As I had previously championed surrealist movies, I had never envisioned a surrealist film so utterly absurd and putrid as The Holy Mountain directed by Alexandro Jodorowsky.
Its name clearly associates the film with mysticism and religious themes, and thus as we (me, Dom, and Deluca) started watching the movie, we began attempting to disect it for religious and spiritual commentary. The rapid changing of scenes and the absence of much dialogue made it difficult to develop a coherent analysis of the very loose plot, like most surrealist films. However, there was a message that was clear to the viewer: with his use of ubiquitous animal imagery and disgusting sexual scenes, that Alexandro thought that the human species was an unsophificated species and a sex driven, base species. About half of the movie is given to the development of the characters that will make their journey to the holy mountain, which is the place they wish to go to to obtain immorality. He develops these characters individually, who come from different planets (Mars, Venus, Neptune, etc.) and seem to symbolize the different vices of man: greed, manipulation, brutuality, etc. However, to simply state this would be unfair to the ridiculousness of the movie. Each description of the planets and their people get increasingly absurd, especially in terms of gross sexuality. It culminates with the planet, Uranus, of course, where even the most perverted youths will be completely grossed out. And with my luck, we had to watch this scene again because we missed a single line of dialogue, which Deluca refused to miss, therefore he tackled me to obtain the remote and we went back an entire scene which was about 30 minutes and we couldn't go back less than that. This is where the comedy really begins though. These indescrible scenes were so disgusting and revolting that the only way for one to react is with laughter; I have never laughed as hard during any other movie and this one I believe was not intended to be a comedy, at least not a conventional one.
As I have read others reviews on the movie that note Alexandro's mysticism, both before and after I have watched it myself, I am seriously perplexed by how anyone can praise this movie for its spiritual commentary, for the absurd elements of the film override any intellectual comments on a matter so deep. However, I believe that the purpose of the film was to portray religion and spiritualism as completely overshadowed by the putrid qualities of mankind, highlighted by our disgusting sexual minds and the fact that we cannot escape our animalistic nature.
I think that if there is any movie that could possibly destroy film as we know it, it is this movie. As described on the back of the dvd cover by Ben Cobb, "[Holy Mountain] tore apart the very fabric of film." The ending of the movie, which I wont reveil, completely reinforces the essence of The Holy Mountain and has a dual meaning in relation to mysticism and religion.
This movie stands alone in a separate category, it cannot be judged like any other movie. The collective opinion of the movie changed multiple times through the movie, from intrigued and attempting to understand the imagery of movie, to slightly grossed out but still taking it somewhat seriously, to completely grossed out and calling it the worst movie ever, to breaking out in uncontrolled laughter, crying tears of laughter, to the end where we called the ending brilliant. To call this movie brilliant though, I think is contrary to the point of the movie, it is so over-the-top and ridicious that it cannot be mentioned with the likes of classics, but still cannot be associated with complete flops, perhaps because this movie tried to be something unlike anything else.
I think the essence of this movie is best summed up with a quote from the movie itself, "You are excrement, you can turn yourself into gold." This movie is the cinematic equivalent of excrement, it is garbage, it stinks and its foul odor travels for miles, but it is gold; even if its only worth is the comedic merit that I reward it, it is a classic. However, if you plan to watch this film (though I cannot recommend to anyone cause it is so disgusting) don't watch it with your parents or squemish girlfriend cause it will most likely corrupt their clean minds. But if you indeed watch it, be open-minded and don't blame me if it ruins the thoughts of your wonderous childhood full of innocence.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Seven Samurai: A brief note on a great film
This epic 1954 Japanese masterpiece is probably the most complete film I have ever seen. It contains both chaotic and calm moments, it contains superb character development between the seven diverse samurai and the juxtaposition between them and the farmers, offers commentary between the young and older generations, insight on Japanese society and culture, and social ciriticism in general. Though the film is about 3:30 hours in the uncut version (the one I watched), this I believe adds to the film because one gets the feeling that they are a part of the movie. The movie is realistic in many regards because it is multi-dimensional, portraying not only the action, but also the preparation and the calm before the storm if you will.
