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.

Monsoon Wedding

Monsoon Wedding is a film that was released in 2001 about an arranged Indian wedding. This movie has several different stories going on throughout that all are caused by the wedding being planned. This film combines 21 century technologies and lifestyles with traditional Indian heritage that causes nothing but chaos in the midst of happiness. The movie focuses on how this Indian family becomes strained due to the arrangements of this wedding. The father is running out of money, the planner is behind schedule and is in love with the maid, the bride-to-be is still in love with her ex, and the niece is frightened by the return of a relative who scarred her for life as a child. All of these sub-plots intertwine with each other and form the story of this wedding that almost did not happen. The film is told in such a way that causes it to be calm at the beginning, chaotic throughout, and then finally resolved at the end. The title of the film refers to the comparison of a monsoon erupting through nature and this Indian family that is about to erupt within itself.

This movie jumped around a lot from family member to family member as it showed all of the different conflicts happening within a short period of four days. Even though there were several sub-plots, I was able to follow the stories and felt a connection with the characters. Although this narrative was not the typical Hollywood style, I still enjoyed it very much, if not more than other movies. Each individual character had a story to go with them which helped me better understand the reasons for what was happening. This film was told in a nontraditional narrative style but was still conveyed the story very well.

Overall, I enjoyed this movie and the way in which it was presented. I liked the several different stories because it made me pay attention and be drawn into the film. I also liked the comedic relief provided from many of the characters throughout the movie. I enjoyed the story that this film tells about traditional Indian heritage that is challenged by the complications of the modern age. In the end, I felt like a had a good understanding of the film's message and that I had a strong connection with each of the characters.

Daughters of the Dust

Daughters of the Dust is an independent film that was released in 1991. This movie tells the story of a Gullah family that is moving from the Sea Island to the mainland of America. The film focuses on the three generations of women in the family who are conflicting on whether or not they should move or not. The main conflict is between the family matriarch, Nana, and the daughter returning from the mainland, Viola. Nana believes that the family should stay on the island because it is the home of their ancestors and where they belong. Viola believes that the family should move because they need the influences of the mainland and the love of Jesus. Throughout the film, many family members are torn between staying close to their roots and leaving for a new life entirely. There are also several other conflicts throughout the film. One was involving Eli and his wife Eula and another involved Haagar, her daughter Iona, and St. Julien Lastchild. The film shows how the elder family member holds on to her beliefs and is dedicated to her ancestors heritage.

This movie is told in a somewhat confusing fashion, one that I was not particularly fond of. Throughout the movie there is narration about things that have happened in the past and how they affect the present. The narration, however, changes from character to character depending on the scene. For the most part it was narrated by Eula's unborn child, but it was also narrated by Nana, Viola, and several others. This made the story hard to follow and the points made didn't seem to stick. Several sequences of scenes did not seem to follow any strict order and seemed to make the tensions of the movie even more intense.

Overall, I was not a huge fan of this movie, however, I did appreciate the heritage and the passion with which the story was told. The narration could have been done differently to better draw the viewer into the movie. This film did not give me a feel for each character and I felt distant from the whole family. In the end I wished I knew more about the lives of the Gullah family and what roles each of them played throughout daily life.

Casablanca

Casablanca is an American film made in 1942 set in the midst of World War II. It is a romantic drama that takes place in Casablanca, Morocco. This city was part of a path for refugees who were trying to escape occupied Europe for America. A large portion of the film takes place in Rick's Cafe Americain which is a nightclub/casino. The owner and main character Rick Blaine is presented with several conflicts throughout the film that test his emotions and loyalty. The first is the bestowing of the letters of neutrality upon Rick from Ugarte. The re-entrance of his former lover IIsa Lund is another main conflict that makes Rick become bitter. These two conflicts collide when IIsa tells Rick that she needs the letters to help her husband lead the resistance against the Nazi's. Rick refuses to give her the letters and in doing so causes IIsa to pull out a gun on him. Unable to pull the trigger, she confesses her remaining love for him and the reasons for her leaving so abruptly. After hearing this information, Rick agrees to help IIsa and Laszlo escape their Nazi pursuers.

