Rear Window

     Alright so, here is my review from Rear Window that I wrote last year. I breaifly scanned it and it seems fine to me.

     In this film, half of the shots have fuzzy corners, as to mimmic the vision that the main character is seeing. Since this film was made in 1954, the film is grainy. However, with the plot and setting, it works completely. The main character is constricted to a wheelchair because he broke his leg. He is a newspaper photographer so he has a lot of film equipment in his apartment. So, he uses this to spy on his neighbors. The fuzzy corners, are to show what he sees through the camera lens as he watches his neighbors.

     With these corners, it gives the film a feel like reality. Like you actually there, watching them. Since the entire film is from his apartment, you only see the changes of night and day. And what is outside in others' private worlds. A lot of the movie is at dawn/dusk or night time so, the lighting that was chosen is very interesting. They have no background lights, when showing the main character, played by Jimmy Stuart. Which gives him an important look because the lights cut off half way down in his body in some of the medium shots they have of him.

     In the lighter scenes, but not daylight scenes, they have yellow/orange filters that were placed over the lights. Which helps set the mood because when it is dusk or dawn, the main character, R. T. Jeffers, is with his girlfriend. These are more romantic scenes, but he becomes obsessed with watching the neighbors. When they show the other apartments, they have different lighting. The 'struggling musicians' studio apartment is constantly brightly lit up, the ballerina's apartment usually has shadowed lighting, and so on and so forth. The lighting seems to match the characters in the movie.

     A theme in this film is that of which, one should not stick your nose in other people's business. Jeffers ends up breaking his other leg because he got into someone's business. But, a crime was solved. However, everyone in the vicinity of this apartment complex is now well aware that they should not bother other people. This is also a lesson for life. In showing the different people, with the different types of lighting, it is their own private life, and how their lifestyles are completely different.

     Because this film was made in 1954, the costumes are the clothing that people would wear in the 50's/ Boppsie type of clothing. Because the only outfit that Jeffers wears is his pajama’s, it seems a bit strange that everyone else is always constantly in different clothing. However, the clothing seems to go with the lighting of the scenes. Plus, the grainy texture of the film puts forth a drawl to the film, that is really nice.

     It forces you to concentrate on what is going on at the exact moment. However, you can get easily diverted because you hear other things going on at the same time. A lot of the shots are pans of the area that Jeffers can see. It is nice with these pan shots because you can see a full overview of what he sees. It is a bit annoying because it is only at eye level. When the shots do change to look down or he is looking around, it looks fake because it is going so fast. And the angle is changing so quickly that the shots get even grainier.

     With the final scene, this is really visable and it is slightly annoying because you realize that some of it was done in front of a green screen, which ruins the film and effect for you.

     Well, there it is.

     So, until next time--

Kapitel Eins Vokabeln

     So, I think I have a test next period on chapter 1 vocabulary in German but, I have no idea. I beieve it actually might be on the genetive case, which is possessive case.

     I am still a bit confused on that as well because the first day Frau Theiss explained it, I was on a field trip thus, I missed it. However, even though that was a week ago, I still don't quite understand it fully.

     But, I am speaking more spanish lately, and I am actually mixing up spanish and german words again. One mixed phrase I keep saying is 'Ich bin Hambre.' Which is I am hungry, but in german and spanish.

     That's how crazy I am.

     Oh, and lovely enough, I will probably get put in my home school, whether by Dillard or my parents. Once they find out about the little 'academic probation' situation, my dad will probably ship me to McArthur. At least I will have some friends in my grade. Like, two. But still, they rock and that's all I will need. But, I have also made a deal with my parents that if I get a 3.0 or higher on my next report card, I get to do Dual Enrollment, and then, I will be able to just go to college from there and not have to worry about silly high school drama. Yes, the stupid silly little high school drama is back again, not directly with me, but with some of my close friends and I am the person that I being the 'outlet'.

     Not in a bad way, but, whatever.

     I actually don't have any work right now in first period, reason I'm writing this, Mr. Calder. But, I did have a huge project in 1st and 3rd periods, and I just spent the past two days missing the class that I have this blog for to finish those projects up. However, seeing as I have already seen the movie that the class has just watched, I already have a review thus, I shouldn't worry too much.

     But, considering the review is from last year, I might have to update it a bit because I sucked at writing last year.

