Total Pageviews

Sunday, November 27, 2011

The Muppets Take The GLORY!

 Uncle Deadly is back. When I was a child, I was deathly afraid of Uncle Deadly, a Muppet that was known for his Phantom of the Muppet's Show episode. I was totally freaked out, but I was able to face my fears knowing that he would reappear in this incarnation of the Muppets. I not only overcame my fear, but entertained as well.
Do yourself a favor and watch the Muppets. The movie is jammed pack with self reflexivity and gags that will keep you laughing, but take you back to your nostalgic childhood as to when the Muppet's Show was televised. The love and passion behind the storytelling is astounding, and that is what the industry seems to lack these days. Jason Segel  and Nicholas Stoller have crafted a wonderful and rich original tale using Jim Henson's beautifully designed creations. All of the Muppet characters are present in this new adventure.
The narrative opens up with the exposition of Gary (Jason Segel) and Walter (Peter Linz(voice)) as two brothers who grow up watching the Muppet's Show. Walter becomes obsessed with the Muppets buying all the merchandise and dressing up as Kermit for a Halloween. Gary falls in love with Mary (Amy Adams) an elementary school teacher where they plan a vacation to Los Angeles for their tenth anniversary, and Gary invites his brother Walter to go with them. Walter is very excited because he may have the honor of possibly meeting his hero, Kermit the frog (Steve Whitmire (voice)). When they arrive in Los Angeles (after a couple of hilarious song and dance numbers) they immediately take a tour of the unkempt Muppet Studio where the tour guide (Alan Arkin) gives them a cheap and speedy tour of the place, but during the tour Walter sneaks off into Kermit's office and finds out that Tex Richman (Chris Cooper) has plans to drill for oil instead of preserving the studio and turning it into a museum. Walter tells Gary and Mary and they are soon off to look for Kermit in hopes that they can rally all of the Muppets to save the studio as well as their name.

 The Muppets' Movie is quite the treat for all ages. There are some innuendos but nothing to really worry about. After watching Forgetting Sarah Marshall, I was a bit apprehensive as to taking my family to watch the film, but I am glad that I left my prejudices at home and embraced this movie. I give this movie an A-, especially, for its heart warming theme and values. All I have to say is, "Manamana." Let's talk about it, please let me know what you think of the Muppets? Which Muppet scared you? Are you happy they made a come back?

Spy Kids take the GLORY.


 Robert Rodriguez does it again. This is a great  family movie to not only add to the collection, but one to watch with the whole family because of its wonderfully instilled family values, and moral compass to choose good over evil. The film opens up with a very pregnant Marissa Cortez Wilson (Jessica Alba) fighting a gang of thugs lead by Timekeeper (Jeremy Piven). Marissa zip-lines to safety after a bomb is set off, and she ends up having to go through a high speed chase all the while keeping track of her contractions as she his stalling the birth of her child moments longer to assail the perp.
After the birth of Marissa's baby, she decides to retire from the OSS. One would think that Marissa has it all...married to a famous spy hunting television reporter, a new baby and intelligent twin step kids. Trying to mother Rebbecca (Rowan Blanchard) and Cecil (Mason Cook), who clearly don't want her around, is her toughest challenge yet. Also, her husband, Wilbur (Joel McHale), wouldn't know a spy if he lived with one, since Marissa is a retired secret agent. Marissa's world is turned upside down when the maniacal Timekeeper threatens to take over the planet and she's called back into action by the head of OSS, home of the greatest spies and where the now-defunct Spy Kids division was created.

 With Chaos ensuing, Rebbecca and Cecil are thrust into action and a cooperative adventure when they learn that their boring stepmother was once a top agent, and now the worlds most competitive ten year olds are forced to put their bickering aside and rely on their wits with a little help from a couple of very familiar Spy Kids, Carmen (Alexa Vega) and Juni Cortez (Daryl Sabara). Bringing forth some mind-blowing gadgets, as they struggle to save the world and possibly bring their family together. Marissa brings a whole new concept of bringing your child to work as she straps her baby in and goes into battle to save her step children. This is a great way to pass the torch to new characters and to keep the franchise alive.  This movie is filled action and adventure that will satisfy the appetites of the young and old. Sure the theme of having all the time in the world to vanquish evil while rescuing the world is good, but the value making time for your children is golden. The Aroma-scope was the only downfall with this pic because it did not work, especially, since the first three scratch and sniff portions of the card smelled the same, but the fact that one has the option to smell it if they want top is a plus. There were a lot of bodily gross out humor sprinkled throughout the film and a tad bit overboard on the fart gags, but all in all, Good film. I sincerely give it a B+. Let me know what you think or what's your take? Do you agree or disagree?  

Friday, August 26, 2011

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark. You will be Afraid (Glorify)


Attention all Dark Fantasy and Horror enthusiasts! Finally, a good rated R flick, it’s about time, I tell you!



The narrative opens up with a buggy driver (Bruce Gleeson) dropping off a housekeeper (Edwina Ritchard) at the Blackwood house. The housekeeper dusts the books off in the library and has a meal freshly prepared for Blackwood (Garry McDonald). The housekeeper calls to Blackwood as she proceeds to go down into his study, but no answer. She calls to him again and we see a shadow on the ground revealing the presence of Blackwood, but again no answer until she begins to walk away from the room. She creeps slowly down the steps looking vigilantly and terrified, and then missing a step, she tumbles down smashing head against the concrete while the dark atmosphere is filling with disembodied voices, and the film cuts to the present inside of a BMW, and we are introduced to the three main characters of the narrative: Sally Hurst (Bailee Madison), Kim (Katie Holmes), and Alex (Guy Pearce). Sally is a curious little girl that is suffering from depression due to her parent’s divorce. Sally is sent to live with her father Alex who buys old mansions so he can restore them and then turn around and sell them while Kim (Alex’s girlfriend) is an interior decorator who is having a hard time trying to befriend Sally. The three main protagonists arrive at the mansion and Alex introduces Sally to Harris (Jack Thompson), who is the head contractor and groundskeeper. Sally is given a tour throughout the manor and she is shown to her bedroom. Sally decides to sleep early in her new bed while her father shows her how to use her new night light. Sally can hear her father and Kim fooling around through the vents.



