header image
 

The Death of Bonnie and Clyde: Film Analysis

The Dramatic deaths of the notorious duo, Bonnie and Clyde, was a very interesting scene. Though brief, it conveyed to us many things in the way it was shot. The scene was a piece of cinematographic gold, even though at the time of its release many had mixed feelings. Time magazine had even written a review that derided it(though, changed in a later issue).

The scene starts with the duo driving down a road to avoid the cops, when they see Ivan on the side of the road. They then pull over to see what’s troubling him when suddenly birds fly out from the trees, followed by a hell-storm of bullets that put an end to Bonnie and Clyde’s escapades. The camera shots used for this scene were very quick, only staying on a single thing for less then a second. However, the shots still hold a great deal of significance inside. For instance, the use of the birds flying out from the trees is a great way of informing us to an immediate danger. This comes from the idea of an animal’s ability to sense when something is wrong. Another two shots that hold great meaning are the close up of Bonnie and the medium close up of Clyde. In these two shots we see the duo look to each other with a waterfall of emotion. We see from this, that they know of their imminent death, as well as the love between them.

The part that caused many mixed feelings was the very last part of this scene, where the shooters step out from the bushes and stand next to the bodies of Bonnie and Clyde until they fade out. Many feel cheated at this ending but it really tells more than what they think. The utter silence that follows the scene creates a unique atmosphere. The lack of mourning or any real emotion conveys to us the truth about Bonnie and Clyde. That truth was that they were criminals and murderers, and that you can only run so far. It wakes us up to the reality that they were in the wrong and deserved no dramatic funeral or anything of that nature. The fade out used to close the film also helps to paint this picture. It helps us to try and realize that there is nothing more to be said.

In Reality Bonnie and Clyde were both in their car when the shooting occurred. However this was changed though for Dramatic reasons in order to capture more emotion between the two. Also on the tombstone of Bonnie Parker is written, “As the flowers are all made sweeter by the sunshine and the dew, So this old world is made brighter by the lives of folks like you.” This quote was presented in film in this scene as well when we are shown the Birds fly directly past a clear sky with the sun shinning bright.

Despite what critics once said, this scene hold great importance and was displayed quite elegantly. Its use of symbolism and shots created such a memorable scene. It reminds us of the reality of Bonnie and Clyde, that you can never run away for ever. Also the fact that the characters we have grown to like throughout the film, are nothing more then murderers and criminals and that this was their unavoidable fate. So overall, the death scene is beautifully captured and very deep in its briefness.

Is this really art?

Last class we viewed a handful of films that fall under the category of Experimental/Avant-garde. From this hand full, only a couple seemed good to me. The film, Go Go Go was a great idea; it showed us around New York city, giving us a perfect feel of what it feels like to be there. The sped up motion complimented this quite nicely, representing the hustle and bustle in the city. This was a true work of art by presenting a BIG idea into such a small package successfully.

But Like I said earlier, not all were so well made in my opinion. Meshes of the Afternoon, though very interesting, was a film that really just went too far. The cinematography was very well done creating a steady stream of visuals that really gets you to pay attention; however this alone can’t hide the fact that it seems like a random collection of ideas jammed into a nicely rapped package. I feel there comes a point with Abstract projects where it loses its meaning and just becomes nothing. This film, although not my favorite, doesn’t take the cake.

Mothlight… Hmmmm where to begin with this one. Let’s start with the fact that this man is clearly on something. This “film” is in no way, shape, or form a piece of art to me. All this “film” was, was pieces of dead moths(a clear sign of mental problems) and leaves, glued onto a piece of film. Without being directly told what all of this is suppose to mean, we would have no clue as to what the point was….. at all. Art needs to be able to express one’s ideas into something that people can actually extract them from(keep in mind there’s always room for different interpretations). So to conclude, let me just say this: I’m a fan of art and I respect it but just because one person says something is art doesn’t make it true, and that goes for me as well.

Jump cuts: Love ’em or hate ’em?

