Red

Red is the last film in the Three Color Triology directed by Krzysztof Kieslowski in 1994. According to Anthony Leong, Red" is the triumphant conclusion to Kieslowski's "Three Colours Trilogy", a point of convergence for the three sets of characters in the series. It is the warmest of all three films, and indeed this also stems from the main theme of the colour red of the French flag-- fraternity (or friendship). On a deeper level, it is a film about the invisible connections that intertwine our lives, the nexi that are not always apparent, similar to Kieslowski's earlier film "The Double Life of Veronique". This theme is best summarized by the opening sequence, which makes the technology of the telephone transparent to the viewer. We see a phone being picked up in the film's setting, Geneva, and a number is dialed. The camera then races along the invisible network of wiring, through several switches, along an undersea cable, and re-emerging in England.

The color red in the film is displaced throughout. The richness of the color is shown in the Jeep, the photo shoot and Valentine’s apparel. The camera angles are similar stylistically in the first film, Blue. The camera angle follows the car’s taillight and moves with the pace of traffic. This film is not as emotionally heavy in the sadness aspect. It is actually more hopeful and realistic. The retired judge and Valentine have the best conversations. The effects in this film support and distract less when the judge and Valentine are interacting. Their conversations show how life is not always black and white. It also shows that people can never cease to surprise you. You never know what people think or say when they are by themselves. Kieslowski depicts this when showing the judge ease dropping on all of his neighbors’ phone calls.

Throughout the film Auguste and Valentine seem to be missing each other. They are always so near to each other but because of them being in different relationships or the wrong timing it doesn’t work. The whole time the audience is hoping that they will meet each other. The way that they are both longing to be loved and shown affection convinces the audience that they are ideal. The other idea that reoccurs in the film is doing the right thing. Valentine starts this by bringing Rita back to its owner. She affects everyone that she comes into contact. This rubs off on the retired judge by keeping him company and wanting to notify the neighbors of what he is doing. Through the experience that she has from going next door, she learns that doing the right thing is not always so easy. The retired judge finally comes to the conclusion that he needs to turn his self in. This shows that people’s burdens get to be too tiring to deal with. Sometimes doing the right thing doesn’t always have a nice package resolution. Kieslowski depicts this by the ending scene with Auguste and Valentine surviving with the characters from the previous two films. At the end of the film, Kieslowski leaves the audience with hope.

White

White is the second part to the Three Color Trilogy directed by Krzysztof Kieslowski in 1994. Some critics would say that this was the weakest of the three films. Others would say that it does not fit in with the trilogy. To some degree, this film is different in personality but Krzysztof Kieslowski does a wonderful job of tying it together with the first film, Blue.

The way that Krzysztof Kieslowski ties in the film is the courthouse scene with Karl getting a divorce from his wife of six months and Julie trying to go into the courtroom to find the mistress that was seen in the pictures with her husband. The subtle image if Julie trying to enter the courtroom makes it easy to miss if viewers were not paying attention. Krzysztof Kieslowski also does a great job of showing different point of views within both films. Blue, viewers are able to see Julie’s point of view and then White can be experienced through Karl.

The character, Karl, makes it easy for the audience to sympathize with him. He is a quirky guy who loves his wife but seems to have really bad luck. Just when the audience thinks that Karl is down and out he proves to them that he is smart and has things figured out. One example is when Mikolaj and Karl are talking and Mikolaj reveals to Karl that he is the one who wants to be killed. Karl says, “We all know pain.” Mikolaj responds, “Yes, but I wanted less.” This is a wonderful universal theme that is timeless. Krzysztof Kieslowski seems to be speaking through Karl by saying what should be done with this pain? Should people wallow in it or should they make something of themselves like Karl and move forward. The ironic thing is that Karl moves on and creates a fortune for himself all for one reason, his wife. This brings up another idea on love. The film leaves people feeling that Karl and Dominique have found their love again. The question to ask is why did he have to trick her to come to Poland? If she loved him, shouldn’t she have wanted to come anyways? Also, if it was love in the first place with their marriage and the whole wedding scene with doves why would she through him to the curb just because he couldn’t perform physically up to her standards but yet she would cry at his funeral?

