MYST #3- Champagne(1928)

I came across this movie on YouTube the other day, they have a whole selection of movies that you can rent or watch for free. When I saw that this movie was by Alfred Hitchcock, I was excited to see it because I have never seen one of his silent films before. I ended up liking it a lot, it had a good, yet overused, story line and the cinematography was interesting. 

Champagne is a 1928 British silent comedy film directed by Alfred Hitchcock and starring Betty Balfour, Gordon Harker and Jean Bradin. The screenplay was based on an original story by writer and critic Walter C. Mycroft. The film is about a young woman forced to get a job after her father tells her he has lost all his money. 

This movie had a lot of really cool "effects". For instance, in the movie, the girl's father hired a private eye to watch her and a lot of the times after a scene cuts it jumps to the private eye's point of view, literally, it's filmed as though you are seeing out of his eyes, it's really cool. 

One of the most important scenes to me, is when the girl is talking with the private eye, the girl's fiance is already getting a little jealous and the cruise ship they are on is rocking a lot so he starts to feel sick. Hitchcock does a really great job at replicating a rocking ship and also showing the instability of the characters.

MYST #2- First Love(1939)

4.5 stars out of 5


I really enjoyed watching First Love, it was very entertaining and it had great music! In my opinion, Deanna Durbin was truly one of the best, yet underrated actresses of the 30's and 40's. She was always in musical movies because she had an amazing voice and impeccable acting technique.When she was about 13, she was trained at Universal Studios with Judy Garland and the two starred in a couple of short movies together. The Metropolitan Opera even wanted her to work with them when she was only fifteen!

First Love is a 1939 musical film directed by Henry Koster and starring Deanna Durbin. Based on the fairy tale Cinderella, the film is about an orphan who is sent to live with her wealthy aunt and uncle after graduating from boarding school. Her life is made difficult by her snobby cousin who arranges that she stay home while the rest of the family attends a major social ball. With the help of her uncle, she makes it to the ball, where she meets and falls in love with her cousin's boyfriend. The film received Academy Award nominations for Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, and Best Music.

The cinematographers did a great job, I really liked the lighting. I noticed that, just like many movies of the 30's and 40's, the lighting of the main character's faces were always softened. The way they would light up Deanna's face made her look more youthful, innocent and beautiful. The way they moved the camera around was also really great. Here is an example of the lighting and camera motion:

Out of the whole movie, I would have to say my favorite scene was the last scene. Deanna's character left her awful cousin's house and the guy that she loved and went back to the boarding school she grew up at. Because she left the guy she loved, she decided to become a teacher at the boarding school and she had to sing for a group of teachers so they could approve of her. She sing's Un Bel Di by Puccini. It's absolutely gorgeous and towards the end of the song, the guy she loves walks into the room. After the last note she runs down the stairs and up to him, and then they leave and live happily ever after. 

Oh yeah, she was only seventeen when she made this movie!

1935 Film Project

My group's film was a film by Warner Bros. starring Jimmy Stewart, James Cagney, Barbara Stanwyck and Loretta Young. Directed by Frank Capra.

It is the story of two men; One, a notorious speakeasy owner ( James Cagney) who has lot's of affairs and a girlfriend( Barbara Stanwyck). The other is a humble family man ( Jimmy Stewart) who lives an honest life and has a beautiful wife( Loretta Young). The great depression comes along and both James Cagney and Jimmy Stewart lose money. Their paths cross and the two become unlikely friends and help each other through rough times.

We chose Warner Bros. because we did not want to make a giant blockbuster movie, we wanted to make a lower budget film. We also wanted to make a gangster film ,which Warner Bros. is known for, that also included social issues of the time, like the depression.

We chose Jimmy Stewart because he worked with Frank Capra a lot and was perfect for the role. We were able to get him from MGM by trading him with Humphrey Bogart. We chose James Cagney because he is known for playing a gangster and was perfect for the role, he also was already a part of Warner Bros., so we did not have to make any trades to get him in the movie. We chose Barbara Stanwyck because she was a star at Warner Bros. and was adored by Frank Capra. She also had the ability to play any type of role. We chose Loretta Young because she also worked with Frank Capra and was perfect for the role of a good wife. She always played nice ladies. Although she moved to Fox Studios, Warner Bros. was able to get her because she started off at Warner Bros.

Although our film was a gangster film, we were able to follow the Hayes Code very well. We did not show sex, violence or alcohol use and no authority figures were shown in a bad light. Whenever something violent or bad happened in the movie, it was not shown, just inferred from the dialogue of the film.

Our movie was focused on cinematography. We chose to make our film in black and white for the gangster, film noir effect and used many new and innovative camera angles and techniques.

If there was something I could change about our project it would probably be the Barbara Stanwyck character, I would have someone else play her, like Jean Harlow but that couldn't work because she was not in Warner Bros. studio.

