2001: A Space Odyssey. Mankind finds a mysterious, obviously artificial, artifact buried on the moon and, with the intelligent computer HAL, sets off on a quest.
Okay so let me start off by saying that this might have been the worst movie I have ever seen (and I’ve seen “Gone With the Wind”). There was no story, no sense of urgency, and worst of all, it’s praised as a great classic! Whats up with that.
So lets start with the story, it was an okay plot but the beginning and end of the movie made no sense at all, and why was the first minute and a half of the movie a black screen with annoying music?
My second problem was with the editing, I could’ve cut it together and taken less the half the time, and still gotten the same information across. I honestly cannot see any reason this movie should be called a classic, let alone exist, it is so absolutely terrible every single copy should be destroyed so that no one in the world has to see this pile of horse crap ever again. I have absolutely no idea as to how it could be on this list, in short I hated it with every fiber of my being.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
American Graffiti by Braden Anderson
"American Graffiti" A couple of high school grads spend one final night cruising the strip with their buddies before they go off to college.
This movie was definitely George Lucas' first real movie he had made out of film school. Filmed in 30 days for exactly 777,777.77 dollars, it became one of the most profitable films ever, grossing over 115 million dollars after its 1973 sleeper success and 1978 re-release. That's a considerable amount of money for a film with a simple and elementary plot; just a group of teenagers on their last night of summer in 1962 trying to figure out what to do with their lives. Lots of movies like this have been made with a similar plot, but most of them faded into obscurity or were just plain bad. So what did this movie have that others did not?
Well, to start off with, George Lucas picked a good year to set it in. (Not to mention it made for a catchy tagline). 1962 was between the innocence and conservatism of the Eisenhower years and the turmoil of the later sixties, say, after 1965, when America was escalating its fight in Vietnam, passing landmark civil rights legislation, and protesting and assassinating everything in its way. No, this was a year of promise, dubbed "Camelot" by First Lady Jackie Kennedy. Kids fought authority, but more in a playful way, and still showed respect for it, a sharp contrast with the latter half of the sixties. It seemed like all they did was cruise up and down main drag and go to sock hops at the school, listening to some of the most influential artists of all time. It was the fact that it was just simple, good, clean fun. And when George Lucas made this film in 1972, people were ready to remember that innocence they had just ten years before. Not to mention, it's just a funny movie.
Another reason why I believe that this movie was so good was because George Lucas was under the gun. He had under a million dollars, 30 days, and a full length movie to make just covering one night. He had to cut costs, so he opted to use TechniScope cameras and film, which only used half a 35 mm frame, which Lucas believed would give it a documentary feel when shown in widescreen. I think that he succeeded in this, as the film has this certain feel that it was still professional, but at the same time it wasn't. Kind of like a tuxedo t-shirt. He also used outtakes; he was so pressed for time that he needed fillers, and some of the outtakes were better than the real takes. Several of the shots with the character Toad were unplanned outtakes that just fit his character. The opening shot when Toad lost control of his scooter and ran into a trash can was in fact an outtake, but looked surprisingly planned.
This movie was definitely George Lucas' first real movie he had made out of film school. Filmed in 30 days for exactly 777,777.77 dollars, it became one of the most profitable films ever, grossing over 115 million dollars after its 1973 sleeper success and 1978 re-release. That's a considerable amount of money for a film with a simple and elementary plot; just a group of teenagers on their last night of summer in 1962 trying to figure out what to do with their lives. Lots of movies like this have been made with a similar plot, but most of them faded into obscurity or were just plain bad. So what did this movie have that others did not?
Well, to start off with, George Lucas picked a good year to set it in. (Not to mention it made for a catchy tagline). 1962 was between the innocence and conservatism of the Eisenhower years and the turmoil of the later sixties, say, after 1965, when America was escalating its fight in Vietnam, passing landmark civil rights legislation, and protesting and assassinating everything in its way. No, this was a year of promise, dubbed "Camelot" by First Lady Jackie Kennedy. Kids fought authority, but more in a playful way, and still showed respect for it, a sharp contrast with the latter half of the sixties. It seemed like all they did was cruise up and down main drag and go to sock hops at the school, listening to some of the most influential artists of all time. It was the fact that it was just simple, good, clean fun. And when George Lucas made this film in 1972, people were ready to remember that innocence they had just ten years before. Not to mention, it's just a funny movie.
