It's a whole new world

Thoughts in motion for Media Studies & H.O.C

Umberto D : A man and his Dog, Indeed.

Filed under: Class blog posts — Natalie Bernabe at 8:44 pm on Thursday, October 20, 2011

  Wow, sorry for the late post, this took me forever to organize myself! Hope this counts, but if not I’ll just have to deal.  This movie was really interesting since most of the characters were various unknowns or picked off the street! The star of the show is definitely the dog (Ha-ha, just kidding!). The story follows an elderly man by the name of Umberto, and his struggle with his tyrannical landlady, who is doing her utmost best to drive him out.  He is troubled by the rent he cannot pay, and his only friends are the pregnant housemaid and his little dog Flike.  With the silence and deep facial expressions, each character portrayed their struggles and life-stories. The music cued in really well with each scene, and helped create the sort of environment and ambiance the scene was trying to portray.

The scene I decided to do was the train scene. This scene was the ultimate low of the entire movie; where Umberto felt that he had hit rock bottom and there was no point in continuing on with his life. This is after he’s been kicked out of his apartment, and his attempts to find a good home for Flike have gone astray due to certain circumstances. Just before this scene, he tried to leave Flike by walking away while he was playing with random children. Of course, Flike found him under the bridge. Soon after, he picks him up and starts walking toward the train tracks, where our scene begins. There are people in bikes going past him and across the train tracks. The drawbridge comes down to stop the car that would have passed. The officer yells at the car honking at him while people in bikes still go under, toward the park. Umberto  hesitates for a moment, then goes under as well, in the opposite direction; toward the tracks.  He walks up to the now deserted tracks, with Flike buried in his chest between his arms. We see the shot of the wires and cables that are above the train. Then don at the tracks, back to Umberto’s face. His arm is shaking, and Flike now isn’t snuggled in his arms, but is being suspended by just one arm. Umberto is breathing hard, squinting, and gulping a bit. We see the train come forth, then Umberto look at Flike and at the train. We see him squeeze Flike and the dog panic. His is now being suspended by the neck, and his struggling loosens Umberto’s arms and he is dropped at the exact moment the train goes by. Umberto is now screaming for Flike with dust all around him, and we can barely hear him due to the deafening sound of the train. We now see Flike away from the train tracks looking  at Umberto, cowering a bit, and as the train finally goes by we see Umberto looking around for Flike. He spots him sitting alone far from the tracks. As he goes up to him, Flike turns and walks away. Still calling after him, Umberto follows him across the bridge.

Just a scene that is 1 minute and 21 seconds, but it holds a lot of depth. Such as the music; the use of violins that create a sort of tense atmosphere plays well with Umberto’s hesitance and nervousness. When we actually see Umberto makes his way to the train, there are large DUN DUNs, then silence; foreboding the train’s arrival. Then there is the high climax when the train actually arrives, and the music goes to a sort of waltz when Umberto is looking for Flike. This entire scene plays with the role of suicide and death. The fact that Umberto tried so hard to find a home for Flike, with sense of disregard for his own life, so long as his dog is safe. The part where the bikers are going towards the park and Umberto is solely going toward the train tracks is another symbol of his solitude; of how he is taking the lone road. It also symbolizes how different he is from people; he is like the only elderly man there. His facial expressions were spot on and flawless on how he was clearly at war with himself concerning his and his dog’s upcoming death. There was hardly any speech in his scene, and there was no reason for it, since silence was a key point in this scene. Signifying, again, solitude and the depth in which he stands alone.  Then there is Flike’s panic, and how he sensed that something was severely wrong. After wrenching free of Umberto, he stands alone, far away, and as Umberto approaches walks away in a hurry; his sole friend in the whole world is even deserting him! We see them cross the bridge where the dog once searched for him, now disregarding that, and hurrying to run away.

