navi deity Eywah to indicate Jake must become one among them. This scene is shot in a reverend backdrop and surreal atmosphere. The artistic flavor is distinguishable in such scenes. Without James Horner for his score of music, the totality of these scenes could not be possible. The British singer Leona Lewis is also worth mentioning for her song I See You. Jake connects spiritually with the environment of Pandora and his love for Neytiri is quiet convincing. The heros opposing human interest turns the story to give more impetus. Cameron knows the art of story telling and he clearly satisfied the audience.

Altogether, Avatar is a combination of technology, art, science fiction, adventure and creativity in an unseen world of marvel.

When we talk of precision in Avatar, it could be possible only through mammoth research to set the standard of Pandora  the floating mountains, the usage of hair to communicate with animals like Banshees. The importance of hair for Navis is well explained - the delicate and sensitive tendrils are used to communicate with different plants and animals. The imagination of a dire horse with six legs is also acceptable. The Home tree that is more than 1066 feet in diameter is simply ecstatic. This is larger than any tree on the Earth. The wildlife all of a sudden joins the Navi in the attack against the human forces. This is the answer for the prayer by the hero to Eywah.

The audience wants to enjoy the stories in the best visual experience possible. The screenwriters understood the 3D and created the story with depth. 3D technology is more like a new spice to be wisely used in film industry and it affects each and every step of moviemaking. Technology is behind the success of Avatar. Avatar was shot using a high definition three dimensional camera that was developed for six years by Cameroon. The special effects expert Vince Pace also added to the success of the movie.

Cameron postponed the release of the movie since the technology he was aiming to achieve his vision not available then. This clearly shows that the movie Avatar could not have been possible had it not been for the invention of new technologies.

The movie cost about 300 million. The film became a box office hit surpassing Titanic in revenue collection. The movie won three academy awards  best cinematography, best visual effects and best art direction in the year 2009-10.

Part one - Mise-en-scene analysis

The Graduate- Ben and Mrs. Robinson Fight

Dominant
Mrs Robinson as she is light from below, suggesting her dominance also in the relationship.

Lighting Key
 Low key, shadows and contours place emphasis on Mrs. Robinsons face whilst Benjamin is in the dark, possibly both physically and emotionally

Shot and camera proxemics
Medium shot, both characters from waist up.

Angle
Low angel, we appear to be looking up at the characters placing al of our attention on them.

Color values
Dark, cold colors, predominantly grayscale over Benjamin, whereas Mrs. Robinson is wearing dark colors, her face and body are brightly lit suggesting her dominance over the comparatively youthful Benjamin.

Lensfilterstock
None obvious, possibly a fast film stock due to grainy texture but this may be because technology has improved greatly since this was made in the 60s.

Subsidiary contrasts
Main subsidiary contrast is Benjamin, as he is placed in shadow our eyes are drawn to him second, after Mrs. Robinson whos face and body are brightly lit.

Density
Moderate, background is noticeable but not densely packed with information, characters are main focus in the center of the shot.

Composition
Diagonal, Mrs. Robinsons gaze is upward at Benjamin, whereas his is downwards at her creating a diagonal composition in accordance with their gaze and postures.

Form
Difficult to gauge, neat framing suggests a closed form, but natural relaxed postures suggest an open form.

Framing
Loose, characters have room both between eachother and to the edges of the shot to move without the camera having to move to track them.

Depth
Moderately shallow, foreground frame is the dominant one, but picture on the middle frame is noticeable, and background isnt obscured to de-emphasize its importance.

Character placement
Both characters in center of frame, but Benjamin placed physically higher than Mrs. Robinson causing her to appear submissive, although vulnerability not achieved due to lighting. Her dominance despite being below him only emphasizes her control in the situation.

Staging positions
Both characters are shot in profile, showing their absorption with one another and no other external influences

Character proxemics
Personal, although fixed gaze on one another suggests a more intimate relationship is about to occur shortly.

The Night of the Hunter- Hallway announcement

Dominant
Eye is drawn to John as he is placed in the center of the frame and lit more brightly than Preacher.

