Love 'Em or Hate "Em

I thoroughly enjoyed all of the Coen Brothers' films. They all have this sense of humor that is not laugh out loud funny but they definitely keep you very interested in the movie. They just have this way of portraying a dark subject that is cold and impersonal but put this humor, that can be perceived as dark, that really adds to their films as a whole. They truly do a great job with film making and in my opinion have mastered their craft but there is that something that I can't truly describe it. That I hate the Coen Bros. Is it because they are too good or is it something else? I honestly can't describe it. I love their films; they are amazing but there is that something that makes me want to hate them but I just can't put my finger on it.

I feel like when I'm watching their movies that they are truly one step ahead of everyone else in this industry but still aren't using all of their potential maybe? They could be better some how. In ways, that we can't understand until someone does it and the Coen Bros. will be the first to do it. So I called it in..............End of story.

Robert Altman

Robert Altman's style of film really caught my attention better than any other director we've studied this semester. Hitchcock's mystery stories never reeled me all the way in and Kurosawa just didn't quite do it for me either. The long goodbye was one of the most entertaining movie I've ever seen. It was unique. It was very serious yet sarcasticly hilarious. While it comments on very serious things such as marraige, death, revenge, the mob and crime, it still pulls of a witty humor with all of Elliot Gould's side comments and comebacks to other characters. I tend to enjoy Altman's film that has a main protaganost because no matter how masterful you are of putting in a lot of different characters and different stories it still can get confusing. Plus, I felt more connected to the story of Elliot Gould and Tim Robbins.

Hitchcock

I love Hitchcock he is sort of a genius of his trade. However I did not enjoy The 39 Steps. I was not a fan at all. That could just be because I don't typically enjoy that type of movie. The mystery type thing. I don't like when the whole point of a movie is to solve a mystery and nothing else. However, Rear Window was my favorite of the one's we watched. This also is sort of a crime solving film but in this one we aren't really sure if there is even a crime to solve. This also focuses a lot on the the neighbors and the community around the peeping tom. In the very beginning of the film, I was sort of creeped ou by this guy who spends all his time looking out a window but it becomes less and less creepy because soon enough it's basically the only view you have to see from. Is it less creep because you're the one doing it? Definitely not but everyone sort of feels less weird about it as time goes on.

In general, I am a big fan of Hitchcock andn could see myself watching more of his movies for simple pleasure my own social life negects from. waaaaahahahaahaaaaaahahaaa. I'm a loser. Wait what?

The Godfaaaaahaaather (yawn?)

The next epic tale told by Francis Ford Coppola that my group and I watched was The Godfather. I'm surprised that I only fell asleep twice while watching this movie. I constantly had to keep my wits about to stay awake because this plot takes so long to climax and the rising action didn't really keep my interest either. Perhaps that's why I couldn't type this blog in time.

Any farts, this movie talks a great deal about family and the mafia and Micheal, the Godfather's, son has to choose between his wants and his family's wants. There is some killing where one guy kills this the dad and then the son of that dad kills the guy that killed his dad and is pressured into the mafia by his family. In other words, it's all very confusing and long and unnecessary. Coppola does kind of a crappy job in making movies so far. He makes them way too long in his perfectionist ways and his ways are anywhere but perfect in fact they are anything but perfect... maybe even imperfect one might say. I would say that Coppola's ideas for movies are very good but how he goes about making them and writing them are far from great. His ideas for movies are fantastic but the execution of his ideas are awful. just to reiterate my point. So again, Great ideas but horrible execution of ideas. Thank you.

Worth The Time? Probs Not

Our groups director of choice is Francis Ford Coppola. The first movie we watched was Apocalypse Now. It was an interesting movie that really captivated my attention at first but as the movie went on i realized how long it was and I just wanted to get up and leave. If it weren't for the artisticly amazing shots, if that made any sense, I would have gotten my regretful butt up off the couch and go watch something short and attention keeping like Dumb and Dumber. The movie was pretty decent overall however but having to sit and watch something I otherwise wouldn't have and having to stay till the very end because I was "supposed" to was a difficult task.

I haven't seen any other Coppola films. However, I started to watch The Godfather and fell asleep before anything really happened. This worries me because I hope to God that his other films aren't as long as this last one. On the otherhand I love what Coppola has done with film in general, or at least as fas as I can tell from the interview we watched in class last semester, he's making it more of an art form instead of Hollywood blockbuster and not following the norm and just doing whatever it takes to make a great film. So what I'm trying to say is you should see it but don't expect to see something that will be on your own personal favorites. It's a great film not necessarily fun to watch.