This film is an American classic that portrays typical romantic Hollywood storytelling. It has the lovers, the man caught in between, and the enemies trying to tear them all apart whether they realize it or not. This movie was not incredibly popular at its release but has risen in popularity over the years and has taken its place in the top movies of all time. For a movie that was rushed into production, it was excellently filmed and edited to the point that gave it a sad, tender, yet tense feeling.

Overall, I enjoyed this film and greatly appreciated the way in which it was told. The film tells a story of a timeless romance while depicting an allegory of the War happening throughout the movie. The film also has a feel of uncertainty because the characters, unlike the viewers, do not know how the war is going to play out. There are also several bars of shadows that are cast across the characters throughout the film that form a sort of prison cell. This film with its incredible Hollywood stars, is both intellectually stimulating and entertaining.

Analysis of Bonnie and Clyde

This movie was very unique in the way it was edited because it combined the traditional Hollywood continuity style along with the European "cut and paste" techniques. At times when the movie was slow paced (usually for plot development or speaking roles), the shots were longer and focused on a specific point in time. When the movie picked up speed, however, (as in the chase scenes) the editing became quick and choppy. This unique combination of editing styles really made the movie stand out and also made it feel like a roller coaster with several ups and downs.

The biggest scene that stuck out to me was the chase scene into Oklahoma. This scene take place just after the Barrow gang robs a bank and are being pursued by the law. Most of the following shots are only two to four seconds long. As soon as the scene starts, a banjo begins to play an upbeat song called "Foggy Mountain Breakdown" which is an upbeat song with a fast tempo that is perfect for the chase scene that is about to ensue. The first couple scenes are cut to show the gang then the police officers in the same place as where the gang was with the gang now in the distance. The first scene shows the Barrows pulling away from the bank and then quickly cuts to the same shot of the bank except with the police now rounding the corner and with the Barrows much further down the road than they were in the previous shot. The next shot shows the Barrow gang swerving down a dirt road. They quickly drive by the camera and before the dust made by their car even settles, it cuts to the next shot of the the law in the exact same spot from the exact same angle. This effect is used to bridge the gap of time that actually passes between the two cars. It also makes the chase scene more intense because the police seem to be much closer than they actually are.

The next shot shows a farmer standing near a fence as the Barrow gang races by. Then the shot changes to the inside of the gangs car to show the chaos amidst the Barrows. The shot then quickly returns to the road from the same angle as before and shows the police driving by in the same spot. This happens again with the second police car and then jumps to the front of the Barrow gangs car. It then switches to a shot of the road and the mile markers in front of them and then again switches to the police behind them, shooting. This sequence gives a somewhat skewed view of what is actually happening and causes some confusion. The next shot is a re-establishing shot that shows all three cars driving through a field. This shot gives a better perspective of the chase as it is actually happening not as it is edited together. From here it cuts to a close up of the police car with the cops firing their guns and then quickly cuts back to the re-establishing shot. The Barrow gang's car then drives closer to the camera and slides off screen. At this point, the music stops as the scene cuts back to the bank where a security guard is being interviewed about the robbery that just occurred. As soon as he is finished speaking, the music starts back up and the scene then cuts to him getting his picture taken and then back to the chase. This time, however, the cuts are even faster than before. There is a slew of cuts lasting only about a second changing back and forth from the Barrow gang's car, to the police cars, to the inside of the Barrow gang's car, to close-ups of the different cars, and back to the inside again. This shows the chaotic nature of the chase and the interior car shots show the reactions of the gang to the law's attempt at stopping them.