This film does fit in with the trilogy. The films Blue and Red tend to be on the heavy side but White holds the together. It compliments them very well because it is still aesthetically pleasing, intellectually stimulating and contains well developed characters.

Blue

Krzysztof Kieslowski directed the Three Color Trilogy. The three colors blue, white and red represent the French flag and its’ motto. Blue, the first of the trilogy, was filmed in 1993. According to Nick James, Blue is the very model of a latterday European arthouse work of craft and prestige, and that it is a constituent part of a larger work, the 'Three Colours' trilogy. Schooled in the virtues of neorealist visual storytelling, sumptuously photographed in 35mm colour and impeccably pared down to its vital essences, Blue devotes the vast bulk of its screen time to gazing at Juliette Binoche, an actress of great talent and beauty, as she goes about doing remarkably everyday things. But the film is far from an enraptured hymn to graceful looks and elegant posturing. It's savage irony and remarkable austerity that hold sway.

The camera aesthetics in the film is captivating. The camera’s characteristic typically follows every move whether it be a charcater or an object within the film. For example, the camera follows the wheel of the car before the wreck and also the boy’s feet running after the accident. The colors are very rich, especially the color blue. The color reflects off her face, Julie. Another great affect, the imagery of the music notes as Julie is reading them. The two outsides are out of focus and the middle remains in focus as the camera pans for the audience to read the music. The music and blackouts are very awkward. The music tends to come first and then the blackouts follow. The abrupt change in the film makes them pace uneven and the pattern less flowy.

Throughout the film, the audience is following Julie to see if she will ever overcome her loss of her family. The film seems very heavy especially since things keep happening to Julie. The audience starts to wonder how much more can she take as well as does this kind of luck happen to more people thank one would think. The theme that seems to fit this film is rebirth. The examples that back this idea up is the mouse and its’ babies, the mistress and her being pregnant, and the finding of love that Julie has with Olivier. Julie and Oliver share great conversations together. It is easy to miss out on what is being said because of all of the effects that are going on around the characters.

This film definitely challenges viewers after they see this film. It leaves them asking the question: what would you do if you were Julie and how would you overcome all that she has lost? Would you try to ignore the lost and suffering or embrace it, learn from it and change from it?

The Double Life of Véronique

The Double Life of Véronique is directed by Krzysztof Kieslowski in 1991. This film is one of the most aesthetic appealing films. The rich colors, unique and invigorating camera angles keeps the audiences attention throughout. The colors that were breath taking were green used to light different scenes as well as the leaf in the beginning of the film. The rich red is used in the film throughout sometimes found in set design other times as costume design. Some angles that were memorable were when Weronika is kneeling down on the side walk. The camera makes an abrupt change in point of view. Lastly, the camera inside the grave and the audience can see the dirt thrown on the camera which is a representation of the grave.

According to Doug Cummings,… Double Life is, in many ways, a passionate celebration of intuitive thinking in and of itself and the interconnectivity of emotions generated by music, performance, and beautiful cinematography. A glittering tone poem with a careful arrangement of narrative patterns and details that remain remote, it's certainly Kieslowski's most abstracted and poetic film. Whether or not it offers any deeper meaning beyond its own amber-hued surfaces probably depends more on one's interior predilections and aesthetic convictions than any explicit content on Kieslowski's part.

Another critique Jenny Jediny claims that the visualization of feeling is one of the film’s strongest aspects. Kieslowski’s mise en scene is mesmerizing in its focus on the odd, affecting minutiae of life Véronique’s actions are of note, as they provide a more concrete narrative than the plot surrounding Weronika, but Kieslowski continues to draw out the emotional complexity of Véronique’s inner self while weaving in reminders of Weronika. At the beginning of the film, Véronique played with a green leaf and its tiny veins, and she now touches a grown tree, perhaps the same the leaf fell from, and from this small history springs not only Véronique’s own past, an ever widening connection of individuality within the larger context of human experience.

