So i'd like to start of saying I'm not a fantasy movie kind of girl- However, i thought this movie was pretty impressive. The story was a little hard to follow at first but it started to make sense a little bit into it. The director also had a way of ending the movie where you HAVE to see the sequels or you just feel completely lost!
I thought the characters in this movie were very interesting. The girl who was an owl just blew my mind. When she started changing i was like no way! I also liked how there was the oppostion with good and evil so ,as the audience, we always want the good to win. The way it ended good wasn't winning which only makes everyone want to see the sequel to see the good succeed. Furthermore, when we found of that the little boy was the son of Aton it was shocking since he wanted that baby dead. It was clear once he figured it out he really wanted to protect him and make sure he didn't get hurt or end up on the bad side. Finally, i was a little confused of the significance of the blonde woman. They were calling her 'the other' but also calling the blonde woman 'the other' so it was throwing me off. I also wasn't clear what the bald man (wearing the black wig) was suppose to do in the room with the blonde woman because he clearly didn't accomplish his goal. I'm assuming that maybe this will be a little more clear in the sequel and i can't wait to see it!
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
The Return
So i would like to start off why saying that this is probably my second favorite movie that we've watched so far in this class. I have no idea why it just grabbed me because i was always wondering what was going to happen next. As for the filming i can tell the director was inspired by Tarkovsky simply by his love for natural scenery. It seemed he was always freezing the camera on water dripping, or trees that were just beautiful pieces of nature. Furthermore, i remember a similar scene from a Tarkovsky film with the crosses present in this film as well.
As for the movie itself, I felt as though at the dinner table it was an awkward way for a father to come home. A homecoming should be a celebration but the father was just like "hey" and moved on like he never left which didn't really leave any closure for Ivan. Furthermore, i felt as though the father was trying to do 12 years of fathering in a matter of a week which is just too much for someone Ivan's age to accept. Theres a difference between tough love and near torcher and i felt like he was going beyond tough love. Its hard for children to accept a man telling them what to do when they haven't had it in 12 years. Furthermore, i was upset that we never found out why the father disappeared, or what he was doing on this trip with the phone calls and the hidden box. I wish that would have been explained because that was the only thing that disappointed me about the film.
As for the movie itself, I felt as though at the dinner table it was an awkward way for a father to come home. A homecoming should be a celebration but the father was just like "hey" and moved on like he never left which didn't really leave any closure for Ivan. Furthermore, i felt as though the father was trying to do 12 years of fathering in a matter of a week which is just too much for someone Ivan's age to accept. Theres a difference between tough love and near torcher and i felt like he was going beyond tough love. Its hard for children to accept a man telling them what to do when they haven't had it in 12 years. Furthermore, i was upset that we never found out why the father disappeared, or what he was doing on this trip with the phone calls and the hidden box. I wish that would have been explained because that was the only thing that disappointed me about the film.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Brother
I enjoyed this movie a lot. It was a change of pace from the movies we have been watching, and it was more like something our generation would watch in the United States. I think on our triangle it was less artistic than the previous movies we watched. However, I am not saying that it was poorly filmed I just didn't see many things placed for artistic purposes.
As for the movie itself, i enjoyed many aspects of it. I thought it was interesting that the main character was obsessed with music. He was always commenting on peoples music, and always searching for CDs like it was a comforting thing for him or something. I also enjoyed how (although he was violent about it) he kind of helped people in need. He wanted to hurt the least amount of people while getting the task at hand completed. I felt as though the mob boss was much less intimidating than ones that we may see in American movies. The fact that he's always speaking in proverbs makes him more humorous than dangerous. Finally, i thought it was funny that the older brother (Viktor?) was the one in the end that was sent home to take care of his mother. Their mother said the older brother was someone the younger brother should look up to; however, he was the one in the end that tried to set his brother up and ended up weaping on the ground like a child. In the end it was like they switched roles and the younger brother took over the city and the older brother should look up to him. Overall, this movie was very good.
