Jesus Camp

I saw this movie when it first came out in 2006 and at that time I wasn't prepared to make religious decisions for myself so I was just offend that a negative light was shone upon Christianity because after all I am basically a Christian. But in my second viewing of this film I found myself irate and frustrated. As I watched this documentary all I could think about was: my children will never ever be like this. I never want to force my children into something so forcefully. I do not want them to see religion as this epic dividing factor that can essentially destroy nations and start wars. It bothered me that these Evangelicals thought that everything they spoke was the complete and utter truth. They were so ignorant. Or rather they were portrayed in such a painfully ignorant light (but the "potential" bias of this film is a whole other story). They seemed very obsessed with this idea of church and state melding perfectly into one. But perhaps they don't see that so many other religions have that same right to push their religion onto the government and in turn carry tremendous weight when it comes to national decisions. There were so many actions these people took that made me detest organized religion. From what I know it is supposed to be more about your "personal" relationship with God.

I am all for freedom of expression and I would never condemn these individuals for practicing a religion they put so much faith and passion into, so it is perhaps more the way this movie was made that bothered me. In an interview with the Washington Post the directors of Jesus Camp said that they spent over 10 months editing this film so no bias would appear. But I fear I cannot believe this. There is this one scene in the movie when Becky Fischer asks "Do you believe God can do anything?" to a group of children. Then this mother grabs her sons arm and lifts it up sure to be seen. Then there is the music that is played during moments of prayer, and the camera angles they choose to portray this give speaking in tongues this ominous, mystical sensation. To be bias is natural , but this is a documentary that has so much, maybe too much, power to tarnish a religion and ruin the reputation of a church, or rather a camp, and its pastor.

Ordinary People

I recently went to my sisters acting school to see her do an end of semester performance and one of the scenes done was from the play Ordinary People. My family and I decided that the story as described was so compelling that we bought the movie after we returned from the city and proceeded to watch it that night. It sort of reminded me of Good Will Hunting in the way that the main character was really distraught and by the end of the film they were so transformed and brought to a place of excellence. But I found Ordinary People to be far better. It was so powerful. The tag line is so true: "Some films you watch, others to feel." I fell as if any viewer could connect to Conrad (the main character). I mean yes, he did face a horrible tragedy that people typically don't have to endure in their day to day, but the emotional turmoil of anything really is prevalent in many people's life. The power comes with this: that he didn't let the violent emotions be his demise as it was his friend Karen's. It was beautiful and encouraging to see that. I'm not sure if what I just wrote made sense. I believe it would be far more understandable if the movie is seen, but hopefully it is at least coherent. I think one big reason for this movie being so powerful because the casting was perfect. My sister first stated this and I've thought about it and it's a very valid assessment. Every single character was excellent, even the tiny supporting actors. I clearly have a thing for movie endings, because this movie was made ten times better by the fact that I had no idea what was to come at the end, and when it finally did end it was so bitter sweet. I wasn't sure whether to be happy or mortally destroyed for Conrad. He spent so much time trying to repair this relationship with his mother but she leaves him, but at the same time the closing shot repairs any of the sorrow that goes with that loss. And since I can't find a picture it's this shot that's slowly panning out of Donald Sutherland and Timothy Hutton embraced in this powerful father-son hug.

M.