Because there is so much to comment on, I will choose to pick what stood out most to me.
There are obviously 'seven samurai' in this film, but one of them is not a samurai at all. The character Kikuchiyo enters the film as an obnoxious, heartless persona. He pretends to come from noble ancestry and claims to be a skilled samurai, which is far from the truth. However, behind this cold-hearted facade, the audience discovers that there is much more to this character. He doesn't seem to fit with either the samurai or the farmers because he is neither. He fits into his own category. I believe this relates to a lot of people who never really seem to fit with a particular group or clique and are instead much more complex. We discover that he is a loving and emotional person through the scene where he disobeys the commands of the elder samurai in order to try to save the villagers who are trapped in the other part of the town which lies aflame. If he had listened to the orders of the elder samurai, the baby of the mother who willed her way to save the child, would have most likely died. This showed that he is in many ways a more humane and loving character than the more reserved characters. He, on many occasions throughout the film, potentially sacrificed himself in order to help others. He takes a much different approach from the others, but still possesses many of the characteristics to reveal that he is indeed a character of greater moral fiber. He serves to show that there are many people that society completely misunderstands and that people often aren't how they seem. This is why though one might get the impression that he is arrogant and annoying, society, especially the children and the samurai are willing to accept him into their community.
In the funeral scenes, he shows that death and lose troubles him greatly and though it may seem as if he doesn't appreciate the people that surround him, he sincerely does, perhaps more as than the others. Throughout the film, his peers criticize him and exploits his flaws, laughing at him; however, it is he who is ultimately the one who kills the last invader despite being shot in point blank range. Through this scene, he earns the title of samurai.
It depresses me somewhat that this is all I will write about the film because it was so epic and utterly awesome and there is so much to write about and discuss. I realize, however, that this post is only truely accessible to the few who have watched the film, I apologize to those of you who have yet to see this classic, you must watch to immediately.
Because there is so much to comment on, I will choose to pick what stood out most to me.
There are obviously 'seven samurai' in this film, but one of them is not a samurai at all. The character Kikuchiyo enters the film as an obnoxious, heartless persona. He pretends to come from noble ancestry and claims to be a skilled samurai, which is far from the truth. However, behind this cold-hearted facade, the audience discovers that there is much more to this character. He doesn't seem to fit with either the samurai or the farmers because he is neither. He fits into his own category. I believe this relates to a lot of people who never really seem to fit with a particular group or clique and are instead much more complex. We discover that he is a loving and emotional person through the scene where he disobeys the commands of the elder samurai in order to try to save the villagers who are trapped in the other part of the town which lies aflame. If he had listened to the orders of the elder samurai, the baby of the mother who willed her way to save the child, would have most likely died. This showed that he is in many ways a more humane and loving character than the more reserved characters. He, on many occasions throughout the film, potentially sacrificed himself in order to help others. He takes a much different approach from the others, but still possesses many of the characteristics to reveal that he is indeed a character of greater moral fiber. He serves to show that there are many people that society completely misunderstands and that people often aren't how they seem. This is why though one might get the impression that he is arrogant and annoying, society, especially the children and the samurai are willing to accept him into their community.
In the funeral scenes, he shows that death and lose troubles him greatly and though it may seem as if he doesn't appreciate the people that surround him, he sincerely does, perhaps more as than the others. Throughout the film, his peers criticize him and exploits his flaws, laughing at him; however, it is he who is ultimately the one who kills the last invader despite being shot in point blank range. Through this scene, he earns the title of samurai.