This film is definitely one that has to be seen several times and even then viewers are not able to get the film in its entirety. Every part of the film seems to have a purpose and reason for being displayed or shown in the film. It is up to the audience to dissect the film and figure out the many layers involved with the piece as a whole. The film is very pure in the sense of its colors and camera angles but is very liberal in the sense of sexuality. This can and is somewhat distracting for viewers who are not use to that type of sexuality being shown. Sometimes it is harder to grasp the aesthetics of the film because of the sexual nudity within.

His Girl Friday

Howard Hawks directed the black and white film His Girl Friday in 1940. According to Tim Dirks, His Girl Friday is Howard Hawks' speedy and hysterically funny, modern-style screwball comedy, and one of the best examples of its kind in film history. The film marked the beginning of a number of screwball comedies in the 1940s that emphasized the conflict for women in deciding between love/marriage and professional careers.

During the film, Hawks shows how hard it is for someone to quit something that they were born to do i.e. Hildy and the paper. These lines in the film contribute to this idea: Walter- You’re a newspaperman you can’t quit, Hildy – That’s why I am quitting. Going some place where I can be a woman. Hildy and Walter are very similar in the idea of manipulating people to get what they need or in some cases the story they need. Walter manipulates Bruce in the film several times one in particular is writing him a bad check. Hildy manipulates Earl Williams, the man in trial, into getting an exclusive story for the paper. Another similarity is how well they compliment each other. They have experiences and personality traits that compliment each other and have that Bruce and Hildy could never have. An example is when Hildy kicks Walter under the table and they both take rum in their coffee.

After reading Lauren Rabinovitz’s critique of the film, seems to lend a better understanding of the film after reading what she has to say. Although film critic Molly Haskell praised the way that the movie allows a woman to find her identity in a non-domestic sphere, Hildy still faces rather restrictive options— marriage to home, children, and pallid Bruce or marriage to career and ego with a maniacal Walter. Hildy's choice to remain with the press is less a decision to relinquish her "feminine" longings for home and family than a commitment to the continued excitement and kinetic activity of the world of journalism. Her decision to remarry Walter grows out of their mutual understanding, respect, and love for professionalism. Hildy's ultimate decision for an active, motion-filled life is her only possible choice in a "Hawksian" world. As Hawks himself suggested, her solution is the only way that she can work up enough sense of speed so that she won't have to think about how limited her options really are and how bad life really is. Throughout the 1940s, career-marriage decisions for women provided the crises in several screwball comedies. His Girl Friday marked the transition from the subversion of women working for ends other than marriage to more explicit statements regarding money-marriage-sex roles in the genre in the 1940s (Rabinovitz, Lauren).

This film has a universal theme that is relatable for future generations. This film also shows that things are not always black and white. Women still have to decide whether to have a family or to be competitive in the work force. Yes, we have gotten better on this issue than compared to the past but still have a ways to go. Women have also become more independent and self sufficient. Some women on the other hand would rather have a man take care of them for the rest of their lives which send mix signals to not only the men but society as a whole.

Bringing Up Baby

Bringing Up Baby is a black and white film produced in 1938. Howard Hawks directed the film and is perhaps the greatest director of American genre films. Hawks made films in almost every American genre, and each of these films could well serve as one of the very best examples and artistic embodiments of the type: …screwball comedy (Bringing up Baby)… (Gerald Mast).

According to Gerald Mist, Hawks was a master of point-of-view, knowledgeable about which camera perspective would precisely convey the necessary psychological and moral information. The type of shots that are done throughout the film are establishing shots, crane shots and moving in up close with a crane especially when the scene has the dinosaur bones in it. The shots with Susan Vance, played by Katharine Hepburn, and Dr. David Husley, played by Cary Grant is very different than with Cray Grant’s character and his fiancé, Ms. Hannah. As a couple they are not on the same page. Dr. David has the idea of having both a marriage and work, he wants love, but his fiancé wants it to be about his career. During their interactions the audience can feel the awkwardness and see the magic between Susan and David.