Lighting Key
Low key, shadows and contrast create a sense of unease as felt by John as Preacher looms over him

Shot and camera proxemics
Long shot, see full bodies of characters and surrounding locale which emphasizes the confined space they are in and Johns feeling of being trapped by Preacher.

Angle
High angled, represents Preachers dominance over the small and vulnerable John and the size difference between the two.

Color values
Difficult to gauge as shot in black and white however Preacher is dressed is darker hues whereas its safe to assume John is in lighter or brighter colors, signifying Preachers bad characterization.

Lensfilterstock
Possible wide-angled lens creates depth and the feeling of all the objects in the room and the walls themselves are looming over John, again showing his vulnerability and lack of power in the situation

Subsidiary contrasts
Preacher as he is the only other character in the shot besides John, his dark colors in his dress make him subsidiary to John who is lit more brightly.

Density
Moderate, the objects as walls we see as a result of the wide angled lens, whilst we are made aware of their presence they do not create a busy or shot which is densely packed with information.

Composition
Vertical. The lines of the walls, doors, shadows and postures of the characters all create strong vertical lines, which signify Preachers strength over vulnerable John.

Form
Closed, the selection of a high angled shot does not seem the natural way to frame the characters, suggesting that there is a reason for shooting the scene as such.

Framing
Whilst the shot seems loose as the characters have room to move, the shot seems to emphasize Johns lack of freedom and he is not free to move out from beneath Preachers looming figure.

Depth
Multi framed, we are aware of the foreground and background, whilst the main action of the characters is placed in the middle frame, meaning that we are aware of the location of the shot and the feeling of entrapment felt by John is communicated through the foreground and background.

Character placement
Center, our eyes are drawn to the characters and it is their dialogue and body language which communicates the action of the scene.

Staging positions
Both characters are in profile, Preachers only concern is extracting information from John and John is forced to be concerned about Preacher as he looms over him in a threatening manner.

Character proxemics
The distance they are from one another seems intimate, however, given the context I believe the closeness represents a threatening relationship with one another and Preachers wish to control John by being close to him, as opposed to any affection.

North by Northwest- Rodger Confronts Eve

Dominant
Red of Eves dress and her light hair draws the eye to her.

Lighting Key
Moderate lighting, it is neither particularly bright nor is it particularly in shadow, giving the impression that nothing sinister is about to occur.

Shot and camera proxemics
Mid shot allows us to view seemingly awkward body language between the two characters.

Angle
Eye level shot suggesting no power imbalance between Eve and Roger.

Color values
Eves red dress and preened appearance have connotations of a femme fetale, suggesting that all may not be as it seems with her characterization. Roger however is dressed more mundanely, reflecting his seemingly normal existence before he was brought into this situation being confused for Kaplan.

Lensfilterstock
High quality of the shot given the un recent nature of the film suggests a slow film stock as the lines are crisp and clear, indicating a lot of artificial lighting has been used to light this scene.

Subsidiary contrasts
Roger is the subsidiary contrast as the eye initially is drawn to the attractiveness of Eve. This suggests that she may have the power in this relationship.

Density
Moderate, we see objects in the background however they are not intricate or interesting enough to detract attention from the characters.

Composition
Vertical as opposed to binary as the characters do not seem to be interacting with one another. The position of the arms and standing form creates vertical lines.

Form
Open, the positioning and framing seem like a natural way to shoot this scene, without too much attention being pulled to other objects or noticeable features about the shot.

Framing
Loose, the characters have room to move within the shot without too much difficulty. A relaxed shot seems to contrast with the tenseness we can read from the characters body language and seems to serve to highlight this awkwardness.

Depth
Deep, but not too noticeably so. He characters are clearly identified as the main spectacle of the shot.

Character placement
Center, our eyes are drawn to the characters and it is their dialogue and body language which communicates the majority of the action of the scene as opposed to location, props or scenery.

Staging positions
Both characters adopt a quarter turn, which seems odd given the intimate relationship we have already seen between them. Their positioning suggests and awkwardness with one another, we could second guess that one is hiding something from the other they do not wish the other to know. They seem guarded to one another, not wanting to absorb themselves fully in the other and wishing to keep some distance.

Character proxemics
They seem to have a social distance from one another, but their raised arms also create a further physical barrier between one another, again suggesting that they do want wish to become too intimate with each other for one reason or another and there is another factor which prevents their relationship from being intimate.