It depresses me somewhat that this is all I will write about the film because it was so epic and utterly awesome and there is so much to write about and discuss. I realize, however, that this post is only truely accessible to the few who have watched the film, I apologize to those of you who have yet to see this classic, you must watch to immediately.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Surrealism: A League of its Own
Surrealist Film essentially imitates the production of dreams; based on my theory that dreams are a form of art that is limited to an audience of one, surrealist films create waking-dreams with an amplified audience. However, these films may not be accessible to all people because a dream is intended only for the creator; thus, people must take a different approach to these films. Because they are similar to dreams, they should be viewed like dreams. Just like dreams, some people just watch them because they are interesting, but others see them as deeper. For me personally, I believe that these films allow people to create their own meaning through the context of the film. They are too complex to have one meaning like most movies (though these movies might have many different interpretations, people usually have relatively similar interpretations on the meaning); therefore, people should ultilize watching these films as a time to fully express themselves through the art. The personal interpretations of surrealist films may not be logical to others because every person as there own unique line of logic and sense of emotion. From experience with my peers reactions to Samuel Becketts Waiting for Godot, which contains comparable elements to surrealist cinematography, a number of people simply assert that the work is meaningless because they cannot conclude any clear meaning. Having read different interpretations on the work, I came across both Christian and atheist interpretations among others that represent opposite beliefs; they make at least some sense to me, therefore one must assume that they are both valid. This phobia, which many people possess of developing their own interpretation that is not completely accepted by the masses, is centered around many people's beliefs that there are one answer to problems.
Getting back to cinetography, one of the most popular surrealist films is Un Chien Andalou (1929) by Luis Buñuel which does not have a conventional sequence of plot. It is from the time period of the Surrealistic Movement during the 1920s and 1930s. One might argue that the short film does not have any intended meaning; however, simply because the director did not have an intended meaning (which may or may not be true), does not mean that the film does not take a meaning of its own. My interpretation of the short was that of the nature of men and women. Men seems to be portrayed as evil and abusive characters and the sole woman seems to be the victim of the men's brutality. The famous opening scene (if you haven't seen it, see below for the link) illustrates this. Another scene where a man is clothed in the garb of a nun reveals to me that some men desire to possess the qualities of women, but quickly crashes on his bike, then stripped of the nun outfit by another man, symbolizes the social pressures of manhood and showing how men are, in general, naturally different from women. However, there is a lot of parts of the film that do not seem to fit perfectly with this analysis. Well if you have not seen this short (it is only 16 minutes long), you may want to view it and develop your own opinion of it, though this is not required, you may just ignore what I just said and watch it simply for the aesthetics of it or as a study of the feelings of the people of the time period. I would be interested to hear what people have to think about the piece, especially to see who has the craziest interpretation, but I do not desire to hear the interpretation that it is worthless because that simply goes nowhere though it is a valid one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR9HLI88wVY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJnRU2imZi4&feature=related
Getting back to cinetography, one of the most popular surrealist films is Un Chien Andalou (1929) by Luis Buñuel which does not have a conventional sequence of plot. It is from the time period of the Surrealistic Movement during the 1920s and 1930s. One might argue that the short film does not have any intended meaning; however, simply because the director did not have an intended meaning (which may or may not be true), does not mean that the film does not take a meaning of its own. My interpretation of the short was that of the nature of men and women. Men seems to be portrayed as evil and abusive characters and the sole woman seems to be the victim of the men's brutality. The famous opening scene (if you haven't seen it, see below for the link) illustrates this. Another scene where a man is clothed in the garb of a nun reveals to me that some men desire to possess the qualities of women, but quickly crashes on his bike, then stripped of the nun outfit by another man, symbolizes the social pressures of manhood and showing how men are, in general, naturally different from women. However, there is a lot of parts of the film that do not seem to fit perfectly with this analysis. Well if you have not seen this short (it is only 16 minutes long), you may want to view it and develop your own opinion of it, though this is not required, you may just ignore what I just said and watch it simply for the aesthetics of it or as a study of the feelings of the people of the time period. I would be interested to hear what people have to think about the piece, especially to see who has the craziest interpretation, but I do not desire to hear the interpretation that it is worthless because that simply goes nowhere though it is a valid one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR9HLI88wVY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJnRU2imZi4&feature=related
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Why 80s Movies Fail
The 1980s in general is just an awkward decade. It seems that every movie from the 80s is very corny and archaic. Rather than transcending time, like many older movies, for example, the 1940s and 1970s, which produced in my opinion, some of the greatest movies, especially the 1970s (I haven't seen that many 1940s movies, though they are highly acclaimed) the 1980s seemed stuck in time. The science fiction movies seem ridiculous, with the exception of the Star Wars trilogy (1977-1983.) I have tried to watch Blade Runner three times and have fallen asleep all three times and I tried to watch Brazil today, but it seemed so passé in both theme and production, that I couldn't bear watching it pass the first ten minutes. Those 80s haircuts, sense of fashion, and odd comedic elements seem to override any sliver of intellectual or philosophical elements of those movies.
