 | I remember when I first saw “The conversation” fifteen years ago I was not very impressed with the film. At that time I accounted my disappointment to the connection I made with Antonioni’s “Blow Up.” I thought Coppola re-made the same film, but in a sound format, instead of a visual one. “The Conversation” can also be interpreted by Godard’s idea and practice, that in order to criticize a film he makes one. However, I do not think that was Coppola’s intention. Nevertheless, the film made an impression on me, which at that point I did not understand. |
|
0 Comments
In their article “The Image of Objectivity” Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison examine in detail the images in scientific atlases from the late 19th to early 20th century. Their examination shows two trends. The first one is, the issues connected with the subjective representation of the images that concerned scientists in the 19th century. With several examples, Daston and Galison, show how different scientists dealt with artists who painted the images for their atlases and how the scientists tried to minimize the subjective artistic input. Simultaneously, the article also shows the birth of objectivism from 18th to the 20th century.
 In the film business, the pitch of the story is called a logline. Logline is a single sentence, which describes the gist of your film.
The logline for usa.DT is: Newly, elected, segregationist leader executes his agenda inducing pandemonium amongst the multi-cultural nation, which in turn produces unintended consequences. Dracula's perspective in the novel “Dracula” by Bram Stoker and in the film Bram Stoker's Dracula2/26/2019  Bram Stoker wrote the novel “Dracula”1 in 1897. The novel is written in epistolary style, where the story develops through the perspective of multiple characters, which express their point of view either by writing in their journals and diaries, or through news reports. The book and the film differ drastically in portraying Dracula's perspective. In the novel, the vampire's perspective simply is omitted, where the film uses many different devices – narrative structure, cinematography and editing to show us Count Dracula's point of view and thus to bring us into his four century longing for his love, Mina.
1Stoker, Bram. Dracula.Sterling Children's Books, 2010.
Citizen Kane on Udemy Citizen Kane - the best film ever made Orson Welles on Udemy Orson Welles - the best film director of the 20th century
 The film, “Network”, written by, Paddy Chayefsky, is a timeless classic. The reason is simple-Chayefsky wrote a perfect four act structure, with turning points every 20 minutes, creating an exemplary piece of intellectual frenzy. The scriptwriter, Robert McKee, would say that the use of narration is a copout; but I believe the VO conveys the boring, indispensable information about television ratings pertinent to the story. Forty years later not much has changed. When we watch the scenes between William Holden and Faye Dunaway and change the word television to Internet, it could be present day. The new generation is growing up in front of smaller screens, but the powers that be have the exact same agenda. Instead of ratings numbers, the buzz words are “friends’, “page visits", and bounce rates.
If you would like to learn
|
 | It seems everybody talks about box office figures when they talk about a film or a movie. Why? Partly the notion that box-office dollars are like scores in a contest. The number one film is the winner, and people tend to like to hear about winners. Also there’s a vague assumption that if a film is packing them in, people must like it and therefore it’s worth seeing. Thus reports of big ticket sales in many cases may prolong the a film’s success. |
I think Lars Von Trier is one of the best directors alive. I'm always looking forward to the screening of his next project. When I heard "Nymphomaniac" was being released, I was eager to once again be provoked by the Danish director.
The movie started out very promising with a sound segment that was followed by a scene reminiscent of David Lynch, and finished with a signature Lynchian shot of moving into an enclosed, dark, space. The scenes in the apartment with the virgin man, Seligman, reminded me of paintings by Edward Hopper - austere, yet beautiful, quiet desperation.
The movie started out very promising with a sound segment that was followed by a scene reminiscent of David Lynch, and finished with a signature Lynchian shot of moving into an enclosed, dark, space. The scenes in the apartment with the virgin man, Seligman, reminded me of paintings by Edward Hopper - austere, yet beautiful, quiet desperation.
The Shapes of stories by Kurt Vonnegut
If "We all experience pleasure differently" and "Everything is tragedy, or ends in tragedy" then what's left?
What is left is "Infinite tenderness" and sensuality" That describes Blue is the Warmest Color.
Yes, I know, it has a 10 minute long lesbian scene and a few other scenes that are provocative in nature, but the film also has a sexual tenderness that is seldom seen in teen relationships. The question is, why are we provoked?
What is left is "Infinite tenderness" and sensuality" That describes Blue is the Warmest Color.
Yes, I know, it has a 10 minute long lesbian scene and a few other scenes that are provocative in nature, but the film also has a sexual tenderness that is seldom seen in teen relationships. The question is, why are we provoked?
 | BAD LIEUTENANT Harvey Keitel is great in it and the directing is good as well. The cinematography resembles the 1970's 'wash away' look that is unattractive to say the least. Not worthy of essential list though. RASHOMON One of the best films ever made. This is the film that opened up Japanese culture to European and American audiences. Directing is outstanding. Acting is great as well, but not according to our Western standards. Don't miss it. |
I just saw "The Matrix" again on the big screen and I loved it … again. That is, if you can get beyond the first 15 minutes. Not that they are that bad, but it's obvious that they are inferior to the rest of the film. What I'm referring to is the staging, the dialogue, and the acting in the beginning scenes.
With the physical appearance of Morpheus things change drastically. I want to make one thing clear, everything changes from that point - the acting, the dialogue, and the script becomes more intellectual. From this point the film takes us on a journey and doesn't let us down. The special effects, fighting scenes, and the philosophical message and meaning, keep the viewer constantly invested.
With the physical appearance of Morpheus things change drastically. I want to make one thing clear, everything changes from that point - the acting, the dialogue, and the script becomes more intellectual. From this point the film takes us on a journey and doesn't let us down. The special effects, fighting scenes, and the philosophical message and meaning, keep the viewer constantly invested.
