If we could just get rid of these actors and directors, maybe we've got something here.

The cynical motivations presented in film noir style films certainly create unpleasant antiheros. Last Thursday in my film appreciation course we watched the Robert Altman 1992 film, The Player. This movie told the story of a Hollywood production executive, Griffin Mill, who murders a screen play writer under the belief that the given screen play writer was the source of threatening messages. Though plenty of circumstantial evidence, the clearly guilty Mill escaped incarceration. Mill, as the antihero of the plot, had a sense of ambiguous morality that was maintained throughout the film. Due to ambiguity in his sense of moral judgment and selfish pursuit of success I experienced building distaste for his character. Mill repeatedly attempted to use his career’s demands for cutthroat studio decision making as an excuse for moral shortcomings but any variation of such personally found week bargaining power. Thus from the beginning of the film his character was relatively putrid. As the movie progressed I felt as that Mill’s regression of character could be compared to kicking a dead horse. I already don’t like the character and yet his nonexistent moral frame is still being degraded in the viewer’s eye.

My distaste for Griffin Mill as the antihero seems to illuminate qualities that deter from the movie’s film noir style. Most film noir antiheros roles tend to blur the line of good or evil. Such as in Sunset Boulevard where the audience is left to decide whether Norma Desmon deserves sympathy or admission to the mad house. Should you root for her, root against her, or try to reason out her situation? Despite Robert Altman’s inclusion of many film noir elements, I feel that his depiction of the movie’s antihero misses the mark and consequently loses some of my appreciation for his film. Altman appears to create a monster of a character where there is no doubt of dislike towards the antihero. I want the antihero to have a question of morality that battles my mind as I watch the film, not just building evidence of purely angelic character. The plot should tease my psyche as I battle a mental duel of love and hate over the antihero. I recently watched Law Abiding Citizen, starring Gerard Butler, and I found my moral frame being questioned by Gerard Butler’s motives as an antihero type character. For ninety percent of the movie I was cheering on his path of murder and revenge! His wit, intellect, and appealing vigilante motives kept me on his side despite such a violent path of destruction. I felt his character epitomized the relationship that an audience should have with an antihero and maybe Griffin Mill could take a couple notes.

What... no nudity?

Last class showed how our films production might just make a finely whisked soufflé of mockery out of my organization skills. Although I like a degree of control and am a goal driven individual, you can bet your bottom dollar that I’m not going to be the producer. From paperwork (location agreements), to set arrangement, to the compilation of actors, the producer better be able to manage the Ringling Brothers via Skype. A blackberry in each hand and some outrageous texting skills might do the trick but one predication is for certain, our whole crew would be spending the night behind bars if it was my responsibility. Who knew it was illegal to film in an alleyway without permission anyways?.. Not me. I can’t imagine the river of paperwork that must flow through the production of a blockbuster film, it would rival the Nile. However, although I’m sure location agreements are protocol for most filming endeavors, I question how strict of a protocol it may be. For instance, skateboarding films are generally massive compilations of professional boarders mastering city terrain. These fools hurdle city gaps, fly over stair sets, and ride concrete planter boxes like it’s the interstate. Seeing that all of these objects rest on property that is of personal ownership, how do such films come to fruition without legal mayhem? My guess (though not worth much) is that although most individuals understand the concept of trespassing, they aren’t aware that they own rights for the filming of their property. You can’t sue if you don’t know it’s illegal.

In my original mental conception of our film I viewed it as homegrown. This meant that the people who were behind the scenes in its production were probably going to be the actors. I figured that Doug would win the souls of America while Elizabeth filled the shoes of Meryl Streep and Lennon brought home the bacon with some solid gut wrenching lines. You may notice that I left my name off the acting squad (stage hands don’t get filmed). But now we’re talking about trying to sign actors? I’m still wondering who would want to be in our film. After asking George Clooney I ran out of options. But on a serious note, I’m not sure how many individuals are going to want to perform in our motion picture. Although this project lies near and dear to my heart, I don’t foresee other individuals having the same enthusiasm and ambitions as I do for our film. After the sixth or seventh attempt at a shot they might just tell Doug where to put his director’s hat. On the other hand, maybe I’m just being a bit pessimistic. But for now, be on the lookout for our film premiere... It might just change your life..

Don't mind me crowd, I'm just being Murdered

Last week our class traversed through time via film, the 1981 cinema success Blow-Out took us back to the decade of Reaganomics. Director Brian de Palma epitomized eighties cinema scene through copious nudity, vulgar language, and graphic violence. Blow-Out illustrated a shift in the film industry from reserved to not so modest. The depictions of a modest society, as seen in our previously watched films, (i.e. Singing in the Rain and Sunset Boulevard) were lost to the sixties as film was no longer held back by standards limiting what could or could not be shown. And then two decades later a society corrupt from the demoralizing pursuit of personal gain emerged.