A typical 80s movie scene is on that takes place in some kind of office, like the one in Runaway Train. Everything from the glasses and the facial expressions, are overdone and seem completely unrealistic in comparison to modern times. It seems sad for those talented artists: actors, directors, cinematographers, key grips, and lightning crew members, whose artistic prime occurred during this dreadful time.
It seems strange how there were some great movies from 1980: The Shining and The Elephant Man, but after that year, it all falls short. Pass that, the mementum from the glorious 1970s wears off. And the vast majority of the movies that people like from that era are science fiction movies that are nearly completely for entertainment and lack intellectual themes, such as: Raiders of the Lost Ark, Back to the Future, and The Terminator. These movies often contain children who are full of angst and adventure and come to help shady characters, which is quite cliche, but still could produce a positive effect is done right. But 80s movies seem incapable of doing this, as the results are largely predictable.
After this miserable decade of film, the 1990s produced some of the all-time greats. Goodfellas in 1990s, Silence of the Lambs in 1991, Reservoir Dogs in 1992, Schindler's List in 1993, and quite possibly the best year of cinema in American history, 1994, with Forest Gump, Shawshank Redemption, and Pulp Fiction. Of course people will say "what about ______; it was my favorite movie and it was in 198_." Well for those people, maybe you should write a blog about how you feel the contrary about 1980s cinema, but for me, I rather watch silent films.
A typical 80s movie scene is on that takes place in some kind of office, like the one in Runaway Train. Everything from the glasses and the facial expressions, are overdone and seem completely unrealistic in comparison to modern times. It seems sad for those talented artists: actors, directors, cinematographers, key grips, and lightning crew members, whose artistic prime occurred during this dreadful time.
It seems strange how there were some great movies from 1980: The Shining and The Elephant Man, but after that year, it all falls short. Pass that, the mementum from the glorious 1970s wears off. And the vast majority of the movies that people like from that era are science fiction movies that are nearly completely for entertainment and lack intellectual themes, such as: Raiders of the Lost Ark, Back to the Future, and The Terminator. These movies often contain children who are full of angst and adventure and come to help shady characters, which is quite cliche, but still could produce a positive effect is done right. But 80s movies seem incapable of doing this, as the results are largely predictable.
After this miserable decade of film, the 1990s produced some of the all-time greats. Goodfellas in 1990s, Silence of the Lambs in 1991, Reservoir Dogs in 1992, Schindler's List in 1993, and quite possibly the best year of cinema in American history, 1994, with Forest Gump, Shawshank Redemption, and Pulp Fiction. Of course people will say "what about ______; it was my favorite movie and it was in 198_." Well for those people, maybe you should write a blog about how you feel the contrary about 1980s cinema, but for me, I rather watch silent films.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
The Darker Side of Pale: My Search for the Best Scary Scene
As I watched El laberinto del fauno or Pan's Labyrinth directed by Guillermo del Toro, I came across one of the scariest and heart-pumping scenes I have ever seen. However, it's not a typical horror type scene that is driven simply by violence and gore, (even though the film is quite violent, especially for a fantasy film, yes it is a fantasy film but an adult one) but rather it is a scene that entails very interesting concepts and themes, though I'm sure Mr. Bennett would completely loath this film because it pits a facsist monster up against a cute, innocent girl, in addition to having a religious type ending; not the moral ambigouity he's looking for, but you can't please everyone.