As for the movie itself, i enjoyed many aspects of it. I thought it was interesting that the main character was obsessed with music. He was always commenting on peoples music, and always searching for CDs like it was a comforting thing for him or something. I also enjoyed how (although he was violent about it) he kind of helped people in need. He wanted to hurt the least amount of people while getting the task at hand completed. I felt as though the mob boss was much less intimidating than ones that we may see in American movies. The fact that he's always speaking in proverbs makes him more humorous than dangerous. Finally, i thought it was funny that the older brother (Viktor?) was the one in the end that was sent home to take care of his mother. Their mother said the older brother was someone the younger brother should look up to; however, he was the one in the end that tried to set his brother up and ended up weaping on the ground like a child. In the end it was like they switched roles and the younger brother took over the city and the older brother should look up to him. Overall, this movie was very good.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Ivan's Childhood (1962)
Andrei Tarkovsky
I generally liked this movie. It was very different from the other movie we watched by Tarkovsky. This one was very easy to follow and was much more like a story-however, it seems as though Tarkovsky is a big fan of the flashback and dream sequences. He cuts out a lot of extra scenes by simply putting them in a dream so it's like a short version of a long story. This movie reminded me a lot of the Ballad of a Soldier because he followed a particular soldier through the war rather than all the soldiers and the war itself which leads one to believe it wasn't a film based on Socialist Realism.
There were a lot of things i liked about this movie. First, i liked Ivan's tough guy attitude. It as though he was literally fearless. I also liked how Ivan insisted on helping the war efforts and said "those who did nothing during war time were useless." I also loved how Kholin and Katasonov treated him like their son. It was nice to know they were thinking of adopting him after the war, which showed they really cared about him. Second, i thought the scene with Kholin and Masha in the birch forrest was beautiful. I know Tarkovsky appreciated nature- and this was one of the more striking natural environments that i've seen in a movie. However, the situation between Kholin, Masha, and Galtsev confused me. When in the woods, it seemed as though Masha was in no way interested in Kholin, but then they kissed and when he said come over here she did it. Then Galtsev wanted to transfer her so I couldn't figure out if he was mad at her or what the deal was exactly. Finally, i thought the movie gave a shocking account of the german massacres. Toward the end when they were going through the german HQ's they showed places where people were hanged, tortured etc. They also gave us the audio of when Ivan was hanged which was upsetting to hear.
Overall, i thought this movie gave a great account of a young boys interest in the war efforts while giving a background on why he was interested in doing so-I'm assuming to avenge his parents death since they were killed by germans. It was a sad movie; however, it was an enjoyable one.
I generally liked this movie. It was very different from the other movie we watched by Tarkovsky. This one was very easy to follow and was much more like a story-however, it seems as though Tarkovsky is a big fan of the flashback and dream sequences. He cuts out a lot of extra scenes by simply putting them in a dream so it's like a short version of a long story. This movie reminded me a lot of the Ballad of a Soldier because he followed a particular soldier through the war rather than all the soldiers and the war itself which leads one to believe it wasn't a film based on Socialist Realism.
There were a lot of things i liked about this movie. First, i liked Ivan's tough guy attitude. It as though he was literally fearless. I also liked how Ivan insisted on helping the war efforts and said "those who did nothing during war time were useless." I also loved how Kholin and Katasonov treated him like their son. It was nice to know they were thinking of adopting him after the war, which showed they really cared about him. Second, i thought the scene with Kholin and Masha in the birch forrest was beautiful. I know Tarkovsky appreciated nature- and this was one of the more striking natural environments that i've seen in a movie. However, the situation between Kholin, Masha, and Galtsev confused me. When in the woods, it seemed as though Masha was in no way interested in Kholin, but then they kissed and when he said come over here she did it. Then Galtsev wanted to transfer her so I couldn't figure out if he was mad at her or what the deal was exactly. Finally, i thought the movie gave a shocking account of the german massacres. Toward the end when they were going through the german HQ's they showed places where people were hanged, tortured etc. They also gave us the audio of when Ivan was hanged which was upsetting to hear.
Overall, i thought this movie gave a great account of a young boys interest in the war efforts while giving a background on why he was interested in doing so-I'm assuming to avenge his parents death since they were killed by germans. It was a sad movie; however, it was an enjoyable one.
Monday, January 19, 2009
The Mirror
Andrei Tarkovsky
I'm not going to say whether i liked or disliked this movie because I'm not really sure what I think about it yet. From reading the book I can tell that Tarkovsky puts a lot of effort into his movies and has a lot of passion for art whether in the form of a painting or through the cinema. After watching this movie, one quote that sticks out from the book is, "my job is to speak in living images, not in arguments. I must exibit life full-face, not discuss life...Otherwise the artist is imposing his thoughts on his audience." I feel like Tarkovsky lived by this quote. I, in no way, felt as though this movie was imposing any thoughts or messages on me. For Russian directors, this is a change of pace because it seems as though almost every movie so far had some sort of hidden or blatant message we were suppose to pick up.