Tim Dirks claims that Bringing Up Baby is one of the funniest, wackiest and most inspired films of all time with its characteristic breathless pace, zany antics and pratfalls, absurd situations and misunderstandings, perfect sense of comic timing, completely screwball cast, series of lunatic and hare-brained misadventures, disasters, light-hearted surprises and romantic comedy. With the way Hawks uses the different situations between Susan and David, there is nothing but pure comedy. Both characters share the comedy of equality which is very different from the Old and New comedy traditions. The characters evoke laughter equally at the idea that men and women are different and at the idea that they are not (p 122 Cavell). Cavell continues this idea of comedy of equals with saying that is it a comedy of privacy, evoking equal laughter at the fact that they are, and are not, alone. Some of the scenes that fit this description is when they are looking for baby around the house, in the forest, and at the end when she comes to visit him at his museum.

This film also does a great job showing the female pursing the male which back in the day was not really common. It was the men who planned everything out and would win the over the girl’s heart. But in this film, Susan is the one who is after David. She is the one in control and has David in a daze. He wants to get away from her but somehow he is drawn to her. She plans when she is going to see him again and is the one that can manipulate him to do anything she wants. David fights with her through the whole film but also during the fighting he shows his feelings for her for example when he rushes over to check on her because he thinks baby has done something to her. The ending, resembles the idea of the walls of Jericho and how it had to come down in the film, It Happened One Night. The bones had to come down for David to finally give in and spend his life with Susan in common love.

The Philadelphia Story

George Cukor directed the black and white film, The Philadelphia Story, in 1940. This film fits the screwball comedy genre but is not one of the funniest films of this genre. The entertainment comes not from what the characters say but how they deliver what they say. The film deals with love, marriage, human growth and class distinction. Things that can be relatable back in the 40’s and even still today to some extent.

There are two events that foreshadow what will happen later on. One is when the Spy magazine gets trampled on by the horse’s hoof. The camera makes sure to follow the magazine till it hits the ground and the horse running over it. Its meaning is later explained when viewers finally learn that George is not the right one for Tracy because he is only worried about his reputation and how this marriage will make him more popular in the press. The significance of the horse running over the magazine shows that Tracy will not end up going through with the marriage. The other is when Dexter gives Tracy a model of their boat that they sailed on in the summer after they got married. Tracy puts in the boat in the pool while she is swimming. The boat is close to her and then the audience sees her get out and the boat continue to sail in the pool. This shows that Dexter has always been close to her even after their breakup. He is working on a way to get back to her.

Stanley Cavell makes two great points in his book the Pursuit of Happiness. One point is the audience is torn between what guy they want Tracy to end up with. Both men, Dexter and Mike, are great guys who love and appreciate Tracy and vice versa. Cavell claims that the one picked is the one chosen by the genre that makes the perfect fit. One reason Dexter is chosen is because Mike belongs to the wrong class. The thing that Dexter has on Mike is that Tracy and he grew up together. It also fits the notion that the heroine can rewin or win back the female character. In the film, when Dexter gets in the car to check on Tracy to get her to come inside after she has been drinking is probably the most intimate moments throughout the whole film. Mike and Tracy have a shared interest in books and such but they do not have memories together like Dexter and her.

Another point that Cavell mentions is Tracy and her father’s relationship. The two of them have a showdown when he returns. Tracy has assumed his position as the figure head when he lefts and now he has come back to reclaim is position and she is not willing to give it up so easily. The father is able to reclaim his wife quite easily from Tracy. This shows that Tracy’s mom can’t and want offer her comfort or protection which the film shows their loss of connection through the rest of the film. One example would be when they are at the party and Tracy thought her mother left a long time ago.

I leave you with a line from the film, Tracy: The time to make up your mind about people is never.

The Age of Innocence

Age of Innocence is a film in color that is directed by Martin Scorsese in 1993. The film is set in 1870 in New York where who you are and what you have is of the up most importance. This is shown through the film’s genre of mis-en-scene. The two major visual components of mis-en-scene are composition and design which is mastered quite beautifully.