The scene opens with the girl walking down a mysterious hallway with ominous hushing-type noises to reveal the dark nature of the place. She then glances thoroughly at a luscious assortment of food on a grand table; this symbolizes the desires that will tempt her and nearly cause her demise. Because of the themes and meaning of the movie, I assumed this symbolized sin. The cinematography is done so she is glancing at the table as she is walking and as she walks on viewing the food, she abruptly views the horrid image of the "pale man," the quintessential evil creature who eats children. The camera work is done in that way in order to tell the audience that with all these great things in front of you, they are joined with great evils and appalling consequences. There are also depictations on the wall of him eating children and skulls on the ground with the fairies directing her to her mission, away from this horrible creature. The scene is, of course, very silent except for the constant hushing noises and the crackling of the fire. She pulls out a key to open some lock, of which there are three: she at first goes to open one by stops intuitively and chooses the other. There are several things that arise that this part, one being she has some sort of knowledge that comes from within which goes along with the plot and also doing with the fact she chooses not the center one which she at first goes for, but rather one from the side of it. So she gets what she needs, now comes the truly scary part.
We see a hourglass which foreshadows a problem with time that ensures. She of course falls for the fruit and the pale man takes his eyes from a plate and puts them on his hands. Those horrific squeals and cackling noises that come from this creature and the music cresendos. Now we see the image of this innocent, lovely girl in the front of the screen and in the back, the image of this awkard, child-eating creature. He eats the heads of two of the fairies (thus adult fantasy) and the girl only now realizes that she screwed up big time. With this creature walking in huge slow strides hunting for her, she frantically runs, as he is lead by these eyes that are planted in his hands (refer to link at the bottom of the page for the visuals, you'll understand when you see it.) His shrills and shrieks, which sound like pigs squealing as they are about to be slaughtered, are complemented by the girl's cries. The theme of innocent is overwhelming, only psychopathic killers wouldn't be on edge for this adorable girl, and the hourglass, just then finishs and she runs into the closed door with the camera showing her from the back. So now you're thinking how this girl is to survive with the doors closed with the eminent threat of this possessed creature who is vaguely human looking, yet epitomizes the sordidness of the human. The camera then focuses on her the feet of both of the characters, with his awkward steps compared to her cute girly shoes, as to show that the decadent character is going to devour the innocent child. But she finds a piece of chalk (you'll have to watch the film in its entirety to understand) and opens a pathway, as to show that even though we make mistakes, we can still overcome them with our own actions of good. Then she escapes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9YD2PFF31E
The scene opens with the girl walking down a mysterious hallway with ominous hushing-type noises to reveal the dark nature of the place. She then glances thoroughly at a luscious assortment of food on a grand table; this symbolizes the desires that will tempt her and nearly cause her demise. Because of the themes and meaning of the movie, I assumed this symbolized sin. The cinematography is done so she is glancing at the table as she is walking and as she walks on viewing the food, she abruptly views the horrid image of the "pale man," the quintessential evil creature who eats children. The camera work is done in that way in order to tell the audience that with all these great things in front of you, they are joined with great evils and appalling consequences. There are also depictations on the wall of him eating children and skulls on the ground with the fairies directing her to her mission, away from this horrible creature. The scene is, of course, very silent except for the constant hushing noises and the crackling of the fire. She pulls out a key to open some lock, of which there are three: she at first goes to open one by stops intuitively and chooses the other. There are several things that arise that this part, one being she has some sort of knowledge that comes from within which goes along with the plot and also doing with the fact she chooses not the center one which she at first goes for, but rather one from the side of it. So she gets what she needs, now comes the truly scary part.