There are too many other shots to go into detail in this blog analysis, but you get the idea of how this movie was edited. There are several more re-establishing shots before the scene is through and there are a couple more returns to the citizens at the bank. Eventually, they make it across the border into Oklahoma. This method of editing makes the viewer really have to pay attention to little details as the shots quickly go by. It is very easy to loose track of what is going on because very few of the shots in the chase scene follow a strict continuity. Overall, I loved the combination of these two styles of editing because it added so much more to the character of the film itself. The editing also helped make the movie humorous because the quick cuts made the characters snappy quotes seem even funnier. The editing used was definitely unique. This film seemed to break the rules of both Hollywood continuity and Hollywood storytelling of not sympathizing with the "bad guys."

Bonnie and Clyde

Bonnie and Clyde is an American crime film that came out in 1967. This film is about Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow. It is based on the actual story of their lives. During the Great Depression in the 1930's, these two would rob banks in the central United States to make money. This film is fast paced and once it starts, it does not slow down until the end. It starts off with Bonnie tagging along with Clyde and then as they travel they recruit more people into their crew. This movie portrays life in the 30's and how people would do anything to survive and how many different people were effected by the Depression. The plot revolves around the gang making their way from state to state robbing banks and trying not to get caught. The law is angry and frustrated that they cannot apprehend these criminals. One Texas ranger in particular, Frank Hamer, takes up a personal vendetta against the two and is determined to stop them.

This movie is edited in a way that jumps around and makes it seem even more fast paced than it already is. Events in the story are sometimes not even shown but are just talked about at a later time. If every event that took place was shot and added into the film, the movie would be much longer. During the chase scenes, the shots would only be a few seconds before jumping to another aspect of the chase. The jumps in time really add to the movie and its aspect of action and hurriedness.

Overall, I enjoyed this film. The acting was excellent even though it was goofy at times. The fast pacing of the movie made me watch even more intently and pulled me into the characters lives. The concept of living life on the edge made this movie interesting to me. Another idea that stuck out was the aspect of survival at any cost.

Analysis of Run Lola Run

As I stated in the previous entry, this movie is very fast paced. What makes it fast paced is mostly due to the way it is edited. It cuts scenes together in such a way that makes the viewer feel like they need to keep up and pay attention or they may miss something. I know that as I was watching the movie, I wanted to take notes but at the same time did not want to look away for fear of missing an important scene. The opening scene itself contained creative editing. The crowd of people sped up and blurred while one character that was in the movie stands out in real time and in crystal clear color. The scene would then dissolve into the next where another character would stand out in the crowd. Another place where dissolve and color change are used is both times someone dies before the movie "re-starts." After the character is fatally wounded, the scene dissolves to a red screen and goes to Lola and Manni lying in bed still entirely red. It then dissolves back to true color and the sequence re-starts.

This leads me to another editing technique that helps this re-starting aspect. When the bag of money is either thrown up or dropped, the scene is cut back to an earlier scene of Lola carelessly throwing her red phone up in the air and landing perfectly on the hook. Each time, the phone slams on the hook before the bag hits the ground signifying that before the character dies life is re-started. This leads into Lola's constant running scenes. There are many different edits and cuts while Lola is running in order to show how far she has gone in a shorter amount of time than reality. There are times when Lola is running and the camera is in front of her then it quickly cuts to behind her as if she has just ran through the camera. Other times it cuts from the front to the side to give a better picture of where she is actually running. Another edit that I particularly like is when Lola is shot from the side at one location and then suddenly is cut to another location almost running in the exact same rhythm.

Another important edit is when we encounter the minor characters whose lives change drastically with each re-start. Each time we see these characters, the details of there near future are revealed with still frames. These still frames are transitioned by flashing lights as if from a camera flash. This gives the impression that these people's lives are being documented for our viewing. One other edit is at the beginning when Manni is explaining his situation to Lola. He tells her that the bum who stole his money is probably on a plane to somewhere far away. He begins to list foreign places all around the globe and as he does the scene cuts from location to location. This is somewhat confusing because as the viewer you have to determine if these places are where the homeless person actually ran to or if these other countries are involved at all.

