What do the movies Cloverfield, Quarantine, and The Blair Witch Project all have in common? They were all shot cinéma vérité (true cinema) style. This was acutally a French film movement that made the film feel more natural and realistic. Rather than following the usual technique of shooting sound and pictures together, the film maker first tapes actual conversations, interviews, and opinions. After selecting the best material, he films the visual material to fit the sound, often using a hand-held camera. The film is then put together in the cutting room. Cinéma vérité is used to approximate truth moreso than other films. I think cinéma vérité is effective in doing just that. I loved The Blair Witch Project partially because it seemed so real to me because of the way it was shot and the fact that it was filmed as a documentary (though was actually fictional). I also really liked the other two movies I mentioned.
Quarantine actually showed a news team, following firefighters around as a feature story, with their camera in hand. It was a very good movie and very realistic. Cloverfield could've been a little better. The beginning was too long and therefore became irreleveant to the film's plot, I think. These aren't the only three movies that are filmed via cinéma vérité; these are just the ones I have seen.
So what makes cinemal verite so appealing to filmmakers and viewers? Realism is the artistic attempt to recreate life as it is in the context of an artistic medium. The artist’s function is to report and describe what he sees as accurately and honestly as possible. Particularily appealing to filmmakers, cinema verite doesn't require expensive equipment and special effects. The camera is usually small and lightweight so it's able to fit into people vehicles and other small spaces, creating an even more realistic feel to the movie.
All three of the cinema verite movies I saw were horror or suspensful movies. I think these are the best types of movies to be filmed cinema verite style. I say this because those are the types of movies that literally make you (well me, at least) feel like part of the film. And with cinema verite, this happens to an even greater extent.
That's all for now. I'd appreciate your opinions on cinema verite, if you've seen it!
Monday, March 30, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Blog 10 (A Scanner Darkly)
This blog will be mainly about a movie I just saw that I thought was unique enough to blog about. It's called A Scanner Darkly. In a nutshell, this movie was based "seven years from now" and was mainly about America's war on drugs as well as government spies. One of the most unique aspects of the movie, one I had never seen before, was something called rotoscoping. Digital cinematography was used to film the movie. This is the process of capturing motion pictures as digital images, rather than on film. And after being filmed, the movie was animated with Rotoshop.This is an animation technique invented by Max Fleischer in which live-action figures are cut out and re-drawn.
When I first started watching, I couldn't believe how close the animated characters looked to the actual actors. I figured the film was being drawn out, instead of actually filmed with real people acting. I since learned differently. Rotoscoping was kind of interesting to view at first, but it isn't how I'd want to watch all my movies. Apparently this technique was used in The Lord of the Rings in the '70s, but I've never seen that movie. Anyways, rotoscoping definitely makes the animations look more realistic, but not completely realistic. The square and triangle-shaped "shadows" on characters' faces proved that. At first glance, though, the animations are quite vivid and realistic. If you haven't ever seen a rotoscope animation film, I encourage you to do so, just to see what it is like.
In addition to this unique animation, the plot of the movie was quite interesting. It was a movie where not everything made total sense until the very end of the movie. A particular scene, where Arctor was talking to the medical experts, a nurse told him to get Donna blue flowers. I didn't see the connection until the end of the movie.
Here is a link to an article where the director, Richard Linklater, of A Scanner Darkly talks about his techniques used. "It’s just different. Philip K. Dick is always asking, ‘What is reality?’ and I think this technique puts your brain in the right place to take in this particular story," he said. Linklater also said that he didn't think that the movie could've been made as a live-action movie. They had a $6 million dollar budget.
If you've seen the movie or read the book, you might remember the "scramble suit." I think that even if the movie was filmed as a live-action movie, the scramble suit still would've been animated. Well, at least Linklater's interpretation of it.
If you haven't seen it yet, I encourage you to do so, but I will warn you that I had to really pay attention to keep up with what was going on. The person I watched this with had read the book, so he explained things to me.
That's all for now...
When I first started watching, I couldn't believe how close the animated characters looked to the actual actors. I figured the film was being drawn out, instead of actually filmed with real people acting. I since learned differently. Rotoscoping was kind of interesting to view at first, but it isn't how I'd want to watch all my movies. Apparently this technique was used in The Lord of the Rings in the '70s, but I've never seen that movie. Anyways, rotoscoping definitely makes the animations look more realistic, but not completely realistic. The square and triangle-shaped "shadows" on characters' faces proved that. At first glance, though, the animations are quite vivid and realistic. If you haven't ever seen a rotoscope animation film, I encourage you to do so, just to see what it is like.