The fact that Umberto was unable to commit suicide was deeply shown with him RIGHT next to the tirain as it roared past. As if his whole life was just a cycle of failed tasks; his inability to pay for his room, to find a good place for Flike, to secure a loan from his former friends, and to help the pregnant maid with any of hr troubles.  It is the long struggle of his life that he has been facing, never quite reaching the end. It was an interesting movie, and the ending, although vague and unsatisfying as to what he will do with his life, is in fact one of the most realistic.

Analysis project #1: Shot-by-shot- breakdown of a scene.

Filed under: Class Assignments — Natalie Bernabe at 7:19 am on Friday, October 14, 2011

This Scene is from Umberto D. In this scene, he is leaving the apartment and is going on a Trolley ride in order to find a new home for Flike.

14 shots. 2 minutes and 15 seconds long (2:15). Umberto D from 4:07 to 6:23. All rights to ilposto19614u on Youtube.

1. L.S (19 seconds). Low angle. Frame of the Building is shown on the right of the screen. Camera is facing the left side in a diagonal viewpoint. Umberto walks out of the building, with Flike by the leash. Puts briefcase down, closes the door. Picks briefcase back up, and walks towards the street. Stops by the street and faces the camera. Waits, while a person in a bike comes into view. Violin music has been playing a somber melody. Cut.

2. L.S (10 seconds). Low angle. Back of Umberto is shown.  Rows of buildings. Trolley comes in on the right side of the screen. Umberto walks briskly towards it. It stops, and he puts is briefcase in first, then picks up Flike and steps inside. Cut.

3. Medium Long Shot (35 seconds). Long take. Straight angle. View of Umberto with Flike in hand, he puts Flike down. Conductor informs him he cannot bring the dog in. Violin music has cut off.  Umberto looks at him while putting his briefcase down. Facing Umberto’s left side; he is on the right side of the screen. Conductor’s right side, he is writing something, he is on the left side of the screen. Umberto says before 8:00 he can. Conductor asks if he is telling him the rules. He says if it is a hunting dog, then yes, if otherwise, no (He shrugs). Umberto, while fishing for money in his left jacket pocket,  claims he could say he is going hunting. Conductor asks for what. Umberto replies with a question:  that couldn’t he have a gun in his suitcase? Conductor looks down at it, then looks up and says all right, and asks where he is getting off. Umberto replies Via Leccosa. Hands him ticket, Umberto takes it, and picks up his briefcase. Conductor turns his face to the right and says go. Umberto passes to the left side of the screen and walks out of frame.Shot of conductor writing something. Cut.

4. M.S (4 seconds). Low angle. Music turns back on. Umberto is in frame again. Sits down on chair looking out the window. He takes up most of the right side of the screen. An old man is to the left side of the screen. Umberto looks up out the window. Cut.

5. L.S (10 seconds). Low angle. Side of the building, maid is looking down towards him. She is occupying the center of the frame. Camera moves with the bus; towards the left. hroughout the shot, she stays in the center. Lamp post, trees come into view. Cut.

6. M.S (11 seconds). Straight angle. Umberto’s right profile. His bust is towards the camera. Looks down, his body faces the camera more, face still downcast. Without looking at the camera, turns to his right, giving us his left profile. Peers out of the window. Cut.

7. Medium Long Shot (13 seconds). Straight angle. Rest of the trolley shown. Bus driver is on the far left side of the screen. We see Umberto to our right, 2 men sitting in chairs in front of him. Left profile shown. Commentary  of two men, where one says the whistle keeps blowing and the other says that he is so sleepy in the morning. The music lowers. At this, Umberto looks up to the left, three men walk through. One stands to the left of Umberto, and he picks up Flike from the seat to his left. Cut.

8. M.S (10 seconds). Straight angle. Man sits down. One right side of screen, on Umberto’s immediate left. Umberto looks at him, then down, then to the right again to look out the window. Cut.

9. M.S (5 seconds).  Low angle. White buildings are in view. Camera is still moving with the Trolley. Motion is towards the left. Cut.