One final scene that I will comment on is when the clock is about to strike twelve noon. At this point, Manni is about to walk into the grocery store to rob it while Lola is around the corner about to appear. At this point the scene wipes to Manni watching the clock on the left , Lola running on the right, and a clock ticking at the bottom of the screen. This shows clear time continuity and relativity. This technique is also used during the third "try" except with Lola's father in the frame on the left instead of Manni.

Overall, I enjoyed the way this movie was edited. These editing techniques make me have to imagine what takes place in the gaps that are left by the quick cuts. The transitional devices such as cuts, wipes, and dissolves really help give the movie an aspect of being rushed and panicked. This movie is all about timing and patience and the editing certainly can attest to both these ideas.

Run Lola Run

This movie is a German film that came out in 1998. It is set in Berlin, Germany and chronicles 20 minutes of a woman's life. This film tells a story about the woman, Lola, whose boyfriend, Manni, needs to acquire 100,000 marks in 20 minutes or he will suffer the consequences from his boss, Ronni. This film is shot in a unique way as to show how minor details can change the course of an entire event. The movie portrays how fate controls the uncertainties of day to day life and how one event can effect the outcome of other events. This is a fast paced film that explores the different possibilities of different actions. The movie also follows several characters individual lives but also intertwines them together as it progresses.

This film uses a very uncommon style of editing to convey the sense of panic and disorder. It uses very fast cuts and wipes to transition scenes which makes it very chaotic. There are even times when three different scenes are all shown simultaneously on the screen to show time relation and significance. There are also several times when the shots will change immediately and the only thing that will change is the background but not the actor. This shows a jump in time and place. These techniques are used constantly throughout the film and can easily distort one's perception of time. Although this technique is used, the overall time continuity remains focused on the one 20 minute period of all the different characters lives (with the exception of three minor characters).

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. I like movies where I am forced to pay attention and try to figure out what is going on. I enjoy trying to keep up with the jumping scenes and trying to figure out what is going to happen as each scene progresses. I liked the idea of second and third chances that the movie portrays and the constantly used notion of "what if."

Analysis of Do the Right Thing

As I have stated in my previous entry, I am not the biggest fan of this movie or how it tried to get it's message across, however, the way the scenes and props were used was unquestionably excellent. Throughout the film there are many different locations presented along with specific characters that inhabit them. For example, the pizzeria contained Sal and his sons working, the food market always had the Korean grocer usually in some kind of conflict with the locals, and the blank red wall on the street had the three men relaxing the day away. There are many more examples but these are just a few that stuck out to me. All of these scenes are intertwined with one another throughout the movie as characters shift from location to location showing how the town was a community and a family of sorts. Radio Raheem's boombox is one clear piece of mise-en-scene. This loud, thunderous noisemaker is constantly playing public enemy's "fight the power" which is an underlying motif of the whole film. The boombox represents the overall feel of the neighborhood towards the system or "the man." Another aspect of Radio's apparel that stands out as a representation of the citizens of Brooklyn are his love and hate brass knuckles. These accessories showed me that Radio believes in love over hate, but that to accomplish love one might have to use hate.

This brings me to the scene where Mookie runs into Radio on the street. Mookie is supposed to be delivering a pizza but stops, as usual, to make conversation with Radio. It is at this point where Radio shows off his brass knuckles and explains the constant struggle of the two words with love eventually triumphing. The way this scene is shot is very unique and captivating. As it starts, you see both Radio and Mookie from the side, but as Radio begins to give his explanation, the camera pans directly in front of Radio cutting out Mookie making the viewer feel as if they are in Mookie's shoes watching Radio face to face. Once Radio is finished, the camera pans back out to the side and both actors are seen again. This scene gave me a better feel for Radio's character rather than just the mute giant wandering around in previous scenes. It also shows how Mookie is a common friend among almost everyone and is able to fit in with everyone he meets.

Before I begin rambling on about cinematography, let me get back to mise-en-scene. One reoccurring piece of mise-en-scene that stuck out to me was the sidewalk chalk that Mookie constantly walked across on his trips to and from the pizzeria. This sidewalk art depicts smiling faces and sunshine. A little child is always sitting on the ground drawing away. This shows that even in a town where racial conflict and tension is prevalent, the innocence of children is still present. This innocence, however, can be easily corrupted by the constant racial bickering and can cause a child's mind to stop focusing on the good and simple things in life.