We see a hourglass which foreshadows a problem with time that ensures. She of course falls for the fruit and the pale man takes his eyes from a plate and puts them on his hands. Those horrific squeals and cackling noises that come from this creature and the music cresendos. Now we see the image of this innocent, lovely girl in the front of the screen and in the back, the image of this awkard, child-eating creature. He eats the heads of two of the fairies (thus adult fantasy) and the girl only now realizes that she screwed up big time. With this creature walking in huge slow strides hunting for her, she frantically runs, as he is lead by these eyes that are planted in his hands (refer to link at the bottom of the page for the visuals, you'll understand when you see it.) His shrills and shrieks, which sound like pigs squealing as they are about to be slaughtered, are complemented by the girl's cries. The theme of innocent is overwhelming, only psychopathic killers wouldn't be on edge for this adorable girl, and the hourglass, just then finishs and she runs into the closed door with the camera showing her from the back. So now you're thinking how this girl is to survive with the doors closed with the eminent threat of this possessed creature who is vaguely human looking, yet epitomizes the sordidness of the human. The camera then focuses on her the feet of both of the characters, with his awkward steps compared to her cute girly shoes, as to show that the decadent character is going to devour the innocent child. But she finds a piece of chalk (you'll have to watch the film in its entirety to understand) and opens a pathway, as to show that even though we make mistakes, we can still overcome them with our own actions of good. Then she escapes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9YD2PFF31E
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Music of Gold: My Search for the Perfectly Composed movie Song
Well, it wasn't much of a search being that only as I currently write this developed the idea that I was on mission to find the perfectly fitting song. As I was watching "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" (which i fell asleep during the middle hour of, which to my credit wasn't entirely my fault, i did previously see three other movies right before viewing this one) I came upon the greatest song that I ever saw in a film. This song, appropriately called "Ecstacy of Gold" fits perfectly with the scene and evoked the exact feeling that the visual does. But there is no more time for my faint, nebulous appraisal, I will begin my analysis without giving much away to those who have yet to see this classic.
From the start, the scene opens with "the ugly" stumbling on a tombstone, which reveals that he found the cemetry he was looking for where the money is located. This is accompanied by ominous piano playing shortly followed by what sounds like an oboe solo. It is lightly played though, as the character discovers where he looks upon the immense vastness of the cemetry which extends as far as the eye can see. Then as the ugly is signaling the sign of the cross, the oboe sounds celestial but this is evanscent, because right after he makes some unknown irritable noise and throws whatever papers he is holding at the time. Afterword, he fills up with excitement because he now possesses all he needs to find the gold, the music builds up with a crescendo of that recurrent ominous piano 4 note riff as to illustrate the theme of false religiousness. Then he starts walking though the cemetry and the bass also rises into prominence. Then we hear a quick lifting effect in which you know leads up to something in the film and the audience is wondering what will happen to this character as in relation to him finding the treasure. Our thoughts are answered with opera singing. This is evokes the feeling of excitment and personally makes me want to start running which is very convienent because the character starts running in excitment to find the gold (thus the name esctasy of gold.) Just as he stops running, the full orchestra plays in unison as he looks around for the tombstone with the gold buried underneath. This serves as the bridge between the momentary evelation in excitment because it calms you down before the big lift. Then you are engulfed by this blend of the opera singing, the sound of the marching snare drum, and the full orchestra that is so powerful which fills me up with enthusiasm. Then we hear a raise in pitch from the opera singer as if signaling a following cut off with appropriately follows. Gumbling and gong hits make us feel as if something has weakened in the character; maybe he has given up on the search, the cemetry too vast for him. No, a cool sounding opera riff preseeds the music and we are thrown back in the thrill of the chase. But now we hear new prominent trumpet playing which offers a new aspect of the song. Then our character looks as if he found the tombstone he was looking for. The music now levels off as soon as he sees something and we hear prominent lower brass playing instead. Then a new element is heard, a heavenly sounding chorus which at one point is the only thing that is heard which as if one is taking a big breath of air, waiting for that big moment to come. Then in the last hurrah of sorts, all elements of the previously heard song is blasted in our faces with the camera moving continually faster, as if an ecstasy is upon us. Then finally it ends, the character zooms past the screen illustrating that this ecstasy smacked him suddenly without even time to stop.
