The article "Film of Paul Bowles Short Story Rediscovered" was really interesting. I can only imagine the frustration and heartbreak the director, Sara Driver, felt when the negative was destroyed. Spending all that time on a film, which sounds like a great one, only to find out that there were no watchable copies left must be a filmmakers worst nightmare. It definitely seems, however, that fate was at play, and the circumstances of the film being lost and then rediscovered again brings even more meaning to the film. The article influenced me to look out for the film, and to read the short story. Being a bookworm myself, this sounds like something I really need to get my hands on.
The second article was also extremely interesting and inspiring. I think it's really beautiful and moving that there's a nonprofit organization dedicated to restoring and showing films that never got the exposure and promotion they deserved. It goes to the show how inspiring and powerful art can be, and how dedicated the people who appreciate high art are in getting this art out to the public. In the article I particularly liked the comparison of "Limite" to Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring", and I feel that this connection gives me an idea of what seeing the film would be like. The film sounds like it's truly a brilliant work of art and I will love to get the chance to see it one day.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Jean Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast
Matthew Britt
12/19/10
Jean Cocteau
Beauty and the Beast
Fantasy
French
1946
Seeing this version of Beauty and the Beast was interesting because, one; i didn't know this version existed and two, I always loved the famous Disney version as a child. The film techniques and general quality of the film were certainly ahead of its time for 1946. One thing about the film that really makes it important in my eyes, like all the other film's we've viewed in class, is its ability to create mood and atmosphere through simple means; and the unlimited power of a single shot. The film relies heavily on romanticism and plays out like a romantic poem. This film really touches upon childhood emotions in the same manner fairy-tales and classic childhood tales would. Watching the movie certainly brought me back to my childhood. Seeing the progression of the story, and how Belle eventually falls for the beast, the movie really emphasizes a certain dream-like and magical feeling; with romantic theme's dealing with how true-love is skin deep and often unpredictable. The costume's and makeup used in the film definitely helps in creating the romantic mood; as well as the scenes that take place in the Beast's castle. It's extremely impressive how the director, Cocteau, was able to create a fantasy-world that's uniquely his own, and massively appealing.
In David Galeff's "A Sense of Magic: Reality and Illusion in Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast", Galeff discusses Cocteau's enthusiasm towards the power of a fairy tale, and his quest to touch upon the inner child of his audience. This article really gives insight to Cocteau and his passion's as an artist for mystery, the imaginary, and the sense of the impossible being possible. In Roger Ebert's review of the film, Ebert stresses the context of when the film was made, and the fact that there was limited means for creating special effects. This really points to the authentic magic of the film, and Cocteau's masterful talents as a director.
In Galeff's article, he speaks of how Cocteau requests "naivete" from his audience, in order to fully appreciate the magic and fairy-tale effect of the film. "In requesting naivetee from his audience, Cocteau is asking for a regressive belief in magic, a belief in the improbable so necessary to the fairy tale". This quote really confirms what I felt when I saw the film. Throughout the film there was a pervading sense of magic and this very unique feeling that made me harken back to my days of being a child and being immersed in the romanticism of a captivating imaginative tale. It's interesting that this article confirms that this response is what Cocteau was expecting from his viewers. In Ebert's review, Ebert notes a similar response to the film. "Its devices penetrate the usual conventions of narrative, and appeal at a deeper psychic level". This is ultimately what this masterful film achieves.
In a review written by Donald Faulkner, the reviewer states "this film proves that there's no such thing as technique, but only invention". I think this beautifully sums up the power of the film. This piece of cinema stands out on its own due to its uniqueness in it's dream-like quality and imagination. The filming techniques used in the film were effective and masterful; such as the creation of tension through dramatizing certain shots and the use of motion to add to the buildup of particular scenes. As mentioned before, the various sets and costume's employed in the film really establish a unique dreamworld of its own. This was an extremely well-made film.
12/19/10
Jean Cocteau
Beauty and the Beast
Fantasy
French
1946
Seeing this version of Beauty and the Beast was interesting because, one; i didn't know this version existed and two, I always loved the famous Disney version as a child. The film techniques and general quality of the film were certainly ahead of its time for 1946. One thing about the film that really makes it important in my eyes, like all the other film's we've viewed in class, is its ability to create mood and atmosphere through simple means; and the unlimited power of a single shot. The film relies heavily on romanticism and plays out like a romantic poem. This film really touches upon childhood emotions in the same manner fairy-tales and classic childhood tales would. Watching the movie certainly brought me back to my childhood. Seeing the progression of the story, and how Belle eventually falls for the beast, the movie really emphasizes a certain dream-like and magical feeling; with romantic theme's dealing with how true-love is skin deep and often unpredictable. The costume's and makeup used in the film definitely helps in creating the romantic mood; as well as the scenes that take place in the Beast's castle. It's extremely impressive how the director, Cocteau, was able to create a fantasy-world that's uniquely his own, and massively appealing.