Sally can hear her name being called, so she follows the voices to an area behind the house where Harris finds her and tells her not to return to that place again. Alex and Kim are alarmed to find Harris manhandle his daughter as he tells Alex his concerns. Sally insists on there being a basement in the house, and she shows her father the window leading bellow. Grabbing a sledge hammer, Alex smashes through a hollow space in the wall under the stairs where they find a secret door, and they proceed to walk down the steps and look at Blackwood’s study and work area. Sally is focused on the bolted furnace door. Her curiosity and carelessness unleashes the ancient race of fairy like creatures that thrive on human bones. Sally became mesmerized by the beings then she became extremely terrified, and she wants to protect her family but she has to convince her skeptical father that these creatures exist.



The film gets an A! I have not seen anything that terrifying and mesmerizing since William Blatty’s The Exorcist.  You want to look away, but your sadist masochist nature forces your gaze towards the terror. Guillermo Del Toro’s Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark is a tour-de-force of suspense and terror, especially, since the film will captivate and ensnare the audience from the opening exposition of a Victorian era. Guillermo Del Toro dives into a story, setting, and suspense of Lovecraftian proportions, even though, the creatures in the story are of miniature stature, the damage and violence in numbers supersedes their size. The architectural structure of the Blackwood house is very creepy and gothic as it comes to life as a character as well as a setting. The sound was just as terrifying as the visuals. Great use of mise-en-scene, the blue and yellow filters gave the film a dark and a hazy setting while the sound took the film to another ethereal level, especially, with all of the voices and whispers. The lighting and the use of shadows were a work of art, especially, during the visuals of the creature’s eyes refracting light in the darkness. The acting is really impressing creating such a dark mood while creating a colorful array of character flaws and strength in a modern age is feat to reckon with. One begins to care and empathize with the characters, amazing. The writing is captivating and filled with emotion causing the narrative to move flawlessly throughout its allocated time. The film did not feel rushed, nor did the scenes seem out of place. The tension and suspense is cleverly worked and well crafted, and I have a feeling that if I watched those same scenes I would still jump up and cringe with ghastly terror. Thanks to the direction of Troy Nixey, the writing of Guillermo Del Toro and Mathew Robbins, this frightening remake will cause me to sleep with a flashlight near my bedside tonight. I highly recommend this film. If you have seen it, please let me know what you think? How did it make you feel? Did you care about any of the characters or not? 






Friday, August 12, 2011

Final Destination 5

I really enjoyed the first four films because they were typical tongue-in-cheek popcorn horror flicks filled with moments of synesthesia while commenting and targeting teenagers in a particular subculture. The narrative debuts a new director and the creator/writer will be substituted, so I do not know if the film will continue to have its flare. Shall we Glorify, Declare WAR, or Not Bother? The choice is yours.

Shark Night 3D. Is this too easy or it will it entertain?

Shark Night 3D. Shall we declare WAR, Glorify, or Not Bother?

Is Sherlock Holmes Warbound or to be Glorified?

Shall we declare War, Glorify, or Not Bother? What shall you speculate?

Monday, August 8, 2011

The Smurfs: Bland Road to War

I declare WAR on the writers of this unpolished work. The success of The Smurfs is due to the parents of this generation who are sharing their return to eighties nostalgia and grasping an innocent moment of their youth. Although The Smurfs live-action film is soft hearted with a nice theme (A dedicated father would go through any lengths to protect his family) and sub theme (Once in a Blue Moon), the film has weak, generic, and writing flaws that make the narrative feel loose and a bit unpolished. Tightening and polishing the script while giving it another revision would have created a classic and a solid boot to the live-action franchise, but the collaboration of the two writing groups felt indecisive. The Smurfs had too many cooks in the kitchen which gave rise to a bland flavored flick.  The Smurfs was directed by Raja Gosnell (Beverly Hills Chihuahua, Big Momma’s House, Scooby Doo 1&2, and Home Alone 3) and the screenplay was written by J. David Stem (Shrek 2), David N. Weiss (Shrek 2), Jay Scherick (Zookeeper), and David Ronn (Zookeeper).

The film opens up with a group of Smurfs gathering Smurf-berries from the forest while the rest of the Smurfs are preparing for the Blue Moon Festival. The Smurfs work really hard in their socialist commune known as the Smurfs Village, where they live in their iconographic mushroom architecture, singing their iconographic theme song, and wearing their iconographic Phrygian white caps and white trousers while Papa Smurf (Jonathon Winters) wears his red Phrygian cap and trousers. The Smurfs’ vocation is solely based by their archetypal personality. Jokey Smurf (Paul Reubens) works on comedic gags and pranks, Chef Smurf (Wolfgang Puck) works on the culinary delights, Brainy Smurf (Fred Armisen) is too smart for his own good, and etc.… all the while they get paid in Smurf-berries no matter how hard or how little work they do.