Ahh, irony at its best. This movie was so perfect. Aside from it being visibly ironic, the end was so unpredictable. It was sort of maddening and shocking, and I must say, I did love that. There were so many brutally ironic elements in M, and I'd like that to be the prime focus of this entry. So much was revealed through the irony about the movie's characters and also Germany at the time. I recall this one scene where Peter Lorre has chalk on his back and the little girl tells him he's a mess. First of all, shouldn't she feel worried that some random man has been stalking her (for lack of a better word), I suppose not. This small girl is treating the murderer like a child. The way she cleans him and even hands him his knife back are all very naive, but at the same time rather ironically mature. Peter Lorre is trying to take advantage of the children but they are being a matronly figure to his disheveled self. Another blatantly ironic element is the way the criminals are taking the police's position as law enforcers. They obviously have their own motives, but it's so irresistibly ironic the way they search for him and catch him and even have some twisted form of a trial. Their proceedings are parallel to that of the polices, but perhaps even a bit more acceptable. (And here lies my theory of the police being more like brutes than enforcers at that time and this is therefore a reflection of German society at the time, but this is merely a prediction of mine). At the end of the trial the man who is trying to do good by defending this clinically insane child murderer gets his way by pulling a gun out on the crowd. It's ironic because you'd perhaps expect him to be a pushover of sorts, or at least a gentle man who would resist such action. I really really enjoyed this movie. I wouldn't venture to say that it was well made or even that interesting, but M had this element of being completely insusceptible. The end was really superior to many I've seen. It was almost sort of corny, but I didn't expect that outcome at all, and I loved that.

Good Will Hunting

So I have a thing about predictable movies: I hate them. I'd almost rather them end really awfully than really happy all the time. But I suppose this isn't a uniform statement because I did actually like Good Will Hunting. But I'm not sure if it's for more than the fact that it was a sincerely excellent "feel-good" film. In every sense this movie was predictable. There was a bad fella, his excellence was unlocked, he fell in love, he gets help, and oh, he ends up with the girl. Of course he does. There's nothing wrong with being predictable, but of late I feel like a lot of the movies I have been seeing bear that unfortunate element of: "Okay, this is so obvious, I could walk out now and know the ending." Well, aside from that, I feel that I should perhaps focus on the movie I've titled the blog with. The acting in this film was supreme, really great. I'm a big fan of Robin Williams, especially when he plays those more serious roles. A lot about this movie was really beautiful. I liked the way Will Hunting sort of humbled himself to become something. I'm totally down with that: when those people who tend to be a bit cocky and macho get over themselves and do something great. I feel that Will Hunting had to do a lot of that in this film to become what he did. Despite the painful predictability this movie was a viewing pleasure.

Casablanca

What a beautiful movie. What a wonderful classic! I really enjoyed this film. I've tried to watch it twice before and I just couldn't get into it. I was pretty disappointed though because it was supposedly an AMAZING classic that everyone loves. I had high expectations. This time, in Art of Film, I was forced to watch it. Turned out to be a good thing. I suppose I had lower expectations but that doesn't make this movie any less beautiful. It was so full of moral conflict and compromise, making the decisions Rick was often faced with that much harder and his decisions that much more powerful. This movie was as much an allegory of the time as it was a story. The more I think about it, the more intricate the allegory becomes. I'm not that highly educated about World War II so I had a little trouble drawing all the parallels, but when they were pointed out they were that much more amazing. I must say though that I valued this movie much more for its beautiful love story and the honor and devotion that was constantly showing through every aspect of this film. My favorite part of Casablanca was easily the end. It was so perfect really. The entire movie was really encapsulated in these final seconds of Casablanca. Ilsa leaves Rick, again, perhaps for the last time, he talks about letters of transit, and money, and the weather exudes the theme of the film, that gloomy, upsetting mood which kind of resonated through out the film, or at least obvious aspects of Rick's personality. It seems to be a revolutionary realization for Rick that he needs a friends, that alcohol and women and money can't fill his "whole." That quote: "This looks like the beginning of a beautiful friendship."