Formal Film Study

The three films I decided to watch are all films about classical musicians or composers. I watched the film Puccini (1952), Callas Forever (2002) and Lisztomania (1975). 

The first film I watched was Puccini, it was a pretty good film. It is a biographical film about the composer Giacomo Puccini.The story begins when he is a student and ends with his death;the plot centers around three of his lovers and the compositions of his operas. 

The second film I watched was Callas Forever, which I absolutely loved. It is about one of the most famous sopranos of all time, Maria Callas. The movie takes place during the time Maria's voice started to deteriorate due to old age and is about how she kept her career going on even after she could not sing anymore. 

The third film I watched was Lisztomania which I absolutely hated, it was just dreadful to watch. It is a parody of Franz Liszt's, the famous composers, life and career. It was just odd, to say the least.

All of the movies were made at different times, but they were all in color. Puccini and Lisztomania both had that "old movie" look to them, while Callas Forever looked more digital and new.

 I did not like how Carmine Gallone and  Glauco Pellegrini, the directors of Puccini, edited the film. The film had many important events happen in it, but instead of showing the important events, the film would just skip to what happened afterwords.For example, after Puccini had married his first wife, he went on tour and the shot focused on his wife knitting, all of a sudden she turned old with gray hair and lots of time had passed. Even though it was a cool shot, I would have liked  to know what happened in between. Puccini did have beautiful music in it though!

 Franco Zeffirelli, the directer of Callas Forever, did an amazing job with this movie. The cinematography was beautiful and the film had some of the most beautiful music in it( all sung by Maria Callas). I really liked how the actress who played Maria actually looked somewhat like her, because when the actor/actress does not look like who they are supposed to portray, it can be very distracting. Franco Zeffirelli is one of the greatest directors, he also directed Maria Callas on stage during her career. One scene in particular really moved me in the movie. Maria put on recordings of her self singing and while crying, because she no longer had the beautiful voice she once had, mouthed the words and  acted along to it in private. It was tragically beautiful.

Lisztomania had some cool special effects but strange costumes and set designs. I found the whole movie quite atrocious, it was as if someone had mixed together A Clockwork Orange and Austin Powers, made it into a movie, and said it was about Franz Liszt. Also,  I had a hard time following along with the plot. I absolutely despised what the director, Ken Russell,  did with Franz Liszt's music. He turned it into pop/rock music and had Roger Daltrey ( who played Liszt in the movie) singing it. There was one part I did like in the movie; Ken Russell made the character who played Richard Wagner and evil vampire type of person, and not being one of Wagner's biggest fans, I liked that.

In Puccini, the directors made it seem as though every man in Europe had affairs with women while they were married. They also emphasized how important classical music was and still is in Europe.

Callas Forever, also emphasized how important classical music was, and still is in America and Europe. It also had a lot to do with the new technology people were making in the 80's and how much people could do with it compared to when Maria Callas was still singing in the late 60's.

Lisztomania, to me seemed like an experimental film. It was futuristic and also had a lot to do with Nazis and  Communism. They made a lot of fun of the Communists and Nazis in the movie. Also, the more I watched, the more I realized the movie was about the actual phenomenon called Lisztomania, not about the actual composer who caused it.

To me, when making a biographical movie about an artist, composer, etc., the director must include what the main character is famous for, in the movie. For example in the film Amadeus, the director included all of Mozart's most popular compositions, and that is what helped make the movie so great. Unfortunately Ken Russell did not do that when he made the movie Lisztomania.

All in all, I enjoyed watching three new movies, especially ones about classical music, because I am an opera singer and will be studying it in college. Plus, I love classical music.

Cinema Paradiso

Cinema Paradiso-1988

Cinema Paradiso is an Oscar-Winning, Italian drama made in 1988. It was directed by Giuseppe Tornatore and starred  Philippe Noiret, Marco Leonardi, Jacques Perrin, Salvatore Cascio, Enzo Cannavale and Antonella Attili.  In the movie a filmmaker recalls his childhood, when he fell in love with the movies at his village's theater and formed a long lasting friendship with the theater's projectionist. It is a beautiful film with a touching story. It is basically a story about life and growing up.

                I first decided to watch Cinema Paradiso because of the soundtrack. I had heard the main theme of the movie and instantly fell in love with the music. When I watched the movie I was not disappointed. In fact, I enjoyed it just as much as Titanic. I always compare other dramas to the 1997 movie Titanic because, in my opinion, it is one of the best dramas ever made.

                One scene in particular really touched me. The main character “Toto” was supposed to buy milk for his mother but instead, he spent the money on the movies. He loved going to the movies but was not allowed to go because they really didn’t have much money. When his mother found out he spent the money on the movies she began to punish him but Alfredo, the projectionist at the cinema, helped him out. That is when their friendship really began.