Another reason why I believe that this movie was so good was because George Lucas was under the gun. He had under a million dollars, 30 days, and a full length movie to make just covering one night. He had to cut costs, so he opted to use TechniScope cameras and film, which only used half a 35 mm frame, which Lucas believed would give it a documentary feel when shown in widescreen. I think that he succeeded in this, as the film has this certain feel that it was still professional, but at the same time it wasn't. Kind of like a tuxedo t-shirt. He also used outtakes; he was so pressed for time that he needed fillers, and some of the outtakes were better than the real takes. Several of the shots with the character Toad were unplanned outtakes that just fit his character. The opening shot when Toad lost control of his scooter and ran into a trash can was in fact an outtake, but looked surprisingly planned.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Star Wars IV by Nick Reardon
"Star Wars IV". Luke Skywalker leaves his home planet, teams up with other rebels, and tries to save Princess Leia from the evil clutches of Darth Vader.
I believe the shot composition was very well executed, especially during the numerous fight scenes. It's very impressive that they were able to pull off all the special effects such as the lightsabers. The actual plot was way better executed than most films today. i would definitely recommend this movie to my friends and family.
I believe the shot composition was very well executed, especially during the numerous fight scenes. It's very impressive that they were able to pull off all the special effects such as the lightsabers. The actual plot was way better executed than most films today. i would definitely recommend this movie to my friends and family.
Pulp Fiction by Tyler Moffat
"Pulp Fiction" The lives of two mob hit men, a boxer, a gangster's wife, and a pair of diner bandits intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption.
The shots were simple in the film but still made the film fun to watch. The story was interesting on how it would switch to different people and at the end explains how everything added up. The movie was one of the funniest movies I have ever seen and was really creative.
The shots were simple in the film but still made the film fun to watch. The story was interesting on how it would switch to different people and at the end explains how everything added up. The movie was one of the funniest movies I have ever seen and was really creative.
Rebecca by Mark Livingston
Rebecca. When a naive young woman marries a rich widower and settles in his gigantic mansion, she finds the memory of the first wife maintaining a grip on her husband and the servants.
In the summer before my sophomore year, I had the summer project of reading the novel Rebecca and found the mystery/drama quite enjoyable. After discovering the novel had a movie adaptation in the top 100 list, I was intrigued to see how Alfred Hitchcock (the director) had taken the novel to the big screen.
As the movie opened with the opening monologue, I instantly remembered reading the novel and the beautiful chill it created. The reading done by Joan Fontaine (the second Mrs. de Winter) combines not only the elegant poetry of the words, but the chill of eerie reveal of Manderley.
As for how well the movie follows the plot of the book, I would have to say it does so far better than I thought it would have. Seeing the movie was like stepping back in time and rereading the pages once more.
The credit given for the plot of the movie should only be awarded to Daphne du Maurier who was the author of the original book. The plot combines a variety of genres together to create a mysterious, enchanting, romantic, and chilling story of the late Rebecca and how fluental she is of the second Mrs. de Winter even after her death. Although she is not a seen or heard from character from the book, she is one of the most lively because of her tales from those who knew her. Perhaps this is why she could candidate for being the most interesting character in the story.
What won me over however was the acting within the movie. Joan Fontaine plays the role of the awkward and shy Mrs. de Winter perfectly. Somehow she managed to portray the quiet and out of place character without going over the thin line of becoming obnoxious. Every moment you see her in the movie you have a sense of compassion for she has to compete for the love of a man with a woman who cannot even breathe.
Laurence Olivier should always be acknowledged for his role as Maxim de Winter. For almost all of the movie (besides about the last half hour), Maxim is seen as a melancholy widower who has quite the short temper when in reality his morose attitude comes from the murderer he committed so long ago. Even though he hated Rebecca, Maxim still must have felt a weight of grief on his shoulders for every second of his life and Olivier portrays this perfectly.
The woman who amazed me the most in her performance, however, was Judith Anderson who played the strange and spiteful Mrs. Danvers. Anderson is able to have the haunting sense of distaste towards Mrs. de Winters throughout the whole movie because she knows Mrs. Danvers loved Rebecca like a child and now there is another woman who she believes does not deserve the same rank as her former mistress. The tension only builds between Mrs. de Winters and Mrs. Danvers as the maid eventually makes Mrs. de Winters crack down crying after stating that she will never amount to the level of perfection Rebecca achieved. This moment of the film is perhaps my favorite purely from Anderson's performance. She lets the character of Mrs. Danvers overtake her and portrays the hatred which has built within Mrs. Danvers magnificently.