Today is Tomorrow

Bill Murrey stars in the romantic comedy Groundhog Day. I thought this movie was pretty hysterical. My favorite scene is when that insurance salesman yells Ted for the third or fourth time and Bill Murphy flat out punches him in the face. The frustration that guy causes is thoroughly expressed in that one shot. This movie was an unnecessary romantic comedy. I think that the movie would have been good maybe better without him getting together with Rita. However it does give some closure to the story due to the fact that he tried so hard for so long to hook up with her. She wasn't even that good looking. I think it may have been a better movie if they didn't end up together because that was his goal for so long. But the true lesson learned was that he had to be better to people. Treat them as he would like to be treated. The golden rule thought to us by Jesus or in the movies case the groundhog? Relation to the article maybe? Otherwise the movie was hilarious. Repeating the same date over and over again kinda creep but otherwise funny. I enjoyed my experience with this movie. One more time emphasizing through a different arrangement of words... I highly enjoyed this film.

Screwball Comedy

I think I've actually seen this movie before this class but no recent enough where I knew the plot. In the beginning of this movie, the humor is that worse of a cartoon and I had a hard time getting into it but after a while I seemed to get used to it and even understand how ppeople could coceive this as funny. It really hit me when George the dog came into play. His nonstop barking and chasing of people really lightened the mood I thought. Iit was so annoying it became funny. Much like that of the humor found in family guy. If you do a repeated action or noise it's funny, do it long enough it's funnier than before. However Bringing Up Baby might have done it TOO long I still found it to be enjoyable. Now the love part of it didn't really add anything. However, i lkied the fact that David realized that his wife had no point being with him she was a emotionless, heartless woman that sound be living with cats because she can't sustain a relationship. The fact that Susan and David got together at the end was pointless. It was onlythere to provide closure to the end of the movie. You had no feeling of happily ever after like a romantic comedy and that was the only thing that bothered me but overall I quite enjoyed the movie.

Classic Western

I'm not even sure if this blog is really worth my time since it's so late but I thought i might as well spread my opinion on the subject. To be completely honest the only western hero I had ever heard of growing up was John Wayne. That was about as in depth as I got into westerns. I remember as a kid on afternoons I would channel surf, I mean what homework did I have as an 8 year old, and stop maybe for a minute or two on a western because the sound of gunshots seduced me. There really is a lot more to them then I remember. Although typical westerns are basically the same they can be very interesting. The scene in My Darling Clementine Wyatt comes into town merely to shave and ends up getting a job as a sheriff. The reluctant hero is there a better kind. This concept is used even today. If anyone has read Harry Potter they know Harry is much like Wyatt in that they both don't want to do it but everyone looks to them when there is danger because they are the natural leader and that basically was the whole point of this blog. I just wanted to point out that Harry Potter is a western with magic instead of guns. Good! Point MADE! try and contest me....ya can't!

Citizen Kane: One of the Greats?

Citizen Kane has been conceived to be one of the greatest films in the history of films. Why? Because it uses techniques developed by other directors in a way that adds affect to the film. He combines these different techniques to create a collasal movie. His backround in radio shows as he uses large contrast in sound. Like in the opening scene transition when Kane whispers ROSEBUD and then immediately changes to a big booming voice of an announcer reading headlines of newspapers. Not to say that some transitions aren't a little goofy and unnecessary. One in particular, you may be able to guess it, The skwaking bird. WHAT WAS THAT? Anyfarts, However great the shooting of this film was or wasn't does nothing to do with the unfufilling plot. What lesson came from this story? Was there a point? Was it that a man's life can't be summarized in one word? Was the point to relate his life to that of Adolph Hitler? There is no clear cut reason to watch this. Which to me, is close to as bad as a movie without an ending. If the point was to entertain it didn't entertain me. It kept my interest but did nothing for me. So, does Citizen Kane deserve to be considered one of the best films? I would lean to yes it does. Cause even stories with clear cut reasons to watch still suck but i couldn't stop watching it kept my attention and was interesting to watch even WITHOUT color. O M G!!!

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

The Good The Bad and The Ugly, (directed by Sergio Leone, staring Clint Eastwood, Eli Wallach, and Lee Van Cleef) a typical western movie about three cowboys who's paths cross in the search of 200,000 dollars of the Confederate's army. But where the typical western breaks away is when we are introduced to the fact. It's during the Civil War and the money is buried in the middle of a battle field and a graveyard. Each guy has a piece of the information to which grave it is buried but no one is giving up their information.

Throughout the first ten minutes or so there is no, i repeat, NO talking. No dialogue what so ever. This puzzled me. It added this mysterious effect that wasn't appealing at all. I was literally getting upset cause we are introduced to the bad and the ugly yet we don't know anything about them. All we get is a face. I was literally yelling at the TV and seeing if the sound was on. It was rather uncomfortable. The techniques used in this movie such as camera angles, movement and non diagetic sound help to keep the story moving. However the lack of other elements that keep current audiences focused on the movie and not some new mole they discovered on their arm are in great shortage. I myself fell asleep but was awaken by a bridge exploding so I can't say it was completely boring but didn't hold my interest for the length of more than 2 hours.