                Cinema Paradiso was edited to perfection .The director did an awesome job of cutting back and forth from present to past in the movie. He made it clear and precise; I knew what was going on the entire time. The lighting in the movie is beautiful and the director used different camera movements like lengthy tracks, rapidly moving dollies, and rotating perspectives.  All in all, I give Cinema Paradiso a 4.5 out of 5 stars. 

REVIEW OF THE REVIEWS

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19950113/REVIEWS/501130302/1023

Mr. Ebert's review on Legends Of The Fall is a fairly positive one. He starts his review with his opinion of the movie and a somewhat short summary of it. Ebert described the movie as a  "high-class horse opera", meaning that it had all the passions of an opera, yet he did not find the movie serious. In fact, he poked fun at some characters and parts of the plot in his review.

 He focused primarily on the actors though, and how they portrayed their characters. I believe he did that because the cast of Legends Of The Fall consists of primarily successful actors and they are expected to do a good job. Ebert also made a couple of references to the movie Giant, starring James Dean. He made these references because two characters in the movie have a lot of parallels to James Dean's character in Giant. 


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/videos/legendsofthefallrhowe_c0049e.htm

Mr. Howe gave quite a negative review for Legends Of The Fall. He starts off the review with a quick summary of the movie, and then picks out all the little things he did not like in the movie. The tone of the review was very sarcastic and Howe uses words like "overwrought", "ridiculous" and " dreadful" to describe the movie.

Howe primarily focused on the plot of the movie and how he that it "deteriorated" " right around the time youngest brother Thomas -- to his fiancee's horror -- volunteers to fight for the English in World War I. Quinn follows him too, and Pitt tags along to protect Thomas."(Desson Howe, Washington Post Staff Writer). 

Having seen Legends Of The Fall, there are things in the movie that I like and do not like. "On that basis it is enormously entertaining, a throwback to the days when Hollywood didn't apologize for passionate stories involving three brothers whose fates are intertwined with that of a legendary woman, as they're all outlined against the Big Sky." ( Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times).  I completely agree with Ebert on this, Legends Of The Fall is an entertaining, dramatic, love story and there are not as many movies like this anymore. The acting/cast was great, the setting was beautiful and the music score was absolutely stunning. 

However, there were details in the movie that made me think a little bit. " So while Brits, Canadians and Germans die in the muddy fields of Europe, Pitt rides around on horseback, hair still excellent, taking care of Thomas. Which army unit is Pitt in, anyway -- the Cowboy Detail?" As Howe mentions in his review, Brad Pitt's character went to fight in WWI and he still had long, flowing hair. There is also a scene in the movie where he sneaks into a German trench and kills two Germans by hand. It is a bit ridiculous. It still is a really great movie though.

If I had not seen Legends Of The Fall and I read both of these reviews, I believe Roger Ebert's review would be more convincing. In the first paragraph of his review he described the movie as an "epic Western saga", that really grabbed my attention. In film reviews readers want to find out if the movie is good, what the summary of the film is and how good the acting is. 

If I were to write a review on a film I would include the summary of the film, but not give too much away. I would also write about the setting. If a film has a bad setting, it can really ruin a good story. Costumes and lighting are also important. For instance, I began watching a version of the story Sense and Sensibility, the costumes were not too great and the lighting was extremely artificial and awful. Those two things ruined the entire movie for me, even though the plot was great. Lastly, I would make sure to include my opinion of the acting quality. Bad acting can ruin a movie. I would leave out the film soundtrack, because it isn't as important. Sometimes films don't even need music or sound effects to be good. 

Film Intro Survey

1. What is the first movie that really made a strong impression on you?

When I was four or five years old I watched My Dog Skip and it made me really sad, so now I don't watch movies about dogs.

2. What are 3-4 of your favorite genres?

Historical, Silent, Classics and Romantic.

3. What are 3-4 of your least favorite genres?

Horror, Sci-Fi and Fantasy.

4. What are your five favorite films?

Once Upon A Time In America, Amadeus, The Great Dictator, Sunset Boulevard, and Modern Times.

5. List three characteristics of what you consider to be a good movie.

Good script, good actors/actresses and a good soundtrack.

6. What are some of your least favorite movies?

Paranormal Activity II, Twilight, A Night At The Roxbury, The Cat's Meow and The Moderns.

7. List three characteristics of what you consider  to be a bad movie.

Bad acting, bad soundtrack and  bad script.

8. If you have any favorite directors, list them.

Charlie Chaplin, Mel Brooks, Alfred Hitchcock and Steven Spielberg.

9. If you have any favorite actors/ actresses, list them.

Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet, Charlie Chaplin and Lucille Ball.

10. List three films that you consider important films for people to see.

The Great Dictator, Titanic and Once Upon A Time In America.

11. What's your oldest favorite film?

The Kid ( 1921).

12. What's the best movie you've seen that's been released in the past 2 years?

Django Unchained.

13. What are the next five films on your "queue"?

Rebel Without A Cause, Gone With The Wind, Arsenic and Old Lace, All About Eve, The Great Gatsby and Lincoln.