10. Medium Close-up Shot (3 seconds). High angle. Umberto’s face, and he is looking up. He is on the left side of the screen. Somber expression. blinks. Cut.

11. M.S (5 seconds). Low angle. More buildings pass by. A window is open on one side of a building. Something white sticks out. Goes out of frame. Cut.

12. Medium Close-up Shot (2 seconds). High angle. Umberto’s face again with the same expression. Sways a little bit. Cut.

13. M.S (3 seconds). Low angle. Looking outside of the window again, but turning a corner of a building, now facing it. Cut.

14. M.S (9 seconds). Straight angle. Umberto and old man on his left. We see a little of Umberto’s back and left side. Gets up and walks out of frame. Other old man now turns to his right and puts his hands up to his eyes. Fade out.

Breakdown:

First of all, the music the melody was a violin streaming a sad long melody, that would go high in a few places, but overall had a feeling of departure, which basically was what the entire scene was about. The fact that the music was cut off entirely during he and the conductor’s conversation is pretty interesting. Almost as if he was in his own little world, and had to be brought back to reality. Once the dialogue ends, the music cues and he is back to lose himself in his thoughts. The fact that he is always looking out the window is important; as we clearly see his regret and sadness in leaving with the long, low-angle shot where he looks up at the maid in the window. It is the most memorable shot, clearly depicting the home he is leaving, the one he has dwelt in for many, many years. The maid looks down at him, and it almost seems like she is next to go. After seeing her go out of view, he doesn’t look at the camera, almost as if he doesn’t want to face us. He stares at the man who made him move his dog, and the man has an almost weary posture. I also thought the shot with the window with the white was symbolic, as it almost looked like a person, and his somber expression was probably him reminiscing his last moments with the maid. But, just as the Trolley had to move on, so did he.

 

Goodbye, Baby.

Filed under: Class blog posts — Natalie Bernabe at 5:23 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

 I…personally didn’t like this film. Don’t get me wrong, the acting was GREAT, just the story line was a bit too…. drawn out and over-dramatic for me . There were some key moments in the film though, but as I said, not my cup of tea. I do understand why it is so revered to critics and movie-lovers, which is the oh so poplar film noir. This film was a perfect example of how well it can be portrayed in American films. Film noir is a cinematic term to describe (most of the time) crime dramas. Two words that should never be put together, in my opinion. Not only that, but it’s used to emphasize cynical motivations and sometimes uses sexual themes to further deepen the plot.  Double Indemnity did just that. The scene I will be analyzing kinda sums up both the cynical motivation and some sexual themes all in the span of two and a half minutes, which is awesome. The picture above kinda hints at it, so you probably know what it is: the scene when good ol’ Phyllis dies.

First off, let’s focus on the dialogue in this particular scene; it’s very detailed yet slightly cryptic at the same time. The scene starts off with Phyllis on the couch, looking down with a cigarette in her hand saying, “We’re both rotten.”  This is referring to the act of murder they both committed, although Walter dealt the killing blow.  He brandishes this fact at her by stating that she is more rotten than he; that she used him to get rid of her husband, and Nino (Lola’s bf) to get rid of Lola (her stepdaughter), and possibly to get at him as well. This sequence is very important since it ultimately shows Phyllis’s drive of manipulation and an endless cycle of cynicism to get what she wants. That no matter what the means, she will get someone to clean up her mess. Next we see her hint at why he is at her house in the first place; murder. He then states that he “doesn’t like this music anymore”, which implies that, at first, he did enjoy it. This shows us his opinion of Phyllis as of now, compared to his rash need for her affection and approval in the beginning of the film.  He asks if she minds if he closes the window  and she shoots him when he does.

