Cast: Ralph Fiennes [M. Gustave], Jude Law [Author], Tony Revolori [Zero Moustafa]
The Grand Budapest Hotel: A popular European ski resort in the 1930s, run by concierge Gustave H. with Zero, a junior lobby boy, becoming his friend and protege. Gustave prides himself on providing first-class service to the hotel’s guests. When one of Gustave’s lovers suddenly dies, he finds himself the recipient of a priceless painting and the chief suspect in her murder.
Inspired by: Writings of Stefan Zweig
My rating: 9/10
Narrative aspects
‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’, directed by Wes Anderson, is a film that stretches out the extent to which one’s imagination can be built upon and presented to an audience. Inspired by the works of Stefan Zweig, Anderson developed brilliantly multi-layered characters with intricate and lavish set design and a plotline that is captivating for an audience no matter if they like films with this one’s aesthetical layout or presentation. The film plays around with narrative, building a skeleton that seems as if it is a take on Christopher Nolan’s ‘Inception’:
1st level = A girl reading a book called ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’ by a statue of remembrance
2nd level = Old ‘Author’ telling the story into the camera about his book ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’ from when he worked there
3rd level = Young ‘Author’ meeting the elderly Zero Moustafa, who tells him the experiences he had when he was younger.
4th level = Young Zero Moustafa travelling on adventures with Gustave H. while being the lobby boy for The Grand Budapest Hotel.
This in-depth take on a story reflects how impactful and captivating the experiences of Zero and the event revolving around Gustave H. were in the history of the hotel as well as for the Republic of Zubrowka. Generations continue to talk and discover more about this particular part of history in the fictional world Wes Anderson created. There is a story within a story and each level of the plot is vital to the other one progressing. moreover, the fourth level of the story (as described above) is further divided into five different chapters, further giving the film the feel of the audience reading a visual book than watching a film. It steps out of the conventions of a film, combining and creating synergy with two different entertainment mediums. Also, it follows the idea of the film’s core plot being eventually written into a book that the young girl in the first level (see above) reads.
Infer & Deduce: ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’ shares its name with the hotel in the film that serves as the main turning point in the plot as well as where the main character, M. Gustave H. works. It is the heart of the story while serving as a topic that generations read and talk about, as seen in the film. An audience immediately sees the relation and significance of the hotel to the entire plot of the film.
Technical Aspects
Wes Anderson is an auteur with a unique visual style. Where his narrative lacks in depth, the aesthetic in which he presents the world of stories makes his films visually pleasing and entertaining. He is truly an artist, using his films as a canvas to portray the world of his imagination.
Much like with his other films, Anderson incorporates unique camera movements that set his film aside from other films at the box office. Especially in The Grand Budapest Hotel, all camera movements consist of panning left and right, tilting up and down, dolly forwards and backwards and using a crane for moving the camera up and down. Rarely (i.e. 2 or 3 shots in the film), the use of hand-held shots are made. The camera movements complement the fairy-like setting for his characters as well as the homage he pays to a vintage look in The Grand Budapest Hotel, is apt for the time period in which it is set. Similarly, Anderson is more prominently known for the colour palettes he incorporates into the look of the entire film as well as different colour schemes from scene to scene. The colour palette in this film is bright but elegant, filled with purples, yellows, reds and pinks. These colours reflect some sort of special occasion’s colour scheme, or desired colours for desserts and pastries, an element that is closely associated with the hotel business in the film. The old aesthetic is also seen through the elaborate, time, setting and character-specific costumes and props that give implicit details on the personality of the variety of characters, the aspects of the locations used and the plot as well.
To add on, there is a lot of diegetic voice narration in the film, which helps to establish certain plot points from a third person point of view. Also, it reminds the audience of the ‘story within a story’ concept of the film, where the author is telling a story of Zero Mustafa. Moreover, the variety of aspect ratios used within the film (Cinemascope, 4:3 etc) helps to differentiate between the different levels of the story and help establish the time period in which each level takes place. Also, it is aesthetically pleasing!
Favourite Scene
This scene is one of my favourites. It is near the beginning of the film and introduces the two main protagonists of the film: Gustave and Zero. Gustave meets his new lobby boy and decides to interview him while he completes his daily errands, and the humorous side of both the characters is established in this introductory scene. While Gustave asks the new employee questions about his prior experience in the hotel business, Zero answers every question with a comedic ‘zero’, indicating his lack of experience and alluding to his name.
Gustave’s personality is understood with more depth through this scene as he is witnessed genuinely caring for the hotel he works at as a concierge and does not consider it as just a job. He is also the core powerhouse that the entire hotel operations runs on, as all his subordinates ask for his approval for certain hotel management aspects while he interviews Zero.
Visually, the scenes seem to have natural lighting (at least in the appearance) which contrasts with the unrealistic use of colour and costumes. Within the hotel, the setting is not over-illuminated as it would be expected in a fairytale-like surrounding that the hotel looks like. The lighting also aids with the saturated colours within the setting that enhance the tone and mood of this scene, and the entire film in general. This scene, being at the beginning, establishes the mood of the film through its array of bright colours. To add on, there are a variety of shot types, movements and angles in this short duration of the scene that also compliment towards setting the round-off idea and feel of the film that viewers can familiarise themselves with.
What would I do differently?
‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’ uses brilliant camera techniques, has a multi-layered story with intriguing characters and is aesthetically very pleasing to watch. Personally, I would not choose to change anything. It is the perfect movie for my own viewing and every time I watch it I enjoy it as if it is my first time.
Cast: Jack Nicholson [J.J. ‘Jake’ Gittes], Faye Dunaway [Evelyn Cross Mulwray], John Huston [Noah Cross]
J.J. Gittes, a private eye in Los Angeles, is hired by Evelyn Mulwray to investigate her husband’s activities. Jake’s investigation soon becomes something more than routine when he meets the real Mrs Mulwray and realises that he was hired by an imposter. Mr Mulwray’s sudden death leads Gittes into a trail of corruption, deception and eerie family secrets as Evelyn’s father becomes a suspect in the case.