Part two- Short essay

Inglourious Basterds (2009) and Composition

Tarintinos use of composition within his film Inglorious Basterds allows the audience to gain a further insight into the action we see unfolding on screen, signifying to the audience issues of control and characterization, which is a key part of this text given the setting and theme.

For example, if we look at the shot one we see characters Aldo and Donny looming over a Nazi. The composition consists of vertical lines, in the posture of the characters, Donnys outstretched arm, the trees in the background and Aldos knife. Using this element paired with the low angled shot the audience is given the strong impression of these characterss strength over the Nazis relative weakness. The size of the trees, the size of the characters and their weapons on thus emphasized to again show us of this relationship. In addition, by also portraying this through a point of view shot, where we the audience are looking up at the menacing expressions on the faces of these two actors, there is no question as to who holds the power here and we are able to empathize with the feeling of vulnerability the Nazi must be feeling.

Similarly in the next shot Ill be looking at composition greatly enhances the feeling of unease in the opening scene of Inglorious Bastards. The main focus of the shot is the character of Hans Landa, and as he reclines on his chair, the other characters similar diagonal posture work together to create almost an arrow shape pointing at the floor, where we are aware there are Jews hiding under the floorboards. In addition, all the other elements in this scene, the table, the vertical lines of the wall, the table leg and the braces of the character on the left seem to be similarly pointing our attention downwards. These features together function to create a very tangible sense of unease within this scene, which lasts a few minutes as the audience, aware that Hans knows of the Jews under the floorboards, we know this as in this shot he seems to actually be pointing at them with his left hand, wonder how he is going to behave.

The final shot I shall be looking at is that of Melenie as she adjusts the film reels in preparation for the events which occur at the final climactic point of the film. Whilst she is positioned to the right of the shot, she is clearly the dominant feature of it given that she is the only character to be ascribed a colour value as she is clothed in a red dress, and similarly has red nails and lipstick heavily coding her as a femme fetale and a rare dominant female in film. In addition, whilst the majority of the film is chiaroscuro, by shrouding her in red the audience is hailed to regard her as important. However, whilst we are aware that she possesses power, in the centre of the shot and therefore were know of importance is the film reel. It is ultimately this object which comes to cause the death of lots of high powered Nazis, and possibly without this object Melenie would hold little power. The message portrayed through this composition of this shot therefore is that it is Melenies ultimate relationship with the film reel which holds the real power and dominance in this film, causing two generally underestimated elements, that is females and the power of film, to lead to the end of a great deal of Nazi power, something Tarantino seems to use his film to make strong a political and social point about being a film maker himself. Similarly, our attention is further directed to these objects through the use of shallow focus, causing us to overlook the density of the objects placed in the background. Again as these two elements create strong vertical lines through Melenies posture and the positioning of the film reel she is coded as being powerful and in charge.

In conclusion, through use of the element of composition Tarantino is able to communicate clear indicators of status and character to the audience as Melenie, Aldo, Donny and Hans are all positioned and framed in such a way that there is no question as to their dominance and power in each context. Whilst it is often the case that Tarantino leaves the audience guessing about power and control in terms of narrative, by looking at composition rather more consistent messages are portrayed, allowing the audience to be able to follow the narrative in a more linear fashion, picking up addition pieces of information to create a consistent text. Through Tarantinos adoption of a classicist mode to portray his narrative, elements of style and creativity are able to be expressed through mise-en-scene as details are given of above. However, Tarantino is prevented from losing the audience and the narrative and presentation of it remains wholly plausible and believable, to work together to create a text which is both highly stylised however still has an air of authority and truth.

Overall, I would consider Tarantinos use of composition to be on the same lines as others we have viewed this semester, as the composition does communicate a great deal of more subtle messages regarding integral plot points and character relationships, similarly in Citizen Zane for example, shots were also set up in such as way so as all elements of the mise-en-scene were carefully constructed to communicate a deliberate message to the viewer. However, the differing styles of these two directors has meant that the relative interplay of the elements which contribute to a mise-en-scene vary so as to allow each director to put their personal stamp on their own film and for it to reflect their own style of film making.