In addition to this unique animation, the plot of the movie was quite interesting. It was a movie where not everything made total sense until the very end of the movie. A particular scene, where Arctor was talking to the medical experts, a nurse told him to get Donna blue flowers. I didn't see the connection until the end of the movie.
Here is a link to an article where the director, Richard Linklater, of A Scanner Darkly talks about his techniques used. "It’s just different. Philip K. Dick is always asking, ‘What is reality?’ and I think this technique puts your brain in the right place to take in this particular story," he said. Linklater also said that he didn't think that the movie could've been made as a live-action movie. They had a $6 million dollar budget.
If you've seen the movie or read the book, you might remember the "scramble suit." I think that even if the movie was filmed as a live-action movie, the scramble suit still would've been animated. Well, at least Linklater's interpretation of it.
If you haven't seen it yet, I encourage you to do so, but I will warn you that I had to really pay attention to keep up with what was going on. The person I watched this with had read the book, so he explained things to me.
That's all for now...
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Blog 9 (Alternate Endings)
This week, I've decided to write about alternate endings on movies. This past week, I watched The Butterfly Effect and realized that there was more than one ending. I hadn't known that before. (I watched it once before). I was confused as to why Evan ended up watching a different home video on the end of the movie. I guess I watched the theatrical version this time, and the first time I watched the director's cut version. The plot was pretty much the same, except for a few scenes different, until the end. I was a little disappointed with the ending, mainly because I didn't know there were two endings. The one I watched this past week had a happier ending, but it was the one I saw second. Even if the ending was horrible, it was the first ending that was instilled into my mind. However, once I open my mind to actually watch the alternate ending, I usually end up liking it.
DVDs make alternate endings possible. Sometimes I like the idea of DVDs having alternate endings, so I can see all the different outcomes for the movie, but I also think that sometimes it just ruins the movie, especially if I had seen one ending that I really liked or just accepted. This is a link to a blog about a person's opinions on the seven worst alternate endings. You'll see some familiar movie names, including The Butterfly Effect, though the author of this blog liked the theatrical version ending better.
USA Today writes about alternate endings. The article beings by asking, "What if you could change the ending to you favorite movie?" This article states the positives of alternate endings. "'An alternate ending is a great way to provide added value because it brings film fans into the creative process,' says Ken Graffeo, executive vice president of Universal Studios Home Entertainment." Even though I can be skeptical about alternate endings, I do agree with Graffeo here. It does allow for different endings to suit what different people may like. Moreover, the article states that Universal's research has identified alternate endings as consumers' favorite bonus feature.
What's one of the reasons I don't like alternate endings? Because it makes me realize that it was just a movie, and it can be changed. Have you ever watched a movie that you liked so much that you just wanted to watch it over and over again, playing out the plot in your head? When I find a movie like that, I don't want to know that all it takes is a click of a button to completely change the ending. Same goes with deleted scenes. They're fun to watch, but they also make me realize that the wonderful plot that I just fell in love with was just a movie.
What are your thoughts on alternate endings? What are some positives? Negatives?...
DVDs make alternate endings possible. Sometimes I like the idea of DVDs having alternate endings, so I can see all the different outcomes for the movie, but I also think that sometimes it just ruins the movie, especially if I had seen one ending that I really liked or just accepted. This is a link to a blog about a person's opinions on the seven worst alternate endings. You'll see some familiar movie names, including The Butterfly Effect, though the author of this blog liked the theatrical version ending better.
USA Today writes about alternate endings. The article beings by asking, "What if you could change the ending to you favorite movie?" This article states the positives of alternate endings. "'An alternate ending is a great way to provide added value because it brings film fans into the creative process,' says Ken Graffeo, executive vice president of Universal Studios Home Entertainment." Even though I can be skeptical about alternate endings, I do agree with Graffeo here. It does allow for different endings to suit what different people may like. Moreover, the article states that Universal's research has identified alternate endings as consumers' favorite bonus feature.
What's one of the reasons I don't like alternate endings? Because it makes me realize that it was just a movie, and it can be changed. Have you ever watched a movie that you liked so much that you just wanted to watch it over and over again, playing out the plot in your head? When I find a movie like that, I don't want to know that all it takes is a click of a button to completely change the ending. Same goes with deleted scenes. They're fun to watch, but they also make me realize that the wonderful plot that I just fell in love with was just a movie.
What are your thoughts on alternate endings? What are some positives? Negatives?...