I was very let down by the acting of Clint Eastwood. His character was rather bland and uninteresting. I wasn't impressed at all to say the least. In fact it was "the ugly" that really added to the movie. It was what kept me awake for most of the movie. The humor that he brought. He plays an big baboon that has lost any family he once had which makes you truly connect with him and his ridiculous lines of stupidity. You can't help but laugh. I wouldn't say that this is should be in the Top 100 but I'm not saying it shouldn't. I can see why it should with it's cinematography and editing techniques but also the acting and lack of sound can really put you to sleep. I would recommend you watch it but keep all lights on and take a nap ahead of time. It's worth seeing.

Cameraman, Director, Actor, and Editor

Going into 11th grade one of my best friends had just received a new video recorder for his birthday. He just so happened to bring it up to our church camp just to mess around and put funny things on tape but nothng serious. As the week went on he was getting bored with it cause he thought there was nothing left that could possibly be more funny than taping your gentials and seeing how many peopl you could get to watch it and see it unexpectedly and see there reaction to it. So I ended up using it and became kind of interested in it. So interested in it that i asked my parents for one for christmas and hey we're in Edina so of course they abided. kidding that's all i got from my parents so I got one present instead of 5-7. I ended up making some videoes that are rather amateurish but I don't car I have fun doing them. It's a good way to pass time with friends and editing is a hassle but time cannot pass faster at least for me. I participated in a talent show at my church not a competition or anything but friends and youth staff liked what they saw. Apparently it was rather funny. So, now a few people at my church have asked me to make videoes for them for big volunteer groups I prticipate in. It's a good way to make a little extra cash while for me having lots of fun. This is a video I made very late at night after some plans fell through with friends and because of this YES I made it by myself like a loser with no friends. It's on YouTube. Search "jfkera" if you want to see more. Don't watch the hummer one. I'm warning you now it's a waste of your life 8 mins approximately. TRUST ME!

Critique The Critic

Chris Vogner from the Dallas Morning News critiques the recently released to DVD movie 300 in this review. Vogner's views about the move very much relate to my own feelings about the movie. He talks about the "wristwatch rule"

The earlier you look at your watch (or cellphone), the less engaged you are by what you're seeing on the screen.

This is actually a really good point. I guess I never realized how much you check your watch when you're bored with a movie. However I had no feelings like these during the movie. This movie is one of my new favorites. I heard many good things about it before I saw it. So without even previously seeing it, I bought it and I was not disappointed. Chris also relates the cinematography to the very similar Sin City. I ,however, have never seen the entire movie. You know how it goes, bits and pieces. But the similarities are unmistakable. Chris Vogner also talks about the grotesque fight scenes that are VERY entertaining. Who does not enjoy a good blood splatter scene? The action is non stop. The way it is filmed is shot not only intensifies the fight scenes, it makes them more gory and more entertaining.

A digitized cornucopia of craggy mountains, dark clouds, soaring arrows, decapitations and hand-to-hand combat that would make an Ultimate Fighting Champion quiver in fear, 300 is enough to mobilize the pulse of adult teenagers everywhere.

This movie is not only amazing to watch. It is based on a true story, which Vogner comments on, that is also a remake of a previous movie, The 300 Spartans, but it is nothing like it; Vogner says welcome to the 21st century. Vogner comments on how the backgrounds are extremely fake looking if you actually look at them. I didn't realize this while I was watching but can understand how it would look like that since the whole thing was digitized but it in no way did it detract from the movie. Vogner describes the stylized fighting scenes that take up the majority of the movie.

But the bulk of the movie is devoted to highly stylized combat. Spears and swords tear into flesh. Persian elephants go flying off cliffs. Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro), a hairless, effeminate chap who makes Leonidas look even more manly by comparison, sends wave after wave of fighters against the Spartans, only to see them punctured and hacked to bits.

This was what made this movie so great in my opinion. It shows very intense scenes that could very much be realistic, in my opinion, for that time period. Unlike current war movies about recent wars, it shows true bravery and intense combat. Recent war movies are just straight up gory and sad. This film creates the feeling of true bravery. After seeing the movie I didn't feel like crying or an overall feeling of sadness. Honestly I felt like I could kill someone and wanted to just own a guy in a fight. That's a feeling you don't normally get from a movie. Anyway, I think Chris Vogner did a decent job of critiquing this film and creating the feeling and attitudes from this film.

D-son

oh hey there was this time when i couldn't figure out my blog so i consulted an african hippie albino that deals drugs in the parking lot that is video recrded duh.