That's A Wrap!

Even though I consider myself a movie goer or viewer, I feel that after this class has ended that I have learned so much more about film and film making. Something that I should mention is that I’ve never heard of the genre Film Noir, and I have to thank Billy Wilder’s film Double Indemnity (1944) for giving me a better understanding of its style and meaning. Although the beginning may have given away, an aspect of this film is figuring out who exactly the protagonist is, and this will keep you wanting to watch. So of course I’m a sucker when it comes to mysteries and thrillers, and this is one film that kept me wondering what exactly happened and why it took place. 

          

Fred MacMurray, Edward G. Robinson, and Barbara Stanwyck. Double Indemnity (1944).

Julian Schnabel film The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007) impressed with not only the directing of the film, but also the cinematography. Cinematographer Janusz Kaminski was able to catch realism of Jean-Dominique Bauby’s (played by Mathieu Amalric) new life struggle of being physically handicapped, and the struggle learning how to communicate with one eye. In doing so with a majority of the fillm, Kaminski is restricted to Bauby’s point of view through his left eye. An underrated detail about this film, but is compatible with Kaminski’s camera work is Mathieu Amalric’s voice-over narration where we get more insight of the story and blunt opinions of Bauby’s character. What I admire about this film is how though Bauby’s (a real life successful magazine editor) had a great set-back physically, he knew that he had to tell his story. In other words, the message of the Bauby is we could sit around depress and let our setbacks defeat us, or we could resist and fight it and keep moving forward.

           

Mathieu Amalric and Mari-Josée Croze. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007). 

Now I’m going to get a lot of heat when I confess and say that I’ve never seen Quentin Tarantino’s film Pulp Fiction (1994). I’m not sure why I waited so long to watch this film, but I think I would have enjoy it due to the amazing talent of the actors. Now since Pulp Fiction is widely known for how graphic, crude, and just plain out there, editing would be involved. For instances continuity editing scene, where Mia (Uma Thurman) almost overdoses on cocaine while waiting for Vincent Vega (John Travolta), but the scene continues and ends with Mia getting an adrenaline shot. The editing also helped with the order of the movie, that is in the case of the of Travolta’s character. What I’m saying here is that the movie is out of order and give plenty of backstories, however it makes it a one of kind. The last thing that I’ve enjoy about Tarantino’s film is, like Alfred Hitchcock, he makes cameos in his own film. I like how (in a way) with his cameo he explains to Jules Winnfield (Samuel L. Jackson) how he needs to makes better decisions with his life, by also not messing up other people’s life as well. This film impacted my me on how I know that I made wise decisions, mostly with staying out of trouble and that is thank to large part of Samuel L. Jackson’s character. I feel that for not viewing this film all this time, made the wait and anticipation worth it.

John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson, Tim Roth, and Amanda Plummer. Pulp Fiction (1994)

 There are several films that I would recommend for people to watch and the first would be Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960). Although the acting in this movie is worth noting, the two aspects on the film’s story that stood out to me are the lighting and directing (cinematography). This is one of those movie I enjoy watching during October not just for the horror and slasher moment, but for its darkness and shock value as well. The lighting in this movie does make a shift from the beginning to a third into the film and I feel that it is foreshadowing that an event bigger and darker is coming. Now it’s going to be typical, but the shower scene was an iconic moment in cinematic history. Hitchcock put a lot of emphasis on this scene shooting a variety of angles, showing close-ups Marion Crane’s (Janet Leigh) face or mouth when she is screaming to the blood that is being drained, and the audience get a motif of the knife stabbing into Crane’s body. Ever since I’ve first saw this film, I felt that without films like this we would not have other films like John Carpenter’s Halloween (1978).

