Kiss Me Deadly

In 1999, Kiss Me Deadly was inducted into the National Film Registry which requires the film to be "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". Personally, I think it was for sure aesthetically significant, in the last scene especially. Who would have thought that in 1955 they had the technology to film a flaming screaming box?!

Robert Weston has a nice sum up of why it could possibly be a perfect film noir,
"Frankly, it's got everything. The predominance of darkness and nighttime? Check. Morally ambiguous protagonists? Check. Existential underpinnings? Check. Dramatic compositions influenced by German Expressionist artists and filmmakers? Check, check, check."

I think that if for nothing else, the film should be acknowledged because of the crazy low budget it had, with respect to how well known it has become. With a budget of only about $400,000 it's one of few, besides maybe Monty Python and the Holy Grail ($400,000) and Napoleon Dynamite ($400,000), that has become so successful and known to film people all over.

Film/Plum Noir

With such a beautiful flowing name (Film Noir) I expected the genre to be just as beautiful as my new nail color (Plum Noir). However, as the color Plum Noir is hypnotizingly gorgeous in its depth and richness, I felt that the Film Noir, Out of the Past, just couldn't surpass that standard.

I thought that the movie was 'good', but I think I wasn't expecting all the bluntness and hostility. I don't think it's a genre for me. Yes, the suspense and mood was fun to get into, but I did not like starting off my day in shock that all the characters died leaving me in a somewhat heavy mood. So really, the film was just lacking that plum richness- the color/mood of a little bit of hope and dreaminess- because it was a very brutal ending.

Eternal Sunshine

Stephanie Zacharek of Salon.com wrote this review of Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind which I found a little bit interesting. I'll highlight the main point she tried to get across, which was basically that she didn't like the movie, but I personally think that she loved it and she was just sad that it ended.

It's as if young filmmakers fear that their audiences will become bored with a
movie if they don't have a clever mind-boggler to wrestle with along the way. In grappling with these perplexing riddles, we're supposedly exercising our intellect. But isn't it also possible that we're using them as a handy diversion, a way of
distancing ourselves from emotions that might be too strong for us to deal with
easily? Labyrinthine plots are supposed to stimulate us. But are they really
just distracting us from the work at hand -- the work of feeling?

I think she's onto something there- in the way that this film could have moved away from the psychological aspects and literal mind erasing, and moved more towards the feelings and emotions Clementine and Joel. However, I think that the movie is very 'feeling' related, and I don't know how you could watch the movie without being very involved in the feelings between the Joel and Clem.

But just as there's a difference between knowing things and being informed,
there's a difference between going all the way with a movie and going only as
far as is convenient or comfortable.That said, I suspect that whether they recognize it or not, audiences yearn for movies that can make them think and feel.

Although she has a point with the whole 'going halfway' film-making , I think she pinned the wrong movie. I think that Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind has plenty of feeling and thinking and does it very well. You'd have to be a buckthorn tree to not be able to see the emotion behind all the 'thinking' scenes and the feelings that come along with them. I think maybe people are just too wrapped up in knowing exactly what is going on and when everything is happening, that they miss the underlying themes and moods of the film.

So in your opinion, do you think that movies these days are trying to nix out the 'feeling' parts, and that audiences need to be entertained in an intriguing mind-boggler way?

Chalk

Ok, so I watched this movie a few nights ago, and I would just like to applaud it for the following reasons:

1) It was funny, but not too funny. The humor level was at the point where I'd chuckle to myself a little bit and every once in awhile pull a Mr. Roddy and burst out with one laughter note.

2) The characters were easy to follow, with their problems/goals very reasonable and easy to understand. It wasn't a big 'figure it out' movie, it just happened, without questions.

3) The length was BEAUTIFUL. 84 minutes. Solid. I love a movie that starts, gets its point across, and ends. I don't need a trick ending, and I don't need anything to drag on. It was just enough of suspense to keep me enjoying it and it was just enough wrap up to not make me wonder too much.

All in all, well done.

His Girl Friday

While drawing a blank on what to write about for His Girl Friday, because I feel like my opinion is getting a little bit boring, I decided to explore why it fits so well as a screwball comedy instead of a romantic comedy (I know, really thrilling, right?).

First of all, the characters are ridiculous. Take Earl Williams for example. Looking back on the film, he killed someone after sitting in a park for awhile and losing a job and shot someone maybe to escape something? Whatever his true story is, it's very wacky and no one ever challenges the validity of what he says or does.

Also, the romantic aspect is not played up at all. There is one kiss (I think) in the whole film, which is literally just a goodbye peck. This adds to the screwball-ness of the film because the focus isn't on the lovey dovey relationships, it's on the fact that Walter and Hildy have a career together and nothing - not even Bruce - can keep her away from it.

Lastly, there is only one main time when the audience ever "agonizes" over whether Hildy and Walter will get together, and it only lasts for maybe a minute before they've made up their minds.

unfor-who cares.

I did not enjoy the movie unforgiven. I don't like movies with a lot of violence in them, and this movie was too painful to watch. However, I do not think that there would have been any other way to get the message of the movie across without the brutal killing scenes. To get into the head of Will Munny and to get into the emotions of the Schofield Kid would not have been possible without seeing them actually kill innocent people. I also think that Ned almost gave the audience an 'out' (before he was killed) to rest assured that at least someone was being a good honest person. The fact that the movie didn't just end with the two men dead made it a whole lot more of an emotional wreck for the audience. They couldn't just end it with getting money and meeting up with Ned; they had to bring a whole new aspect to the film, killing Ned unjustly and making Will need the revenge aspect. I think that there wasn't really another way to get the audience that involved in their lives, but personally I do not support it.

this has nothing to do with film; it is sweet, learn about it.