For example, Clumsy Smurf (Anton Yelchin) is told to stay behind or not to participate in any of the Smurfs’ activities; for fear that he will innocently mess it up or cause some sort of raucous, but will he earn an equal amount of Smurf-berries like everyone else, ergo the Marxist sociopolitical model.  Outside of the Smurfs’ Village is a society governed by medieval monarchy in a European Valley.
After performing a ritual, Papa Smurf foresees a disastrous premonition as he gazes in his cauldron that involves Clumsy and Gargamel (Hank Azaria). The premonition really worries Papa Smurf, but he does not want to alarm the other Smurfs and he pretends not to be bothered by it, and with that being said, he tells Clumsy not to go into the forest (Spoiler alert). Yes, you guessed it; Clumsy goes into the forest and leads Gargamel to the esoteric Smurfs’ Village. Where Gargamel throws Azrael (Frank Welker) through a mirrored guise of the forest just shortly after Clumsy runs through it, and begins to wreak havoc on the village as soon as he follows Azrael, destroying the mushroom houses to wrap his soiled fingers around these innocent hardworking apparitions, and as the chaos ensues the Smurfs run towards a location of safety while Clumsy misreads a sign and goes the opposite way which directs him to a magical cavern where the rising Blue Moon is activating a magical portal inside the waterfall in the cave. The portal creates an esophagus like vortex sucking up Clumsy, Smurfette (Katy Perry), Gutsy (Alan Cumming), Grouchy (George Lopez), Brainy (Fred Armisen), and Papa Smurf as they hang from a cliff, and are soon defecated out in present day New York’s Central Park. Gargamel throws Azrael in through the portal as he did prior and follows suit. Patrick Winslow (Neil Patrick Harris) a marketing guru with a knack for commercial design is preparing an ad campaign because he would like to obtain the vice president position for Odile’s (Sofia Vergara) cosmetic and anti-aging company called Angelou. Clumsy manages to get inside of Patrick’s box, and the journey begins as the Smurfs follow to rescue Clumsy. The Marxist group of Smurfs is thrown into the progressive Capitalist America as they are bombarded with advertisements when they arrive in New York’s Time Square, changing their lens as they too consume the commercialism of advertising propaganda while riding on top and using the iconographic transportation of the infamous taxicab, and slowly begin to assimilate into the hyper paced Americanism of New York City. Grace Winslow (Jayma Mays) is Patrick’s expecting wife, and after quite a fright, they soon open up their small apartment to the Smurfs. Papa Smurf does not know how long they will be staying in this foreign land, so he rations the Smurf-berries. Thanks to Google and Wikipedia, Grace and Patrick can completely trust the Smurfs because of their search on their very trusty Sony Vaio Laptop (No thanks to the very intrusive extreme close-up on the product placement). The extremely generous and kind Winslow couple helps the Smurfs to find their way back home while helping them avoid the hungry clutches of Gargamel’s greedy desire to acquire the Smurf essence. The film overall gets a C- grade from an adult perspective but a a solid B from the perspective of children, especially, from the raucous up roaring laughter that filled the theater during the slapstick comedic gags. Although the writing was sub par, the cinematic tribute to Midnight CowboySmurfette). I also liked how the Smurfs go into a bookstore to find a spell book that holds an incantation that will re-open  a portal to lead them back home. The book happens to be late Peyo's (Pierre Culliford) comic book anthology of the Smurfs, and they rummage through the book as if they have found the word of god, and in essence, it is the word of their lord and creator, Peyo. Meta-fiction at its best.

There are many unbelievable parts and shows the adult couple's level of immaturity and naivety, especially when they discover the Smurfs home invasion and intrusion. It would seem that they are saying,  “Oh look there are tiny blue people running around my house. Hmmm…I better type in their description in my search engine. Would you look at that…the computer says, ‘They are harmless.’ Okay then, fine by me.” Yes, you are that gullible. Eat up the absurdity and follow the narrative because you are just that dumb to quickly believe what just happened, but I understand that the film is geared for children and not to be so critically digested by the adult spectators that will get dragged into the theater to consume the insanity that logic and reason.
 Why does Gargamel look like Count Orlock (F.W. Murnau’s Nosferatu) down to the ratty front teeth? What is up with the injection of gross-out comedy within children and family films these days?  Let’s desensitize them more than they are. *Warning: there are some gross out scenes, but nothing too outrageous. * For example, Azrael, Gargamel’s beloved cat, vomits up a portion of Smurfette’s hair or during the posh restaurant sequence, Gargamel snatching an ice bucket from a waiter and urinating in it because he thinks that it is a chamber pot. Please tell me what you think.  If you have seen the film, what were your concerns?


Monday, August 1, 2011

Thoughts on I Am Cuba



I Am Cuba
Mikhail Kalatozov’s I Am Cuba, is a powerfully crafted narrative. The opening shot is a bird’s eye view of the ocean and pans towards the island while capturing the lush palm trees. The vast ocean is captured smashing up against the rocks on the shores. The camera stops on a white statue and the voice over commences giving rise to Christopher Columbus’ discovery of the Island, and the camera continuously goes through the city and up a sky rise where it stops and shifts to a close up of musicians atop a roof, capturing their performance, guitarist jumping up, a saxophonist dancing, and another guitarist jumps up. The camera pans over to a man holding a camera filming a group of women playing cards giving rise to self reflexivity, and panning over to an attractive woman disrobing while exposing her two piece bikini as she turns, goes into the pool, and begins to swim. The camera tracks the woman from when she was sitting on the lounge chair near the pool to when she gets up, disrobes, and steps into the pool to swim. The camera also goes into the water and captures the tourists swimming in the water as if to take the audience in for a swim.
The film cuts to a club sequence where there is a medium close up of a man performing a song while the camera captures his performance in a Dutch angle which foreshadows chaos or the psychological instability of the unbalanced characters as it tracks him through the club. The performers are wearing suits with a white mask attached to the backs of their coats with a sad expression on the masks. During the club sequence, the three Americans are depicted as chauvinists, savages, lusting animals that disrespect Cuba and her people.

The American wearing the sunglasses has a distorted view of the Cuban people as he draws exaggerated caricatures of the women that sit next to them. The bearded American is looking for a piece of Cuba that he can identify with.  The lighting and the use of shadows gives rise to contrast as well as increases the dramatic effect of the setting; especially, with the African totems dressing the set of the club sequence. The club sequence intercuts with a sequence in the street with the fruit vendor and Maria. The fruit vendor is depicted as a happy optimist that fronts his fruit cart for the revolution as he hides and passes notes to the rebellion. The vendor sings in the streets about the fruits he is selling while telling his companion Maria his dreams of marrying her, and how happy he will make her. The scene ends and cuts back to the club where Maria is wearing a black outfit adorned with a crucifix around her neck. Maria is asked to sit with the Americans, and the man wearing sunglasses draws a caricature of her face while assuring his friend the bearded American that she holds that identifiable piece that he was missing; the crucifix.