Final scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0_S2J9c2H4

king of california

I work at the library and as I was shelving DVDs I came across this film. I am often drawn to products, movies especially, by their outward appeal. The case of this movie was rather different from most I've seen, so I decided to give it a try. So essentially this movie, King of California, was about a crazy man and his daughter who has been self-sufficient for most of her life because of her father's problems and her mother's absence. In this film the crazy father ignites an expedition to find treasure. If I say much more I fear that the movie will be ruined. But all in all this was the epitome of a feel good film. It was funny and sweet and the ending entails a brilliant twist, something completely and utterly unexpected. Through out this movie, particularly in the beginning, the girl's crazy father Charlie kept talking about these naked Chinese men landing on a beach in California and pulling clothes out of plastic bags and putting them on. His daughter looked at him like he really lost it, but at the end of the movie the most glorious thing happened. She pulled her beat up car next to the beach somewhere and low and behold these Chinese men start parading out of the water. I thought this was so witty of the director. It proved to much in the sense that the impossible isn't always impossible after all. And I loved that. I feel as if there was nothing too extraordinary about the cinematography of King of California, it was just a movie to be enjoyed by the armature eye, I suppose you could say. Of course there are no implications of me being an "expert" viewer, but I just feel like there was nothing special in that department. There's nothing wrong with that though, sometimes it's good to enjoy a film for the sake of the story, well quite often that's the purpose.

DO THE RIGHT THING

I guess this movie was pretty decent. It was the first Spike Lee joint I've ever seen (I think) and for that I enjoyed it. His filming style is pretty interesting, really unique. I feel like in some sort of way it was armature, but at the same time really really interesting. He used such a wide array of angles that I began to feel like a lot of it was experimental. I kind of enjoyed that element of it though. I feel like Spike Lee did a lot with Radio Raheem and the camera. He was often shot with the camera looking up to him or he was shot on a drastic angle. This gave him an air of intimidation. I really liked the way Spike Lee had objects zoomed in on. Most of the time they were important, but other times it was just for effect. I was recently watching the movie La Haine and I saw this exact effect utilized, and later I heard the director say that he sought some inspiration from some of the Spike Lee films he has seen. One of my favorite parts of this movie was when each ethnic group started dissing each other. They were talking directly to the camera. It was as if their internal monologue was being exposed to the viewer. It was pretty interesting that there was this completely random commentary centered around hatred and disdain for each other. I mean it wasn't completely spontaneous because much of this movie was centered on racial tension, but Spike Lee could have conveyed these emotions so many other ways but this option was pretty different. There are so many deeper things to be contemplated in this movie, things like racial issues and doing the right thing (hence the title of the movie) in different social situations. After watching this movie I feel as if it is better for the lessons that can be learned rather than for the actual story. Perhaps I would see it again to delve deeper into those lessons, but I could kind of take it or leave it.

La Haine

The first time I saw this movie I really really love it. I've been ranting about it a lot lately and when I was thinking about why I loved it so much, I wasn't exactly sure. So the other night I decided to watch it again. This time I watched it with the intent of discovering my love for it. I did. Firstly, the entire movie was shot in black and white. Sometimes I veer away from that, and I'm sure that holds true for many people, but the black and white enhances this film so much. It gives it a touch of agelessness, it leads the viewer to think that what is being shown in the film is not only true for the time that it is taking place, but for always. There is so much about this film that really infatuates me. Mathieu Kassovitz was truly brilliant in everything he did with it. There were so many small features of La Haine that I never would have noticed had they not been pointed out, but at the same time they were so brilliant and when I noticed them I became so excited because I'm starting to notice that it's the tiny parts of a movie that make it stand out from all the rest. For example, before each of the three main characters are introduced (Said, Vinz, and Hubert) their names are shown in a unique, really subtle way. In learning this I also learned that Mathieu Kassovitz used the techniques of other directors. After just watching a Spike Lee film I could see some techniques borrowed from him (zooming into an object and dutch angles just to name a few). There are a few really pointless things that go on in La Haine, they are mostly stories that people are telling to Said, Vinz, and Hubert. The actual meaning of each story has utterly no point, but that's the point. Mathieu Kassovitz puts this pointlessness into the air to show off the meaningless life these people of the ghetto lead. For me, La Haine is so much more about the cinematography than it is anything else. There is no real solid, cohesive plot line, but that's kind of the beauty of it. There is a tremendous political meaning to this film. At the time it was made there were many riots in Paris about the death of a young man, he died due to police brutality, so consequently this film kind of has an underlying anti police sentiment. Perhaps you wont be able to understand what I'm about to say unless you've seen the movie, but it should be said. Mathieu Kassovitz does not want people to have the underlying feeling that all black people are drug dealers, that's why he makes it very blatant that some black characters in this film do not touch drugs. He attempts to do the same for police men. He does not want the viewer to come out of this film thinking all police men are "pigs," that's why he places two very obviously good police in the film. There is so much more I could say about La Haine. I could go on and on about how beautiful and innovative it is, but I will not, partially because I really can't do this movie justice and partially because this is getting too long. I will instead encourage anyone who craves something different to see this masterpiece.