This sets up the quite scene where he digs only to find... well remember I said I didn't want to give anything away.
Well that's one of my favorite songs ever, enjoy. You can follow my analysis while watching the scene on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdNh9f2Wwm0
From the start, the scene opens with "the ugly" stumbling on a tombstone, which reveals that he found the cemetry he was looking for where the money is located. This is accompanied by ominous piano playing shortly followed by what sounds like an oboe solo. It is lightly played though, as the character discovers where he looks upon the immense vastness of the cemetry which extends as far as the eye can see. Then as the ugly is signaling the sign of the cross, the oboe sounds celestial but this is evanscent, because right after he makes some unknown irritable noise and throws whatever papers he is holding at the time. Afterword, he fills up with excitement because he now possesses all he needs to find the gold, the music builds up with a crescendo of that recurrent ominous piano 4 note riff as to illustrate the theme of false religiousness. Then he starts walking though the cemetry and the bass also rises into prominence. Then we hear a quick lifting effect in which you know leads up to something in the film and the audience is wondering what will happen to this character as in relation to him finding the treasure. Our thoughts are answered with opera singing. This is evokes the feeling of excitment and personally makes me want to start running which is very convienent because the character starts running in excitment to find the gold (thus the name esctasy of gold.) Just as he stops running, the full orchestra plays in unison as he looks around for the tombstone with the gold buried underneath. This serves as the bridge between the momentary evelation in excitment because it calms you down before the big lift. Then you are engulfed by this blend of the opera singing, the sound of the marching snare drum, and the full orchestra that is so powerful which fills me up with enthusiasm. Then we hear a raise in pitch from the opera singer as if signaling a following cut off with appropriately follows. Gumbling and gong hits make us feel as if something has weakened in the character; maybe he has given up on the search, the cemetry too vast for him. No, a cool sounding opera riff preseeds the music and we are thrown back in the thrill of the chase. But now we hear new prominent trumpet playing which offers a new aspect of the song. Then our character looks as if he found the tombstone he was looking for. The music now levels off as soon as he sees something and we hear prominent lower brass playing instead. Then a new element is heard, a heavenly sounding chorus which at one point is the only thing that is heard which as if one is taking a big breath of air, waiting for that big moment to come. Then in the last hurrah of sorts, all elements of the previously heard song is blasted in our faces with the camera moving continually faster, as if an ecstasy is upon us. Then finally it ends, the character zooms past the screen illustrating that this ecstasy smacked him suddenly without even time to stop.
This sets up the quite scene where he digs only to find... well remember I said I didn't want to give anything away.
Well that's one of my favorite songs ever, enjoy. You can follow my analysis while watching the scene on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdNh9f2Wwm0
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Why Shawshank Redemption is Great
Our teacher, Mr. Bennett has belittled many our favorite movies. In response to this, I have devised a study on why one of these movies is indeed great. One of the most highly acclaimed pieces of cinematography, The Shawshank Redemption directed by Frank Darabont, is probably my favorite movie. Though it may lack moral ambiguity, it is great not only because this innocent man ultimately survives the corrupt system of the prison, but also because he learns that he must rise up and rebel against the warden and others by out-corrupting them. He learns to both maintain his principles, as seen by the scene where he plays that Italian opera music despite the fact he realizes it will result in severe punishment, and be opportunistic, never forgetting that his only real goal is to escape the prison, taking advantage of the power he is given by the warden. Our hero, Andy Dufresne, is an independent man but still a "team player," as seen when he builds the library and helps others gain their GED. Although this movie lacks moral ambiguity, I feel it doesn't need it. Rather, it is substituted by the fact that the main character is a just man but is denied justice, and instead of waiting for someone to save him, he saves himself. While others in the prison are products of the system, Andy creates his own system and despite being in jail, he continually expresses himself and accomplishes more than most people who are free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