‘Chinatown’ is a brilliant example for the use of the three-act structure, a method of division used in story-telling to keep the plot cohesive, systematic and engaging for a reader or audience. It allows story-telling to fall under a fixed skeletal framework which follows a character on a journey through the beginning, middle and end (in a broad sense):
Act 1 is usually for the ‘Exposition’ or ‘Set-Up’ and establishes the main characters, the relationships and the universe of the story. Soon, the incident of the story takes place and the main character, usually the protagonist, is made aware of it by him/herself or another outside source. The attempts to deal with the incident usually spiral into a much more bigger or deeper problem. The first turning point takes place, which ‘(a) signals the end of the first act, (b) ensures life will never be the same again for the protagonist and (c) raises a dramatic question that will be answered in the climax of the film.’ (Wikipedia)
J.J. Gittes is introduced to the audience as a tenacious yet arrogant private investigator working on his own venture and firm to provide services to the general public. They are also introduced to his colleagues and rivals then witness the set up of a new case that seems to be like any regular infidelity-in-relationship deal when Mrs Mulwray comes to his office. Though however, Jake Gittes soon realises that an imposter came to his office that day and the real Mrs Mulwray suspects no problems in the relationship with her husband, who is found dead in the water days later. Jake takes the case as his main priority and realises soon that something bigger is going on.
Act 2 serves as the ‘Rising Action’ or ‘Conflict’ typically shows the protagonist try in resolving the problem that occurred during the previous act, only to find that the situation is worsening. The protagonist may be unable to solve the problems faced because he/she may not have the skills at hand to deal with it and the negative forces, the antagonist, he/she are fighting. The protagonist develops as a character with a greater understanding of their capabilities as well as a better awareness of their surroundings (a character arc). Usually, the protagonist is supported by others since they cannot achieve their goals alone.
J.J. Grittes is seen uncovering the deeper and darker secrets of the situation regarding Mr Mulwray, Mrs Mulwray and her father Noah Cross, and how it all ties in with the problems involving the water supply in the city. J.J. Grittes does not seem to have the interrogative expertise to deal with the deadliness of the situation he has stumbled upon, though he develops as a character and the audience truly sees him grow as an individual who actually cares about the people he works for, in this case, Evelyn Mulwray.
Act 3 is the ‘Resolution’ of the story and its probable sub-plots (whether about character relationships or a side plot to the main one). This act contains the ‘Climax’ where the main tensions of the story are brought to their peak and the dramatic effect is heightened as well, usually leaving the protagonist and other characters involved with a greater new sense of who they are after having the main question answered. At a point, the victory for the protagonist may seem impossible but perseverance is witnessed along with the wisdom of new ideas or trials that finally lead him/her to success. Though however, in some stories, the characters are left with a cliffhanger or an unsatisfactory ending to what they were looking for. Nevertheless, the protagonist becomes more aware of their new capabilities.
J.J. Grittes is made aware of Noah Cross and how big of a toll he is in the crime that he is in the process of solving. Noah Cross turns out to be more villainous than imagined when his abuse towards his daughter Evelyn is revealed. Grittes is battling between catching Cross while avoiding the police force, like Lieutenant Lou Escobar. In the end, the film reaches the climax where Grittes is threatened by Cross and thus the foreshadowing of no victory becomes true with Evelyn being shot dead and Cross taking custody of her daughter. The film leaves the audience with a strangely sad and satisfying end as the detective does not get the solution he wanted and worked for. In conclusion, the audience learns that “It’s Chinatown”.
Infer & Deduce: The reason for the title of the film does not strike at first but while watching the film it becomes apparent that it means more than just referencing to a cultural area in America named ‘Chinatown’. Throughout the film, China and people from that country are referenced but this still does not give a clear indication as to why the film devotes it’s identifying title to that place. One would think that it could be an expression for something but now, after the release of the film, it has more or less been used as it. Previously, using the word Chinatown would only be associated with the area belonging to that ethnicity but now the film has coined a phrase that continues to live on as an expression in conversation. But it all still bears the unanswered question as to why the film is called ‘Chinatown’. This doubt is cleared up when J.J. “Jake” Grittes first mentions that he had some dealings in the place Chinatown in the film while he was an officer. (This is further explored in the section ‘Favourite Scene’ below)
Technical Aspects
‘Chinatown’ is a film where the plot takes place in the realm of the plausible reality and even so since it does inspire its plot points from the actual California Water Wars incident. Because of this, the location and set designs used do resemble real life and mirror the personalities and living styles of people who most probably do exist, like business magnates and their families, and private investigators and police officers. Scenes in natural environments like many desert scenes seem to use prominent natural lighting and are shot during the day to set the scene better for the audience to understand. Moreover, the film makes great use of suburban town life and uses empty streets outside shops and houses for scenes of J.J. Grittes following suspects or the suspects making a getaway.
Moving forward, the soundtrack of the film compliments the genre as well as the scenes in the film as Grittes follows suspects and continues the investigation at certain locations or in his office. Though it is interesting to note that this film does have a minimal use of soundtrack to convey certain emotions or carry on as the background for a scene. The lack of non-diegetic music and the prominence of silence present in the film reflects the reality of the situation, wherein normal real life people do not have music to compliments the emotions they feel in a given situation, and it is merely a tool used in visual mediums to convey to an audience more non-spoken details about characters, plots, settings or themes. In scenes where Gittes is on a stake-out, following characters while maintaining his anonymity, the silence heightens the tension and the reality of keeping quiet in a critical situation like it when a detective is investigating. The audience is taken on a journey into the inner workings of a detective and how they complete their tasks, whether morally or immorally.
Above all, like many of the films in history and especially considering the mystery genre, camera techniques play an important role in the way in which an audience perceives a situation and how it affects the progression of the plot. In ‘Chinatown’ the camera usually follows the viewing field of the character it is focused on (in most cases J.J. Grittes) tracing their gaze and seeing what the character sees without the scene being in the first person point of view. Furthermore, the camera moves with pans and dollies to reveal certain subjects in a scene, people or objects, that were not visible before, which goes well with the mystery genre since the idea of it is all about revealing the unknown and figuring out the solution to a probably unsolvable problem. An example of this is a scene towards the beginning of the film where Jake is watching a man out in the desert with binoculars. The camera follows the man but then dollies out and pans to the right to reveal Jake standing by a pillar and keeping an eye on his actions.