In David Galeff's "A Sense of Magic: Reality and Illusion in Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast", Galeff discusses Cocteau's enthusiasm towards the power of a fairy tale, and his quest to touch upon the inner child of his audience. This article really gives insight to Cocteau and his passion's as an artist for mystery, the imaginary, and the sense of the impossible being possible. In Roger Ebert's review of the film, Ebert stresses the context of when the film was made, and the fact that there was limited means for creating special effects. This really points to the authentic magic of the film, and Cocteau's masterful talents as a director.
In Galeff's article, he speaks of how Cocteau requests "naivete" from his audience, in order to fully appreciate the magic and fairy-tale effect of the film. "In requesting naivetee from his audience, Cocteau is asking for a regressive belief in magic, a belief in the improbable so necessary to the fairy tale". This quote really confirms what I felt when I saw the film. Throughout the film there was a pervading sense of magic and this very unique feeling that made me harken back to my days of being a child and being immersed in the romanticism of a captivating imaginative tale. It's interesting that this article confirms that this response is what Cocteau was expecting from his viewers. In Ebert's review, Ebert notes a similar response to the film. "Its devices penetrate the usual conventions of narrative, and appeal at a deeper psychic level". This is ultimately what this masterful film achieves.
In a review written by Donald Faulkner, the reviewer states "this film proves that there's no such thing as technique, but only invention". I think this beautifully sums up the power of the film. This piece of cinema stands out on its own due to its uniqueness in it's dream-like quality and imagination. The filming techniques used in the film were effective and masterful; such as the creation of tension through dramatizing certain shots and the use of motion to add to the buildup of particular scenes. As mentioned before, the various sets and costume's employed in the film really establish a unique dreamworld of its own. This was an extremely well-made film.
Kurosawa's, "Rashomon"
Matthew Britt
12/19/10
Rashomon
Japanese
Akira Kurosawa
Crime-Mystery
Won the "Golden Lion" at the Venice Film Festival
Rashomon is certainly an intellectually-stimulating film. I was really impressed with Kurosawa's utilization of the different point's of view throughout the film. I felt that this really made the film interesting and fun to follow. It was interesting to realize that the director only used a few different location's in the filming. The overall approach of the film was very minimalistic and it was impressive in that sense, because Kurosawa's talent for building a strong story that can stand on it's own is very evident. I thought the idea of contrasting the perspectives from each person who told their version of the story was very original, and really made me think of what Kurosawa was trying to say with this film. It's obvious that he's interested in how people deal with the truth, and how they create their own truth's, or recollection's of what happened, to protect themselves. Kurosawa is clearly analyzing morality and honesty, and how different people deal with these things. Perhaps the reason why Rashomon is so timeless, is because these are universal issues.
In Jeanne Lombardo's article "Japanese Film Greats-Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon" Lombardo focuses on Kurosawa's innovative filming techniques, and points out recurring shots in the film that are symbolic. Lombardo notes how- "Kurosawa’s repeated shots of the sun seem to hint at the underlying truth of things, bright as sunlight but hidden by the leaves of self-interest and self-preservation and seen only fleetingly" -Lombardo. This observation really helped me appreciate Kurosawa's talents as a director due to his complete reliance on a shot itself, without any dialogue or hints at what the recurrence of the sun might mean, to get a point across. That is, in my opinion, true art. Roger Ebert's review of Rashomon discusses the importance and influence of the film on cinema. Ebert emphasizes the theme of the film, being the subjectivity of truth, and provides insightful background of the film, and how many people in the business were reluctant towards the film, such as the head of the studio in which the film was produced, who "had his name removed from the credits". All this points to the groundbreaking quality of the film, and the fact that Kurosawa was taking a risk by creating such a film.