In the club Maria is known as Betty, she gets tossed around by the Americans from one to the other while the spectators laugh and cry out with their euphoric mind set, and Betty hears the beat, the beat of the drum, and she begins dancing around the African totem in a native dance, but is force to stop when the tossing around commences again. The bearded American wants to see her world, to understand her culture; he wants to see where and how she lives, so he takes a cab and escorts her home. Betty lives in a shack outside of town in a poor village. The camera is positioned in a Dutch angle as the background gives rise to German Expressionism by way of the design of the set. There is a large crucifix hanging from the head post of the metal frame while the frame looked very unbalanced. Maria takes the covers off of the bed and unfastens her crucifix, throwing it to a nearby chair. The man insists on buying her crucifix, but she looks at him in dismay. Maria sleeps with the bearded American, and in the morning he counts the money is going to pay her, when the fruit vendor opens the door abruptly, and sees the American with the money and Maria lying in bed with white sheets covering her naked body. The American exits, and the vendor looks at her in disgust.
Maria is, in a sense, a representation of Cuba while the Americans are a metaphor to the people and politicians that rape or whore Cuba for their own benefits. This is all depicted in the club sequence leading to Maria’s house and village. The Americans are staying in the posh hotel buildings of Cuba, and not in the poor village. The children are starving and begging for money while the women observe the displaced American man acting frantically as the children and people approach him.
For example, during the club sequence the American wearing the sunglasses states: “there is nothing decent about Cuba.” When he was making comments about the women and the performers, but when the Cuban performers were wearing ceremonial tribal costumes the same man states: “Now we are going to see something.” The man’s sunglasses are an allusion to the distorted view Americans have on Cuba. The man never takes them off throughout the sequence.
In the sequence with Pedro the sugar cane farmer, the narrative was very clear and linear with a montage of the exposition between Pedro buying a house, getting married, starting a family, and managing his crops. Pedro prays to Cuba to give him a healthy field of sugar cane, so that he can take care of his family, and the land provides for them, but Mr. Acosta informs Pedro that he sold the land to the United Fruit Company and that they no longer have a home, nor land to work. Pedro sends his children to the city while he burns his cash crop and home. There are a total of four sequences. Another sequence describes the suppression of students and dissenters at Havana University, and the final sequence shows how government bombing of mountain fields induced farmers to join with the rebels in the Sierra Maestro mountains. The final scene is a triumphal march into Havana to proclaim the revolution.

The film has a lot of Social Realism elements embedded within the film. There is a sequence were the Cubans rally together on top of steps and protest the government’s injustices  towards its people, like Sergei Eisenstein’s Battleship Potempkin, the steps of Odessa. The film itself tries to play off a documentary feel as if to depict the heroism of Fidel Castro’s revolution to claim Cuba in the name of the people, but the outcome was not so noble. Kalatozov’s uses four stories and interweaves them from beginning to end to add to the embedded Social Realist theme of uniting the Cuban people to ‘stand up for what is right’ (socialism) throughout the film.
Finally, I feel that the camera work by A. Calzatti and B. Brozhovsky, gave the spectators a glimpse into the lives of the Cuban worker (Fruit Vendor), the prostitute (Maria), the farmer (Pedro), the student (Enrique), the revolutionary (Mariano). Each of the stories were strong enough to stand on their own, but keeping the connection, one can see the effectiveness of the continuity editing, the avant garde camera angles and panning, the montage, and the strong story-telling that made this film a powerful narrative.
Yes, the film has huge propaganda qualities to show the heroism and risks that Fidel Casto took to overtake Cuba with socialist ideologies, but the film at times did not feel as blatant as the other Russian films such as Circus or Ballad of a Soldier, and the film captures a longing for freedom amongst the people of Cuba. The film stands alone, and can be studied for its technical genius and structure. The film was produced in the 1964, but the techniques that were utilized were very advanced. The film was ahead of its time and so was Kalatozov. I will leave you with this stunning quote from the poet Yevgeni Yevtushenko, sums up the film’s provocative nature:
"Don't avert your eyes. Look! I am Cuba. For you, I am the casino, the bar, hotels and brothels. But the hands of these children and old people are also me"
-- Yevgeni Yevtushenko

Thoughts on 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days



Four Months, Three Weeks, and Two Days till the Birth of Death
Although abortion is a taboo topic in many nations as well as it is illegal in others; the controversial subject is very real, and to capture it on film would adhere to Bazin’s ontological theories. Ontology is the study of the nature of being, and according to Bazin the art of cinema is through reality. Bazin outlined the ontological foundations of the art of cinema in his magazine the Cahiers du Cinema (Cinema Notebooks). Cristian Mungiu creates a world in which the audience is quickly engaged and immersed in the lives of Gabita and Otilia, and Mungiu adheres to Bazin’s ontological theories through his long takes, the capture of impoverished characters, deep focus, and minimalistic cuts; to capture the space and the illusion of real time. In Ladri di Biciclette and Umberto D by Vittorio De Sica, two very powerful neo-realistic films and tearjerkers about the poverty in Italy, after World War II. De Sica’s characters are very heart felt and honest while the people around them push the characters to the very edge of sanity and judgment of values, but as sad and as powerful as these films are; they are not tragic unlike the film by Mungiu. Mungui uses the classic theories of Bazin as well as inspired shots of De Sica, to captivate and capture a very powerful subject matter, and the emotional rollercoaster of the decision to abort the birth of a child; due, to an unwanted pregnancy.