He then walks up to her saying, “You can do better than that, can’t you baby?” When he is right in front of her, even though she can shoot him dead easily, her hold on the gun loosens and he takes it from her. He then asks why she did not shoot and she just holds on to him. He then says it couldn’t be because she was in love with him, for he now knows that she wasn’t and she agrees with him. This shows that even though she proclaimed her love for him over and over throughout the film, she was manipulating him to get the grand prize: ridding herself from the husband who never noticed her. She never loved her husband, however, as she explains to Walter that she is rotten to the heart and has never loved anyone, “Until a minute ago, when I couldn’t fire that second shot”. I’m not sure whether she is sincere or not, but I kindasorta believe she’s trying one last pitiful attempt to draw him into her clutches again, which may be why we see her hands near his neck. I say pitiful because she herself knows he will not take her back, especially after being SHOT AT. He proves this by saying, “sorry baby, I’m not buying.” She sobs saying that she doesn’t care and she just wants him to hold her close. This could be the underlying sexual theme, “hold me close” can be taken, especially to a man, as an invitation for something more. Women can use this for manipulating men, as perhaps Phyllis is trying to with Walter. In vain, however, as we see the conviction in his face, she then realizes he will kill her and stares pleadingly into his face as he says, “Goodbye, baby.” He shoots her twice and she slumps in his arms.

Not only is the dialogue important, but film noir also portrays scenes in shadows and the deep contrast of light to dark. Again, back to the beginning of the scene. We see Phyllis and the ‘rotten’ statement; she is wearing white, depicting purity and light, yet stating that she is rotten, which one knows associates with the color black, which is all around her. Her posture is not as upright and proud as it once was; it’s slightly downcast and even her hold on her cigarette is loose.  Walter, on the other hand, has a little bit on light shining on his suit, maybe symbolizing that he has ‘seen the light’ in regards to Phyllis’s actual character, his pose is also upright, and a small smile is shown on his face; a sort of confidence leeks out of him. When Walter goes to close the window, Phyllis throws her cigarette, looks down with a emotionless expression, although the way she is getting up is menacing; her face is slightly covered in darkness before she actually gets up from the chair. The bars from the window Walter is closing shine on him before he covers them with the curtains, sort of foreshadowing his end as she tries to ‘snuff him out’ with a bullet. Now, she is the one with the bars around her head; they are more pronounced, definitely stating that she will go down first. Let’s fast forward now to the part where he shoots her; he is now cast in almost complete darkness as the deed is now done, and the bars pierce him, signifying his turn in the series of deaths. He lays her down on the couch, and as he goes to pick up her gun we see her foot pointing to him as if stating, “you’re next.”

———————————————————————————————————————————————-

That’s it in a nutshell, a semi-large nutshell, again, sorry for the lengthiness, but definitely a great scene that underlines the category of film noir as a whole. Although film noir is very broad and has different levels depending on the film, we can get a general view on it through this film.

 

A Marriage Just like any other Marriage

Filed under: Class blog posts — Natalie Bernabe at 4:02 pm on Thursday, September 22, 2011

Citizen Kane was different from any other movie we’ve watched so far. I don’t know, maybe it was because I was analyzing it more, but I noticed a bunch of signs and the effect a camera did, the displays of power and power-struggles, it was all so captivating.  It was one of the few movies I can say REALLY drew me in, especially since it was black and white, which in a sense is harder to pinpoint certain things that grab your attention, since everything is either black or white. There’s no color to draw your attention elsewhere, which maybe in a sense is what the director was going for; to NOT draw your attention elsewhere, are you with me? Perhaps not, but all in all a film unlike any other, and two thumbs up for Orson Welles, who played Charles Kane to a T. I really was amazed on how he managed to actually age his character so much, he should really give tips on how Hermione, Ron and Harry should have aged in HP7 Part 2. Because all that makeup and props DIDN’T work (like Ron’s pot belly?!).