Janet Leigh and Mother (?). Psycho (1960)

 There are two reasons why people should watch Some Like It Hot (1959). The first (and I’m going to sound superficial) would be Marilyn Monroe, and this would be the go-to film people need to see her in. Second and most importantly is the comedy involving the film. So with comedy comes a lot of content and form. An example of content that I always enjoy is the run-on joke throughout the film with Joe (Tony Curtis) and Gerald (Jack Lemmon); Type-O. In the case other, there were several scenes that satisfied comedy with its form. The best example would have to be switching montage of Joe and Sugar (Monroe) alone and having a romantic evening, which then shows Gerald and Osgood (Joe E. Brown) on their evening date dancing away. In this moment, you can’t help but laugh at what is happening with these characters. My favorite part of this film is the message; nobody’s perfect.  

Marylin Monroe, Tony Curtis, Jack Lemmon, and Joe E. Brown. Some Like It Hot (1959).

  Finally, that I would recommend for people to watch Oliver Stone’s The Doors (1991). Although it is not exactly my favorite movie, I always seem to be able to sit back and enjoy this film, and I think that it follows my criteria for films. Not to mention the overall composition of the film is intriguing. In my opinion I feel that The Doors just perfectly describes (or defines mise en scène; from the wardrobe, the time setting and settings, background extras, and what make the film different is how Oliver Stone’s uses sequences in the film. The first sequence that was of interest to me was when the Jim Morrison (Val Kilmer) along with his bandmates and girlfriend Pamela (Meg Ryan) go to the desert for an acid trip; and the theme was how they were all feel and what they were thinking. The next scene that had a great sequence was when they are San Francisco with the counterculture (Hippies) after making their first record; the theme here is a celebration. On a random note, this film got me to ignore my favorite band, The Beatles. That’s the kind of impression this movie was able to leave on me.   

Val Kilmer, Meg Ryan, Kyle MacLanchlan, Kevin Dillion, and Frank Whaley. The Doors (1991).

Michael Keaton Interview on The Treatment

I just heard the KCRW radio interview of the actor Michael Keaton. This interview was taken place on February 4^th, 2015 in front of a live audience. He is best known for his film like Night Shift (1982), Mr. Mom (1983), Beetlejuice (1988), Batman (1989), Batman Returns (1992), and Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014). I must mention that there are many people who will make the argument that Michael Keaton is the best actor who played Batman. I will leave that for you to decide. 

Now what I’ve known about Michael Keaton from other interviews like the late night shows that take place is how animated he is. In other words, he moves really quickly, and talk with his hands. Although this is funny and entertaining, it makes him seem like a welcoming kind of person. What I enjoy hearing is how he mentioned his childhood and that he was very imaginative. Also, it was good to know he was big reader that would get lost in his books. It’s was important to know that he felt that this may have helped him with his acting career. Something that I did know about Keaton is that he started his career, or body of work through stand-up comedy. This should have made some sense to because as mention he’s very charismatic and it shows in his movies. For example, the movie that I think displays a lot of himself in is the movie Night Shift (1982). There were a lot of funny moment in that film, but his character was in most of those moments. As he mentioned in his interview that he really enjoyed comedy, whether it was reading it, writing it, and performing it, and I feel he that he may have had a lot of input for his career. The interview kept coming back to staying focus and concentrating on one subject. 

In this scene we are introduce to Keaton's character in Night Shift (1982). With Henry Winkler.

 I think that it is amazing that Keaton is making a sort of come-back, though he never really left. What I enjoy about this interview is how he explains getting into character, and he says “I don’t, maybe that’s what happens when I flip the switch and go to work. I’m kind of all in […] It’s hard for me, not to be locked in. I get kind of, very detail oriented.” This is ironic to me because the most serious that I’ve ever really seen Keaton was his character as Bruce Wayne and Batman. That might be a cop-out but he had to be stoic one moment to playing a mystery man the next moment, which is what I was getting out of his character. I’ve recently seen Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014), I must say that it really leaves an impression. Keaton explaining his acting method would best explain his characters in Birdman.