The tension rises as Rebecca comes back for one final time in trying to sentence Maxim to a life in jail and with the build up from discovering who Rebecca is, how she actually died, and what will result from Maxim's action are what make the plot of Rebecca so enticing. The acting of not only the main actors and the supporting ones makes the movie so enjoyable and entertaining for those who view it. Me personally, I found this movie just as satisfying as the novel it is based off of and give it a rating 5 stars. *****
Slumdog Millionaire by Gabe Gardi
"Slumdog Millionaire A Mumbai teen who grew up in the slums, becomes a contestant on the Indian version of "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?" He is arrested under suspicion of cheating, and while being interrogated, events from his life history are shown which explain why he knows the answers.
I thought the movie was really well composed with its great lighting and shot composition . A lot of the shots were very wide in such scenes as the part were they are sitting on a train and you get a wide shot of the indian countryside, and they used a lot of lighting to put a different mood on the moviegoer especially when you saw him in the childrens beggar camp and it was very dark and ominous lighting. And also they mixed the video that was playing and the music really well when you see them in downtown india and the music starts to build up. You had a lot of great scenes that were made even better because of the music.
I thought the movie was really well composed with its great lighting and shot composition . A lot of the shots were very wide in such scenes as the part were they are sitting on a train and you get a wide shot of the indian countryside, and they used a lot of lighting to put a different mood on the moviegoer especially when you saw him in the childrens beggar camp and it was very dark and ominous lighting. And also they mixed the video that was playing and the music really well when you see them in downtown india and the music starts to build up. You had a lot of great scenes that were made even better because of the music.
The Departed by Jordan Garlach
"The Departed"Two men from opposite sides of the law are undercover within the Massachusetts State Police and the Irish mafia, but violence and bloodshed boil when discoveries are made, and the moles are dispatched to find out their enemy's identities.
The shots were well composed and varied throughout scenes and the entire movie. It kept suspense building and portrayed the characters very well. I really liked how the main character was a bad guy with the cops, then a good guy with the bad ones. It had well lit shots and the aspects of the movie were great.
The shots were well composed and varied throughout scenes and the entire movie. It kept suspense building and portrayed the characters very well. I really liked how the main character was a bad guy with the cops, then a good guy with the bad ones. It had well lit shots and the aspects of the movie were great.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Hurt Locker by Austin Stom
"Hurt Locker" Forced to play a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse in the chaos of war, an elite Army bomb squad unit must come together in a city where everyone is a potential enemy and every object could be a deadly bomb.
I liked how they built the suspense up and the back story how they show his wife several times. They keep showing the days he has left and were he was at. How it starts over in the end. I like the shot complexion and the lighting. The action scenes were set up good. The ending were you could feel the emotion between the two of them
I liked how they built the suspense up and the back story how they show his wife several times. They keep showing the days he has left and were he was at. How it starts over in the end. I like the shot complexion and the lighting. The action scenes were set up good. The ending were you could feel the emotion between the two of them
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of The King by Justin Durkin
"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of The King" The former Fellowship of the Ring prepare for the final battle for Middle Earth, while Frodo & Sam approach Mount Doom to destroy the One Ring.
Shot composition was varied between each scene. But it was easily picked out what kind between characters and when the battles scenes were going on. They used the fill light multiple times during the scenes with Frodo and Smeagle. During the dark scenes of the movie they used low lighting to depict a different type of emotion. The facial shots through out the entire movie added extra emotion to the film. when the film had a battle scene there were multiple shots and they were faced past.
The film deserves its awards that it was given. It won eleven oscars 111 other awards and 68 nominations. Some of those were best director, best costume design, best makeup, best film editing and best art direction.
Shot composition was varied between each scene. But it was easily picked out what kind between characters and when the battles scenes were going on. They used the fill light multiple times during the scenes with Frodo and Smeagle. During the dark scenes of the movie they used low lighting to depict a different type of emotion. The facial shots through out the entire movie added extra emotion to the film. when the film had a battle scene there were multiple shots and they were faced past.
The film deserves its awards that it was given. It won eleven oscars 111 other awards and 68 nominations. Some of those were best director, best costume design, best makeup, best film editing and best art direction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)