Citizen Kane

Citizen Kane is a film released in 1941 which was directed by and starred Orson Welles. This film chronicles the life of Charles Foster Kane through the eyes of those closest to him. It has many different aspects of several different styles of film making which make it a truly unique film. This movie was also way ahead of its time in cinematography and special effects. The narrative was also very different from other movies and made it stand out in 1941. The controversy surrounding this movie also made it very well known. The controversy was that the life of Charles Foster Kane was based on the life of William Randolph Hearst, a rich newspaper tycoon of the time. Hearst did everything in his power to destroy the movie, but was unsuccessful and the film remains a classic to this day.

The story is about a boy who is adopted when his mother gives him up after acquiring some wealth to get him away from his abusive father. Kane is taken in by a wealthy man named Walter Thatcher who provides the boy with everything he could have ever wanted. The film explains Kane's life and how he rose to wealth and power by only operating a once small newspaper. It then shows his trials and tribulations and eventual his fall from power.

The opening scene starts the movie off magnificently. The outside shots faded into each other then faded to an establishing shot of Kane's palace and continued to overlap and fade closer and closer to the room where Kane was lying. The close up to his lips and then the tracking shot of the snow globe falling were excellent followed by a quick zoom shot of the broken globe. The nurse walking into the room was only seen through the reflection of the broken glass. The use of reflections was used very well in this film. When Kane, Bernstein, and Leland are standing outside of the "Chronicle" building, they are only seen through the reflection of the window. Another shot that I thought was very creative was the close-up of the "Chronicle" staff that had the seamless transition to the same staff in real life in the identical pose only now working for the "Inquirer."

The narration of this film was very compelling and pulled me into the story. The way that everybody told Kane's story from different perspectives made it seem more realistic. The different characters each had their own personal experiences with Kane that had a major influence in their lives. The interviewing style used was very unique and made the film seem like an investigation. The reporter, Thompson, was a key character that helped me as the viewer to better understand the life and legacy of Kane and why he acted the way he did.

The overall style of the film was very impressive and way ahead of the times in 1941. The opening scene creating mystery, the news broadcast showing how the public viewed Kane, and the investigation and interviews of everyone close to Kane to uncover the identity of "Rosebud."
In the end, I thought that this was a very good film. I was very impressed by the amount of cinematography styles used throughout the movie. One of my favorite types was the deep focus which was used to show things in the distance and up close in the same clarity. Another aspect I liked was the establishing shots that showed the side of someones head to show where they were looking and then the close-up of what they were looking at. I was not too impressed by the fact that the whole plot revolved around "Rosebud" which was only Kane's sled from his childhood. Overall, I really enjoyed this piece of cinematic history, however, I would not call it the greatest movie ever made. I do not think that any one movie can be labeled the best when each has their own individual flaws and when there are still many more movies to be made in time to come.

Analysis of Film Noir

So what the heck is film noir? After watching several different movies that have been given the title or description of film noir, I 'm still not exactly sure whether or not to call it a genre or a style. Defining film noir can be a tricky task. Certain aspects may apply to some but may not apply to others. Most people consider film noir to be a combination of genres such as crime, drama, thriller, mystery. The four films under scrutiny today are The Maltese Falcon, Touch of Evil, Chinatown, and Sin City. These movies all tend to follow some key elements that can be defined as film noir, however, they all also differ from each other in a significant manner. Some defining themes of film noir are said to be moral ambiguity (caused by character motives), shifty alliances, and order of character importance. Some formal aspects of film noir are usually high contrast, shadows, vertical lines, water (whether rain or a body of water), a femme fatale, and a washed up hero. (Also trench coats and repeated slapping.) These elements all contribute to the way in which we define a movie as film noir.