Despite having a flashy front I felt that Blow-Out was about as predictable as they come. The representation of eighties society and film is really what I found appealing. The corrupt justice system was rampant with mafia infiltrated officers and politicians. The society’s view of the state of affairs was jaded through blinding media and the compulsion to band together during times of crisis. Most corruption was simply overshadowed by the domineering nature of patriotism. Director Brian de Palma certainly was not shy in his intentions of calling out the social order. As can be seen by this film, Brian de Palma is known for borrowing much of his directing inspiration from previous fixtures of the film industry such as Alfred Hitchcock. And although I can see where a source of inspiration can be need at times, I initially found his borrowing of techniques to be quite frankly lame, unoriginal.

Whenever I have the urge to be creative (i.e. write, draw, sculpt), I generally want my masterpiece to be unique. For a director to make a movie and openly borrow most of the techniques utilized is like making prints of an original work of art. You would think directors would want their work to be original, push the envelope. Not just compile the styles of other directors. But despite my initial shock with lack of originality, I came to realization, through the aid of class discussion, that most feasible forms of filming (i.e. techniques, cinematography, themes) have be explored. Thus the sharing of directing techniques is like the reoccurring forms that can be seen in literature and Brian de Palma isn’t a director lacking originality but a well referenced artist, giving respect to his predecessors. Therefore de Palma must be a well studied man of his art and I find that respectful. Thus despite not being overly impressed with Blow-Out, Brian de Palma gained my attention.

The Road to Sundance

At last, our film making challenge has been issued! Just last Thursday our class was divided into teams, assigned different film genres, and given inspiration to create a film worthy of Hitchcock himself. Although I am a tinge nervous, I feel my team, as well as the entire class, is buzzing with excitement to see their ideas come to fruition.

My film producing squad has been dealt the film category of romance. Beyond the inclusion of romantic qualities we must also incorporate the presence of a mime/clown, cheese grader, guitar, and the phrase “Why is this happening to me today of all days?” as well as “It would be better for us not to talk about that.” Based upon the requirements of our project, one can see that my group’s final venture will be a masterpiece.

Seeing that my affinity for romance based movies is limited, I foresee our film project borrowing themes from other types of movies. We strongly feel that the incorporation of humor or shock value is an essential quality. One reason is that the film project has been limited to between three and five minutes (which greatly limits the depth of the film). Thus humorous or shocking scenes allow for entertaining qualities while keeping the plot brief enough for a quick tale.

My personal vision is for the film to utilize dramatic irony (where the audience is privileged to information that has been withheld from the story’s characters). The utilization of such irony can give the audience an empathetic sense of obligation where they are uneasy because they foresee negative events in the future of the character. Whether tragic embarrassment or a painful accident, they know something is fixing to happen. It would be like a piano falling from the sky, on course for an individual’s head, and although an onlooker may see these events unfolding, he’s six floors up on a building and has no means of warning the endangered pedestrian. As far as my group’s video is concerned, we could use dramatic irony to simply set up a sense of apprehension in the audience that an event is fixing to unfold. Then despite the audience being aware of building tension, I want them to be surprised by the event for it would be unpredictable based on the cues previously given. Imagine being surprised be someone who was hiding underneath your bed when you, based on clues observed, thought that someone was actually in your closet. Such a stunning climax preceded by mounting anxiety could certainly make for an interesting short film!

Moses Supposes His Toeses Are Roses

Last week Singin’ in the Rain earned my respect as movie of classic proportions. Its witty, vibrant plot was filled with clever dialogue that kept my smile sharp and attention focused. The movie’s outlandish performances and playful instigation of humorous drama made me feel as if I was watching a comical play. Although I failed to record extensive critique notes (due to the film locking in my focus) I did happen to notice how the style of sound frequently punched the action of the actors. Cosmo Brown’s slapstick scene of exaggerated gyrations and dancing is a primo instance where sound drove the physical action beyond reality. This technique reminds me of cartoons where sets of stairs might as well be keyboards, each advancing step is followed by an attention grabbing chime. I wanted to bring the utilization of such Mickey Mouse scoring to topic because it seemed to be an accurate overall representation of the movie: witty use of drama (over the top sounds) that tells a story with comedic relief.