There are so many excellent aspects of mise-en-scene in this movie that I could go on a rant forever but I will focus my thoughts on one final scene. The scene at the end when all hell breaks loose on the pizzeria. This scene attempts to convey the main message of the movie. Throughout the film, local patrons come in and out of Sal's pizzeria and have several moments of conflict with the staff. These moments of conflict are seen to the locals as normal discussion and their idea of anti-violence. When these conflicts prove fruitless, the people, sparked by the death of Radio Raheem, resort to violence as a means of self-defense from prejudice and hate. The pizzeria is seen throughout the movie as a source of this prejudice. When Mookie breaks the window with a trash can, he breaks the barrier of hate towards the community. One funny aspect, is that the main conflict was about the pictures hanging in the pizzeria and at the end Smiley stumbles through the smoldering ashes and embers of the pizzeria just to hang a photo of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X shaking hands. This shows the idea that either with non-violence or, if necessary, violence the people's goal will be accomplished. All of the racial conflict could be easily avoided if everyone simply accepted people for who they were. However, standing for what you believe in is doing the right thing and that is what Mookie did by starting the riot against Sal's pizzeria.

Do the Right Thing

This film takes place in Brooklyn, NY on the hottest day of the summer. The film depicts the issue of racial conflict that takes place in the city every day. There are several characters that form the cast and all play a significant part whether it be a big or small role. The main conflict in the film takes place at Sal's Pizzeria between the owner, Sal, and the patrons who constantly test his patience. The movie shows how people in Brooklyn are coping with the intense heat while trying to do their daily tasks. There are many sub stories in the film that all tie together to represent the social life in Brooklyn. The main character, Mookie (Spike Lee), struggles with dealling with his boss, delivering pizzas, seeing his girlfriend and son, and keeping up with his friends o the streets. The racial tension builds throughout the movie and eventually erupts at the end.

This movie had a well written plot and a good story line. The acting in this film was also very impressive, however, there were many aspects about this film that I did not like. The quotes given at the end of the movie are powerful and excellent, however, they do not justify the actions in the movie. The point of the movie was well made but I think that it could have been made just as clear without the characters constantly yelling and screaming. There were times when it was simply painful to watch this film because of the volume and tone in which the characters were talking or yelling. The message that Spike Lee wanted to convey to the audience could have been done without the constant bickering of almost every character. Characters would fight with other characters of different races and even with others of the same race. There seemed to be a general lack of intelligence throughout all of the characters in the film which created chaos everywhere they went.

Overall, I was not a huge fan of this movie. I agree with the message being spoken through the movie but I do not agree with the way it was presented. Many people say that the violence at the end of the movie is what most get upset about, but that did not bother me. The movie as a whole bothered me because certain aspects of characters were depicted poorly and were almost stereotyped.

Analysis of The Godfather

The Godfather is a movie that is set apart from all other mafia movies because the plot intertwines so many different characters and stories so that it creates one coherent film. The length of the film may be discouraging to some but I believe that it is just as long as it needs to be in order to incorporate all of the necessary components that make this movie a classic. The movie also depicts crime in America and how easy it was for crime to thrive in the early 20th century. Another fundamental aspect of the movie was Marlon Brando's character and his motto to never mix business with personal life. This is a funny trait considering how deep in crime he is and how much of a family man he appears to be at the same time.

As far as how the film was shot, the lighting and framing were key elements that also helped make this movie outstanding. Shadows were often used to help add to the expression of facial characteristics and emotions. The framing used also switches back and forth from close scenes to pulled back scenes. The close-up scenes give the viewer a more personal feel for the characters while the far back landscape shots give the viewer an idea of location and time period. So much is accomplished with this movie that it is no wonder it has become so famous and renowned.