 
Keaton's character Bruce Wayne reacts to the Bat Signal in Batman Returns (1992).
]What so respectable about Michael Keaton is that he doesn’t forget who he is or forget what made him so successful. In doing so he explains that “one thing that I do slightly obsess over, it always comes down to the funny.” I completely understand where he is coming from, even though comedy is about timing, it can also be personable or just witty as well. Going off subject, a movie that I think follows Keaton’s opinion is the film Some Like It Hot (1959) where there is a lot moment of Jack Lemmon’s character that gave you laugh out loud. What’s interesting is how Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis’s characters are somewhat similar to what Michael Keaton has done in film, playing multiple characters in one film. Now going back to the quote, I think Keaton passion for the funny is to let people feel more relax and personable. What I’m trying to say here is that he gives it an okay to laugh at moment that may not seem so comedic.

 Lastly, something that make both respect and love about Michael Keaton is how he will take on challenging roles. What’s interesting is that he even has to do research on himself as he mentions that “The degree of difficulty, is attracted, the fear factor is attracted […] I think and something and go ‘Well have I done that before’.” To me is shows that he one of those actors that feels that he more to offer than one type of character. I guess in way Keaton can be explaining that though comedy is his biggest strength, he can still play a serious, dark, to depressed characters. Though he is talking about himself, it seems that he could be telling the audience or his fans that it is important to challenge ourselves while not doing the same thing over and over again. Also as he mentions how people will resonate with the film Birdman because it helps them question their own self-worth and their ego. In other word, people have to challenge themselves but remind themselves why they are doing so.

 I may sound bias, but I felt like I was able to learn a lot more about Michael Keaton even if it was a short interview. For example, him speaking with Tim Burton about working on Batman (1989) and he was giving most of his opinions about working on the film and Burton agreed with Keaton on everything being said. Second, how he’s able to focus on his work whether it’s his character, content, or deadlines. Lastly would have to be his respect for the people who are involved in this industry. He even jokes about how the good looking men in this industry are cursed because people do not take them seriously and don’t appreciate the ones that are talented actors.  I think this is why a lot of people would want to work with Michael Keaton, and overall Michael Keaton is one of those actors who is able to keep an open mind when taking on a role. 

Keaton's character listens to the opinion of his altar ego in Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014).

Janusz Kaminski's Cinematography of The Diving Bell and The Butterfly

OVERALL LOOK

Janusz Kaminski, the cinematographer of  The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007), was able to give the best perspective of a character’s point of view. Kaminski had the audience believe and understand Jean-Dominique Bauby’s (Mathieu Amalric) real-life struggle through the use of his left eye, due to a stroke. By doing so, he was able to show other character’s like the doctors, nurses, speech and language therapist, and loved ones the focus for the first forty minutes of the film. Once the audience finally see’s Bauby himself, they get see flashbacks of what kind of a life he had before his stroke which also has great cinematography as well. Since his work on this film was so different and respected, Kaminski cinematography won him several accolade which included; The Boston Society of Film Critics, Los Angeles Film Critics Association, Satellite Awards, 33rd César Awards, and best of all 80th Academy Awards.

IMAGES

One of the scenes that stood out to me in the film was how Bauby’s character was expressing to the audience that though his body cannot move at all, his mind is free think of whatever he pleases. Like his thoughts of a butterfly; viewing it flying through flowers; his thoughts on a beach, a mountain, the Amazon, to being with a woman in one of those elements. One last thing that is worth mentioning is how the audience will randomly see Bauby’s character in a diving bell suit. Now this was more of symbolism, that he is telling and explaining to the audience that this is how he is feeling. He cannot move, feels as though he is floating, but is trapped with where he is at.  

 

SHOT LENGTHS

In the beginning there were several shots that were well displayed in length, and there did seem to be a sort of pattern that was going on. For example, the film starts off with Bauby in a hospital bed meeting the doctors and trying to figure out what is happening, and they give him an explanation of his diagnosis and where to go from there. Next he meets with the specialists that will be working with him, and they give their insights and opinions on how he would start communicating, and how he would start slowly to rehabilitate his mouth. Next, the audience is introduced to (what Bauby explains) the mother of his three children, and she has a conversation with him, which was tricky since it she was only able to ask him yes or no questions. Finally, the audience is shown a sort of montage of the daily regimen that Bauby has to endure. This new routine consists from getting washed off, getting dressed, doing his physical therapy, to practicing his new form of communication.   