In the very beginning of the film, different shots of the same scene are shown to achieve one point of view. According to Roger Ebert, observe how Scorsese sets up the dynamic of the film before a word has been spoken between Newland and May or Ellen. It involves a point-of-view sequence, and Scorsese told me: "We look through his opera glasses, seeing what he sees.” This is something that would have to be pointed out after watching the film or would incline several viewings for an audience to realize its importance. The editing consists of fast cuts to different parts of the characters i.e. earrings and buttons that contribute to the composition of the film.

Several camera angles that were eye catching and intriguing were when the camera was on stage looking out at the audience during the Opera performance. The audience was able to see what it is like to be onstage and to look out into the audience. Another is when the camera is off stage, the viewers are able to interpret the play within the film. The pan of all of the art whether is be classical or contemporary shows the design and contributes to the films as a whole. Lastly, is when the camera is up above showing people eating at the dinner table and at the ball when people are dancing. It is like the audience is God and they are getting to look down from heaven to observe those two scenes. Roger Ebert comments on how Scorsese has two great strengths in adapting it. The first is visual. Working with the masterful cinematographer Michael Ballhaus, he shows a society encrusted by its possessions. Everything is gilt or silver, crystal or velvet or ivory. The Victorian rooms are jammed with furniture, paintings, candelabra, statuary, plants, feathers, cushions, bric-a-brac and people costumed to adorn the furnishings.

The characters with the way they dressed and look fit well with the films design and composition. It made the audience seem like they were actually in the 1870s. Michelle Pfeiffer’s character Ellen always wore rich colors like blue and red. She always stood out compare to the other women in the film. This contributed to her actions and what she said as a unique and stronger character than any other person in that society which is was attracted Newland to her. The irony of it all is how social customs are more important that legislation. Throughout, people are more worried about up holding traditions and how people think of them more so then what is right or wrong especially how it might hurt someone in the process.

The film is very slow which makes people lose interest in the actual plot of the film and more on the set, angles, and costumes. The beginning and the ending are the best of the entire film. Rogert Ebert put is best when he said, “the final scene, on a park bench in Paris, sums up not only the movie but Scorsese's reason for making it; it contains a revelation showing that love is more complex and secret than we imagine. Archer's son Ted says his mother told him his father could be trusted because "when she asked you to, you gave up the thing you wanted most." Archer replies, "She never asked me." We reflect, first, that she never did, and second, that she never needed to.”

It Happened One Night

Frank Capra directed the black and white film It Happened One Night in 1934. According to Lauren Rabinovitz, this film is a rag to riches story much like a modern folk tale reversal of Cinderella. This screwball comedy raises the issues of relationships, romance and gender issues. While those issues are occurring, the audience is able to not only see how things will pan out but also develop a sense of humor with not only the characters but also themselves.

Ellie Andrews is the female protagonist who is very much a kid at heart. She comes from a wealthy background, use to getting her and being taken care of. Ellie can also be very stubborn; this was shown when she jumped off the boat because she was angry at her father. She thinks that she can handle this big o’ world by herself but Capra shows several moments where she is not able to. Two examples are when she asked the driver to hold the bus because she was going to be a little late getting back on and when she was laying in the hay and Peter goes to find her something to eat, Ellie starts to get upset when she realizes he is gone even though before she said that she didn’t care if he left. When Peter Warne meets Ellie, it is hard for the audience to know at first if they are both just using each other or if their relationship can be legit. After all, Peter is interested in getting an exclusive interview with Ellie and Ellie is only interested in not being caught and taken back to her father. Lauren Rabinovitz claims that both characters discover a mutual independence of spirit, feistiness, and resilience.