In Four Months, Three Weeks, and Two Days by Cristian Mungiu, fulfills Bazin’s theory of “Cinema pur (pure cinema),” because the issues of an unplanned pregnancy and then the decision of abortion with a back alley logic; is not only powerful, but utterly disturbing. The subject matter and the lives of the characters create a spectacle of epic proportion. Mungiu’s technique of hand held camera use is extraordinary because of his long unflinching takes and slow paced tracking to capture every minor as well as major detail, but Mungiu uses limited cutting to capture the sense of time. He also uses the close up to maximize the focus of certain objects. For example, in Four Months, Three Weeks, and Two Days, Otilia opens Mr. Bebe’s suitcase and the camera is zoomed in on the instruments in the case, and she pulls out a switchblade; popping out the blade, she tries to push it back in, and she takes it because Mr. Bebe has returned from the restroom. In that scene one begins to wonder what kind of doctor, Mr. Bebe is, if he is a doctor at all or just a street thug.
The decision made by an impoverished female scholar to abort her child, and even though, the tragic death of an unwanted child is documented within the narrative; the camera seems like it is breathing and alive because it is handheld. The audience feels like they are traveling with the characters or like hidden voyeurs trapped in the room with Otilia and Gabita with the time that is set and even though, the camera’s wide angle lens picks up the entire space of the dorm or space of the room; one gets a sense of claustrophobia. In the following passage Bazin discusses how the camera is a nonliving agent that is used only to capture and reproduce the moment in time and space:
For the first time, between the originating object and its reproduction there intervenes only the instrumentality of a nonliving agent. For the first time, the image of the world is formed automatically, without the creative intervention of man…All the arts are based on the presence of man, only photography derives an advantage from his absence. Photography affects us like a phenomenon in nature, like a flower or a snowflake whose vegetable or earthly origins are an inseparable part of their beauty (What is Cinema?, p. 13).”
Bazin seems to be rationalizing the use of technology to capture reality on film in the above passage. Although Bazin struggles with the idea of technology and its advancements; he will never truly know how his theories on pure cinema and ontology have evolved as well as the advancement of technology to capture the aesthetic value of contemporary neo-realism. Technology strives for advancement to capture the description of reality through binary information like the media of High Definition and Digital stream, for example. Film is very honest, since the technique of its reproduction and replication was analogue, but technology has advanced into a realm of digital. The true performance that used to be recorded is now a clear description, and not of the actual, but this does not hinder or take away from the production of Mungiu’s film, rather, it has in some way enhanced the quality of the film while maintaining the integrity of Bazin’s vision of naturalism and neo-realism.
Mungiu’s film is very honest in the way he uses the classical theories of neo-realism and how he uses modern instruments to film its contemporary evolution. In the following passage by Bazin, he explains the validity and credibility of the photograph, and how the art of photography: “The objective nature of photography confers on it a quality of credibility absent from all other picture-making…We are forced to accept as real the existence of the object reproduced, actually represented, set before us that is to say, in time and space. Photography enjoys a certain advantage in virtue of this transference of reality from the thing to its reproduction” (What is Cinema?, p. 13). Bazin almost feels cheated if not for the evidence of photography; since it gives him a sense of verisimilitude. Bazin seems to be in search of honesty and truth with what he digests visually as well as the oratorical within the narrative of a film. Bazin wants to relive the moments with the characters with the setting and stage of reality. In Four Months, Three Weeks, and Two Days, the space feels tight and smothering. A lot of natural depth of field and deep focus is captured with the bird’s eye of the street; capturing, Otilia as she runs towards the train station, or the medium close up of Otilia and her boyfriend Ardi sitting on a window sill of a hallway while other college students walking up the flight of stairs fill the space of the background, and since the camera is capturing both of the main characters, the banister of the stairs in the background, and the depth of the hallway; the audience gets a sense of the size of the space. The scene is very small and yet very important because Otilia needs to borrow money from Ardi (her boyfriend), and at the same time Ardi needs Otilia to return the favor by picking up flowers for his mother since it is her birthday. The scene prepares the audience for the locations of her Otilia’s journey and more of the character’s personality traits are exposed.
The main characters of the film are very poor, hustling for a pack of smokes and borrowing money while living in a dorm at a college in post communist Romania. Bazin discusses the validity of communism in The Bicycle Thief in this following passage: “Its social message is not detached, it remains immanent in the event, but it is so clear that nobody can overlook it, still less take exception to it, since it never made explicitly a message” (What is Cinema? Vol. II, p. 51). Bazin explains how De Sica has captured the impoverish nation of Italy after World War II through the scenery of the streets and the workmen, and how they go about their lives to survive. Mungiu’s vision of post communist Romania is using the same principles as De Sica and as Bazin explained in his guidelines for ontology in cinema. Otilia and Gabita trade household goods like Nescafe for cigarettes or give their neighbors powdered milk to feed some cats; these characters are poor but they are also surviving, and they borrow money and repay it with the money they earn from grants. In the following passage, Andrew explains how camera is merely an instrument to record the events and the use of technology to create art as the audience perceives it to be:  “We view cinema as we view reality but not because of the way it looks (it may look unreal) but because it was recorded mechanically. This inhuman portrait of the world intrigues us and makes of cinema and photography not the media of man but the media of nature” (Andrew, p.138). The media of nature is nothing more than a tool to capture it in time and space, but of only that moment that is trapped on the celluloid. The aesthetics of reality are captured and then played back so that others may indulge in that experience, but film is limited to the time that it has been used to record; sure, one can replay the event over and over again to relive that moment, but then reality loses its meaning every time the image and/or moment is played back. In the following passage by Andrew, he discusses how the audience perceives and intake the feelings of cinema: “With cinema, then, we are struck by two kinds of realistic feelings. First, cinema records the space of objects and between objects. Second, it does so automatically, that is, inhumanly” (Andrew, p.139). In the above passage Andrew clearly conveys the perception of realism in cinema. The brain reacts to the objects and images and places the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle into place to create meaning and understanding. No stone is left unturned; especially with the Mungiu’s film. The slow pace and long takes feed the the mind of the audience as well as fulfills the Bazin’s theories of his ontological guidelines. The time of the moment is not as natural or as spontaneous as the first time one immerses oneself in that captured moment of time and space, but rather fooling oneself for the sake of the illusion of self gratification and immersion of a false sense of reality. What is captured is pure for that moment, but the purity is lost the spectator who returns to the same reproduction of the same moment. That is the beauty of neo-realistic cinema. Before one sees the film a moment of anticipation and wonder arises, even during the spectacle of watching the film, but after the same feeling and sense of surprise is gone, but not of the experience.

That is why I disagree to a certain extent with what Andre Bazin on his arguments of realism, surrealism, and the use of montage, but I can grasp what he is trying to show with his arguments as well as an appreciation for what he has written. There are aesthetic values in his clarity and visions of ontology in cinema. One can only wonder what he would think if he were alive to see the genius of contemporary neo-realism such as the work of Four Months, Three Weeks, and Two Days by Cristian Mungiu.