     So, until next time--

Lola, Rennt

     Lola, Rennt ist ein movie das ist originally in Deustch. In English, that means, Run, Lola, Run is a movie that was originally made in German. This is one of the most recent movies I have seen in Cinematography, my current 4th period class. Ina nut shell, it is about Lola, running around the city, in three different versions of the same scenerio. Since this is the case, all of the characters are wearing the same exact costuming throughout the entire film. Of course, there are parts of the film where there are glitches and you can pick out where the still photographer did not do his job properly. There are no costume changes in the film, but it seems like one of the actors plays multiple parts throughout the film. However, there are parts of the movie where people get killed and then they are back in the next part. So really, no one actually does die in this film. This is only because of the different versions of the scenerio.

     There was not much of a call for speial effects in ths film. The show of blood is a special effect but in the way of computer generated effects, there are virtually none at all. The lighting is basically the same throughout the film, because everything is based during the day, though some is inside.

     I can not think of anything else right now thus, this is the end of my review right now.

     So, until next time--

Ararat

     Ararat is a film depicting the Armenian Genocide, which the Turks still deny ever happened. The movie basically skips around a few stories, which tie together completely. An artist, Arshile Gorky's, time painting a picture of him and his mother, while he currently living in New York, taken back in Armenia. He ended up killing himself. The stories that tie into that, are first mostly, the time of the Armenian Genocide, in which Gorky lived through, and the story of a boy, Rafi who is on a mission to find out the meaning behind the connection of the genocide and his father's death and life. A few more characters also have parts in the last story in where they also connect with other things that happen throughout the film.

     This film is a bit confusing because it jumps around a lot. I think the director did that purposely to keep the audience on it's toes. You must pay attention because all of this is important to how things happen today. That seems to be the message that Atom Egoyan, the director of Ararat, is trying to put out there. In this film, there is a film being made about the Genocide, and what happened from the fictionalized point of view of Gorky. In this film being made, Rafi's mother is the art historian consultant of the movie.

     Emotions of this film are mainly rejection of truth and then what the real truths really are. The scenes depicting the genocide are from the film being made during this film. They have a yellowish tint to them, rendering the strong emotions about the genocide. Hatred and self-worth from the Turks are what is mainly causing the genocide to happen.

     In this film, the actual one, there are a lot of close up shots that are of the faces and body parts of the actors. This is used to emphasis the actions being made and words being said. These closeups are helpful to determine which parts of the story are the most important ones. Over the shoulder shots seem to be a favourite of Atom Egoyan. In almost every single conversation in this movie, there is at least one over the shoulder shot. There also seems to be, however, a lot side shots and full shots of everyone in the film. You get to be very familiar with their profiles, as well.

     There is one scene where there a mixture of a long shot, medium shot and rack effect throughout the entire scene. It is a sex scene but, in the background there are a bunch of plants (marijuana) and it is an interesting scene to me because they were able to incorporate the rack effect with the medium/long shot where your attention actually goes to what is in the background for a second or two. The mood in this scene is active but, at the same time it is an intimate scene. However, Rafi is distracted because of things he is thinking about.

     The element where they keep skipping around in the stories helps to move the movie forward. In the scenes where they are actually on the 'battle field' of the Armenian Genocide, the camera is shaking a bit, trying to pull you into the picture. So that you feel like you are a part of it, and are actually in the film. With that in mind, they also do a few pan shots of the surrounds of the main characters when they aren't speaking. They zoom into the characters so that the audience is concentrated on the character and not what is going on around them, but what they are doing. What their mission is.

     This film seems to be a mission for everyone who is a character. They are all in the modern times, and they all pretty much have worked on the film being made in this film. So, they are accustomed to the older clothing that was worn back in the 1920's, when the Genocide happened. There also seems to be an element of the older clothing style in what they are wearing as modern clothes. When depicting Gorky in the 1930's in New York City, it is exactly what you would expect a man of that time to wear. However, he is dressed down a bit, because he is painting. There are multiple scenes of him, but only one actual thing he s doing in all of them. Painting the picture of him and his mother. If you want to study good cinematography and learn how to really draw the audience in, you need to scrutinize the work of Ararat.

     This is a review from last year, one of the movies we probably wont see this year. I just decided to put it up here to have something in the mean time.

     So, until next time--