Thursday, June 20, 2013
Review of Jarmusch's Down by Law
I thought this film was very minimalist. There was very little action, dialogue, and sets were simple. Like the previous Jarmusch film I have seen Limits of Control, there seems to be no point or theme to the film. The stylistic elements of the film are very reductionist. The camera moves little. The editing is uncomplicated. Like Ebert says in his review, the style of the film is very "noirish."
Analyzing Jarmusch films could probably constitute a whole course. Comparing it to other films like Limits of Control yields some points of comparison. Limits of Control has more action and a definitive climax. Perhaps it does not, like Down by Law, have a plot or metatextual meaning.
I enjoyed watching the film because of what it does for Cinema. It purposefully eschews blockbuster style filmmaking and puts forth an artistic creation. Some of the shots were very well done and the cinematographer should be commended. The story and style of the film grow out of Noir films. All of the characters are struggling to survive in the urban jungle that New Orleans is. Each of the three characters paths intersects, and, by the end of the movie, all three characters have again gone their separate ways.
Down by Law is a film about struggling to survive. In each character we see someone who is setup to take a fall and has ended up in jail. The film is an interesting story that tells of random occurrences with no apparent meaning. Aimless, wandering, typical Jarmusch.
Analyzing Jarmusch films could probably constitute a whole course. Comparing it to other films like Limits of Control yields some points of comparison. Limits of Control has more action and a definitive climax. Perhaps it does not, like Down by Law, have a plot or metatextual meaning.
I enjoyed watching the film because of what it does for Cinema. It purposefully eschews blockbuster style filmmaking and puts forth an artistic creation. Some of the shots were very well done and the cinematographer should be commended. The story and style of the film grow out of Noir films. All of the characters are struggling to survive in the urban jungle that New Orleans is. Each of the three characters paths intersects, and, by the end of the movie, all three characters have again gone their separate ways.
Down by Law is a film about struggling to survive. In each character we see someone who is setup to take a fall and has ended up in jail. The film is an interesting story that tells of random occurrences with no apparent meaning. Aimless, wandering, typical Jarmusch.
Monday, June 10, 2013
Review of Side by Side
This film was a documentary about the transition from traditional film stocks to digital production processes. It was a very revealing film that went into considerable detail about the future of the movie industry and how technology is changing the way films are made from shooting to post-production and distribution. Last Fall I took a class about Cinema and Digital technology. This coming Fall I'm going to teach that class and I plan to show this film on the first night of class. I think it is a great, if brief, overview of the current debate about the transition from film to digital.
It talks about how digital technology, primarily cameras, has evolved from handhelds that looked like home videos to the latest camera technology that can create images that look like the highest quality of film 35m. The film also discussed how distribution is changing, moving from traditional film projectors to digital video projectors. Almost all the major theaters have changed from film to digital, even Art house cinemas have made the transition.
All this technological evolution leads to the question that the film posed to many famous film directors over the course of the film; is film as a method of capturing images dead? Has or will digital replaced film completely? George Lucas, prior to the film, said that "film is dead." Other filmmakers such as Christopher Nolan, who made the recent Batman movies says film is still of use. Other directors also weighed in on the future of film. The consensus was the film is, indeed, dead. Although it still might have some use, like in the recent movie The Master which was shot in 70m. But, more and more, as the camera technology improves so that digital produces that grainy, painterly quality image that film cameras produce, using digital cameras, which are much cheaper, is becoming the instrument of choice among filmmakers.
The debate about digital or film is fleshed out in detail in an article by the two leading movie critics of the New York Times. They provide are better analysis than I could and provide a nice compliment to the film. I will be assigning the article in class.
I think the transition to digital has already usurped the movie business. From dogme95's The Celebration, which I will be showing the second week of class, to the big budget Superhero movies, digital cameras are becoming the method used most by filmmakers. I think it is a positive advancement that digital cameras can now capture video that is the same or very similar quality to 35m, or even 70m.
I just think about what to do with all those old films, lying around in canisters, slowly wasting away?
It talks about how digital technology, primarily cameras, has evolved from handhelds that looked like home videos to the latest camera technology that can create images that look like the highest quality of film 35m. The film also discussed how distribution is changing, moving from traditional film projectors to digital video projectors. Almost all the major theaters have changed from film to digital, even Art house cinemas have made the transition.
All this technological evolution leads to the question that the film posed to many famous film directors over the course of the film; is film as a method of capturing images dead? Has or will digital replaced film completely? George Lucas, prior to the film, said that "film is dead." Other filmmakers such as Christopher Nolan, who made the recent Batman movies says film is still of use. Other directors also weighed in on the future of film. The consensus was the film is, indeed, dead. Although it still might have some use, like in the recent movie The Master which was shot in 70m. But, more and more, as the camera technology improves so that digital produces that grainy, painterly quality image that film cameras produce, using digital cameras, which are much cheaper, is becoming the instrument of choice among filmmakers.
The debate about digital or film is fleshed out in detail in an article by the two leading movie critics of the New York Times. They provide are better analysis than I could and provide a nice compliment to the film. I will be assigning the article in class.