Favourite Scene
When a film maintains the level of suspense and intrigue created in the audience throughout its entire time-frame, an ending to it needs to be worthy and ‘Chinatown’ has a conclusion that was sort of uncalled for but satisfying. After learning the abusive truth about Mrs Mulwray’s father, Jake confronts Noah Cross and is only challenged by his superiority in status that stops Jake from arresting him. Noah ends up getting away with shooting his daughter Evelyn and taking custody of his granddaughter (and daughter), winning the entire showdown and leaving Jake in a silent stare.
This scene is not only powerful as it brings about this fantastic story to an end but it also sports a created phrase that is still used in places today:
Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.
— Lawrence Walsh
This line at first seems to be nothing more than a plain reference to Jake’s previous workings in the location of Chinatown as an officer and having some tough times while completing cases. However, this saying does have a deeper meaning to the entire situation the film depicted. The phrase said by Lawrence Walsh, J.J. Gittes partner, simply means that ‘what happens, happens’ and there is nothing a mere man like Jake can do anything about. He is just one man in front of a powerful individual like Noah Cross, which would make it seem as if Jake worked on the case with both hands tied behind his back. Jake continues to battle against the injustice of the law system and how wealth and status is majorly determined by how much money a person has with them, which is exactly the factor that makes Noah Cross the superior being in the situation and allows him to swiftly get away with the murder and abuse of his daughter and her husband Mr Mulwray. The film sheds light on a very real and important issue in society as injustice takes place on a regular occasion, sadly, whether to do with race, religion, gender, age, money or occupation. Despite the level of education, people receive and the awareness created in relation to current events, prejudice still runs the day and this is exactly seen in ‘Chinatown’, though however, no one dares to challenge Noah Cross since he could practically buy out the police force or the best lawyers the country has to offer.
The audience also sees the character development in Jake Gittes, from appearing as an extremely confident and arrogant private investigator to one that now seems to actually care about the people he works for and wants the best for them. The expression of despair and loss is clear on his face when he sees Mrs Mulwray’s blood-soaked body in the driver seat of the car, clearly depicting that he really feels the weight of being taken advantage of and no matter how much he would want to help and make things right (take down Noah Cross) he is helpless and cannot do anything. Jake has turned towards having his own private eye venture after leaving the police force to better help the people who hire him, where the police would shrug off. He even states when he is getting a shave at the barber’s shop that:
Listen, pal. I make an honest living. People only come to me when they’re in a desperate situation. I help ’em out. I don’t kick families out of their houses like you bums down at the bank do.
This would portray Jake as someone who wants the good of the community to be the product of his work and be someone who is there for people when the police would not. Though the last scene makes it clear that no matter how good at heart Jake, or in fact anyone, is there is no stopping the people with power over everyone else who can sway the sympathies of special forces that govern a country’s way of running.
What would I do differently?
Being an avid fan of the mystery genre, ‘Chinatown’ appealed to me as a film. The story is intriguing and keeps an audience engaged till the resolution, or mystery’s answer, at the end whether it is seen as justice or not. I would not change anything about the film as it starred brilliant characters and an issue addressed that is factual (the California water wars). Although, making it with modern day camera and effect quality would make the film much more suited appearance-wise for the audience of today. Moreover, this film’s narrative would actually suit as a televised mini-series going on for a season of 5 to 10 episodes. Jack Nicholson as the main character, did an amazing job portraying the character of Jake Grittes and his arrogant but considerate attitude towards helping the people who hire him. To add on, the director and the screenwriter brilliantly captured the essence of an issue that was, in reality, a big part of history for the USA, while the rest of the crew brought the mise-en-scene to enhance the atmosphere at everyone moment in the film.
Cast: Tom Cruise [Frank T.J. Mackey], Philip Seymour Hoffman [Phil Parma], Julianne Moore [Linda Patridge]
On a random day in San Fernando Valley, a dying father, a young wife, a male caretaker, a famous lost son, a police officer in love, a boy genius, an ex-boy genius, an ex-boy genius, a game show host and an estranged daughter will each become part of a dazzling multiplicity of plots, but of one story.
My rating: 8/10
Narrative aspects
‘Magnolia’ is a film that has its storyline divided into different sections with the obvious weather forecast headings like ‘Light Showers. 99% Humidity. Winds SE 12 MPH.‘, and also the more frequent use of various characters and their lives which switch between each other. This allows the audience to finds breaks within the story and to shift their focus from one idea to the next, keeping them engaged in the film and attentive towards the plot point and perhaps the implicit details as well. Moreover, divisions between ideas are important for a film that is as long as two average length films, to not overwhelm an audience with an abundance of information for just one character. The length of this film is justified by the in-depth use of so many characters and backstories that seem to not connect but then eventually do. All characters relate to each other in some way, acting as parallels to each other, whether biologically or visited by another at a public place. It shows that even in reality, people’s lives can, in fact, overlap and a person may be going through the same situation or emotions as another. Though at the beginning of ‘Magnolia’ the similarity between the characters is unclear. However, an audience would expect that such a combination of characters coming together in the same town would eventually take place, otherwise the director of the film would not show these characters’ stories.
The film is covered in themes exhibiting key ideas that help an audience to sympathise, despise or understand characters and situations better, though also including Biblical allusions that serve as the interpretation of the famous frog scene in the film.
(covered in detail in the ‘favourite scene’ section)
Relationships – The film depicts different kinds of human interactions like a husband and wife, a presenter and an audience, a father and a son or a nurse and a patient. These relationships allow the audience to observe various angles of probable life and understand the mood and atmosphere created. It is a theme since it is relationships that drive characters to make choices like committing suicide, meeting someone new or facing their fears, and it is this that allows the characters to grow and the story to progress forward.