SHOT TYPES

From the very start of the film we get a lot of extreme close-ups of different characters. These shots of the characters show what an importance they have on Bauby. There are a few long shots that the audience get to see of Bauby. The significance about this is that they seem him in his wheel-chair, and how he was before. This is telling the huge difference and comparison, from being well normal and even somewhat successful in the business that he was in, to evidently being handicapped from his stroke.  

CAMERA ANGLES

Carrying on from shot-type, there were quite a few camera angles that needs mentioning. It was important for Kaminski to show his use of eye-level shot was to have the audience understand that Bauby’s character was equal to everyone else, despite being handicapped. This would help justify the Bauby’s character mind since he has strong thoughts, and imaginations. In other, if Kaminski had Bauby’s character looking up at the other characters the audience would feel weak, or if he was looking down, the audience would have power, which would not make sense at all. Now one of the few times that we get a low shot angle is when Bauby is with his family on Father’s Day, the audience gets the shot of his helping him wipe his father’s chin. Though this may have been a weak moment, it gave Bauby’s son a touching but powerful moment.

COMPOSITION

A scene that show to have had heavy composition is when Bauby left his girlfriend (model) at the hotel because of religious reasons. The audience will notice that he alienated himself, and sees that in the town the people who are out are with someone. This is telling Bauby’s character that they are all there for a reason, and it is a reason that lacked, faith. Once he is alone in what now looks like a deserted town, he finds himself in front of a store that has a Virgin Mary (the Madonna) at the window. Though the scene cuts off right away, Bauby’s observes her while the audience read his reflection in the window. The audience is left to wonder what Bauby is wondering about, or what he is disappointed in.

CAMERA MOVEMENT  

            The scene or camera movement that I felt added some visual excitement was the where Bauby’s was driving his new car to his country side home. Of course this scene was to have Bauby either remember what happened before his stroke, or for him to have him flashback to a happy moment that he had of physical freedom. Since Bauby left his car top down, it allowed for Kaminski to move the camera as he please. The interesting part about this that it looks as though the audience is getting a view from inside the car, as in the camera is sitting on the passenger seat. The part about this scene is that the audience views Paris and Bauby enjoying himself while they are taking in the time to relax themselves. For it having a lot of movement, it was handle with a lot of care and smoothness.

CINEMATOGRAPHY STYLE

            Kaminski style of cinematography was clearly intentional, and that is a great thing to say and even have admit. The reason clearly speaks for itself, and that it for the audience to understand and follow what is going on with the story through the camera. The main intentional style that was dominate and important was filming the point of view of Bauby’s character, and by doing so as if it were from his left eye. Which why the characters are patterned to be on a certain part of the frame a majority of the time. This alone gives the idea of the struggle that Bauby had to endure. 

My Criteria For Film

Robert De Niro's character Vito Corleone embraces his new-born son Michael, symbolizing freedom they now have. 

The Godfather: Part II (1974).

      Reading, Television shows, and Movies are some of the preferences that people have for hobbies, interest, or just for entertainment. Whenever I read to myself, I found that I would have trouble with creating a picture in my head, till recently, I realized that I am just a visual learner. With television shows, I also realize how much of a big time investment we put into them. Now there are still some great shows going on today (maybe even better), however there have been a few where I have been left disappointed by the way they ended. Watching and enjoying movies has helped me with learning about writing and storytelling; visually understanding expressions; and overall the artwork that is being formed. Unlike television shows, I could watch a movie in one day and decide if I like it or not (with a good, bad or sad ending). As mentioned, writing and storytelling would have to be at the very top of my criteria with films. These are what always keep me wanting to watch, and hit the pause when I need to.  Now I feel that the next important part to bring such art on screen are the actors. There have been some actors that have stood out to me where they bring something completely different to either the character’s personality, the other actors on screen, or to the emotions they make the audience feel.    