I think the transition to digital has already usurped the movie business. From dogme95's The Celebration, which I will be showing the second week of class, to the big budget Superhero movies, digital cameras are becoming the method used most by filmmakers. I think it is a positive advancement that digital cameras can now capture video that is the same or very similar quality to 35m, or even 70m.
I just think about what to do with all those old films, lying around in canisters, slowly wasting away?
Monday, June 3, 2013
Review of the Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest
This movie was a tour de force. It had the gripping suspense that held viewers attention in the first installment of the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series, but was sorely lacking in the second film. I thought the story was the strongest aspect of the film. A government conspiracy, a girl who had been so wronged by a corrupt and perverted system, and a group of dedicated freedom fighters working for justice. Great film! Great trilogy!
In film class we are currently talking about the hero's journey. We are reading a book by Vogler who writes about the steps and sequences the hero goes through. He argues that stories can be boiled down to their essentials to reveal that there are not so many different stories throughout time and across cultures. I think Lisbeth, the hero of the the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo qualifies as a hero who goes on a long and difficult journey. In the first film she is an avenging angel. She works outside of Swedish society to help Mikael solve the crime. In the third and final film she is cleared of any wrong doing and her rights and sanity are restored.
In the third film we see the hero's journey come to a climax. The events of the previous two films lead up to a trial where Lisbeth must prove her innocence and legal competence. In a number of plot twists it is revealed that Lisbeth accusers, the psychiatrist, her legal guardian, and her father are all guilty of a vast conspiracy to help Zalachenko and keep Lisbeth institutionalized. The suspense builds to a peak and all of Lisbeth's enemies are dealt with leaving her free.
Aside from the hero's journey Lisbeth goes on, and Lisbeth is quite a hero. First, she is a woman who is abused by white men. The film is a clear indictment of the patriarchical Swedish society the Lisbeth lives in. She must fight against entrenched corruption with only a few resources and few allies. Yet she does come out on top.
I also found the use of technology interesting in the film. It is such a film that reflects how digitally connected we are. Lisbeth uses her skills as a hacker to find information, her allies hack computers to clear her name, and cell phones are very common. I like the whole "cypherpunk" style and attitude of Lisbeth. I like how there is a constant tension as to how she is going to succeed. How is she going to expose the villains and evilness of Swedish society. It also goes well with the current activities of hacktivists, anonymous, and current debates about the internet, government secrets, openness, abuse of power, systematic repression, and corruption in government. With the trial of Bradley Manning and the legal status of Julian Assange in question this film is very relevant to today's World.
I think this film is a very good conclusion to the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series. It ties up all the lose ends, there is a definite conclusion. The film has some classical aspects to it, but with a postmodern influence. There are "good" people who help Lisbeth and there are villains just like in a classical story. Yet all of the events and use of technology make it a story that is very contemporary.
I'm teaching a course this Fall about Cinema and Digital Technology and I'm debating about which film to show; the first film or the third film? I will take a survey of the class to determine how many students have seen the first film and if there are a lot of students who have seen the first film, then I'll probably show the third film.
In film class we are currently talking about the hero's journey. We are reading a book by Vogler who writes about the steps and sequences the hero goes through. He argues that stories can be boiled down to their essentials to reveal that there are not so many different stories throughout time and across cultures. I think Lisbeth, the hero of the the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo qualifies as a hero who goes on a long and difficult journey. In the first film she is an avenging angel. She works outside of Swedish society to help Mikael solve the crime. In the third and final film she is cleared of any wrong doing and her rights and sanity are restored.
In the third film we see the hero's journey come to a climax. The events of the previous two films lead up to a trial where Lisbeth must prove her innocence and legal competence. In a number of plot twists it is revealed that Lisbeth accusers, the psychiatrist, her legal guardian, and her father are all guilty of a vast conspiracy to help Zalachenko and keep Lisbeth institutionalized. The suspense builds to a peak and all of Lisbeth's enemies are dealt with leaving her free.
Aside from the hero's journey Lisbeth goes on, and Lisbeth is quite a hero. First, she is a woman who is abused by white men. The film is a clear indictment of the patriarchical Swedish society the Lisbeth lives in. She must fight against entrenched corruption with only a few resources and few allies. Yet she does come out on top.
I also found the use of technology interesting in the film. It is such a film that reflects how digitally connected we are. Lisbeth uses her skills as a hacker to find information, her allies hack computers to clear her name, and cell phones are very common. I like the whole "cypherpunk" style and attitude of Lisbeth. I like how there is a constant tension as to how she is going to succeed. How is she going to expose the villains and evilness of Swedish society. It also goes well with the current activities of hacktivists, anonymous, and current debates about the internet, government secrets, openness, abuse of power, systematic repression, and corruption in government. With the trial of Bradley Manning and the legal status of Julian Assange in question this film is very relevant to today's World.
I think this film is a very good conclusion to the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series. It ties up all the lose ends, there is a definite conclusion. The film has some classical aspects to it, but with a postmodern influence. There are "good" people who help Lisbeth and there are villains just like in a classical story. Yet all of the events and use of technology make it a story that is very contemporary.
I'm teaching a course this Fall about Cinema and Digital Technology and I'm debating about which film to show; the first film or the third film? I will take a survey of the class to determine how many students have seen the first film and if there are a lot of students who have seen the first film, then I'll probably show the third film.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)