Lombardo's article talks about the films opening scene, being "set to the incessant drumming of the rain". I think choosing to begin the movie with this particular scene is a testament to Kurosawa's genius film making abilities. Right away, I was lured into the movie, and I believe this scene ultimately captures the atmosphere of the whole film. In his review of the film, Ebert mentions how "when it was released, nobody had ever seen anything like it". The interesting thing is, even through my 21st century film-viewing perspective I understand this, because I have never really seen anything like this movie myself. The fact that the movie is done in such a minimalistic manner and is able to give off such a profound and deep message is amazing to me. This confirms Kurosawa's abilities to create such a deep and penetrating work of art while utilizing so few resources.
I loved the fact that the film was silent because I always believe silence leaves room for more interpretation and adds an interesting dimension to the film. The silence creates a certain atmosphere which goes beautifully with the film. It's clear that Kurosawa has an appreciation for presenting a story in such a way that is "bare", meaning that it stays minimal in its presentation and leaves plenty of room for the audience to interperate their own meanings and feelings towards the film. The low budget and eerie tension that runs throughout the film is absolutely necessary for this film to come through as strongly as it does; such as the lighting, and use of just a few location's. It's also clear that Kurosawa has an immense appreciation for literature, and story-telling. The minimalistic filming approach to me is beautiful. I feel like by having a somewhat "stripped down" approach, like Kurosawa had with this film, really puts emphasis on the power of an image; or shot.
12/19/10
Rashomon
Japanese
Akira Kurosawa
Crime-Mystery
Won the "Golden Lion" at the Venice Film Festival
Rashomon is certainly an intellectually-stimulating film. I was really impressed with Kurosawa's utilization of the different point's of view throughout the film. I felt that this really made the film interesting and fun to follow. It was interesting to realize that the director only used a few different location's in the filming. The overall approach of the film was very minimalistic and it was impressive in that sense, because Kurosawa's talent for building a strong story that can stand on it's own is very evident. I thought the idea of contrasting the perspectives from each person who told their version of the story was very original, and really made me think of what Kurosawa was trying to say with this film. It's obvious that he's interested in how people deal with the truth, and how they create their own truth's, or recollection's of what happened, to protect themselves. Kurosawa is clearly analyzing morality and honesty, and how different people deal with these things. Perhaps the reason why Rashomon is so timeless, is because these are universal issues.
In Jeanne Lombardo's article "Japanese Film Greats-Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon" Lombardo focuses on Kurosawa's innovative filming techniques, and points out recurring shots in the film that are symbolic. Lombardo notes how- "Kurosawa’s repeated shots of the sun seem to hint at the underlying truth of things, bright as sunlight but hidden by the leaves of self-interest and self-preservation and seen only fleetingly" -Lombardo. This observation really helped me appreciate Kurosawa's talents as a director due to his complete reliance on a shot itself, without any dialogue or hints at what the recurrence of the sun might mean, to get a point across. That is, in my opinion, true art. Roger Ebert's review of Rashomon discusses the importance and influence of the film on cinema. Ebert emphasizes the theme of the film, being the subjectivity of truth, and provides insightful background of the film, and how many people in the business were reluctant towards the film, such as the head of the studio in which the film was produced, who "had his name removed from the credits". All this points to the groundbreaking quality of the film, and the fact that Kurosawa was taking a risk by creating such a film.
Lombardo's article talks about the films opening scene, being "set to the incessant drumming of the rain". I think choosing to begin the movie with this particular scene is a testament to Kurosawa's genius film making abilities. Right away, I was lured into the movie, and I believe this scene ultimately captures the atmosphere of the whole film. In his review of the film, Ebert mentions how "when it was released, nobody had ever seen anything like it". The interesting thing is, even through my 21st century film-viewing perspective I understand this, because I have never really seen anything like this movie myself. The fact that the movie is done in such a minimalistic manner and is able to give off such a profound and deep message is amazing to me. This confirms Kurosawa's abilities to create such a deep and penetrating work of art while utilizing so few resources.
I loved the fact that the film was silent because I always believe silence leaves room for more interpretation and adds an interesting dimension to the film. The silence creates a certain atmosphere which goes beautifully with the film. It's clear that Kurosawa has an appreciation for presenting a story in such a way that is "bare", meaning that it stays minimal in its presentation and leaves plenty of room for the audience to interperate their own meanings and feelings towards the film. The low budget and eerie tension that runs throughout the film is absolutely necessary for this film to come through as strongly as it does; such as the lighting, and use of just a few location's. It's also clear that Kurosawa has an immense appreciation for literature, and story-telling. The minimalistic filming approach to me is beautiful. I feel like by having a somewhat "stripped down" approach, like Kurosawa had with this film, really puts emphasis on the power of an image; or shot.