            Now I’ve just recently watched the film Double Indemnity (1944) for the first time, and it was worth me saying that I should add this movie to my library. Now the story immediately hooked me in with the character Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray) giving a confession to his manager Barton Keyes (Edward G. Robinson) about the wrong-doing he committed. This made me want to watch and see what crime he committed, who was involved, and why he was not successful. It was great form of how they had Walter Neff give his confession, but by using it as narration. Now I am a big fan of twists and surprises, so when we find out how Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck) had already committed a crime before the killing of her husband, I knew it was not going to end well for all the characters. However, I felt the moral was that we do choose our fate, and we have to make sure that we are making the right decisions or our karma will come back to us. Even though Fred MacMurray did a great job portraying his character, I felt the Barbara Stanwyck and Edward G. Robinson stood out to me. Stanwyck managing to make me feel bad for her and believe that she was the victim, until we learn that she had a master plan the whole time making her two faced and untrustworthy. After seeing that she was the antagonist, it made sense how Stanwyck acted at certain points in the film, like not even showing sympathy for her husband’s death when she should have. Now I have seen Edward G. Robinson in the film The Ten Commandments (1954), and I thought he was an absolute snake in that movie (which is a good thing), but after seeing this it made me appreciate his acting. Robinson character would be considered the investigator in the film, and I feel that it is a tricky job because he had to act somewhat oblivious in film for not knowing the closes person to him committed the crime. Not to mention that sense of passion he had to bring for his character, which (this may sound funny) convince me that a desk job is still a lot of hard work to endure. I would recommend Double Indemnity (1944) it would show people where a lot movies of today have gotten similar ideas from this film. 

Mr.Gowers (H.B. Warner) hugs Young George Bailey (Bobby Anderson) for saving him from making a honest mistake. It's a Wonderful Life (1944).

Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) sitting and recollecting his thought of his decisions. 

The Godfather: Part II.

        Now my two favorite films that follow two details would have to be It’s a Wonderful Life (1946), and The Godfather: Part II (1974). These two differ in many ways, but I always find myself to sit down, watch and enjoy these stories and actors. It’s a Wonderful Life (1946) taught me that we as individual are important in this lifetime. I always enjoyed how they showed a kind of alternate universe when one person is not present, showing what difference an individual can make for others. Adding to my criteria, this movie has comedy, romance, and even suspense, overall these help give the movie great storytelling. Another thing that it brought out of me are the emotions, and the actors are part of this doing. For example, the scene when young George Bailey (Bobby Anderson) reveals to Mr. Gower (H.B. Warner) how he (Mr. Gower) accidentally switched the wrong medicine capsules, thus George saving the sick child from being poisoned, and Mr. Gower from the circumstances. This scene always gets to me because of the emotions these two actors brought out of each other. The Godfather: Part II (1974) did something completely different which was a prequel and sequel all in one film. It is amazing how the film goes from Vito Corleone’s (Robert De Niro) growth to becoming the Godfather to his son Michael Corleone’s (Al Pacino) current time and troubles as the Godfather, but I was always able to follow the stories. The director Francis Ford Coppola also showed how both characters had similarities dealing with tragic events, yet somehow both were able to survive in the end. To me I felt that the moral of this film was to not betray your family. As great of a cast as this film was, I feel that Robert De Niro and Al Pacino carried this whole film. I always felt that De Niro’s scenes were more the quiet but respectful scenes, while Pacino (whom I personally thought should have won the Oscar for his role) was calm but anticipated the worst to come, and was relatable to why he would become so angry at times. Although I have a huge library full of movies and a lot of other kind of favorites, I feel that both It’s a Wonderful Life and The Godfather: Part II always give a satisfaction for myself to say “what a movie”.      

 George Bailey's (James Stewart) and Marie Bailey 's(Donna Reed) wedding night. An underrated and romantic in scene. It's a Wonderful Life (1946).