Now let’s start things off by saying how enjoyable the film Breathless was. It was a very intriguing story with some great humor. However, the film utilizes jump cuts, which I have mixed feeling towards. At first it was very disorienting and made me lose track of things from time to time. So during the first half of the film I became very sore about it. But come the later half, the jump cuts became lessĀ  noticeable(or rather less and less disorienting). at the very end of the film I found that my opinion on it had changed for the better but I found that my reaction to jump cuts were still undecided. I thought to myself, “Did jump cuts help create the atmosphere in the film that I enjoyed?” or, “Are jump cuts unnecessary in progressing plot and just get less noticeable as the film goes on?” This post is a short one because I’m looking for comments on whether or not you guys liked jump cuts and why. I’m at end of my rope on this and require assistance!

everyday life doesn’t really interest me

The films Umberto D, early summer, and Panther Panchali are about the lives of some characters in everyday life and we watch them struggle through it. Now to me, this doesn’t really scream excitement and quite frankly, can be down right unbearable to sit through. The longer these films are dragged out the less and less I seem to care about the characters.

Now I could never really say that these movies didn’t have any effect on me at all because that would be a lie. I admit that some parts from each film had me pulled into the story. For example, the search for Flike left me on the very edge(but that’s cause I love puppies)! The problem was that there was too much of “nothing” in the movies. There would be such a long gap before anything of any importance to the plot would happen. And in the case of Panther Panchali, those long gaps were increased exponentially due to the films length.

Overall it was not very pleasant to sit and watch(especially in those seats, cause they are very uncomfortable). These movies are just not the type for me, plain and simple, but that doesn’t mean they’re trash. I see movies as an escape from reality to see something new and exciting. That’s why everyday life is a let down to see in a film.

True Horror

The concept of how to make a great “Horror” movie has been debated over and over and over and over…. well you get my point. Personally, I feel the use of “hard-core” Gore is a tactic only amateur director would use. All it does is created over dramatic scenes that are so far from reality. If you really want to scare me, then work towards creating something that can really happen. Now, this doesn’t mean that movies like “Chucky” or “Nightmare on Elm Street” aren’t scary because its hard to believe, but with them you can always say to yourself, “it’s only a movie.”

The Movie “Psycho” is a Fabulous example of how you don’t need to create something paranormal to really scare you. Let’s just look at what exactly there was that frightened us with this movie: We have a run down, secluded motel, and a shy, awkward man who supposedly lived alone with his mother. Now you’re probably saying to yourself right now, “How could this be scary!?” Under normal circumstances no, it isn’t scary, but its up to the director, actors, writers, and everyone else involved to create something that penetrates us to the very core of our fears. This movie(mainly because of the time it was made in) had no “gore”, yet it was able to get under our skin because of how well it was made and the fact that its something that can very well happen to you.

This is why gore should only really be used as an added effect to something that is scary already. It does have an effect on us, making us uneasy and grossed out; however, there is a thick line that separates those reactions with genuine fear. Sadly though, my generation and generations after have developed a need for gore in order to keep focus on the movie, otherwise they’d just tune out. As I conclude let me just say once again, gore is not bad, but its how well you incorporate it a movie that creates a great Horror Film

Film Analysis

The scene I chose to look into comes from the movie “Citizen Kane.” The film is about a man’s rise to fame and tragic fall. However, no matter who tells the story of Charles Foster Kane, we never truly see what kind of man he was. One man in particular is responsible for the start of this mystery, and that man is Walter Parks Thatcher. The scene I will breakdown will show just what kind of an effect Thatcher’s life, ambitions, and teachings led to in the end.

The scene opens to Reporter Jerry Thompson entering a large, empty room with a statue of Thatcher and a lone desk beneath it where a woman is sitting. The lighting is dim, and all we can see is the silhouettes of the characters. This setting shows the emptiness in Thatcher’s life. It provides a picture of an unfulfilled life, not in the sense of wealth, but in meaning. The dim lighting goes on to add an extra sense of mystery as well. Also the use of depth follows up the idea of a empty life, by expanding the room by a much larger degree.

As Jerry asks to see Thatcher’s records, we hear a cold and unattached tone coming from the woman. This tone adds the sense of unfamiliarity and distance the relationship between the woman and Thatcher. In other words, it further disconnects any character with a sense of morning for Thatcher. The next part of the scene leads Jerry into yet another large dimly lit, empty room with on table in the center. On their way, we hear an echo of their feet hitting the floor towards the door of the room. This echo is meant to tell us that the room is completely empty; meaning that even though we can only see a portion of the room, the rest is still just as empty.

Not only does this show what Thatcher’s life was like, but it also gives us a first hand look at what Charles Foster Kane’s life was like. In the following scenes we are shown that Thatcher grew to be a “father” figure to Kane, for the most part. That is that many of Thatcher’s concepts were rubbed off onto Kane himself, even though we see that they don’t see eye to eye. It is the idea of emptiness that is shared between Kane and Thatcher that we are presented in this scene.