The movie’s historical representation of 1920’s Hollywood provided interesting ties to actuality. The gap between celebrity and Hollywood reality was shown numerous times through the eyes of Don Lockwood and Lina Lamont. Don’s ‘dignified’ rise to celebrity status demonstrated how society worshiped movie stars as perfect specimens of humanity. The two young females that declared how refined Lamont must be also solidified the false impression of celebrity perfection. Controlled public exposure of these iconic Hollywood figures demonstrated how the producers could manipulate the eye of the public through the intentional propagation of celebrity drama. The public thought Lockwood and Lamont was a superstar couple when in reality their relationship was nothing beyond professional associations. I find it an interesting concept that producers (at this time in Hollywood) would deceive the community through restricted media. Today the phenomenon of false stories concerning celebrities is commonplace but often the product of tabloids not producers.

One of the class’s side conversations discussed how film restoration has helped to preserve pieces of film history. Despite such efforts many films are lost forever due to termination or the degrading effects of time. Donna happened to mention that occasionally films are found that were thought to have been lost to the dark side of the moon. This funneled by imagination to think how cool it would be to find a lost film. Just imagine opening an old trunk and rescuing a piece of film history!? One can only dream…

Film Ambitions

Within the first three film lectures I have come to terms with the prickly nature of film production. For there is only one way you can handle a porcupine and taking the wrong approach could prove to be tragic. And although many interesting structures, methods, and effects have been introduced to the class, I am interested to see which of those are within our means. Despite such apprehensions there are a few features that I would like to utilize into my group’s project.

The regressing film structure of Sunset Boulevard provides appeal that would adequately suit a short film. The said movie leads off with a scene that portrays a tragic yet mysterious murder. Although the film shortly reverts back in time to the building story line, the unconventional beginning gives the movie an early bout of tension. Not only does such tension amplify the drama of the story, it hangs the spectator on the story’s plot- just like a good cliffhanging end to a novel’s chapter. My hopes for incorporating such a technique would be to engross the observer into the movie. When watching film clips on a website, like Youtube, it becomes second nature to complacently surf from video to video, never watching the shorts all the way to the finish. My wish is to eliminate the possibility of onlookers passing my group’s work after the first minute. Exploiting this method is even more appealing when you recognize how reproducible it is with the technology and talent we have been allotted. With a minor storyboard inversion we would be on the fast track to producing an attention hogging film expedition.

Beyond the possible introduction of storyboard inversions into our group movie, effective lighting techniques are a must. After watching Sunset Boulevard in combination with Dietz’s film workshop, my shallow world of film lighting was exposed. The three point lighting system provides depth to shots and a much needed focal point to direct the audience’s eye. Darkness can provide a melancholy atmosphere where bright light can illuminate gay occasions. In Sunset Boulevard, the lighting on Norma Desmond serves as a pristine example of lighting that directs the mood of the audience. Hard lighting on her face lets the audience know that the camera denies her of star status. Most stars at the time had only soft light cast upon her face to preserve their perfect appearance and persona. Although our lighting set up will undoubtedly be a fine example of second hand rigging, I’m excited to explore our possibilities.

There's nothing tragic about being fifty… unless you're trying to be twenty-five.

Sunset Boulevard- the tale of a comeback diva... Or as Norma Desmond might say, the tale of her return. Normally my interest in classic movies does next extend much beyond Blazing Saddles or The Graduate, but in the interest of film exploration I thoroughly enjoyed Sunset Boulevard.

As the movie progressed, I keenly focused my attention on the many aspects of the critical viewing guide. Religiously recording my observations, I felt that I had nearly logged the entire movie. That is, until we began openly discussing our annotations with the class. Nearly every observation that one of our classmates brought to attention was a side of the movie that I had ignorantly glassed over. From differences in lighting to the multiple symbolic representations of the two worlds that divided Norma’s skewed persona, I couldn’t have been more impressed with everyone’s astute observations. Not in fifteen views would I have noticed that the hard lighting of Norma’s face denounced her star status. Many of my observations were actually quite shallow in comparison. And with this apparent, I honestly learned more about the movie from our twenty minutes of open discussion than the two hours that I spent in tedious concentration. Now I just wonder what key concepts I crudely overlook in many other films! For each time I re-watch one of my favorite movies, I always come away with surprising amounts of new, previously missed insight. With this in mind, I left last class under the impression that I had watched Sunset Boulevard thirty times, each through the eyes of a different individual.

Besides the movie’s fascinating plot and addicting characters, the film repeatedly captured my attention through mini pop culture history lessons. Its characters exposed the generation differences between the society of the film and present times. Cigarettes appeared in nearly every scene and not only showed the prevalence of smoking during the time period but how smoking was much more socially acceptable. With all of the hottest stars smoking six packs a scene, I might have even succumbed to the social pressures of the era. Also, the lack of intimate scenes and bodily exposure, as Sam bluntly pointed out, bared the modest side of 1950’s cinema. Modern films are a bit more trigger happy in the excessive skin department so I can only imagine how the kissing scene between Joe and Norma once warmed the audience in a wave of intimacy.