In the Maltese Falcon, these key elements can be clearly seen throughout the film. This particular movie does not challenge the "definition" of film noir most likely because it is one of the earliest examples and because it establishes most of those same elements. Sam Spade is a character that sets the pace for film noirs to come. He is a detective (who wears a trench coat) whose partner is murdered after a woman (who has been lying) hires him to tail a man. In this sentence alone there are several elements of noir. However, in Touch of Evil, Mike Vargas does not follow this strict set of rules and throws off the idea of generic film noir. He is not necessarily washed up, there is no femme fatale, and the police are lying to him rather than the criminals. This does not fit the Sam Spade mold at all. In Chinatown, Jake Gittes follows suit after Sam Spade better than Mike Vargas. Even though this movie was filmed in the 70's and was set in the 30's, it still captured the key ideas of film noir. Jake is a detective who is being lied to by the femme fatale, Evelyn Mulwray, and he ends up investigating a murder. In Sin City there are several different stories, some that follow film noir more closely than others. The best example would probably be the story of John Hartigan (also wears trench coat) who is a police officer about to retire, aka washed up. He is betrayed by his partner when trying to save a little girl, Nancy, and eventually tries to find her when she is older in order to save her. What he doesn't know is that the people who pretended to hurt the girl are using to him to find to her. In the end he kills the man who is after Nancy and then also kills himself to protect her from any more thugs or criminals, aka moral ambiguity.

Most all of these movies have some sort of theme relating to moral ambiguity and shifty alliances. In Maltese Falcon it is both. Sam Spade is conflicted with the choice to help the police, the woman, her enemies, or himself. In Touch of Evil it is also both, however it is from a different perspective. Instead of Mike Vargas having these conflicts, it is Captain Hank Quinlan who is lying and shifting alliances with those around him. In Chinatown, Jake Gittes also faces moral ambiguity with the law and also shifts his alliance with them, both before the setting of the movie and then also during it. In Sin City it is the conflict between Hartigan and his partner, and the conflict between doing things by the book or breaking the law to serve justice. All of these themes can be defined as film noir.

If these themes can be defined as film noir then surely that is all that matters when establishing it as a genre, right? Wrong. Other aspects such as cinematography play a large role in how a film noir is told. The use of shadows and vertical lines is a reoccurring aspect that shows up in almost all of these films. Chinatown and Sin City stray the most from this visual aspect, mostly because they were created later than the other two. However, they still create their own unique style of film noir-esque shadowing and lighting. The vertical lines used throughout these movies creates a sort of prison cell feel that portrays how characters become trapped by their twisted lies and shifty alliances.

Another aspect of film noir is the period in which they were originally filmed. Most people will say that film noir only existed between the 30's to the 50's. This is contributed to the culture of the certain era in which the movies were filmed. The post-war realism of this time period created an audience that demanded a different style of film that showed the harsh reality of everyday people. This puts forward the idea that film noir cannot be repeated but is rather a genre locked in time. Technologies in modern cinematography are far superior to that of the original film noir period. This lack of technology is said to add another element to the movies that modern film cannot. Themes from film noir can be easily repeated but not in the same way. Many have tried to remake classic film noirs and have failed miserably. D.O.A. is a perfect example of a film noir that got butchered. This film was originally shot in 1950 and followed the basic key elements of film noir. A re-make was done in 1988 that was simply awful. It did not follow any of the key elements of film noir nor did it follow the original plot.

There is still no one specific definition of film noir but rather peoples opinions and observations. There is definitely a uniqueness to these types of movies that have made them stand and and be questioned as to what they are. Even though movies like Chinatown and Sin City try to re-create film noir, they cannot be called film noir but rather neo-noir which can be considered another genre of its own. This is only one mans perspective of film noir only after watching these four movies, but I believe that film noir is indeed a genre but not one that can ever be duplicated. It is a genre confined to the annals of time that can only be watched and studied but not re-created.

Here's a list I found, from someone elses perspective, giving some more in depth film noir characteristics:

• Urban environment
• Rain-soaked streets
• Seedy taverns, diners, and run-down buildings
• Claustrophobic interiors
• Flickering street lamps
• Neon signs
• Scenes appear dark, as if lit for night, with many dark shadows
• Oblique and vertical lines, especially in regards to lighting
• Shadows
• Films done in black and white
• Narration, especially flash-back narration
• Criminal underworld
• Hopelessness
• Corruption
• The "heroes" tend to be morally ambiguous, alienated from society, and
• have a fatalistic outlook.
• Characters torn by psychological conflict
• The femme fatale

List from http://www.librarypoint.org/what_is_film_noir

Sin City

Sin City is a neo-noir that was released in 2005 which features an all-star cast consisting of Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke, Clive Owen and many more. This film was an adaptation of Frank Miller's graphic novel Sin City. This movie focused on three separate stories that took place in BaSIN City. These stories all shared some key elements without most of the characters even realizing it. The first story starts the movie off but is quickly cut off by the second story and is not continued until after the third story is complete. This first story involves officer John Hartigan who is one day away from retirement. Hartigan is after a serial child rapist who is the son of a powerful senator. His partner tries to talk him out of taking action and risk getting killed, but Hartigan is determined to save a young girls life and knocks his partner out. He makes his way to the building where the girl is being held and after beating and killing several henchmen, corners the rapist and shoots him. The girl is safe and free but Hartigan's partner awakes and shoots him. He goes down and viewers are unsure if he survives. At the end of the movie this story reconvenes and concludes the conflict started at the beginning.