In the book Pursuit of Happiness, Stanley Cavell raises a couple of interesting points about the film. One is the notion of the Walls of Jericho. Cavell mention the fact that as soon as the film introduces the idea of the Walls of Jericho that the film foreshadows the ending with the Walls of Jericho tumbling down. It is hard at first for the audience to understand the meaning behind the blanket because it is so easy to tear down so Cavell seems to think that there is a correct way in the walls tumbling and that both characters seem to be in awe of what is holding it up. Another issue being raised is the genre of remarriage where the male educates the woman which correlates with her desires. Lastly, Cavell discusses the ordeal about Ellie not eating. She would not accept food from her father and at times was told not to eat some things by Peter. Ellie seemed to not want her father’s food because she did not want to give away her intimacy and release a sense of her freedom. With Peter, she eventually decided to let down her guard and accept what all he was trying to teach her. When she ate breakfast with him that morning the cabin, he was a father figure to her. He then controlled her by not allowing her to eat those chocolates and in the diner because she had no money. When he did offer her something to eat something healthy like carrots she was disgusted which Peter took personally to mean that she didn’t want him. Finally, she became desperate enough to the point where she decided to try his carrots. She becomes open minded and willing to acknowledge her feelings for him and that it is he that she wants.

The Lady Eve

Preston Sturges directed the film The Lady Eve in 1941. The Lady Eve is one of the greatest screwball comedies throughout film history. Peter Tonguette claims that The Lady Eve is fundamentally dialogue driven. It depicts a unique relationship between two people. The leading woman, Jean, is in control more so than the male character, Charles. During the film, audiences are able to see both characters roles change while they are trying to make their relationship work meanwhile the audience can get in a good laugh.

According to Peter Tonguette, The Lady Eve is a virtual embodiment of some of the precepts of the feminist movement. Several examples in the film depict his reasoning such as when Jean Harrington played by Barbara Stanwyck held the mirror during the dinner watching Charles Pike played by Henry Fonda. Some would say that the mirror represents her crystal ball and that Jean signifying her dominance over Charles. Another example is how Jean controlled the situation with getting Charles’ attention with making him trip over her shoe but also by getting him to come back to her room. Jean not only controls Charles but also tries dictating to her father, 'Colonel' Harrington, especially during the card games where she actually beats him at his own game.

On a philosophical level, the film can be interoperated as Sturges presenting the audience a comic version of the explosion from the Garden of Eve (p. 47 Cavel). This is help determined by the action between Jean dropping the apple on his head to gain his attention and the interaction between Charles’ snake and Jean’s dreams. Their relationship disintegrates when Charles gains new knowledge. The idea of the fall is shown over and over in the film for example when Charles keeps falling at the party three or four times.

Today, Preston Sturges' fast-paced films, with their inimitable dialogue, are still first-rate comedy material. On close scrutiny, however, they reveal themselves to be a series of tenacious attacks on American mores, values, ideals and beliefs. This is something that audiences would have to study and watch more than once in order to understand what Sturges is trying to depict. Since the dialogue and comedy is well done it is hard for viewers not to realize what Sturges is trying to express and just take it for face value.

Quote: Preston Sturges foresaw this our modern mayhem and left us with a lesson to be learned: the very least one can do is to laugh the laugh of the doomed and desperate. “It isn't much, but it's better than nothing in this cock-eyed caravan.”

The Conversation

The 1974 film The Conversation directed by Francis Ford Coppola fits in with the Hollywood’s era of the cinema of paranoia. During the seventies, things in the U.S. were very difficult with the Kennedy brothers and Watergate. Films during that time depicted how people and the country were dealing with and felling about everything. According to Philip Kemp, this film turned out to be a film about responsibility.

In the opening shot, it makes the viewer feel like they themselves are a hit man and they are stalking someone. The very next scene the audience sees the sniper. The first couple of scenes give the audience the perspective of the sniper and that they are stalking someone. Through out the film, Harry Caul changes from the stalker to being stalked. This occurs not only with Harry but with the audience as well. Harry’s character is one who obsesses over his privacy but yet invades other. He makes no emotional connection with people and tries not to get involved but that soon changes he develops a sense of responsibility. In the end the machine devours its own: the bugger, punished for a momentary deviation into human feeling, becomes the bugged i.e. Harry.