As for the movie, there were some things i feel like i may have picked up (or again i may have noticed something that wasn't really there). In the beginning, Professor Isham told us to take it for what it was worth and not try to analyze it. So from that.. this is how I understood it. In the beginning, Ignat was shown being hypnotized. I know most of us noticed the microphone shadow in the back as an error in filming but I feel like maybe it was suppose to show us it was being filmed for a show-like a healing show. Furthermore, i feel like the main idea i kept picking up from this movie was human suffering and abandonment. The idea of Ignat's father leaving was reiterated many times throughout the movie. I remember a time when the mother said, "you should come around more often-he needs you." This just reminded me how important a father can be in a child's life and without one it's difficult to grow up. Furthermore, I felt like the mother didn't pay much attention to Ignat so it was like he had no one to turn to and was kind of alienated. As for the flashing of scenes I'm going to venture to say maybe this was trying to give us a sense of time-what era he was trying to express- like when he showed war scenes etc. Moreover, i just want to say I think Tarkovsky would have been an amazing director for horror films because some of his scenes were just so creepy. For example, when the mother and the man were standing starring at the burning barn-they had their backs to the camera and were staggered in a way that just reminded me of a scary movie. Continuing from this idea, i can understand why Ignat had a stutter because if I saw some of the things we saw i'd have a stutter to- like reading a book to a woman who disappeared? weeiirdd.
As for the year the movie was made- i was surprised to see the paper saying it was made in the 70's. Watching it, i assumed maybe late 50's but i did not expect it to be even close to the 70's. As for the title of the movie, mirror's reflect- so maybe Tarkovsky is trying to portray that he came from a home where he was alienated and had no real support system since his father left and his mom was kind of all over the place. So maybe Ignat is suppose to represent Andrei?? I don't know just an idea. All in all- the movie was gnerally confusing and if nothing i said was correct- then it was very misleading!
I'm not going to say whether i liked or disliked this movie because I'm not really sure what I think about it yet. From reading the book I can tell that Tarkovsky puts a lot of effort into his movies and has a lot of passion for art whether in the form of a painting or through the cinema. After watching this movie, one quote that sticks out from the book is, "my job is to speak in living images, not in arguments. I must exibit life full-face, not discuss life...Otherwise the artist is imposing his thoughts on his audience." I feel like Tarkovsky lived by this quote. I, in no way, felt as though this movie was imposing any thoughts or messages on me. For Russian directors, this is a change of pace because it seems as though almost every movie so far had some sort of hidden or blatant message we were suppose to pick up.
As for the movie, there were some things i feel like i may have picked up (or again i may have noticed something that wasn't really there). In the beginning, Professor Isham told us to take it for what it was worth and not try to analyze it. So from that.. this is how I understood it. In the beginning, Ignat was shown being hypnotized. I know most of us noticed the microphone shadow in the back as an error in filming but I feel like maybe it was suppose to show us it was being filmed for a show-like a healing show. Furthermore, i feel like the main idea i kept picking up from this movie was human suffering and abandonment. The idea of Ignat's father leaving was reiterated many times throughout the movie. I remember a time when the mother said, "you should come around more often-he needs you." This just reminded me how important a father can be in a child's life and without one it's difficult to grow up. Furthermore, I felt like the mother didn't pay much attention to Ignat so it was like he had no one to turn to and was kind of alienated. As for the flashing of scenes I'm going to venture to say maybe this was trying to give us a sense of time-what era he was trying to express- like when he showed war scenes etc. Moreover, i just want to say I think Tarkovsky would have been an amazing director for horror films because some of his scenes were just so creepy. For example, when the mother and the man were standing starring at the burning barn-they had their backs to the camera and were staggered in a way that just reminded me of a scary movie. Continuing from this idea, i can understand why Ignat had a stutter because if I saw some of the things we saw i'd have a stutter to- like reading a book to a woman who disappeared? weeiirdd.