Although this scene plays no real significance to the main plot, it helps us grasp a deeper understanding into the mind of Mr. Kane. A man of Mystery, shrouded in darkness, and hollowed out inside, that is Mr. Kane true identity. The scene is meant to start this concept in our minds as the rest of the film chisels it out into a complete work of art, that is Charles Foster Kane.

I’m jumping on this before anyone else

Okay so what’s the worst movie ever created? I’ll tell you, it’s called “The Room.” Now I’m sure you’ve either seen it or heard stories about it., so I know its not something very obscure. This movie is the definition of what not to do in making a film. From Poor acting to a down right horrible plot. Tommy Wiseau and many good thoughts about filming in his head but completely failed at displaying them in a manner understandable to a human being.

One little thing that he wanted to do was have a side story for just about every main character in the film. Now if done correctly, it opens our minds to a truer sense of what the film is about and the different views of others. What he got was a bunch of jumbled up, pointless scenes that showed us very little about the characters. For instance, the scene when Danny(or Denny or Dinny or whatever his name actually was) was confronted by the drug dealer demanding money for drugs he bought, was confusing and just frustrating to watch(though very funny at the same time). Before seeing this scene we are given NO clue as to what Danny’s life is like, let alone anything about his character. With no identity, we the audience feel Bathos rather than Pathos, when Danny is put into a conflict.

Another Side Story is that of lisa’s mother. We are meant to see her as Lisa’s consoler; however what we see is some senile hag who constantly repeats herself and says nothing of relevance to the major plot. In one scene she even says that she just found out she had cancer, yet this topic is never once mentioned latter in the film. This little fact again, only creates Bathos for us. Wiseau’s attempts at a great story fell on deaf ears. Again, I must say that this is a brief summary of SOME of the problems found in this film. please feel free to add any other flawed(or just funny) parts t this movie below.

Star Wars: Why the Prequel Trilogy sucks

Alright, we all know Star Wars, whether we’ve seen it or not(that goes for you Matt). Now I’m writing this to vent out my rage caused by the disgrace of the last 3 movies made. They suck. And I don’t mean that as a Star Wars fan, I mean that in the way that they are not well written… at all.It’s like George Lucas lost his mind completely!

Let me try not to go too far with this rant, so we’ll start withe the idea of character development. The first 3 movies had cool(Han Solo), lovable(Chewie), and relatable(Luke) characters. Who does the Prequel trilogy have? Padme? Anakin? Jar Jar? These characters aren’t good to say the least! Padme isn’t even known until the end of the 1st movie and is only seen from time to time in the other movies. If you try to think of how to describe Padme’s character, you’ll find it near impossible. There’s no development! As far as Anikan goes, he’s not really relatable in any sense, nor cool or lovable. All he does is whine, that’s it! Now Luke whined a lot in a New Hope, but he grew up! That’s something Anikan failed completely to do. Now Jar Jar….. let’s not even touch that one, lest my eyes and ears start to bleed while typing ALL the reasons why he has ruined Star Wars.

Now we come to story, the Original Trilogy was rich in this. We had a New Hope, which introduced us to the heroes and villains. It got us to connect and feel for these characters. In Empire, These Characters are thrown into a huge mess of problems and they try to overcome them while growing closer together. Finally, in Return of the Jedi are characters reunite and rise up together to ultimately defeat the bad guys. Now this is a good way of writing a story whether you like the movies or not. With Episode one we are introduced to a handful of characters….. who are not ever again involved in the next movies. In Episode two they try to develop Obi Wan and Anakin by down right telling us! In the first 15 minutes of the movie we are told by Obi and Anakin of all the things they did between one and two. This doesn’t work when you are trying to establish a bond between characters! We as the audience need to see this friendship. Instead, every time Anakin is on without Obi, he goes on and on about how he doesn’t like him! Now Episode three is meant to be the struggle between these characters, which does work to an extent. However, there’s no turn around like Return of the Jedi was. It just ends on a bad note and fails to really build up into the Original Trilogy at all.

This is just a brief summary of SOME of the ways the Prequel Trilogy sucks. These are the reasons why they fail as films. For any fan of Star Wars I know you will probably have something else to add, and I encourage it!

perchance a bit of poetry before the fortnight?

 

Spam prevention powered by Akismet

Skip to toolbar