Pan's Labyrinth

This movie was ridiculous. In the best sense. I've seen this movie a couple of times and this time I was begging to understand every centimeter of it. I've watched it so many times because I love the plot line. I love the fantasy mixed in with the inevitably real. I love the devastation and hope all melded into one. It was so beautiful the way so many things fell apart but came back together in an utterly different but sometimes far brighter way. This time when I saw the movie I was relatively infatuated with two things: the parallels between The Captain and Ofelia and whether or not the fantastical element was real, of just a pigment of Ofelia's imagination. I was rather immersed in the search through out the film for these parallels. They were subtle and I suppose I discovered a few, but in the spirit of not ruining the film, I encourage you to search for any parallels at all between these two vital characters. I was also very involved in my search for truth in the fantasy world of Pan's Labyrinth. To say I now know the answer would be a fallacy, but my search did lead me to deeply study the film. I watched the establishing shot a few times over and I also watched what Guillermo del Toro, the director, had to say about anything relating to this film in hopes of obtaining an answer. I did not. In accordance to my own judgment I decided that all that was not entirely possible was fake. The fantasy was not a reality but rather the result of Ofelia's overactive imagination, an imagination to escape her fate. I could rant on and on about my theories on that, but rather than waste the time I'd simply ask the viewer to hold this question to a high regard and consider it. All in all I was utterly captivated by Pan's Labyrinth and all the rich detail it had to offer.

thedivingbellandthebutterfly

I have wanted to see this movie for quite some time, and after hearing so much about it I knew the summary on the back of the DVD case couldn't do it justice, so I decided to finally see it. I was glad I finally did. In short, I was rendered speechless after this film. Everything oozed with perfection: the soundtrack, the cinematography, and of course, the story. What a beautiful story. It was so moving. I was in tears for most of the movie, and when it comes to movies it takes a lot to make me cry. It is undeniable that I was deeply influenced by this film. There was one part where Jean-Do explains the remorse he has for not loving his children more and for not being kinder to their mother. I was kind of jolted at these words because I noticed that anything fatal could happen at any time. To anyone. I am often one who takes it all for granted, treating people however the hell I want to. And in retrospect it isn't right, that's obvious. But when there's that chance that you could be ripped away from everything so quickly, unable to make a menze it's scary, and potentially very real. The first, I'd say 15 minutes of this film were shot through the eyes of Jean-Do. How brilliant! I felt a bit anxious because of my inability to see everything. I imagined that Jean-Do felt quite similar to that, I'm sure he felt inhibited and anxious because of the confusion so prevalent in the opening scenes. A most powerful part of this film was when there was a montage of pictures of Jean-Do from all different aspects of his life. They portrayed him as this lively human being, bursting at the seem to live and experience all he could. Then it's his current face, a face permanently distorted. No more expression to be seen there. It was devastating but powerful and harsh. It was so painful to see such a young being destroyed at the prime of his life. But to say he was destroyed would sacrifice much of what he did, so perhaps he was merely inhibited from pursuing his life to the fullest extent. It is incredible that this man wrote a book. It goes to show that despite his body being a complete vegetable, his mind was bustling with thought and beauty of imagination. Remarkable really.