Pain – This involves both emotional and physical pain felt by the characters in the film. Every character has their own source of pain like Frank who is living with the emotional pain of his lost parents and Stanley who is pushed by his father to compete and succeed in a trivia game show. Moreover, physical pain is felt by Earl Patridge and Jimmy Gator in the form of their ever-growing cancer, which brings emotional pain to the loved ones around them. The film explores the different situations and reasons for pain and depicts how a certain individual could act and respond to it.
Impurity – The film depicts characters that are going through a dose of ‘impurity’ like Claudia Gator and her drug intake, Linda Partridge and her adultery and Frank T.J. Mackey and his continuing game of lies revolving around his past. To add on, the other characters also display impurities in relation to their situation and story. In the end, all characters are seen with the struggle and the heavy-weight their guilt and regretful actions have put on them emotionally that they are seen broken down, with the aim of getting some help and being saved from the nightmare their sadly enduring. This drives the story to progress and also adds the suspense and tension which keeps the film engaging since the audience would not know how and if the characters would come out of the situation with success.
Repentance & forgiveness – Characters look out for the forgiveness by their relatives and acquaintances for the ‘impurities’ they are guilty for throughout the film and in the past of their lives. Characters aim to restore their dignity and improve as people with an inner self-awakening and this drives them towards being committed in the film and pushing the plot forward.
Infer & Deduce: There are many ideas involved in finding a reason for naming the film ‘Magnolia’. The flower comes to mind at first, signifying the life cycle of an animate object which can be seen throughout the film where characters seem to be content at first but then something in their life tears them apart and brings them to their lowest. Flowers, in general, could symbolise blooming juxtaposed to withering. The meaning of Magnolias depends on the colour of the flower as well as the attitude of the person giving and receiving the flowers. White magnolias, in particular, symbolize purity and dignity which in the case of the film is quite ironic since every character is going through a state of impurity, whether it is the use of drugs, the abuse of parents or infidelity, which brings them to their downfall.
Magnolia Blvd. is a street in the San Fernando Valley where the film takes place.
Magnolia sounds similar to “Magonia”, a term created by Charles Fort (who wrote about strange phenomena and is referenced in the film’s closing credits) which is an alleged place in the sky where things are kept until they fall from it.
There is a legend that the bark of the Magnolia tree can cure cancer.
All of the above points do apply to the film’s characters, plot and settings, further re-instating the fact that there is not only one reason for the film to be called ‘Magnolia’ and rather than just like the characters with varying identities, Magnolia’s meaning is subjective and can be applied to all of them.
Technical Aspects
Along with the astounding attention to detail in the narrative part of the film, ‘Magnolia’ exhibits an array of camera techniques used to convey certain emotions or plot points throughout the 3-hour time span of it. The ratio of freeze-frames (where the camera is still) to shots where camera movements are involved is significantly low.
Pan and Tilt movements – These types of movements are used to follow characters in a scene. Panning is used as they walk from the left to the right, or vice-versa, parallel to the camera, moving on a fixed axis point. While titling involves the same concept though is done from top to bottom, or vice-versa, on a fixed axis point. These kinds of camera movements are not as active as dolly movements where the entire camera follows the subject, and allow an audience to observe the scene with more stability. An interesting use of the pan and tilt camera movements is with the Whip-Pan or Swish Pan, where the camera moves very quickly on the pan or tilt axis which causes a blur and can create a seamless continuous transition from one scene to another even if they have been shot at two different times and put together in post-production. In the film, it is used to transition from one character’s story to the other character, and appear to connect both timelines.
Dolly and Zoon movements – This is a major technique used in various instances in the film to denote a sense of suspense and a rise in tension. The frame goes from a wide shot to a medium or closeup shot very swiftly, creating a fastened pace while emphasising on a certain character or object in a scene. This technique is achieved by using a dolly and physically moving the character towards or further away from the subject, or by using the internal built-in feature, zooming in or out, of the camera. While dolly is used to increase the intimacy between characters and other subjects, zooming in or out gives more of an on-looker sort of feeling, as if the audience is spying on the subject in the frame.
Framing – The type of shots mostly consist of medium to medium-closeup shots of the subject, especially people, and are at eye level, whether they are standing or sitting. It is rarely done that the angle is higher or lower than that of the normal eye-level of a person. In terms of significance, it allows audiences to view all characters, regardless of what they are going through, how their personality is exhibited and what choices they make, to be assessed and judged as equals to each other. All the people in the film are going through their own subjective experiences and form them as individuals who either grow into greater individuals or succumb to the expectations of reality. What someone goes through, no matter how small or large, does not make them inferior or greater than anyone else. At our core, we are all equal and the perception of the clothes characters where, or where they live alters their status in our eyes.
Other – Tracking shots that are not necessarily on a dolly (are hand-held, most likely being a Steadicam) are used in one particular scene where Stanley, the young boy visits the TV studio that conducts the trivia show he had been studying for, is being shown around the premises and the camera follows him but then shifts to following the presenter’s wife. The camera does not seem to make a cut and it follows the character like some sort of ever-watching entity, paying attention to all actions made by the character. This effect engages the audience’s attention into following the on-screen characters on their narrative journeys.
Favourite Scene
Up to this scene appearing on screen, the film captivated me through its multi-layered character portrayal and development and how the seemingly varied people linked up in some ways. Though once the first frog fell from the sky onto the windshield of Officer Jim Kurring’s police car, I was introduced to a wave of confusion, bewilderment and incapability of holding my laughter in. The rain of frogs was hilarious for me and I felt that it was so random for a film that made perfect sense up to this point. It was after the film ended that I researched the scene’s significance and found that it is quite symbolic.
The film uses a Biblical allusion of the plague of frogs to mirror the modern day situation to history:
(1) And the Lord spake unto Moses, Go unto Pharaoh, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Let my people go, that they may serve me. (2) And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs.