The best element of this film is its audio. The audio is endlessly played and replayed throughout the film, in full or in brief snatches, sometimes with pictures, sometimes just on tape or re-echoing in Harry's mind, as its various levels of meaning are gradually teased out (Kemp, Philip). There are different audio levels throughout and the soundtrack to the film that is very enjoyable. The best is when Harry is playing the trumpet and the record is playing. In this scene, there is a close up of Harry’s hand working the three tape players and then the film goes back to the establishing shot. The audio controls the shots of the camera. It leads to a flashback from what we have already seen but through the eyes of the audio. In the end, the audio is what makes him go crazy. According to Brenda Austin-Smith , it is a madness brought on by extreme self-consciousness, with not even his faith to sustain him (he smashes the statue of the Virgin, as if it were Ann, while searching for the bug).

The film is quite slow in some parts. The film makes the audience focus on one thing and that is the audio. Even the visuals in the film point how important the audio is for the film. This film is one that people need to watch multiple times to get the different points and supporting elements. For one reason, the point of view of the film being audio is one that people are not use to even in the twenty-first century. With the U.S. at war right now, this film can appeal to audiences today. This film is timeless one that can always be interpreted and relatable to any audience anywhere.

Klute

Alan J. Pakula directed the 1971 film noir Klute. The film stylistically is what makes the film a success not the content. For within the film, the angles of the camera and the lighting are what captivates the audience and makes it fit in with the Hollywood drama genre. According to Thomas L. Erskine, the film is generically both film noir thriller and a psychological thriller, and the audience identifies with Bree Daniels, a developing character whose inner conflict torments her, not with John Klute, the static and reticent male.

In the beginning, the camera angles create a pattern. The first shot in the scene is an establishing shot then it goes from each individual shot and back to an establishing shot. There are no close ups within this pattern. The first close up the audience sees is when the tape recorder is playing a tape. This was done as a hint to the audience of its importance and its role throughout the film. Another great shot is when Bree Daniels, the main character in the story, walks directly into the camera creating suspense but also engaging the audience. The camera angles within the film were very captivating and creative. One that was really effective when the camera was when Klute was standing and Bree was at the table sitting. The camera was at the height of Klute’s hip so in the scene Klute was visible with his leg and the audience is able to see Bree sitting down. This gives the audience the perception that they are standing right by Klute.

The lighting in the film was very important and what makes this film a film noir as well as creates the drama and thrill from within. In the scenes, eerie music would be playing in the scenes that had dark lighting. Some examples of that are when Bree is walking down the hallway and when she is in the bed and the camera slowly backs further and further away to create more space. A primordial response to darkness and light is a deep-seated element of human psychology that filmmakers have harnessed in order to influence the ways viewers respond to narrative development (http://www.filmreference.com/encyclopedia/Independent-Film-Road-Movies/Lighting.html). With the dark lighting and the music this builds suspense for the viewer as well as the viewer is trying to figure out what will happen next and to whom. One of the purposes for lighting in film is the creation of atmosphere or emotional effect. With the different examples mentioned above, the audience tended to feel worried about Bree and if the killer was going to kill her as well as the sense of wanting to find out who the killer was.

The film’s story was the weakest part. Some areas were very slow and dry. The only thing that kept my attention was the style of the film. I thought the actors were very professional and believable. I was able to figure out who the killer was in the very beginning when they first showed the character who would later be the killer. The rest made it uninteresting because I already knew what was going to happen. Yes, this film was a great thriller in the 70’s and is much better than some of the recent thrillers and drama films but I want something that grabs my attention throughout. I want something that will keep me guessing and wandering who did it and what will happen next, much like the film Fracture.

So all in all style of the film great, story not so great.

Stagecoach

Stagecoach is a film directed by John Ford in 1939. Ford does more with this movie than the audience expects. The audience is expecting the movie to be mainly about the conflict between the Indians and the white man. According to Richard Barsam, Ford, however, presents sharp psychological portraits of vivid characters, magnificent imagery, and pointed social commentary.