The scene I chose to go in depth with is where Jedediah goes on to describe Kane’s first marriage with Emily; a President’s niece. He starts the flashback with saying, “It was a marriage just like any other marriage…” He also commented that in the first couple of months they only saw one another at breakfast. We see the scene’s transition to how a scene where Kane would have breakfast with Emily, in a room bathed with light. We see Emily on a table serving herself tea or coffee, and Charles walking up to her with a kiss on her head, and lavishing her with compliments like “beautiful” and “I absolutely adore you”. He sits next to her, and we clearly see Emily: a pretty woman with a white low cut dress which wraps around her arms. Charles is wearing a tux, and the conversation goes on about her concern for him always being at the newspaper, saying that “even newspaper men have to sleep”. He complies with her wishes and stays home, even giving the hint that they might do something later when he asks her the time, her saying it’s late, and he saying “It’s early” with a smile.This scene has certain key connotations that tie in to some seemingly small details. For one, the fact that the room is extremely lit even though it’s supposed to be ‘late’ may refer to their fresh start to their marriage, since white usually signifies matrimony. Emily is wearing white as well, which could also signify innocence, and she seems fresh and happy.

The next segment uses the camera to make a circle, going to a different time with Emily a bit farther away from him, and there is a plant in between them. She now has a buttoned up dress, and her hair is more kept up. She has a bit of a hurt tone when she comments about how long he kept her waiting. He answers back with a smile and a pipe. The scene revolves again and now Kane is dressed in a robe, he goes a bit on the defensive when she talks to him in a condescending tone about his newspaper articles about her uncle, since he uses yellow journalism. The next scene goes to her in slightly more conservative dress, her hair much more formal, and more things are accumulating on the table.  Charles has his hair slicked back and is wearing a suit, and when she asks to not have Mr. Bernstein see the baby, he now has no regards to her wishes anymore. The next scene jumps yet again and we see her trying to reason with him saying, “what would people thin-” and he cuts her off in a powerful voice,” what I tell them to think.” The music before this has just been a slow waltz; fluttery and happy, but as the scenes were revolving, it has becomes much faster; even taking a menacing tone when Charles Kane says this line. He is dressed impeccably, and looks older, with a demeanor that is powerful, hateful, and controlling, staring at her with squinty eyes, while she has more and more conservative clothing and her hair all neat. The last scene shows them both not smiling, not talking; both staring at the root of the problem: the newspaper. As we zoom out of Charles medium close-up shot, we see the rest of the table, how they are sitting on opposite ends of the table. The camera is careful not to be hasty but taking in the entire shot slowly as to really put emphasis on this broken marriage. The room also isn’t lit anymore, and darkness hovers now, contrasting what we saw in the beginning.

The circling of the scene is like a representation of this endless cycle; of the time placement as years go by in this manner. In the beginning, there is hardly any distance, but then, more and more items start to pile in between them, almost hording, really. This is showing a physical strain in their relationship and marriage, how so many things are literally coming between them, say, the newspaper, the amount of time spent together, what he writes about (like her uncle), etc. Their appearance is to be taken to account too, Charles was very loose about his dress and manner of speaking, and it was very light, and in the later years his dress is more and more regal and refined, and his smile soon disappeared. While Emily had a very airy sense of being and was seen as lithe and sweet, as the years went by she became more conservative and hostile, more condescending and not as all loving. The music is important as well since it is another physical demonstration of their marriage; at first it is soft and mellow, then high-strung and tense as the ‘years’ go by; showing their deteriorating marriage. At the height of it all, where he talks back to her in a menacing tone, we know their marriage has all but died, shown more clearly when neither of them speak at the end, and are extremely separated by silence and distance. The music shows this as well, taking on the powerful bearing of Charles Kane

———————————————————————————————————————————————–

Thank you for reading and sorry for the lengthiness, I know we were supposed to do a minute or less scene, but I really enjoyed writing about this one! It was by far my favorite since it showed a deteriorating marriage that movies strive to show for a full two hours in a span of two minutes! The camera shots showing their growing distance and the endless cycle is really interesting. The only thing I’m not 100% on is if it really morning or night! The music more than the camera, however, gave me more of a sense of growing isolation between them two, and how their marriage grew apart.  Great scene and pretty neat movie.