The second story involves a low life thug name Marv who is enticed by an attractive blond haired woman named Goldie. After a long night together, Marv awakens to find that she is dead and the cops are already on their way to frame him for her murder. He quickly escape their attempts to arrest him and sets out to find out who really killed her. Marv brutally works his way up the criminal ladder and finds that the Roark family is responsible for Goldie's murder. He now has to face many other adversaries such as a ninja-like killer and crooked cops and risk his own life in order to find the real person behind Goldie's murder.

The third story revolves around a barmaid, Shellie, who his trying to fend off her ex-boyfriend. She secretly has another man, Dwight, staying with her and is afraid that Jack, her ex, will kill them both. Dwight roughs up Jack after he and his crew enter Shellie's apartment and sends him away after nearly drowning him in his own piss. Jack and his crew then head to Old-town for a night out on the town. Dwight follows them knowing they are up to know good. Dwight's history with Old-town catches up to him as soon as he gets there when an old lover Gail confronts him. Jack and his friends, meanwhile, are harassing another young prostitute and end up pulling a gun on her. The girls then take swift action in killing these men who are threatening their rules and way of life. Unfortunately after they kill Jack, they realize that he is a hero cop and that the police will start a war with Old-town if they find out one of their own has been killed by the girls. It is then up to Dwight to try and dispose of the body before anyone finds out and save Old-town from having riots all over again.

This film is very unique and is definitely in a class of it's own. The color style in which it was filmed was also very unique because it was almost in a negative film fashion with added colors on specific people or items. This film follows some of the major elements and themes of film noir such as moral ambiguity and shifty alliances. Other reoccurring aspects are trenchcoats (which are worn by every main character in the movie), repeated slapping, an ex-cop on a mission, rain and or water is often present, and lighting. The oblique lighting and shadows used create a film noir feel while the angled vertical lines give it an aspect of modern film. This movie differs from a typical film noir, however, in the sense that it does not have a femme fatale but rather has women that act as opposites. The women in this film are always loyal to the main characters and are concerned with the hero's safety more than their own. This film also requires the viewer to almost suspend their ideas of reality and disbelief as the characters seem borderline supernatural. The theme of vengeance is strong throughout the film and adds to its film noir aspect. This movie also is not set in any particular time period as many different aspects of different historical eras were incorporated. For example: some characters used pay phones, others use large mobile car phones, and still others use tiny modern cell phones.

Overall, I enjoyed this film and it's uniqueness. As far as whether or not this movie can be classified as film noir is still hazy. In some aspects it clearly follows the standards of film noir while in other ways it contradicts them. It definitely captures the theme of film noir but creates a style of its own in doing so. The moral ambiguity in this film is rampant, but the lack of a femme fatale proves disappointing. I believe that this film could be cautiously considered a film noir.

Chinatown

Chinatown is an American neo-noir film that was released in 1974. It starred Jack Nicholson as Jake Gittes, Faye Dunaway as Evelyn Mulwray and John Huston as Noah Cross. This unique film, directed by Roman Polanski, has several key aspects of the older film noir movies while adding a few different features of it's own. The film take place in and around Los Angeles, California in 1937. Jake Gittes is a private detective (typical of film noir) who is hired by a woman who claims to be Hollis Mulwray's wife to follow her husband to find out if he is cheating on her. When Gittes finds out that Mulwray is in fact cheating, the media gets wind of the story and publishes it on the front page of the newspaper. Soon after, Evelyn Mulray shows up at Gittes office telling him that she is Hollis' real wife and that she is filing a lawsuit against him. Gittes then tries to figure out why this original woman set him up to take down Mulwray, so he tries to find Mulwray to talk with him. In doing so, he eventually finds Mulwray dead in a resevoir being fished out by the police, with whom he does not get along (another element of film noir). Gittes then visits Mulwray's wife to figure out why this all was happening. She quickly drops the lawsuit and instead hires Gittes to investigate her husbands death. Throughout the film, Gittes is beaten and psychological stressed. Around every corner he finds that someone else is lying or covering something up. In the end, some disturbing truths are revealed that are not typical of film noir and make this a film of it's own.