As for the year the movie was made- i was surprised to see the paper saying it was made in the 70's. Watching it, i assumed maybe late 50's but i did not expect it to be even close to the 70's. As for the title of the movie, mirror's reflect- so maybe Tarkovsky is trying to portray that he came from a home where he was alienated and had no real support system since his father left and his mom was kind of all over the place. So maybe Ignat is suppose to represent Andrei?? I don't know just an idea. All in all- the movie was gnerally confusing and if nothing i said was correct- then it was very misleading!
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Ballad of a Soldier (1959)
I thought The Ballad of a Soldier was a very good movie. I enjoyed how different it was from other war films because instead of focusing on the war/fighting, it focused on one individual soldier. This allows you to realize that soldiers aren't just mindless violent people, they acutally have homes, families, and feelings. I feel like the message that this movie is trying to explore is that wars are fought by individuals and that they are sacrificing things to fight for a cause which is something their families experience too. One thing that is prevalent in both this film and the realist films is the romantic relationship.
Moreover, there were many aspects of this film that i enjoyed. First, I loved how helpful and polite Alyosha was in this movie. It kind of showed how different things used to be, and how trusting people used to be. I know now not many people can say they would trust another person to carry their luggage around with them and not steal it. It was refreshing to see that Alyosha would give up things for himself to help others. This was even shown when he lied to the soldiers grandfather about how well his son was doing when he didn't know him at all. Second- although that was getting kind of irritating when he was wasting his time doing this for others when he had to get home to help his mother with the roof. He was taking WAY to much on his shoulders and it just wasn't possible to get it all done. Third, i love how the actor's faces look throughout the film. In particular, I remember one close-up of Shura sleeping while waiting for Alyosha and there was just the right amount of light on her face where it looked so perfect-almost airbrushed. Moreover, when Alyosha saved everyone from the train- the way it was filmed was pretty cool. The way the scene was filmed it was like all we could see was Alyosha shadow with the flames in the back round as he carried people out. This can allow me to believe that a hero is faceless- meaning Alyosha isn't doing it for fame he did it to help. Furthemore, it can show us that anyone can be a hero. Also, in this scene Alyosha is sitting on the ground after saving everyone and one man walks by and says that hes useless and to get out of the way. This kind of reminded me about how when men would come back from war they were temporary heroes and then everyone forgot about them. Finally, i thought it was interesting how the entire town was excited to see Alyosha come home and they all wanted to know how their family members were doing. It was like-for the most part- people gave up on those who went to war-and they simply gave up when they left. Alyosha mom even said she gave up on his father when he left. Thats disturbing to hear because these people were fighting for everyone and their girlfriends/wives were very selfish in giving up on them so easily.
I feel like Alyosha's story is more than just a single Russian soldier because every single one of them wanted to go home and see their family. What he experienced was something they all wanted to do except Alyosha is the only one who got the chance. I think it was significant that Alyosha saved people from the burning train because his heroism from the war was kind of a fluke but he pulled through when he needed to show he was brave and a real hero. The only thing i didn't like about this film was the lack of a proper ending. I would love to have known what happened with Alyosha and whether he was one of the few that made it home. All in all, this movie was very good and showed up a different aspect of war that a lot of us don't get to experience.
Moreover, there were many aspects of this film that i enjoyed. First, I loved how helpful and polite Alyosha was in this movie. It kind of showed how different things used to be, and how trusting people used to be. I know now not many people can say they would trust another person to carry their luggage around with them and not steal it. It was refreshing to see that Alyosha would give up things for himself to help others. This was even shown when he lied to the soldiers grandfather about how well his son was doing when he didn't know him at all. Second- although that was getting kind of irritating when he was wasting his time doing this for others when he had to get home to help his mother with the roof. He was taking WAY to much on his shoulders and it just wasn't possible to get it all done. Third, i love how the actor's faces look throughout the film. In particular, I remember one close-up of Shura sleeping while waiting for Alyosha and there was just the right amount of light on her face where it looked so perfect-almost airbrushed. Moreover, when Alyosha saved everyone from the train- the way it was filmed was pretty cool. The way the scene was filmed it was like all we could see was Alyosha shadow with the flames in the back round as he carried people out. This can allow me to believe that a hero is faceless- meaning Alyosha isn't doing it for fame he did it to help. Furthemore, it can show us that anyone can be a hero. Also, in this scene Alyosha is sitting on the ground after saving everyone and one man walks by and says that hes useless and to get out of the way. This kind of reminded me about how when men would come back from war they were temporary heroes and then everyone forgot about them. Finally, i thought it was interesting how the entire town was excited to see Alyosha come home and they all wanted to know how their family members were doing. It was like-for the most part- people gave up on those who went to war-and they simply gave up when they left. Alyosha mom even said she gave up on his father when he left. Thats disturbing to hear because these people were fighting for everyone and their girlfriends/wives were very selfish in giving up on them so easily.