Exodus 8:1 & 2
The film refers to the numbers ‘8’ and ‘2’, at times even together, many times in hidden places subliminally. This clearly alludes to Exodus 8:2, a verse that happens to also mention frogs and an abundance of them, just like the film depicts. According to IMDb.com, the places where the numbers appear are as follows:
Weather forecast: 82% chance of rain
A gambler needs a 2 in blackjack but gets an 8
Sydney Barringer’s mother and father’s apartment number is 682
Right after Jim Kurring sees Donnie Smith climbing up the building, you can see a flash of a sign on the side of the road that says “Exodus 8:2? (it’s visible again when the frogs fall and hit Kurring’s car)
In Marcy’s mugshots, her criminal record number is 82082082082
In the bar scene, there is a chalkboard with two teams, the frog and the clouds, the score is 8 to 2
A member of the game show crowd holds a placard with Exodus 8:2 written on it
Jim says he gets off work at 8:00, and Claudia suggests they meet 2 hours later for a date
These are just a few of the examples where Paul Thomas Anderson uses the cleverness of scriptwriting and set design to really leave clues for the attentive members of the audience to spot and draw the connection to this very confusing frog scene. The verse from Exodus 8:2 refers to the story of Moses and how he was given a mission from God to convince the Pharaoh of Egypt to let the prisoners go so they may worship Him, and if the Pharaoh refuses, God “will plague all [the Pharoah’s] territory with frogs”. In the context of the film, it could refer to the ways in which the characters have drowned themselves in self-doubt and wrong-doings that it is time for them to turn to repent for their mistakes. The “Pharoah” could be a symbolism of the characters’ addictions (drugs), jobs (motivational speaker), relationships (husband and wife) and agendas (winning a competition), and that these people should prioritise and focus on the bigger picture and meaning of life and improve themselves. Though however, the audience sees the characters continue on the same path they started on and become rather worse in their behaviour or emotionally unstable which causes a rain of frogs to “cleanse” out the impurities caused by the ‘naive’ characters.
To add to the peculiarity of this scene, on the 28th of June in 1957 a weather phenomenon took place. Thousands of small fish, frogs and crayfish fell during a rainstorm at Magnolia Terminal near Thomasville, AL. Whether it is a coincidence that the numbers 8 and 2 were part of the date and the location of the incident was named Magnolia Terminal, or an act of a powerful entity on purpose is beyond comprehensible. It is quite interesting to ponder upon, being that this occurrence took place years before the film was produced and released. Paul Thomas Anderson could have taken some inspiration from this event which lines up very well with the Biblical verse.
I immensely enjoyed the film, not expecting it’s extended length to deliver worthy entertainment and a story that was captivating in every scene. The two aspects I would alter would be the length since, for me, I feel that it would put off people from watching the film since it would seem like taking a major life decision since it takes a lot of time out of someone’s life. However, when considering the story and how heavily its audience captivation depends on the various characters having detailed backgrounds and somehow linking to one another, the 3-hour length seems to be appropriate. Regardless of this, the film did not seem boring at any point. To add on, the other aspect I would change would be the explicitness of the film, especially regarding Tom Cruise’s character. Though however, his actions and attitude did contribute to the understanding and interpretation of his personality and reasons behind what he chooses to do.
Cast: Kathy Bates [Annie Wilkes], James Caan [Paul Sheldon], Richard Farnsworth [Buster]
Paul Sheldon, a novelist, is in a serious car crash and is rescued by former nurse Annie Wilkes, who claims to be his number-one fan. Annie brings him to her house in the suburbs, where her obsession for him takes a horrifying turn when Sheldon is killing off her favourite character, Misery, in his upcoming novel. As Sheldon comes up with a plan for escaping, Annie becomes more controlling and violent as she forces the author to write according to her wishes.
Based on: ‘Misery’ by Stephen King
My rating: 8.5/10
Narrative aspects
‘Misery’ is a film that explores a brilliantly thought out plot that is simple but yet multi-layered. The film mainly takes place in the house of Annie Wilkens, limiting the settings in which the protagonist Pal Sheldon is exposed to yet, the film remains to be interesting until the end. A main point about the film is the character portrayal and development that aid the story to move forward and engages the audience into the surprises of the unknown:
Paul Sheldon – The famous author for the ‘Misery’ novel series suffers from a celebrities worst nightmare when he is taken hostage by a woman who claims to be his number-one fan. Paul Sheldon is thankful at first but as the story progresses he starts to realise that whatever happened to him with the car crash was a complete disaster and far from any good. The audience sees him start to struggle and suffer, which would ultimately bring an inner awakening to a person who would be assured of being arrogant and egotistical. Paul has a successful novel series and out of nowhere, he is in a situation he never thought he would end up in. It makes one realise how sufficient we are on our own but also how easily we can be brought down to nothing from illness or injury. Paul is seen bedridden and completely dependant on Annie Wilkens, who sadly, by his bad luck, is not someone who he would want taking care of him.
Annie Wilkens – The antagonist of the film is seen with a variety of attitudes, from content and civilized to completely rageful and horrific, which would lead an audience to immediately conclude that Annie is suffering from bipolar disorder. She is easily triggered into feeling angry by the slightest of words or actions, and Paul falls victim to it. Annie’s innocence is shadowed upon a few scenes after she appears, at first making an audience question the outburst but once it continues repeatedly on occasions, an in-depth look into her character could unearth more origins for her behaviour. Annie is portrayed as someone who is most likely having ‘Celebrity Worship Syndrome’, an obsessive-addictive disorder, where clearly, Paul is the famous personality in this situation. For Annie to stumble upon her idol is beyond her dreams and she displays to be ‘overly involved and interested (i.e., completely obsessed) with the details of the personal life of a celebrity’ (PsychologyToday). This leads her into controlling Paul as if he is some sort of play-doll or pawn in a game of chess, with her demands being every move towards reaching ‘checkmate’ and gaining the version of the ‘Misery’ novels she would be pleased with.
According to Wikipedia, based on the book by Christopher Booker:
Overcoming the Monster
The protagonist sets out to defeat an antagonistic force (often evil) which threatens the protagonist and/or protagonist’s homeland.
Rags to Riches
The poor protagonist acquires power, wealth, and/or a mate loses it all and gains it back, growing as a person as a result.
The Quest
The protagonist and companions set out to acquire an important object or to get to a location. They face temptations and other obstacles along the way.