Works Cited
Bazin, Andre. “The Ontology of the Photographic Image” and “The Evolution of the Language
Of Cinema,” Film Theory and Criticism. Ed. Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen. Oxford:
Oxford UP, 2004.
Bazin, Andre. “Bicycle Thief,” What is Cinema? Vol. II. Trans Hugh Gray. Berkely: UC Press,
1971.
Bazin, Andre. “Umberto D,” What is Cinema? Vol. II. Trans Hugh Gray. Berkely: UC Press,
1971.
Andrew, J. Dudley. The Major Film Theories. New York:
Oxford University Press. 1976.

Thoughts on Eraserhead



In Heaven…
Although Eraserhead by David Lynch, is a horrific tale of coming to terms with fatherhood, and loneliness with themes of: family, premarital sex, wedlock, infidelity, abortion, child birth, and murder; Erasehead has chauvinistic undertones, values the blue collar worker, and the oneiric landscapes inside Henry’s apartment mystifies and capture the viewer’s attention that pulls them into the narrative as well as focuses on the imagery. Lynch’s interpretation of the oneiric experience is almost that of lucidity, since the main character (Henry) has his eyes wide open when he sleeps while Mary X (Henry’s girlfriend) sleeps with her eyes closed. Henry is in search with a spiritual meaning and purpose to (and for) his life while living in a post apocalyptic universe known as Philadelphia. The hero’s journey begins with the spiritual, like that of King Arthur’s quest for the Holy Grail (A very twisted version, but spiritual none-the-less). The desire for spirituality is vividly expressed by Henry’s escape to the woman in the radiator; during his daydreams. David Lynch’s uses Film as an instrument to capture his world of surrealistic expression.

In Eraserhead, Lynch’s portrayal of Mary X is that of a weak, timid, seductive, controlling, baby producing trapper; that ruins Henry Spencer’s life. He is a blue collar worker for a printing company, and he was on vacation. A vacation that was cut short when Henry found out that his girlfriend Mary X had an abnormal premature mutation. A mutation named Junior. Henry had to get married and help rear the little mutated child.  Mary, afraid of her mother as well as motherhood, looks down and crosses her arms when she is around her mother. Mary, when confronted with becoming a mother, leaves in desperation back to her parents, and leaving Henry and the child to fend for themselves. A contradiction to Mary’s values occurs; even though, she wants to get away and seems to be happy living with Henry, she returns to the place that she wants to escape from. Her actions paint a picture of immaturity as well as the contradiction.
When the audience is introduced to Mary; she sits anxiously looking out of her post apocalyptic home in an industrial area of Philadelphia. The house is in a desolate part of the industrial town, and Mary sits on the window sill spying out the window. Henry pulls a note out of his pocket while Mary stares out into the darkness from the window. Mary X tells Henry that he is late and Henry retorts “I made it, didn’t I?” Mary introduces Henry to her mother and the mother begins to ask him questions about what type of work he does and what is he doing at the moment while Mary who is very timid at that moment; begins to have an epileptic seizure.
In Eraserhead, Lynch manipulates time and space. In the beginning of the film, a black planet with a man sitting by a broken glass window mans the levers which suck up a fetal looking object from Henry’s mind and into a pool on the planet while lying down with his eyes open. Henry (the main character of the film) wears a suit with a pocket protector filled with pens walks through an Industrial part of Philadelphia holding a paper bag filled with groceries. Henry checks his mail box for any correspondence; notices nothing, and walks to his room. An attractive woman across from Henry tells him that a girl named Mary had called, and that Mary needed too get a hold of him. Henry thanks her, and enters his apartment. Henry places his groceries on top of a sideboard, and turns on some music on his record player. Taking off his socks and placing them on the radiator, he stares at the floor looking at the textured shag under the radiator. In the following passage by the French Surrealist Group discusses how the subconscious mind perceives the contradictions of reality and how it manipulates to rationalize the meaning in the world of the absurd:“Everything tends to make us believe that there exists a certain point of the mind at which life and death, the real and the imagined, past, and future, the communicable and the incommunicable, high and low, cease to be perceived as contradictions” (Second Manifesto of Surrealism, pp. 123-4). This is true; especially, in Eraserhead.  David Lynch manipulates the phobia of fatherhood with black humor. For example, in Eraserhead, there is a scene where the mutated premature child is crying; Henry inserts a thermometer into the child’s mouth (Seeming to be normal), turns around, and the child is covered in boils while Henry replies, “I guess you are sick?” The infant became ill after Henry inserts the thermometer. So, Henry sets up a humidifier and an ice pack over the child. Henry invites his female neighbor into his apartment while the baby is there. She asks him where his wife is and then she asks him if it would be alright to stay the night. She does and they have sex in front of the baby.  In the center of the bed they are immersed in milk where they fornicate. These scenes are absurd and can only be rationalized and reasoned in a world that is oneiric. For example, when Henry wakes up to Mary sprouting out fetuses, and Henry while shocked kept pulling out fetuses from between her legs. Henry began to throw the fetuses against the walls, and the fetuses’ head would splatter, or when the Father is introduced and he lets them all know that dinner is ready, and if Henry would do the honors of carving the chicken. Mr. X hands Henry the knife and fork and Henry holds the knife and fork over the chicken; the chicken’s wings and legs begin to move while ooze seeps out between its thighs and Mrs. X begins to salivate and have an orgasm at the table. Mrs. X runs to the kitchen. Henry is ambushed by Mrs. X and is interrogated if he had premarital sex with her daughter. She also begins to kiss Henry on the neck. Henry tells her that, that information is none of her business, but she spits back that Mary just had a premature baby and as soon as they get married they can pick up the child. Henry is shocked and dumfounded. They pick up the child and Henry feels like a complete family, but arriving into his apartment he stares off into the radiator and he sees a stage before snapping out of his daydream, due to the baby’s cries. At night a storm wakes up the baby and he begins to cry, and Mary cannot sleep and she leaves to her mothers. Henry stares at the radiator once more after Mary leaves and the stage returns. An alien like woman with really big cheeks dances on the stage doing a shuffle while fetuses are falling onto the stage. The woman in the radiator then steps on a fetus and does the same to the right of her. When Henry wakes up from his dream Mary begins convulsing in her sleep; only to find Mary giving birth to more of the same mutations.