Monday, March 2, 2009
Blog 8 (Decline of Movie Theatres)
I love going to the movies. I find it more fun than sitting at home on my couch watching movies. I don't have a home theatre system or even a very big T.V., so one of the main appeals of the movie theatre is the surround sound and big screen. I know that those are becoming more common in the household, so that could be a contributing factor in the decline of movie theatres. I know not everybody likes to go to movies as much as I do. Some would rather save their money and wait until it comes out on DVD and rent it. If it's a good enough looking movie, I can't wait that long to see it.
This blog will look into some of the reasons behind the decline in the popularity movies as well as my opinions on what the theatres could do to fix this problem.
According to this website, one of the largest contributing factors to the decline in movie theatres is social issues, such as people talking on their cell phones, babies crying, etc. I also think people having conversations in person plays a part in this.
"Purple Violets" is a movie that won't release in theatres; it will release on iTunes. Anyone who has $13 to download it can. But is this really cheaper than going to the movies and seeing it? With all factors considered, probably. First there is the movie ticket itself. In my hometown we could see a movie for $3. That movie wasn't just released, but it hadn't come out on DVD yet. However, other theatres have much more expensive tickets. Then there's the gas to get there. We can see movies at our theatre in Valley City, but they stay here for like two weeks and there's only two at a time, so we have to drive to Fargo or Jamestown if we want to see a specific one. Then of course, there's the popcorn and pop which is rediculously over-priced at theatres. (Though in my hometown we could get popcorn and pop for a dollar).
Josh Wolf says that the value of actually going to the movies is becoming less and less significant. "At the same time, I can't see the movie theater going away as a dating oasis and the refuge for teenage lovers that it has always been," Wolf says in his article.
Going back to home theatres systems, some think Blu-Ray will knock off movie theatres. For me, who has a small T.V. and a regular DVD player, the movie theatre's movies are much better quality and more enjoyable, but I've seen high-def. and Blu-Ray, and it's probably better quality than watching movies at the theatre.
An article says that distinct advantages movie theatres once boasted, such as superior picture quality and surround sound,have been eliminated by the latest innovations in home theater technology.
I think that in order for theatres to make a comeback, they have to keep up with high-definition technology. They also have to realize that people want to feel more at-home in the theatres, so reclining, comfy seats and maybe even couches might offer that. One disadvantage with that, though, is that then people may feel even more comfortable and the social problems I mentioned at the beginning of my blog might escalate.
Do you think movie theatres are becoming/will become obsolete? What do you think will be the ultimate downfall for movie theatres? What do you think they could do to make a comeback?
This blog will look into some of the reasons behind the decline in the popularity movies as well as my opinions on what the theatres could do to fix this problem.
According to this website, one of the largest contributing factors to the decline in movie theatres is social issues, such as people talking on their cell phones, babies crying, etc. I also think people having conversations in person plays a part in this.
"Purple Violets" is a movie that won't release in theatres; it will release on iTunes. Anyone who has $13 to download it can. But is this really cheaper than going to the movies and seeing it? With all factors considered, probably. First there is the movie ticket itself. In my hometown we could see a movie for $3. That movie wasn't just released, but it hadn't come out on DVD yet. However, other theatres have much more expensive tickets. Then there's the gas to get there. We can see movies at our theatre in Valley City, but they stay here for like two weeks and there's only two at a time, so we have to drive to Fargo or Jamestown if we want to see a specific one. Then of course, there's the popcorn and pop which is rediculously over-priced at theatres. (Though in my hometown we could get popcorn and pop for a dollar).
Josh Wolf says that the value of actually going to the movies is becoming less and less significant. "At the same time, I can't see the movie theater going away as a dating oasis and the refuge for teenage lovers that it has always been," Wolf says in his article.
Going back to home theatres systems, some think Blu-Ray will knock off movie theatres. For me, who has a small T.V. and a regular DVD player, the movie theatre's movies are much better quality and more enjoyable, but I've seen high-def. and Blu-Ray, and it's probably better quality than watching movies at the theatre.
An article says that distinct advantages movie theatres once boasted, such as superior picture quality and surround sound,have been eliminated by the latest innovations in home theater technology.
I think that in order for theatres to make a comeback, they have to keep up with high-definition technology. They also have to realize that people want to feel more at-home in the theatres, so reclining, comfy seats and maybe even couches might offer that. One disadvantage with that, though, is that then people may feel even more comfortable and the social problems I mentioned at the beginning of my blog might escalate.
Do you think movie theatres are becoming/will become obsolete? What do you think will be the ultimate downfall for movie theatres? What do you think they could do to make a comeback?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