This movie follows many of the elements that are similar in film noir pictures but at the same time it strays away from these norms and creates a different aspect of psychological turmoil. The aspects that followed the film noir suit were the detective who is the central character, Jake Gittes, the femme fatale, Evelyn Mulwray, the murder of someone close to the femme fatale, Hollis Mulwray, and the characters that are constantly lying and the story that is ever-changing. One reoccurring aspect of film noir that I also noticed was that somebody always gets slapped, repeatedly.

In the end, nothing seemed to be resolved. This is not typical of film noir and kind of threw me off. The movie seemed to be a bit drawn out and did not use the extra time to help bring any kind of closure to the film. The viewer sees the whole picture pretty much, but they are still left with many questions once the credits begin to roll. The tragic ending for the femme fatale is similar to film noir but in this case there were other aspects that were simply left unresolved. Overall, I enjoyed this movie. It was different from other film noir and even other neo-noir. Even though it left me with some unanswered questions, I still appreciated the way in which the story was told and the way it broke free from some of the typical film noir elements.

Touch of Evil

Touch of Evil is another classic example of film noir. This movie is an American film that was made in 1958 and was directed by Orson Welles. The film stars Orson Welles, Charleston Heston, and Janet Leigh. This movie starts off with an incredible tracking shot, the likes of which I have never seen. This shot continues for about three and a half minutes with out a single cut. This shot moves through the streets of the U.S./ Mexican border and follows a car that has just had a bomb placed in its trunk. It also follows a couple who turns out to be the main characters Mike and Susan Vargas. The shot finally cuts when the bomb explodes killing the two people in the car. This launches a full scale investigation involving both the American and Mexican law enforcement. The characters from both sides of the law are constantly bumping heads and creating tension. Captain Hank Quinlan is in charge of the American police involved in the investigation and is held in the highest regards. Quinlan, however, has reservation about being helped by the Mexican government. While Mike Vargas is trying to help solve the murder, he is attacked by a member of the Grande family. Unknown to Mike, his wife Susan is held captive by the Grande family at their motel. As the plot develops, it becomes clearer and clearer that Vargas cannot trust Quinlan or many others from the American police. Vargas soon realizes that Quinlan is a dirty cop and has been planting evidence throughout his career simply to make arrests. Vargas then has to try and prove that the hero detective is guilty while also dealing with the Grande family and rescuing his wife.

This film has many unique aspects that draw the viewer into the story. The first aspect is that the viewer is shown a variety of characters and gets a pretty good picture of most of them. The audience thinks they know a good amount about the characters but then are later shown that all of them are not who they seem to be. Another aspect that draws the viewers in is the constant information being uncovered throughout the investigation. The plot take several twists and turns that keep the audience hooked and wanting more. I believe that this is an elemental feature of film noir. This film also demonstrates several other characters of film noir such as a crime that involves the main characters, betrayal, and the main character is on a quest. However, this movie did not have a distinct femme fatale as other film noir.

Overall, I enjoyed this movie. The story was very intriguing and kept me guessing. Towards the end, the movie seemed to be dragged out, but at the very end it made up for it by bringing all of the parts together perfectly. I haven't seen the original theatrical version but I feel like I would not like it as much after seeing this revised version.

The Maltese Falcon

The Maltese Falcon is a 1941 American film that is considered one of the earliest examples of film noir. The film takes place in San Francisco and is about a detective, Sam Spade, who's partner is murdered after a flustered woman hires him to tail a man. As it turns out, this woman is not who she appears to be and is lying at every chance she gets. Soon Spade finds out that this woman, Brigid O’Shaughnessy, was a criminal whose partner was the one would killed Spade's partner. He also finds out that she is involved with other eccentric criminals named Joel Cairo and Kasper Gutman. Gutman has been after a golden Maltese Falcon for seventeen years and was informed that Brigid had obtained it and was willing to sell it to him. After not being able to get the Falcon, Gutman and his crew try to take matters into their own hands, but in doing so underestimate the cunning of detective Spade.