400 blows
Matthew Britt
10/26/10
400 Blows
French
1959
Francois Truffaut
One thing I definitely noticed about this film was that it focused on utlizing certain shots to build up tension and create a certain atmosphere. Just like "The Battleship Potempkin", the film relied on tension and intense emotion from the different scenes. The emotion and atmosphere came more from the directing than it did from the narrative, in my opinion. A great example of this would be the last scene, where the boy runs toward the ocean, but then quickly back to land, with the film ending with an intense look on the boy's face, directed towards the audience.
In John Conomos's "Truffaut's The 400 blow's, or the sea, Antoine, the sea", Conomos =talks about Truffaut's love of literature and how it is echoed in his film-making. He describes the film as lyrical, almost relating it to a beautiful novel, in the sense of how the story progresses, and the lyrical scenes that take place. In Roger Ebert's review of the film, Ebert stresses the simplicity of the film, and how the film is based on feeling; and how that's beautiful in it's own right. Evert's review basicaly says that with 400 Blows, you don't have to over-analyze or dig for meaning, all the meaning of the film is right there in front of the viewer, and it's all easy to relate to.
In Conomos's essay, he mentions how the final scene's "are some of the most hauntingly personal scenes in all of French cinema". These scenes are haunting and personal because they touch upon a universal nerve that audiences, regardless of where they're from, can all relate to. As Antoine runs back from the water, the audience is familiar with the allegory; that universal feeling in life of being stuck between individual fulfillment and the "right choice" in order to survive in a harsh society. In Ebert's essay, Ebert mentions over and over again the simplicity that the film convey's. This ofcourse is seen throughout all the film, as the film emphasizes the emotion's from the boy, which is shown by facial gestures throughout the scenes. One reason this film is so timeless and important is due to it's ability to use simplicity and play on basic human emotions through it's simple use of effective cinema.
I loved this film. This film is actually one of my favorite film's of all time, and the last scene in particular left me with a feeling I only rarely get from amazing film's. Everything about the film, the utiliziation of the different shots, the acting, storyline, atmosphere, etc...is perfect. I can truly say this film's a masterpiece that deserves to be apart of the all time greatest-film discourse.
10/26/10
400 Blows
French
1959
Francois Truffaut
One thing I definitely noticed about this film was that it focused on utlizing certain shots to build up tension and create a certain atmosphere. Just like "The Battleship Potempkin", the film relied on tension and intense emotion from the different scenes. The emotion and atmosphere came more from the directing than it did from the narrative, in my opinion. A great example of this would be the last scene, where the boy runs toward the ocean, but then quickly back to land, with the film ending with an intense look on the boy's face, directed towards the audience.
In John Conomos's "Truffaut's The 400 blow's, or the sea, Antoine, the sea", Conomos =talks about Truffaut's love of literature and how it is echoed in his film-making. He describes the film as lyrical, almost relating it to a beautiful novel, in the sense of how the story progresses, and the lyrical scenes that take place. In Roger Ebert's review of the film, Ebert stresses the simplicity of the film, and how the film is based on feeling; and how that's beautiful in it's own right. Evert's review basicaly says that with 400 Blows, you don't have to over-analyze or dig for meaning, all the meaning of the film is right there in front of the viewer, and it's all easy to relate to.
In Conomos's essay, he mentions how the final scene's "are some of the most hauntingly personal scenes in all of French cinema". These scenes are haunting and personal because they touch upon a universal nerve that audiences, regardless of where they're from, can all relate to. As Antoine runs back from the water, the audience is familiar with the allegory; that universal feeling in life of being stuck between individual fulfillment and the "right choice" in order to survive in a harsh society. In Ebert's essay, Ebert mentions over and over again the simplicity that the film convey's. This ofcourse is seen throughout all the film, as the film emphasizes the emotion's from the boy, which is shown by facial gestures throughout the scenes. One reason this film is so timeless and important is due to it's ability to use simplicity and play on basic human emotions through it's simple use of effective cinema.
I loved this film. This film is actually one of my favorite film's of all time, and the last scene in particular left me with a feeling I only rarely get from amazing film's. Everything about the film, the utiliziation of the different shots, the acting, storyline, atmosphere, etc...is perfect. I can truly say this film's a masterpiece that deserves to be apart of the all time greatest-film discourse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)