During the splattering of the premature fetal mutants, the audience is wrenching in disgust and is overwhelmed with sympathy and empathy with Henry. The audience is experiencing synaesthesia; due to the immersion of the narrative. Lynch’s shocking imagery of Henry killing his son with a pair of scissors; throws the audience into the very face of fear. The film expresses an extreme fear of becoming and being a parent through this metaphorical oneiric landscape. In the following passage, Balazs discusses how the imagery is processed through psyche: “We have learnt to integrate single disjointed pictures into a coherent scene, without even becoming conscious of the complicated psychological processes involved. We have also acquired the ability to interpret picture metaphors and picture symbols that convey situations and emotions indirectly” (Balazs, 1952 edition, p. 30-35). The imagery in the scene is very extreme, but the message is very clear. Even though, Henry murders his children; he will find salvation in Heaven.  In Un Chien Andalou (1929) by Luis Bunuel, the opening scene is very extreme and shocking; a woman sits in a barber’s chair only to get her eye sliced open by a straight razor. Bunuel also juxtaposes the images of the eye being sliced with clouds moving through the moon to symbolize the slice. Brunnius explains how film is the perfect medium and how the camera is the perfect instrument to capture the world of dreams, in the following passage: “Contrary to theatre, film, like thought, like the dream, chooses some gestures, defers or enlarges them, eliminates others, travels many hours, centuries, kilometers in a few seconds, speeds up, slows down, stops, goes backwards . It is impossible to imagine a truer mirror of mental performance.” (Brunnius, ‘Crossing the Bridge’, q.v.). Brunnius’s quote captures the elements of cinema can be used as an instrument to manipulate and evoke the subconscious mind. Just like Man Ray would use different techniques to entertain himself while watching a boring film. In the following passage by Paul Hammond, he discusses what Man Ray’s techniques were: “Man Ray used to transform any film that bored him by blinking rapidly, making a grill with his fingers, covering his eyes with a semi-transparent cloth, even wearing a pair of prism spectacles he had made himself’ (Hammond, pg. 10). Man Ray’s techniques are very interesting, and using his theories to increase the interest of the spectator; can be a useful tool when creating a surreal film/art. Lynch uses a similar technique when he cuts his film. Instead of showing the audience a simple cut, a wipe, or a black screen; Lynch uses milk traveling back to the edges of the frame or doors open to introduce the following scene.

The audience is immersed in the narrative as well as the dark aesthetic qualities of his post apocalyptic universe. The woman in the radiator is Henry’s guardian Angel, and after slaughtering the conscious ego of the audience; everyone experiences salvation as well as closure, and the characters (Henry and the woman in the radiator) are bathed in white light as if their sins have been wiped clean because in heaven, everything is fine.


Works Cited
Andrew, J. Dudley. The Major Film Theories. New York:
Oxford University Press. 1976.
Bunuel, Luis. “Cinema, Instrument Poetry,” The Shadow and Its Shadow.
Ed. Paul Hammond. London: British Film Institute, 1978.
Goudal, Jean. “Surrealism and Cinema,” The Shadow and Its Shadow.
Ed. Paul Hammond. London: British Film Institute, 1978.
The French Surrealist Group. “Manifesto of the Surrealist’s Concerning L’Age d’Or,”
The Shadow and Its Shadow. Ed. Paul Hammond. London: British Film Institute, 1978.
Hammond, Paul. “Off at a Tangent,” The Shadow and Its Shadow.
Ed. Paul Hammond. London: British Film Institute, 1978.
Eraserhead. Dir. David K. Lynch. Perf. Jack Nance, Charlotte Stewart, Allen Joseph, and Jeanne
Bates. Absurda. 1977.
Hoffman, Alison. Eisenstein BB and Day Six: Power Point. Beach Board
Accessed on 17 Nov. 2008.