This movie is fast paced and takes many twists and turns. Just when everything seems to make sense, something will happen that turns it all upside down. No one can be trusted and everyone is out only for themselves. Lies and double-crosses fill this movie and give it an aspect of uncertainty. If I had to label this movie with a specific type of genre it would be crime, drama, thriller. A few things that stuck out to me were a rough style of editing, important use of lighting and shadowing, and an almost typical Hollywood style narration. Even though there is chaos throughout the movie and no one is certain of anything, all is resolved at the end leaving few questions to be asked.

Overall, I enjoyed this film and it's differentiating genre style. This film drew me into the story and had me trying to figure out who was lying and who was telling the truth. I was delighted with Bogart's style of acting and the way that his character handled situations. This film was very unique and surpassed my expectations.

Analysis of Narration: Casablanca, Daughters of the Dust, and Monsoon Wedding

The past three films reviewed all had different styles of narration. Casablanca featured the conventional Hollywood film narrative style while Daughters of the Dust and Monsoon Wedding featured two different alternative narration styles. These differences show how much narration has an effect on a film and the way in which it is told. These films also range from 1942-2001 so they demonstrate how the typical Hollywood narration style has been challenged and shifted throughout the years.

Daughters of the Dust deviates from the Hollywood narrative because it does not focus on a few main characters, but rather focuses on the entire family of Gallahs. This change shows how many different characters influences play a major part in the movie and the outcome of the plot. The conventional Hollywood narrative often excludes many outside characters and gives only the details of the people the director wants the viewers to pay attention to. Another deviation is the narration by several of the characters throughout the film. For the most part, Daughters of the Dust is narrated by an unborn child. This challenges the Hollywood style greatly because it creates a narrator who is not alive in the story yet and tells the story from an unbiased outside perspective. The Hollywood style usually only features a narrator who is an outside voice who is not directly related to the events in the film or is simply narrated by the main characters actions and thoughts.

Monsoon Wedding is similar to Daughters of the Dust in the sense that it shows many different perspectives. However, this movie differs from both Casablanca and Daughters of the Dust because it incorporates the styles of both films into one and adds its own style as well. Monsoon Wedding uses a style that narrates the movie through the thoughts and actions of the several different characters in the family. Every person in the film has a significant effect on the outcome of the story. This film also was structured differently than both previous movies because it took place within four days and constrained the events to happen within this limited time period.

The narration of Daughters of the Dust and Monsoon Wedding challenges Hollywood style narrative because it does not fulfill the expectations of the viewer. In Casablanca, the narrative style is straight-forward and any questions that a viewer might have are easily answered by the end of the film. The other two movies, however, keep the audience wondering and thinking about what they are watching and leaves them with some questions at the end.

In Casablanca, the main characters are obviously seen. Rick, Ilsa, and Victor. In Daughters of the Dust, however, there is no one particular main character. All of the characters conflict with each other and do not point out one main character. In the scenes where the family is sitting in a circle discussing whether or not to leave the island for the mainland or to stay put, the elder Nana seems almost to be the main character because she causes so much conflict, however, the rest of the family soon chimes in and throws off this main character centrality. In Monsoon Wedding, the main character title could be placed on the daughter to be married, however, she is surrounded by others who take away her centrality and focus it somewhere else. Eventually in the end, all of the characters come together and the focus is on the family itself, not just an individual. Both Daughters of the Dust and Monsoon Wedding have a style of narration that questions the objective realism of classic Hollywood style narration. They both incorporate ideas, values, and beliefs that are not accepted by everyone and makes the audience see from different perspectives.

These key aspects of narration totally decide how a movie is told and how it is received by the viewer. In Casablanca, the audience only sees from the perspective of Rick and his experiences. Most audience members fell comfortable with this type of narration because they feel like they can relate to one character. In Daughters of the Dust, the audience sees an entire family and their different and conflicting perspectives. This can make an audience uneasy as they are not sure who to side with or what to decide. In Monsoon Wedding, the audience is again presented with an entire family except this time there are several different conflicts rather than one overshadowing argument.

These three films demonstrate three very different styles of narration. Overall, they all convey a certain message but do so in entirely different ways. Some prefer the conventional Hollywood style narration while others enjoy challenging narrations that make them think outside of their own culture or life setting.