Kane Reading Chapter 5

In the Carrigan reading about Kane, I learned so much that one would not know just by simply watching the film. In modern films, special effects are pretty obvious, however in Citizen Kane they are very subtle and strategically placed. I never before considered embellishing the foliage in a shot, or adding more detail could be considered a special effect, but it totally was and completely enhanced the film. Xanadu was very strategically shot to look much bigger than the set, another astounding special effect. The snow falling in Kane's tower when he passes away is essential foreshadowing that couldn't have happened without special effects.

The End of Cinema

I found Ann Feinberg's concern that cinema is ending to be a bit grandiose and dramatic. Yes, cinema is changing due to technological advances and the advent of the ability to watch movies on your personal computer, but I do not in any way think this is a bad thing. If anything, it is making films more widespread and more accessible. Now, there is a copy of almost any film online, meaning if we want to analyze and learn about a film from another country, we do not need a physical copy to be shipped from France. This helps film students learn more and better. Also, I am not disappointed in the bleeding together of mediums. Television has never been given the recognition it deserves, and now that movie techniques and distribution mediums are merging, it finally is, which is a fantastic thing and will result in more amazing television if movie directors aren't too embarrassed to work on television sets.

Notes on Auteur Theory

I completely agree with Sarris when he says that Auter theory needs a clearer definition. To me, it doesn't even seem like much of a "theory" at all. Auteur strikes me more as a term with which to discuss who the mastermind behind the piece is. I also take issue with the fact that a director or "Auteur" must have a distinct personality when making films. Though its nice for branding to want to see a "Spielberg, or a Tarantino" film, maybe there are directors out there that want to bring all sorts of different types of films and different techniques to the table. Should they be discredited as "not having a vision" because their vision is not the same for each film? I do not believe so.

Voyeurism and Fetishism

Typically when I think of these two words, its in a rather negative light. Someone who spies or someone who has sexual obsessions is not someone I want to associate with. However, Hayward makes us see these, particularly voyeurism, in different lights. After all, aren't we watching people, looking in on their lives, when we watch movies. We also fetishize the characters. Movies with romance plots, especially movies starring attractive actors and actresses, do well at the box office. We love fetishizing these people we don't know. Rear window is the prime example of Voyeurism. Though some good does come out of it, in the end, he decides to turn his back to the window, and focus on his own life.

Fuller Moulin Rouge

As a fan of the musical, I was very excited to delve into Moulin Rouge. Typically, unless they're animated, movie musicals done down the acting and end up being regular movies with a song here and there. However, Moulin Rouge completely embraces the fact that it is a musical, down to the red curtain and all, with over the top acting, somewhat impossible plot elements, and gaudy set. But as Fuller asks, will it revive the musical? Honestly, I don't believe that the musical has died. Obviously they are not wide spread, and that is because they don't apply to everyone, but they have a really strong niche. Because the exaggerated nature of musicals probably doesn't appeal to everyone, this movie probably won't change anyones opinions on that.

The Whole Equation of Pictures

"The Whole Equation of Pictures" opened my eyes to a struggle Classic Hollywood faced that I had never even been aware of. When we think back about old films we associate with directors (Hitchcock, Welles, etc.) but what we don't realize is that there were many directors who did not get the credit they deserved of "authors" of their works because they may not have had a name brand that generated the same revenue. For example, the guy who directed Casablanca never truly got credit and national renown. The studio system which was looked upon favorably, often stifled the creativity of those directors because they wanted to make a product that would make money. I see parallels to that today but the studios don't have quite the same power they once did.

Carringer Chapter 3

Carringer Chapter 3

Reading Carringers chapter on how the artwork was made and produced was just amazing. It inspired me, trying to become a film maker and producer myself to hear how Wells was just so spontaneous in the things he did, unplanned decisions in response to unseen realties that the audience wasn’t used to. When he produced this film some of the scenes that were conducted he stated that they were only practicing and reviewing to keep the people funding him off his back because he really did go off the norm of conventional filmmaking. At the time the people that funded the film would tell him to stop but he processed without their notice and made one of the best films in the history of our time. The one thing that struck out to me in the art department was the scene in the big museum and monument of Thatcher when the reporter(Raymond) went to the achieves to get information for “rose bud” that scene was a real scene in a real room, I originally thought it was all special effects but when Raymond proceeded to the door in the back I was impressed that they pulled that off so well. Differing for the Wizard of OZ of the backdrop of OZ was clearly a painting of some sort, I thought the same originally in this but it turned out to be a real scene.  As a filmmaker it was also neat to see how the entire art department process worked, it went from small sketches to small scale and then to the real thing and how much change occurs in between them. The pictures really helped as well to explain what they meant by that. As viewers without reading this chapter or any of the others we don’t realize how much work goes into these films all together and it really makes you appreciate the film more and how much they could do for its time. Citizen Kane will always remain as one of my favorites.

The End Of Cinema- Colletti

Anne Friedberg discusses how technology has been rapidly changing across media, such as television, and computers. Now you can watch whatever you want on your device, your television at home, the computer, or going to the movies. You can watch the same thing on all of these and Friedberg says how its shrinking the medium of cinema. Our visual field has been transformed by newer technologies, the field of film studies fins itself at a transitional moment says Friedberg, things are changing and some people think that its watering down cinema as a whole but I personally believe that there is no stopping technology and the more accessible it is for us the better. I understand where filmmakers are coming from and they will have to go through an adjustment period but that comes with everything. Friedberg also talks about before the digital revolution, Cable, VCRs, and the remote control were all stepping stones to prepare us for this digital revolution that is still going on now. It’ll be very interesting and exciting to see what cinema will be like in the next five years.