Alfonso Cuarón is one of the 5 best directors of our time. As writer, producer, director and co-editor, he is the sole artistic and creative mind behind "Gravity."
The film is the best Sci-fi film since "Space Odyssey" but with a superior sound mix. It's ironic; the superior sound mix comes not always from what we hear, but from its absence. Our identification with the main character, Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock), has more authenticity when we hear as she hears. What I'm referencing is the muffled sound of the tools that she works with. Further, the suspense heightens when she/we don't hear the collisions that are going on in the background of the image.
 | After reading Spike Lee's list of "essential films" I couldn't help by smile sardonically. Finally, I thought that I should comment on it. Reason being, I think there are essential films missing in this "essential list"; Films that are "indispensable" for any begging filmmaker. Spike Lee included some amazing films, but about 50% of them are uninteresting in any shape or form, and are purely inferior to the silent films. |
Even though Grand Illusion is missing Jean Renoir's signature sequence shots, I think this is his best film. Praised by Orson Welles as 'the only film worth saving if there is to save one film', Grand Illusion is a tour de force of the proper and civilized treatment of enemy soldiers during the worst of times - a war.
Widely regarded as the last Great War, the film portrays the humane treatment of enemy soldiers during World War I, while just existing can be an act of futility.
Although the characters are engaged in a pointless race to win battles, the film exudes honor, respect and gentlemen like behavior between the enemies.
Widely regarded as the last Great War, the film portrays the humane treatment of enemy soldiers during World War I, while just existing can be an act of futility.
Although the characters are engaged in a pointless race to win battles, the film exudes honor, respect and gentlemen like behavior between the enemies.
I'm not going to talk about the film as an art piece, or discuss its value to film culture. What I want to talk about is the film's use of numbers and the meaning of the language used.
What grabbed my attention is the use and absence of the number 4. Right from the first shot we are introduced to Alex's gang - there are four of them. What we see in the next 41 minutes is the violence and the fun they have at the expense of other people. These are four teenagers-young-adults, that think the same and enjoy the world in the same way. The break-up of the group is over a disagreement of who is going to lead them. They do not disagree on crimes, instead it's the typical juvenile disagreement of who has the longer penis (metaphorically speaking).
What grabbed my attention is the use and absence of the number 4. Right from the first shot we are introduced to Alex's gang - there are four of them. What we see in the next 41 minutes is the violence and the fun they have at the expense of other people. These are four teenagers-young-adults, that think the same and enjoy the world in the same way. The break-up of the group is over a disagreement of who is going to lead them. They do not disagree on crimes, instead it's the typical juvenile disagreement of who has the longer penis (metaphorically speaking).
Sweet and Lowdown combines two of the great talents in recent cinema. Sean Penn proves that there isn't anything on celluloid that he can't feel or express.
His portrait of Emmet Ray is funny and complete down to the last leg and hand gesture. He is one of the two best actors of our time. Sweet and Lowdown displays his incredible range of talent.
His portrait of Emmet Ray is funny and complete down to the last leg and hand gesture. He is one of the two best actors of our time. Sweet and Lowdown displays his incredible range of talent.
Watching the film made me ask these questions - Why is it so hard to be an artist, and why can't critics and audiences recognize the talent in front of them when it's alive?
There is at least one hundred artists in each and every field that have been ignored when alive and have been "discovered" only after they disappear. Why is it that we are so short sighted and unable to recognize the art piece when we can touch it? Is it because art is elitist?
There is at least one hundred artists in each and every field that have been ignored when alive and have been "discovered" only after they disappear. Why is it that we are so short sighted and unable to recognize the art piece when we can touch it? Is it because art is elitist?
I just saw the best film of 2012. Kon-Tiki is not only the best foreign film of last year, but it's the best film period. It grabs you and takes you on a journey few films can - forgetting where you are and caring about the characters.
It also begs the question; where have all the heros gone?
Where are the real heroes that made this small place called Earth a better place for all of us? It seems technology has wiped them out.
It also begs the question; where have all the heros gone?
Where are the real heroes that made this small place called Earth a better place for all of us? It seems technology has wiped them out.
People who critique moving pictures fall into 3 general classes:
1. Reviewers - are generally journalists who describe the contents and general tone of a movie, with only incidental emphasis on aesthetic evaluation.
2. Critics - are also journalists for the most part, but their emphasis is more on evaluation than on mere content description.
3. Theorists - are usually professional academics, often the authors of books on how movies can be studied on amore philosophical level.
1. Reviewers - are generally journalists who describe the contents and general tone of a movie, with only incidental emphasis on aesthetic evaluation.
2. Critics - are also journalists for the most part, but their emphasis is more on evaluation than on mere content description.
3. Theorists - are usually professional academics, often the authors of books on how movies can be studied on amore philosophical level.
Author
I'm a film critic and I like to write about films that are exceptional and stand above the rest.
Categories
All
2011
2012
2013
2014
Classic
Recent
Theory
RSS Feed
"The role of the critic is to help people see what is in the work, what is in it that shouldn't be, what is not in it that could be. He is a good critic if he helps people understand more about the work that they could see for themselves; he is a great critic, if by his understandings and feeling for the work, by his passion, he can excite people so that they want to experience more of the art that is there, waiting to be seized. He is not necessarily bad critic if he makes errors in judgement. He is a bad critic if he does not awaken the curiosity, enlarge the interests and understanding of his audience. The art of the critic is to transmit his knowledge of and enthusiasm for art to others." ( Pauline Kael )