Voyage and Return
The protagonist goes to a strange land and, after overcoming the threats it poses to them, they return with experience.
Comedy
A light and humorous character with a happy or cheerful ending; a dramatic work in which the central motif is the triumph over adverse circumstance, resulting in a successful or happy conclusion.
Tragedy
The protagonist’s character flaw or great mistake which is their undoing. Their unfortunate end evokes pity at their folly and the fall of a fundamentally good character.
Rebirth
An event forces the main character to change their ways and often become a better person.
‘Misery’ fits in the categories of ‘Overcoming the Monster’ (where Paul makes it his mission to get rid of Annie, the antagonist, and break free from being held captive), ‘Rags to Riches’ (Paul is successful at his work as an author and it all goes away when Annie finds him after the car accident. Paul grows as a person with more consideration as he escapes from Annie’s home), ‘Rebirth’ (Whatever Paul goes through makes him realise that he should change his ways and so ends up with a new mindset about himself and his work). The combination of these plots allows the story of the film to become more in-depth as well as continue to remain entertaining with multi-layered characters till the credits roll. It is storytelling at its finest and combining many of these plot concepts is not noticeable in the film, nor probably in the book by Stephen King.
Infer & Deduce: The film’s title shares its name with the novel it is based on by Stephen King, though contains a hint of mystery since the word ‘Misery’ is also the name of the book series that the main character, author Paul Sheldon, creates and writes. Additionally, this is also the name of the protagonist in the book series that is in the book written by Stephen King that the film is based on. Humorously, it sort of feels like something Christopher Nolan would conjure up. Moreover, the use of the descriptor ‘Misery’ would apply to the emotional state Paul Sheldon goes through while being held captive at Annie’s house, as well as what Annie feels towards Sheldon.
Technical Aspects
‘Misery’ uses a variety of techniques to convey the mysterious and disturbing attitude of the character Annie, for example, or the nature of the plot itself. While the soundtrack enhances the atmosphere and makes the scenes more suspenseful, the variety of shot types allows certain implicit messages to be translated for the audience:
Bird’s-Eye Shot – In the few beginning scenes, shots taken from a helicopter while flying over a landscape create the setting for the rest of the film, allowing the audience to familiarise themselves with where the story takes place and how the setting could affect the fate of the characters.
Long Shots – These kinds of shots are used for establishing a setting but show the more intricate of details when compared to a bird’s-eye view. An example of this are scenes from the beginning where the snowy mountains and location is shown while Paul Sheldon drives on the road. Like the Bird’s-Eye Shot, it enlightens the audience about the setting where the film could prominently take place and how the snow, in this film, could act as a helping hand for the protagonist when he is in a life-or-death situation. In ‘Misery’, it is the snow that causes him to be taken hostage by his psychotic number-one fan Annie Wilkens.
Extreme Close-Up Shots – These kinds of shots are used to either direct the focus of the audience to a specific aspect in particular or if an object is of small sizes, like the orange Novril pills that Annie gives to Paul for his pain. Moreover, a sequence that extensively uses these shots is when Annie is coming back home from getting the paper Paul requested for his typewriter while Paul is hurriedly going back to his room so that Annie does not suspect anything. Movement and facial expressions are emphasised on as the pace of the scene rises. Paul is seen struggling with his injury but hastening to his room with close-up shots of the door nob and him locking the door with a bobby pin, for example, or Annie shoes as she walks into the house.
Low Angled/High Angled Shots – These camera angles allow an audience to view the world from certain characters’ point of view without the shot being in the first person. Low Angled shots are used to create the view of Paul Sheldon since he is lower in height when talking to Annie because of being on his bed recovering. Similarly, the audience sees a repeated use of High-Angled Shots that portray how Annie sees Paul, towering over him and looking down. Moreover, these shots depict the level of power in the situation where Annie is seen as superior and controlling over Paul, and Paul is inferior and helpless.
Pans/Tilts/Dolly Movements – Camera movements of any kind keep the shots more interesting to watch for an audience. While in some moments they help reveal details an audience would not have seen in the setting, camera movements follow characters throughout a scene allowing the audience to feel as if they are in the situation rather than watching characters on a screen. This film uses movements to their advantage in scenes that are high in tension with no knowledge of the fate of characters. This keeps it fast-paced as well as the audiences on the edge of their seat.
Furthermore, the lighting techniques allow another level of emotion to be felt by the audience as it creates an intimidating atmosphere in some settings while giving a natural, homely look in others. In scenes hot during the day, lighting is mostly natural from the source of the sun, while indoor scenes use lamps and candles to illuminate the set. In addition to that, an interesting use of lighting is when it starts to rain in the area where Annie lives. When she enters into Paul’s room with surprise, the scene uses the lightning outside to create a dramatic play of light and shadow on her face, enhancing the menacing and malevolent attitude of Annie.
Favourite Scene
This scene explores a different side of Annie Wilkens as she is seen with a unique attitude when compared to the rest of the film. Annie is seen to have an inner realisation about the situation with Paul Sheldon, stating that because he is almost finished with writing the Misery novel that she wants and that his legs are getting better, he would demand to be let out of the house and go home. Annie would not have any control over his life and situation she seems to be enjoying and the rain outside continues to remind her of that ‘inevitable’ future.
The scene uses an array of camera techniques to portray the emotions that Annie in particularly is feeling, with close-up shots emphasising on capturing her facial features and expressions of despair and melancholy. This makes an audience’s strong pessimistic feelings towards her psychotic behaviour previously die down a little as she is seen to have a progression of character and forget about her delusions. Annie seems to know that she cannot have everything she wants anymore. While this scene has comparatively focused on Annie with lengthened shots on the character, the reactions have been countered with Paul’s expressions being shown from time to time as she looks at him and says particular words. From the way Paul reacts, he would seem to feel exactly the same as the audience and be hopeful that once the new Misery novel would be over, and Annie receives the story she wanted, she would let him go without any harm. There is a look of relief on Paul’s face. The low-key lighting in this scene adds to the gloomy atmosphere created by the rain which in turn affects Annie’s normally energetic attitude. Moreover, the natural lighting sources of the lamps in the room make the scene feel less scripted or fabricated and more of an actuality. To add on, the sound from the rain outside hitting the windows also brings more emotional pain to the scene while making it more naturalistic.