Oh, The Lady Eve

Filed under: Class blog posts — Natalie Bernabe at 3:27 am on Friday, September 16, 2011

‘The Lady Eve’ tore us away from the crime-infested films we were watching to look on to a new genre: romantic comedies. Well, except for the fact that she was a professional con artist, but we’ll get to that later. I thought the escape was needed, to look at different types of movies. This movie was about two star-crossed lovers who meet on a luxurious cruise line. Or so you would think. Jean Harrington is the daughter of “Colonel” Harrington, two con artists looking for a small fortune in the name of Charles Pike, whose father owns the Pike Ale industry. Naive and particularly shy of women, is returning home from the Amazon. He soon meets Jean as she trips him, seemingly by accident, and their adventure begins.

The movie goes on about jean’s deception as a sweet if not unrestrained girl, and she ensnares Charles and he soon asks for her hand in marriage. However, what she didn’t count on was her falling in love with him as well, even going so far as to protect him from her father’s cunning gambling tactics for his money. but when he finds out about her deceit, he dumps her. Enraged and broken-hearted, she sets out a fellow con-man, poses as his classy niece (as he poses as a British nobleman) and names herself Eve.  When she sees Charles again, he is traumatized that Jean has come back to haunt him, but soon after believes that it is a different girl. He falls right back into Jean/Eve’s trap and falls for her AGAIN, proposes to her and actually marries her, all in the span of 2 weeks.

This man really strikes me as odd, i mean, to really believe that? He must have either NO luck with women or be really naive. My favorite part of the movie was the honeymoon, when she ‘slips up’  about her various lovers and exes. even after fending him off and extracting her revenge, she is still in love with him and doesn’t take any divorce money. The ending was funny and kind of a “what?!” moment when he sees Jean in the ship, runs off with her, kisses her various times, an they slip away to her bedroom. As they both tell each other that they’re married. I found it odd that they would put that in, considering the fact that he was so distraught about ‘Eve’s’ ex-lovers.

I noticed the overall theme that was shown throughout this film, the concept of the Bible’s theory of the creation of man; which is the story of Adam & Eve. Where Eve is tempted by the snake and then eats the forbidden fruit which, in turn, she gives to Adam, condemning them both. In the film, we see signs of this: Jean/Eve holding an apple, the snake in the bedroom, the ‘fall of man’ as he falls prey to her womanly wiles. I believe that love tempted ‘Eve’, for what other reason would cause her to lose the control she had over the minds of men, which was shown in the beginning of the film? As well as whose gender rises on top, although men are bound by the actions of their hearts, women are moved by them (emotionally) as well. A really interesting film, and an original of Sturges, as shown in James Harvey’s excerpt from “Sturges: Genius at Work”.

The Public Enemy is Right Outside

Filed under: Class blog posts — Natalie Bernabe at 8:54 pm on Thursday, September 8, 2011

 Don’t let the color picture fool you, it’s another black and white film, which I’ll be seeing for the entire semester. I have to admit, I was a tad bit worried (again), but I’m always surprised that I tend to enjoy these films. The black & white era is beginning to grow on me. Anyway, this was another crime-related movie. The storyline basically was set at about post-prohibition following the story of a boy named Tommy Powers and how he and his childhood pal, Matt Doyle, kind of ‘rise to power’ in the crime world.

The first thing that caught my eye was the fact that many scenes, like when the duo as teenagers enter Putty Nose’s place, is that they used alot of hand signals and gestures. They weren’t even an official gang yet! I guess they were just being careful, but it looked pretty organized, like they were waiting to get caught at any moment. It definitely came in handy when they got hired by Paddy Ryan during Prohibition, as he was a bootlegger; or an illegal distributor of alcohol. With Paddy looking out for them, and the success of the bootlegging, they quickly rose to the top, with money and status.

There was the controvercy over the treatment of women in this film. Uh, hello? How many films have shown women getting beaten, raped, murdered and all around degraded and we’re upset about grapefruit being shoved in some girl’s face? Please, that was comical compared to the atrocities we’re used to seeing. It just bothered me, women back then were probably beaten on a regualr basis, and people complain about a smack in the face. Tom Powers wasn’t the baddest thing to hit planet Earth( MAYBE back then), but he still had a mean attitude and his weird fist thing, which by the way, WE GOT IT.