One of my favorite scenes in this movie is when Michael Corleone meets with Sollozzo and Chief of police McCluskey. Michael is picked up by the two men and is driven to a restaurant in the Bronx. The car ride to the restaurant is filled with shadows and close-ups of the character's faces as they are crammed into the car. McCluskey frisks Michael and finds nothing. The scene inside the restaurant is quiet and calm, almost peacful. There are few people eating and the three sit at a table that stands out in the center of the room. While the three converse, Michael keeps his cool and maintains his composure, not giving the other two any inkling that he is about to kill them. McCluskey seems distant at the meeting and seems to only care about his meal. Sollozzo, however, concentrates on Michael, but not well enough. When Michael asks to leave for the rest room, Sallozzo checks him for a weapon again but finds nothing. Once Michael enters the rest room, a sense of suspense is built. The viewer is shown a tiny, cramped bathroom stall in a dimmly lit bathroom. Michael heads to the toilet to find the gun but takes a while to retrieve it which makes the audience wonder if the gun was correctly planted. After Michael has the weapon, the suspense remains because the deed must still be accomplished without repercusions. When Michael exits the rest room and returns to the table, Sollozzo assumes everything is better, even though Michael is now visibly on edge and ready to snap. Al Pacino does a great job portraying a son who is about to get revenge on someone who has attempted to kill his father. Michael quickly stands up and pulls the gun. The camera then does a close-up of Sollozzo as he is shot in the head and of McClusky as he is shot i the throat and then the head. The camera shot then goes back to the entire restaurant and shows Michael pausing and taking in what he just did as well as the shocked patrons. When Michael finally moves, he grabs his coat, drops the gun, and then disappears into the shadows. He is then picked up by a car and driven away quickly.

This scene is just one of many of the movies turning points and shows how different angles and lighting can make a scene seem more realistic. As I have stated several times before, this is now one of my all time favorite movies. The presented and represented aspects go hand in hand and develop the movie into a story that one cannot help but feel connected to and be pulled into.

The Godfather

This movie is one that is an all-time classic and is now one of my personal favorites. Before this screening I had never watched the movie in its entirety. Upon watch the full film, I have come to appreciate this movie and the way in which it was filmed. This movie is set in 1945 and begins with a time of celebration at a wedding. Vito Corleone (aka Don Corleone, the Godfather) is the head of the Corleone mafia family and is throwing a lavish party for his daughters wedding. His youngest son Michael has just returned from war but wishes to stay separated from his fathers business of crime. Soon after, a drug dealer by the name of Virgil Sollozzo moves into town. Sollozzo wants mafia protection and is willing to pay a percentage of the drug money for the protection. He knows that Don Corleone is the only family head who has all of the politicians "in his pocket" and realizes that he is the only one capable of making the protection work. The Don refuses to offer protection seeing it as dirty work. Sollozzo then has some of his men gun down Corleone in retaliation for his refusal and in order to deal with the Don's sons instead. The Don survives and Michael volunteers to eliminate the drug dealer and his corrupt police partner. This action is his first step towards becoming more and more involved in his fathers business. The attempt on Don Corleones life set in motion a mafia war between the five families. This war inevitably tears apart the Corleone family and makes a vaacum for power.

This movie is a very long movie but it is well done. There is a lot of plot activity to follow throughout the movie but there is also enough action spread throughout to keep the viewer pulled into the story. The way this movie was shot also makes it unique because there and many representative scenes and several lighting techniques that add to the film's atmosphere. Overall I liked the plot of the movie and the sequence of how it was shot and put together. This is one of my new favorite movies.

Analysis of Apocalypse Now (1979)

Apocalypse Now has many different aspects of cinematography that make it a very unique film. The colors, the angles, the depth of field, and the framing were all different from most other movies I have seen. The use of the different hues throughout the film set a certain mood and gave each scene an individual characteristic. The use of music was also very well done in this film. My favorite use was when they helicopters played "The Ride of the Valkyries" as they attacked the Vietcong beach. This music created an emphasis on the domineering attitude of the fleet and more particularly the aggressive and fearless attitude of Colonel Kilgore. This movie takes a dramatic turn towards the end when Willard finally encounters Kurtz. Throughout the first portion of the movie, action and violence seems to dominate the screen while towards the end, the scenes are more drawn out and meaningful. I think this was done so that the audience is given time to think about Willard's moral conflict and to try and understand Kurt's motives.