I feel like Alyosha's story is more than just a single Russian soldier because every single one of them wanted to go home and see their family. What he experienced was something they all wanted to do except Alyosha is the only one who got the chance. I think it was significant that Alyosha saved people from the burning train because his heroism from the war was kind of a fluke but he pulled through when he needed to show he was brave and a real hero. The only thing i didn't like about this film was the lack of a proper ending. I would love to have known what happened with Alyosha and whether he was one of the few that made it home. All in all, this movie was very good and showed up a different aspect of war that a lot of us don't get to experience.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Burnt By The Sun
I thought this movie was very good but depressing! However, it did a great job of showing you something you've heard about but never really saw or experienced. We've heard about families getting picked up in the middle of the night, but its not as bad as acutally seeing it. What i like was how the characters were built up in the beginning of the movie. That way we felt a connection with them and didn't want to see bad things happen to them. For example, Kotov had an amazing relationship with his daughter and once we realized what was happening to him it was painful to watch because you didn't want to see anything that would break her heart. Second, i really disliked Mitya from the beginning. I don't know why but i just had a bad feeling about him in general..Then when he told Nadya that a car was coming for Kotov i knew exactly what was going on. I felt he was definately the villian of the film.
As for the title, i felt like it was a perfect match to the movie. I think of the sun as a powerful source of life and death since if it went out that would pretty much annilhilate human life. Therefore, i felt it was easy to compare it to the revolution since it was the cause of people losing their lives and it was a source of power. I also felt the message from this movie was a very strong one since in the last scene it said "for those hurt by the Revolution." I guess it could be compared to the '9/11' movie that was made shortly after the incident because it was to make us angry at terrorist and to feel sorry for those who suffered. Therefore, i feel like this movie could be international since its views can affect anyone who has felt victimized.
I felt Kotov was a very strong willed character who would never go against his country since he always said he'd die for 'the motherland.' Therefore, i felt Mitya's theories were far fetched and motivated by his love for Marusia. I felt as though he was a much better leader than Chapaev as well because he had a way of talking to people that was friendly, but stern. Overall, this movie really made you feel what happened in the 30's instead of just hearing about it. It really made you feel for the families that were affected by the Revolution
I thought this movie was very good but depressing! However, it did a great job of showing you something you've heard about but never really saw or experienced. We've heard about families getting picked up in the middle of the night, but its not as bad as acutally seeing it. What i like was how the characters were built up in the beginning of the movie. That way we felt a connection with them and didn't want to see bad things happen to them. For example, Kotov had an amazing relationship with his daughter and once we realized what was happening to him it was painful to watch because you didn't want to see anything that would break her heart. Second, i really disliked Mitya from the beginning. I don't know why but i just had a bad feeling about him in general..Then when he told Nadya that a car was coming for Kotov i knew exactly what was going on. I felt he was definately the villian of the film.
As for the title, i felt like it was a perfect match to the movie. I think of the sun as a powerful source of life and death since if it went out that would pretty much annilhilate human life. Therefore, i felt it was easy to compare it to the revolution since it was the cause of people losing their lives and it was a source of power. I also felt the message from this movie was a very strong one since in the last scene it said "for those hurt by the Revolution." I guess it could be compared to the '9/11' movie that was made shortly after the incident because it was to make us angry at terrorist and to feel sorry for those who suffered. Therefore, i feel like this movie could be international since its views can affect anyone who has felt victimized.
I felt Kotov was a very strong willed character who would never go against his country since he always said he'd die for 'the motherland.' Therefore, i felt Mitya's theories were far fetched and motivated by his love for Marusia. I felt as though he was a much better leader than Chapaev as well because he had a way of talking to people that was friendly, but stern. Overall, this movie really made you feel what happened in the 30's instead of just hearing about it. It really made you feel for the families that were affected by the Revolution
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