However, all restored faith in Annie Wilkens drains away when she seems to become detached from the rationale she was leading Paul towards believing and pulls out a small revolver from her robe pocket. Immediately the audience, as well as Paul, realise that Annie definitely has some psychological conflictions with herself and would do anything in her power to achieve what she wills. The tension rises in the scene, creating anticipation towards what horrific action Annie would commit next, or when she would have her next anger outburst. The final dutch-angled shot in the scene taken to show Annie exiting her house and stepping onto the porch portrays a sense of displacement between the character’s attitude as well as their morale.
What would I do differently?
Of course, producing this film with modern day technology would allow it to be high definition and consist of different settings, clothes and props as times have changed though I would not change anything about the film. It was pleasant to watch, disturbing at times which is exactly what it intended on, as well as, entertaining. The actors did a brilliant job in portraying the characters and the emotions they felt in the situation.
Cast: Ivana Baquero [Ofelia], Doug Jones [Pale man, Fauno], Sergi López [Vidal]
The Allies have invaded Nazi-held Europe in 1944, wherein Spain, a troop of soldiers are sent to a remote forest to remove the rebels. Captain Vidal, a murdering sadist, leads them, along with him are his new wife Carmen and her daughter from a previous marriage, Ofelia. The young girl, after witnessing her stepfather’s brutality, is drawn into Pan’s Labyrinth which is a magical world of mythical beings.
My rating: 9/10
Narrative aspects
Guillermo del Toro, a genius with the art of fairy tales, created a brilliant film called ‘Pan’s Labyrinth’, following an 11-year-old girl facing the trials of the real world and the spiritual in order to reach goals from a guiding faun, a mythical creature. Being a film completely in the Spanish language, it applies well to the setting of the story as well as accompanies the characters and their backgrounds. The film starts with a shot which comes again at the end of the film, where Ofelia lays on the floor after being shot by her stepfather. This foreshadows a tragic ending and also signifies that the whole film is a flashback that leads up to that point. Moreover, an audience would not put together the fact that the first scene is, in fact, something that occurs later in the film until they see the shot once again.
The film uses the medium of ‘storytelling’ to convey its message and plot. Quite literally, a film is an art of storytelling so within the film’s story there are various stories, making it a little paradoxical. To add on to this effect, the film has an omniscient narrator at the beginning and the end which gives it the oral sense of reading a storybook. What is more is that throughout the film, characters use the medium of storytelling to cope with their life and it’s tragic calamities and brutal realities. Ofelia, a young girl forced into accepting a person who she despises to be her father, reads fairytales to escape from her sad and demanding lifestyle, while her mother Carmen is seen telling a rather romantic story version of her meeting Captain Vidal, her second husband. Also, the faun uses storytelling to convey the message that Ofelia is a princess and that she needs to complete three tasks to become immortal in a way that would be easier for a young girl who likes the fictional fantasy world to understand. Since this film follows the form of how many stories and fairy tales from books are structured, the Hero’s Journey theory could be applied to Ofelia and her encounters, where she becomes aware of her secret identity, is called to a mission that she feels intimidated by then complete successfully one step at a time.
‘Pan’s Labyrinth’, as the title would suggest, combines many mythical elements to form the story, like the guiding Faun and the Pale Man. While these characters bring about a heightened tension in the film, filled with suspense and dread as to what would happen to young Ofelia next, each of them has a purpose to serve in the story. The reason for these elements is that it brings the stories Ofelia reads in her leisure time to life, in a world where mythical creatures would be thought of not existing. Moreover, it adds the element of surprise and the imagination a child would have in perceiving the world around them. The various mythical entities in the film are:
Faun – In Roman mythology, Fauns are creatures that are part human and part goat, who love the forest, music and good to the people they encounter. They are closely associated with the Greek god Pan. Fauns are merry creatures, who would lure anyone into joining their festivities. Being creatures of nature and showing loyalty to their superiors, it is no surprise that Ofelia, a secret princess called Moanna, stumbles upon finding a Faun in the labyrinth. The good-nature of the Faun is seen throughout the scenes consisting of him, where he even gives Ofelia a second chance after she disobeys him and eats two grapes from the Pale Man’s table of food.
Pale Man – While the film does not name the Pale Man with a mythological creature’s title, the being bears a strong resemblance to the Tenome from Japanese folklore, with eyes in the middle of the palms. The word ‘Tenome’ literally translates to “eyes on hands”, which helps to confirm the origin of the Pale Man in the film. Tenomes do not have a larger purpose to fulfil but they had come around from a tale of a blind man wanting to have a glance at life, only to be reborn as a yokai (a class of supernatural monsters, spirits, and demons in Japanese folklore) with eyes on his palms. According to the lore they are much more carnivorous, compared to the tempting feast put on the long table in the Pale Man’s lair.
Fairies – A magical creature who resembles a human being, with quick wit as their most common trait. Fairies can fly, make flowers bloom and help things grow. In the film, they guide Ofelia in the right direction and advise her on what to do, like many of the mythical elements in the film. They are the ‘pets’ of the Faun, helpers for his goals.
Magical objects – These objects aid Ofelia to progress in her journey given by the Faun:
Fortune-telling Book – Ofelia makes use of a magical book that tells her what to complete next on her mission in the form of a story, with pictures and colour. This book also shows the fortune of the near future, like when Carmen was bleeding and fell sick while Ofelia was looking at the book in the washroom.
Chalk – Ofelia uses a white chalk given to her by the Faun to open a doorway into the Pale Man’s lair. This object looks like a regular piece of chalk but completes what every child’s imagination would want. Ofelia uses the chalk at multiple occasions, with the second time being when the sand timer runs out and the door which she entered through closes, making her draw a rectangle on the ceiling. The third is when she wants to reach her stepfather’s room without bringing any attention to her. Again, it is another tool that helps her out of the darkest of situations and makes sure she complete the three tasks from the Faun before the time is up.