One of my favorite scenes in this movie is where Willard and Lance are moving through the trenches off the Do Long bridge trying to find a commanding officer. This scene is very chaotic and disruptive. The lighting in this scene fluctuates from light to dark very often as guns are shot, bombs go off, flares are shot. The light will suddenly be very bright and then fade to almost complete blackness. As Lance and Willard navigate their way through the trenches, Lance accidentally steps on a soldier thinking he is dead. This is most likely a combination of the poor lighting and the fact that Lance is tripping on acid. The sounds in this scene also greatly contribute to the feeling of chaos. The loud guitar on the radio, gattling of machine guns, the low rumble of bombs in the distance, screaming voices crying in fear and pain, and frequent loud explosions close by all make this scene seem like a place where no one wants to be. When Willard comes upon the two men firing at the Vietnamese soldiers, he remains in the shadows and is never completely revealed. The viewer is only given glimpses of his profile and of his piercing eyes. Willard soon realizes that the energetic men shooting think that he is the commanding officer. These two men are a total contrast to a group of men seen earlier in the trenches who are simply sitting around as if nothing is happening. When they cannot kill one soldier out by the wire, the men call for "the Roach." The Roach is a character who is very calm and collected even amongst the chaos of the scene. He is first seen in a distant trench sleeping and is soon woken up to take care of the problem at hand. This scene is shot from a slightly different angle from where the shooter is to give the effect that the Roach is only a couple feet away. The Roach then walks over to where the two men originally were, the whole time appearing very stoic. The camera angle here is from a low position looking up towards the Roach, almost giving the effect of Willard looking up at him. The Roach loads his weapon, denies the option of using a flare, and takes aim. While he is aiming, the camera cuts to all the characters around him showing their individual responses to his epic demeanor. The Roach then fires a single shot into the night sky and causes an explosion. Afterwards, the Vietnamese soldier is no longer heard. At this point Willard asks the Roach if he knows who is in charge to which he simply replies, "Yeah" and then returns to his former napping position. This scene shows how the war has affected soldiers differently. I also believe that the lighting represented Willard's emotions and feelings towards Kurtz. Just as the light faded in and out, Willard's sympathetic attitude towards Kurtz's state of mind would come and go.

Overall, this movie was excellent. However, I felt that the ending scene could have been done differently. As far as filming goes I though it was great, but I did not feel a real moral conflict in the story. I felt that Kurtz was wrong and needed to be stopped. No dilemma. I did, however, like the message presented that war changes people and can dig deep into their minds and reveal a darkness that civilization would never accept. I appreciated the fact that Kurtz knew it was time for him to die. One line that I particularly liked was when Willard said that even the jungle, the only thing Kurtz listened to anymore, wanted him dead.

Apocalypse Now (1979)

This movie is set at the apex of the Vietnam War. Captain Benjamin Willard is taken from a state of drunken misery and is assigned to kill one of the U.S. Army's own, Colonel Walter Kurtz. Willard's commanding officers inform him that Kurtz has gone renegade as well as completely insane and needs to be stopped. To reach Kurtz, Willard must travel up the Nung River through "hairy" territories. Along the way he learns more about Kurtz and his motives, meets new and unusual people, and has several near death encounters. Eventually, he reaches Kurtz and his savage army and is taken prisoner. After learning the reasons behind Kurtz actions and encountering many of the same experiences that drove Kurtz to "madness," Willard must decide whether or not to complete his mission.
This movie is very well shot and filmed. The acting is nothing less than superb and pulls the viewer into the movie. There were several scenes, however, that seemed to be too drawn out, making one wonder if they would ever end. Other aspects of this movie that bothered me were some historical inaccuracies, but I believe that they may have been added to make Vietnam seem like an entirely different world. Overall, this film was very well put together. I would recommend watching this movie only if you have enough time to kill.