Friday, July 29, 2011

Disney/Pixar Cars 2



Disney/ Pixar's Cars 2, wow…what a theatrical let down? Look, before I get started on why this film needed to have gone straight to video, I want to start by saying, “Rest in peace, Joe Ranft (3/13/1960-8/16/2005).” Joe Ranft’s creative contributions will surely be missed and it definitely shows in Cars 2 because Joe’s inner child and creative sense of humor lacks in this production. Joe Ranft was the creative backbone behind Pixar and his sprinkle of innocence that he added would push the envelope of charm that this animation giant once had, but one can get a sense of what it lacks from Cars 2. Even though, Larry the Cable Guy is the voice behind Tow Mater, Joe Ranft created this goofy character and there was a particular vision that was envisioned by Ranft.
Cars 2, directed and story by John Lasseter, Brad Lewis, and story by Ron Fogelman while Ben Queen wrote the script (your eyes do not deceive you, yes; it took three guys to create the story and one to turn it into a screenplay. I just love seeing my name in credits, don’t you?). That is a whole lot of brains colliding if you ask me, but they came together to force comedic scenes of slapstick humor as well as inspector Jacques Clouseau (Pink Panther) bungling while in a 007-esque espionage façade. Kudos, to that mouthful, let’s not forget the magical theme of friendship, so don’t change who you are to impress strangers; just be yourself (I know you’re feeling my sarcastic tone right about now, but it gets better). I like animation with a moral theme and good values, but I think they already had a full plate, and the narrative suffered a bit from it. What did you expect when they try to jam environmentalist themes down our gullets? We were fed plenty in Wall-E, UP, and Toy Story 3. Let the audience eat more with Cars 2…RALPH! I like the idea of having a clean environment, but this can all be done with PSAs (Public Service Announcements), and Disney/Pixar can lead the campaign to healthier you, anti-animal cruelty, toay donation, clean water, immaculate skies, recycled garbage, alternative fuels, and solar energy, but wait, free doesn’t pay the bills, so let’s cram it in a 112min. movie that way mom and dad are forced to see it, and the kids can say, “Look Ma and Pa, we have to do something about our environment.” Thank you Disney/Pixar as if I don’t already chew the air we breathe here in Los Angeles. How many years did it take you guys to figure that out? I would never have known to by a hybrid vehicle or an electric one if it was not for Cars 2, gee thanks a mill or should I say you’re welcome for the millions you have earned at the box office, merchandise, and upcoming video release. Cheers!
The film gets a C- at best, but had it gone straight to video then I would have graded it a B- because it is slow to the start, but gains momentum towards something palpable. Some of the gags were subpar and (dare I say it) cute, but not strong enough to keep the attention span of my children and I read into it deeply. I will not declare WAR on this film, but I will tell those not to bother going to the theater to see it because it is an over-priced experience, but if you decide to rent it or catch it on cable, then by all means. You will be entertained at a slow pace.
The plot is a bit thin as well. Our hero Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) (Yippy, go NASCAR!) is on vacation, and decides to visit Sally (Bonnie Hunt) and his BFF (Best Friends Forever) Mater (Larry the Cable Guy). Lightning McQueen spends the day with his buddy Mater, but he wants to spend the evening with Sally as they have planned a dinner date. Mater becomes the third wheel and he tries to do whatever it takes to spend time with his BFF. Mater pretends to be a waiter and goes into the bar to order their drinks when he looks up at the TV screen and sees Miles Axelrod (Eddie Izzard) interviewing Francesco Bemoulli (John Turturro). Francesco calls out McQueen on national television and Mater calls into the show and defends his friend (*HINT* friendship theme). This gives rise to McQueen accepting the challenge where he and Mater go to Japan. Meanwhile, the international lemons and clunkers of the world are devising to do away with alternative fuel and increase the trade of fossil fuels, since they own the world’s largest untapped oil reserve, and they are in the works to add new modified parts to help them last longer as they will control the prices. They lemons have found a chemical imbalance within the alternative fuel which causes the car engines to ignite and blow up with an electromagnetic heat ray disguised as a television camera, so as the cars race along the track the clunkers zoom in on the cars with the view finder and activate the targeted cars (stunning isn’t it).
However, the action sequences with Finn McMissle (Michael Caine) are pretty cool and entertaining, especially, the Michael Bay explosions (Woo Hoo), and they definitely remind me of James Bond and how much more entertaining it would be to be watching a James Bond movie. Francesco’s character is colorful and his lines are quite humorous, so in that sense it was not all bad. It is a warm hearted film that pays tribute to all our favorite Spy Flicks, but its strength would have been greater in the world of video instead of the theater, and with that I leave you to tell me your thoughts of the film? Do you agree or disagree? Let down your thoughts. Until next time, see you around the magic lantern.

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Captain America gets the Glory!




Avengers Assemble! This film needs to be glorified! Jack Kirby and Joe Simon would be amazed to see their hero (they created Captain America in 1941) in all his glory. I will have to admit that this film exceeded my expectations, especially, after seeing the horrible Captain America (two part television movie from 1979) or the Roger Corman-esque low budget Captain America, directed by Albert Pyun (released Dec. 14th, 1990). Chris Evans performance is believable and his remarkable likeness to the comic book hero is uncanny; he was well casted for this role. Captain America: The First Avengers, directed by Joe Johnston, written by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely pays an amazing tribute to the creators of Captain America and the fans. Now, this is a true family movie, a film that my family and I could watch without covering the eyes of my children or hesitation. Sure there were some moments where there was use of foul language by Colonel Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones), but it was part of the character’s personality and it was not too offensive. The editing is clean and smooth. For example, there is a scene where Captain America (Chris Evans) is going to be mooned by a soldier as he is about to pull his pants down, the scene cuts away to the USO girls walking on stage. The technique of suggestion was a wise choice. Although the narrative was not compelling, thought provoking, or an extreme work of art. The narrative is very entertaining, definitely a fun popcorn movie that interweaves the other Marvel Superhero sagas like: Thor, Iron Man, and Iron Man 2, for the upcoming Avengers movie. (Definitely stay after the credits, so that you can see the unofficial trailer for the Avengers)
During the opening of the film sequence, the shot with the group of explorers walking up to an unidentifiable object seemed very classic, and that directorial approach caused me to follow along the camera pan with my eyes towards the object and slowly pull me in. An explorer slides down a rope after a laser drill cuts a circular hole through the ice with a turquoise beam of light. After the second explorer slides down, they creep through the hull of what seems to be some type of aerospace craft. They walk up towards a chair and brush off some snow off of what seemed to be a block of ice, and they notice an object inside the block, it would seem to be Captain America’s shield, then the film cuts to a flashback. I do not want to ruin the movie for any of you, especially, going in and dissecting scene after scene, spoiler after spoiler, but these series of shots really captivated and kept me in the movie.
The flashback sequence of the 1940s was really cool too, and I liked the fact that they kept that 1940s dialogue approach, making the world seem more authentic as well as the sets were dressed to look like the forties, and the characters were dressed in forties couture, and the cars were that of the 1940s models. The juxtaposition of the science fiction technology of the future with technology of the forties, gave rise to the age old argument of modern versus post modern ideology of the fifties and sixties. The dream of the flying car, rocket ships, microwave ovens, and televisions as well as the Stark Industry’s World Expo sponsored by Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) which was alluded to in Iron Man 2. The Expo scene introduces Howard Stark as a playboy like his son Tony and (in later sequences) also gives rise to his reckless nature. I would have to add that the scenes where the characters are watching the military propaganda before the featured film of the era were a nice touch. What I really enjoyed was the introduction of the Howlin’ Commandos, seeing them in action was like seeing them pop out of the comic-book pages. If you definitely want to check out a family flick that everyone can enjoy then check out Captain America: The First Avenger, neither your wallet nor your family should be disappointed.  The film makes one feel proud to be an American as well as patriotic. Nothing is more American than creating a hopped up super-soldier on steroids to fight a bunch of bullies while saving the ideals of freedom. Three cheers for the underdog or should I say, the little guy. This flick had a little bit of Americana, but the apple pie. What did you think about the film?