John Wayne plays the character the Ringo kid who has gotten himself in trouble with the law. Dallas played by Clair Trevor is a prostitute who does not fit in well with people and does not come from the right side of town. Thomas Mitchel plays the character Doc Boone. Doc is a fun loving character that brings a light hearted mood to the film as well as Buck. These are just a few of the seven characters who are riding on the stagecoach throughout the film. Every character that is traveling to Lordsburg makes up a diverse group with different backgrounds, professions, and personalities.

The cinematography helps depict the Old West especially with it being in black and white. The lighting is a crucial component. The silhouettes that are created during the harsh close ups of the characters help to grab the audiences’ attention. The camera angles vary from scene to scene. The first close up in the film is when the character Ringo kid is first shown. This creates foreshadowing and clues for later on. There is a high angle shot above the stagecoach when it has to cross the river. When the Apache leader is shown with his men, the camera is displayed lower than the Apache leader to signify his power and seriousness within the film. During the chase between the characters in the stagecoach and Apaches, the angle that is most stunning is the harsh low angle. Throughout the film, the camera makes viewers feel a constant movement by the usage of angles from within the stagecoach, the drivers and the chase.

One of Ford’s persistent beliefs is that civilization occurs as a result of a genuine community built-in the wilderness- through heroism and shared values (Barsam p 87). This idea that Ford has ties in well with the last line in the film when Dr. Boone says, “Well, that’s saved them from the blessings of civilization.” Dr. Boone is talking about Ringo and Dallas heading for the border together. The ending is not typical during that time. People who do bad things or make mistakes must be held accountable but Ford seems to be saying to the audience but what if? This leaves audience to challenge and question that not all of people’s actions have a black or white effect there can be some grey.

Our Hospitality and Sherlock Jr.

Our Hospitality and Sherlock Jr. are films directed by Buster Keaton. Buster Keaton is one of the first well known filmmakers during the silent era of film. Keaton was multi-talented in the sense that he not only directed his films but also was the main actor in them. In both areas, his talent and dedication to film making were way beyond his years.

In Our Hospitality, is a black and white film with no sound from the actors but music is played throughout the film. The music flows with the movement and pace of the film. For example, when the brothers are chasing Keaton’s character the music increases to portray the feeling of a chase. The film’s effects seem very advance for the technology that that day in time had. When the gun went off in the dark, it created a firework/spark effect that was very impressive considering the content of the over all film. The scenes with Keaton on the bicycle were stylistically intriguing. The editing of that shows different angles that the camera is able to achieve. There is a full shot of the scene with the bicycle then it cuts to an above the waste shot of him on the bike.

The film also depicts the era mainly through its style of editing. In some places viewers are able to see where the frames did not mesh specifically together. The film fades in and out thus portraying where the film strips were put together making the film not as clean or crisp. The film is visually stunning from the actually characters, Keaton is the smallest man in size, to the effects within the film. Some of the most intriguing effects were the river scene with Keaton and Virginia Canfield and the early trains that were used throughout.

This is a film that is slow in some parts mainly the beginning but towards the end will have any viewer excited of what they are watching as well as be amazed at the techniques used during the history of film.

In Sherlock Jr., is said to be not only Buster Keaton’s greatest film but is among the greatest achievements in the history of cinema, period (http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0015324/.) Again, Keaton does not disappoint the viewers with his acting nor with the effects. It is a shorter film but has many themes and elements that are intertwined throughout.

Keaton’s character has a dream which creates a dream sequence but the unique part of the dream is that he is entering the movie being shown. This creates a very unique experience for the audience that is watching. The audiences’ desire to become a part of the movies is fulfilled with Keaton leading the way. The car chasing scene is executed very well and the music is recognizable by current chases that are still being done today.

According to Eric Smoodin, it contains a story within a story, through which Keaton deals with opposition central to Western culture: dream versus reality, and reality versus art. There seems to be this underlining meaning of what is reality and what is desire. Freudians would say society or other people contribute to a person having to suppress their wants. Just like in the film when Keaton is trying to be a detective and win over Kathryn’s heart, he is not economically sound enough for her nor is he using his full potential to be a detective. This is a film that can be visually stunning through the eyes of artists as well as a metaphor for life.