Rushmore

There is not much for me to say besides I really just didn't like this movie. I'm not even sure of any good thing I could say about it. Actually, the soundtrack was terrific. But otherwise, I found it so typical and bland. I feel as if I could have seen hundreds of movies of this nature. There was a clear effort to make this movie intriguing but I missed that somewhere along the way. Perhaps the one element conveyed to me in "Rushmore," a theme you might say, is that there is beauty in being ridiculous and living for what pleases you no matter how outlandish it is. It's kind of a lovely truth, and I guess I could benefit from the lesson learned there. I guess I did learn something from this, but I simply did not enjoy it.

ELEPHANT

This film was well... interesting. I delighted in the cinematography, I found it brilliant and rather unique. I enjoyed the lack of words and the conclusions that had to be made by the viewer. I feel as if Gus Van Stan tried rather diligently to connect his audience to each and every character in the film, but oddly enough i lost that connection. He displayed their names before they were explored by the camera, trying to acquaint each character to the audience as much as he could without a true arsenal of dialogue. He strived to reveal the character by the way they were filmed, and he did, but i feel as if the emotional connections were simply not deep enough. There is no doubt that what he was attempting was rather beautiful and of course innovative, but I lost that somewhere along the way. I knew that if I felt this connection as genuinely as I was supposed to I would have cried at the sight of their death, but I did not. I merely thought that the actions were sad and horrible to the highest degree, not something that deemed tears and deep sorrow. I almost feel as if this film was better for no more than its cinematography. While I was watching it I thought I loved it for more than the filming, but for the storyline as well. But in retrospect the most valuable element of it was the filming, but sometimes a film does not need to be much more than that.

V for Vendetta

What an utterly fascinating film! This movie was highly complex but very interesting all the while. There were aspects that were hard to follow and some questions that did not have easily determined answers. I attribute this however to the mere fact that we watched the movie over the course of several days and perhaps because I have only seen it once (in that manner). This movie provoked in me an element of paranoia. I have seen a few films and read a few books about totalitarian governments of the future and the destruction they impart upon the people, but this film by far stirred the most within me. After seeing this film I felt perhaps that many actions of our own government are just an evil plan to acquire what they want with minimal concern for our countries inhabitants. Aside from this pang of paranoia, I enjoyed the comical elements mixed in with the serious, sometimes rather dreadful scenes. Most comedy came from V in peculiar ways. There were certainly some elements of dark comedy through out the course of this film. I do not feel like this movie was a profound unearthing of much of anything, and I'm funny in that way that I often look for that. Despite my thoughts on it lacking a profound determination of anything, I did enjoy this film, I really certainly did. But I suppose because I always look for the profound element in anything I tend to be unsatisfied when I cannot find it. This is of course not necessary in anything, but a mere desire of my own. The plot of this film was interesting but it was not steeped with artistic elements as I often enjoy in the films I watch. It seems apparent that I cannot simply enjoy a movie. I always need to have a purpose for seeing it, I always need to learn something. I guess I did learn something in V for Vendetta and that is how vunderable I am and how easily influenced I am by most anything. I could not end this blog entry with once again reaffrming my like for this movie, it was simply just not what I tend to prefer.

HIGH NOON

I'm not really into westerns, never have been, probably never will be. I think they're a bit too American for me. I felt as if the story plot was kind of typical and only bordered slightly on interesting. In this film Will goes around the little down he lives in trying to find help to ward off Kane and his gang of bandits. No one helps. For the whole movie you're stuck assuming he's screwed, four to one, he's dead for sure. But in the back of my little mind I had a feeling that all those people would pity him and help him defeat the people who previously made their lives so fearful. I was so sure that they would come to the rescue. But contrary to my belief they didn't. I was shocked at that, I really was. But he survived and his new wife Amy, the pacifist, helped him. She saved the day more than Will did, he just had the courage to get to the place where she could do what she had to. Once learning of all the parallels to society and the political scene of the 1950s, the actions of Will and all the town people seemed kind of sensible, not what I assumed, but sensible. All in all, I would've never watched this on my own, but I still did kind of enjoy it. There were a lot of aspects of the film that were a surprise to me. For example the lack of majestic beauty that is sometimes associated with western film.