My main interest was the tone of revenge that underlined the entire movie. As well as the good egg/bad egg sibling complex Tom and his brother had. My favorite scene was the dinner with the large keg in the middle of the table. Mike’s face as he stared at that keg was priceless, but not as much as the dispute the brothers had about the keg being made of “Beer and Blood” which is actually the the title of the book this movie was based off of. The acts of revenge were more than just words, however. Such as Puddy Nose’s demise over having double-crossed his young pupils, Matt’s death and the fall of the once great gang led by Paddy Ryan probably drove Tom to the brink of madness. Which is probably why he took on that rival gang in the pouring rain without backup. As the movie came to a close, and you see Mike walking towards the camera as if he’s going out for blood on his now murdered brother, we know this is just an endless cycle of crime, although the credits say a bit otherwise.

M is for Maniac

Filed under: Class blog posts — Natalie Bernabe at 10:31 pm on Tuesday, August 30, 2011

I was taken aback by the fact that we watched a movie so early in the game. It was like seeing fireworks at the forth of July JUST as the sun went down, or something. Nonetheless, I was a bit heavyhearted when I saw the title; a drawing of a hand with a large M written on it. Real original. Did sort of remind me of V For Vendetta for a sec. Then came the bomb: a black & white COLORLESS film. I could hardly contain my enthusiasm. Not. I understand the fact that it will forever be “timeless ” and “classic”, I just personally don’t enjoy black and white films.

Ever since Some Like It Hot with my 11th grade English class, I’ve grown to dislike them. I mean, the movie just lacked taste, even with Marilyn Monroe and her little ukulele. Back to the topic at hand; the movie M. As I sat there in the second row, dreading the worst, an underscore of music came on. It was simple, and it sort of reminded me of the beginning of Disney’s Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs first opening song (when the credits were on screen). So I sat back, and tried to watch the movie. I noticed the subtle imagery such as the the little ball rolling away, or when the mother calls for her little Elise and all you see is an empty room, and undertones of something sinister as his shadow covers his own wanted poster. I gasped when I needed to, and chuckled at the small comic reliefs that actually tied in with the film.

The actor who played the killer, Mr. Beckert, gave a really good performance. I couldn’t understand a lick of what he was saying if it wasn’t for the subtitles, but his facial expressions, and hand movements really convinced me that he was truly insane and could not restrain himself. He actually reminded me of Timothy Spall’s portrayl as Peter Pettigrew in Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. His hunched back, watery eyes, and hands real close to his face really made him seem like a pitiful, and erratic character.

M by itself probably wasn’t all that, since it did drag on a bit, but the theme really kept us watching it. It had a serious topic at hand: what do we do when our childrens’ lives are in jeopardy? Some say let the police handle it, while others think the matter must be dealt with themselves. This movie really argued the fact that if we were to take matters into our own hands, will it be justified? And that no matter what, the children can never come back home.

It’s a girl’s world :)

Filed under: R-r-random! — Natalie Bernabe at 4:34 pm on Monday, August 29, 2011

 

The only reason I would write such a title is because it’s sorta, semi-true. I mean, not to be sexist, but where do babies come from? Anyway, that was off topic from this shish-kabob of stuff that I’m supposed to write. I’ve only ever written in journals, and never actually kept track of them…..so this is new to me. I’m even using a computer from a public library since my other 2 are either broken down or really slow. A blog. BLOG. GOLB (just kidding). It is really odd. I’ve only read novels about people who tell their life stories and personal mumbo-jumbo on blogs. Not only that, it’s for class.  How amazingly different, and it’s for movie reviews! New experiences are so welcome in my book. Time to get started.

« Previous Page
 

Spam prevention powered by Akismet

Skip to toolbar