Analysis of The Diving Bell and The Butterfly

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is a film that is shot unlike any other movie that I have watched. The first half an hour or so of the movie made me feel trapped and confined in Jean-Do's body unable to get a good grasp of the surroundings. The camera going in and out of focus and the shots cutting quickly from one to another as if a long blink had happened also made it difficult to concentrate on one specific area. The depth of field was constantly shifting which actually made my eyes strain. This point of view really pulled me into the movie and helped me understand what the main character was going through. In this movie there was also a lot of offscreen space, meaning space that could not be scene by the main character from his point of view but still existed or was implied outside the film frame. This too made me want to move my head and shift my position in my seat so that I might see the world around the character.

There were also several representations scenes in this movie. The most prominent ones were the diving suit, the butterfly, and the iceburgs. To me, the diving suit represented the feeling of being trapped. Jean-Do was trapped in his now paralyzed body as he was trapped underwater in the diving suit without a diving bell for him to ring which would singnal someone to pull him out. Just as he had no diving bell in the vision, he had no diving bell in real life for someone to pull out of his paralysis. This leads to the scene of the butterfly. I believe that the butterfly represented the nurse who helped Jean-Do to communicate. She gave Jean-Do the wings he needed to escape his trapped world through his imagination and through communicating through his one good eye. The final representative scene of the icebergs falling into the ocean represented Jean-Do's world crashing down around him. He had lost the will to live and felt as if he had nothing. By the end of the movie, however, he sees life differently and learns to appreciate what he has. He comes to terms with his condition and makes the best of it by writing a book about his life and experiences. The closing scene with the icebergs in reverse motion showed how at the end of his life he had put everything that he could back together in his mind and felt accomplished.

There were several other scenes that that I especially liked. The first was where Jean-Do is alone on a dock surrounded by the high tide. This represented how lonely he was and how he was isolated from everyone else. Another scene is when someone is talking, such as the nurse, Jean-Do's mind wanders and he explains how he is really feeling while you can still hear the person in reality talking in the background. This monalogue shows how frustrating and time consuming it is for him to communicate and how his thoughts have shifted from before the stroke. The last scene that stuck out to me was the shots of Jean-Do driving through Paris. These shot immediatly follow a scene from Jean-Do's post stroke, confined point of view. They completely contrast the previous shot by being extremely angled, panning left to right, and sometimes even upside-down. This shows how differently he used to observe life and how we can sometimes can take the gift of mobility for granted. Overall, this movie was creatively shot and filmed and gave me a unique viewing experience.

The Diving Bell and The Butterfly

The film The Diving Bell and The Butterfly is a french film that came out in 2007. It is based on a true story and adapted from the book written by Jean-Dominique Bauby. This film chronicles the life of an editor-in-chief of a magazine who suffers a massive stroke and falls into a coma only to awake three weeks later paralyzed from head to toe with the exception of his left eye. The movie shows his present life and how he must adapt to his "locked-in syndrome" while also reflecting on his past. He soon realizes that his only escape from his paralyzed state is in his imagination. While in this condition he decides to write a book about his experiences, his trials, and his regrets. This is only made possible by a nurse reading a French alphabet (in order of frequency) and Jean-Do blinking when he heard the letter he wished to use.

This film is shot in several different angles and with multiple effects to make the viewer experience exactly what Jean-Do is going through. The story jumps around from present to past several times throughout the movie and can sometimes be confusing. There is also a good amount of representation throughout the film that describes the state of Jean-Do's mind.

Overall, I thought that the movie was interesting and well told, however, reading subtitles for two hours can get old real fast unless you can understand fluent French. The story itself is inspirational and really pulls at the heart strings. The different camera shots were unique and made the film unlike others that I have seen. I would recommend watching this movie only if you like French, need to appreciate your life a bit more, or can read well and concentrate on the actors at the same time.