SIX SHOOOOTERS

Ha! Dark comedy. What a weird film this was. I mean I really can't say I enjoyed it. I felt like a bit of a sadist laughing at all the completely obscure things happening. I feel like this film sort of broke conventions in the way that all these rather somber things happened - such as death and suicide and murder - most people cringe at the sight of any of this. I think people typically watch movies to escape their lives and so to a degree I feel as if most would not want to be watching other peoples lives fall apart. But maybe that's because I'm more of a happy ending kind of girl. I thought the implementation of the serial killer cursing repetitively was quite fitting. It enhanced his air of "I don't give a shit." I sort of felt obligated to laugh at certain elements of this film, certain things that I feel a bit uncomfortable about but ended up laughing anyway because of the way it was introduced as a comedy. I thought the ending was particularly awful in nature, but from a philosophical stand point the ending was powerful. The main character in this film is Donnelly, he is also the only character in this movie with an actual name. After all the death that goes on around him he attempts suicide. First he kills his rabbit, then himself, but the gun fails him. I think this pretty much indicates that he was destined to live, despite what he wanted. The end is left for much open interpretation. All in all I didn't enjoy this film, but it was sort of interesting.

Spirited Away

I'd say that I never thought it possible for me to really enjoy an animated film and gain significant moral insight from it. I really tend to detest films that don't appear utterly serious or intentionally stupid, and this film appeared neither. While watching this film I became more engrossed in Chihiro's quest for her parents initially but then so much more in the end. It was so interesting the way her quest evolved and how deep it became. She created such a mess with the No Face, but she also solved that mess. Haku saved her once from being expelled and then she deemed it her duty to save his life after getting attacked by the paper birds. She even travels by train to return the witches seal that Haku stole. Her determination and desire for justice becomes more and more evident through out this film, and also more admirable. At first Chihiro appeared as this little whinny annoying thing but as the film progressed I actually started to admire her little animated self. I really enjoy foreign films. I've seen many films in French and Italian, but I've always kept away from those in Chinese and Japanese because they weren't as pleasant to listen to. With Spirited Away I much prefer hearing it in the language it was intended, it sounds far more natural. All in all I've enjoyed this film, learning much more than I thought possible.

LOOK.

North by Northwest is an exquisite Alfred Hitchcock film. Thus far I have learned one very relevant fundamental aspect of cinematography. I am positive that this holds true in any film, but in this specific one it has been pointed out numerous times. This "element" is that there are so many small aspects of a movie that often get overlooked but are added by the director for an element of fun I suppose. There is no real need for these additional surprises that most people don't notice but they are sort of a surprise for those who do care to look. In this film the element of foreshadowing is used many times, a few particular times that I remember well are when in The Oak Bar at The Plaza Hotel there is a picture in the background that shows a man being taken away and that is what is about to happen to Roger Thronhill. Again foreshadowing is used when Roger Thronhill is talking to the CIA agent at the airport and there is an airplane propeller that looks like it's shooting Roger in the head, something to come a bit later in the film. Another part of this movie that foreshadows what's to come is the intersecting lines of a building when the beginning credits are rolling. The bodies on the streets of Manhattan also move in such a way where they look like intersecting lines. These intersecting lines, I believe, are showing what's to come in Roger Thornhill's life, they are showing all the people he will interact with that comes as a surprise to him. There are many elements of this movie that are small and not noticed by many but are very interesting when they are picked up.