Mandrake root – Being a member of the deadly nightshade family, plants that contain toxins. While the Greeks used to use it as an anaesthetic, and in the Middle Ages, they used it for its fertility powers (‘those having trouble conceiving would sleep with them under their pillows’). Referring to www.wired.com, “According to Anthony John Carter, writing in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine in 2003, medieval folks carried mandrake roots around as good luck charms, hoping the plant would grant them not only wealth and the power to control their destiny but the ability to control the destinies of others as well”. These ancient believed traits could apply to the use of the Mandrake root in the film as it was intended to aid Carmen, Ofelia’s mother, through her difficult pregnancy.
In terms of character portrayal, Captain Vidal is a personality that would be despised by an audience from the beginning. His brutality and lack of hesitance towards torturing and killing people are horrifying for the characters in the film as well as the audience watching. Being a dominating and aggressive person, he is Ofelia’s stepfather but the audience would want him to be far from it. While Ofelia tries to escape the reality she hates, Vidal is seen as being a pure villain of the story. This film generally seems like a children’s fantasy story yet juxtaposes and displays the real gruesome reality of life in a rather graphic way. It is an adult film throughout but follows a young girl on her journey with a mythical creature in a fantasy land.
Infer & Deduce: There has been discussion over the film’s title and whether it is the right name to give it. ‘Labyrinth‘ is defined as “a confusing set of connecting passages or paths in which it is easy to get lost”, which would apply to the maze seen in the forest near the soldier base camp. Moreover, labyrinths have a spiritual significance as well. According to www.crystalinks.com, “A labyrinth is an ancient symbol that relates to wholeness. It combines the imagery of the circle and the spiral into a meandering but purposeful path. It represents a journey to our own centre and back again out into the world. Labyrinths have long been used as meditation and prayer tools”. In this sense, the labyrinth could be both a literal one present in the film as seen and also carry a symbolic meaning, where Ofelia’s journey from discovering that she is a princess to reuniting with her royal family is a maze of trials on its own.
Another point of discussion is the question of ‘Who is ‘Pan’ in Pan’s Labyrinth?’ since there is no character called pan in the film. Pan is a mythical Greek god of the wild, and faun-like creature. Guillermo del Toro wrote the subtitles for the film and it was his own choice to use ‘Pan’ in the title, though he has revealed that it is not an accurate descriptor for the film.
Technical Aspects
‘Pan’s Labyrinth’ uses brilliant CGI (Computer Generated Imagery) techniques to create the world of fantasy and fill it with creatures like the fairies that can shapeshift into stick insects. However, many of the non-human characters’ looks are achieved by special effects makeup and costume, like the Faun and the Pale Man. The set design uses materials and props from the 1940s, like vintage cars and soldier outfits that are historically accurate. An interesting point of the film is that even though it is based around a fairy tale story, the colours are not that rich in the film and mainly revolve around shades of brown, black, green, yellow and grey for aspects in the mise-en-scene. The only scene which contains much more than these earthy colours is the last scene where Ofelia is finally reunited with her family in the underworld. This scene has the colour scheme of red and gold, glowing and shining while making the sequence look far more magical than the realistic presentation of the world during the rest of the film. These palette choices, along with the accurate set props and design, all magnify the juxtaposition between the 1940s and modern day 21st Century, as well as the real world and the fantasy world (i.e. the world of others compared to the world of Ofelia).
In camera and editing, two techniques create an interesting outlook in the film. The first is where the camera is at many times positioned lower than the average eye-level in scenes, following the gaze of the 11-year-old protagonist of the film. Though it is still at her personal eye-level, this tactic allows the audience to see the world from her eyes without the film being in the first-person point of view and making the fears of Ofelia much more intimidating, like using low-angled shots when she is conversing with the adults in her life, her mother and especially Captain Vidal. Moving forward, another technique used in ‘Pan’s Labyrinth’ is the overlapping transitions where one scene blends into the other while the camera pans or dollys to the right or left. An example of this is the scene involving Captain Vidal and his search team in the forest, where the camera dollys to the right and a tree trunk comes into the shot. Another shot of Ofelia exploring the forest on her own is taken after the camera moves away from the trunk. These two takes are seamlessly edited together to create this continuous movement effect which makes it seem as though both scenes are occurring simultaneously. From a story perspective, it could signify the fact that in the world of the plot, both the real world and the fantasy are taking place in the same dimension and time even though rational thinking would not allow the world of Fauns and magic objects to exist at the same time. It strengthens the sense of escapism that Ofelia is going through, wanting to disconnect from her life that she feels discontented with.
Favourite Scene
Ofelia, after completing the first task set by the Faun, uses a chalk given by her new mythical friend to draw a portal-door to an underground lair that houses a Pale Man sitting at a table like a statue, which boosts her confidence to finish the task quickly before the sand timer runs out. This scene is a famous one due to the presence of this odd, no-eyed creature with large hands and a vicious behaviour, making it stand out from the other scenes in the film. It is a tense moment in the film as Ofelia races against the clock to achieve her goal and make it back to her room in time before the Pale Man traps her in his lair for good. The audience desperately want Ofelia to escape without being harmed, which makes it more enthralling to watch.
This scene sheds light on some small realities of life and the behaviour of children especially. Ofelia, being a young girl, seeks out what every imaginative child would want. Having being bestowed to use a magical chalk that can make portals and doorways appear through a solid wall after drawing with them is filled throughout every childhood dream. The attitude of Ofelia in this scene is like how any child her age would react and interact, excitement and curiosity filling their mind. Moreover, the scene does not glorify the power of the unknown and magical, and Ofelia is faced with a horrifying encounter while being in the Pale Man’s lair. This balances out between the expectations a person would have compared to the reality of it, where one would want a task to be as simple as drawing a rectangular outline on a wall with an everyday item but would then have to face a life-and-death situation. Equilibrium is restored throughout the film, the odds are never completely out of favour for Ofelia. Where she is in a dire situation, there is always a helping hand or a ‘miracle’ that aids her to avoid a drastic future. To add on, this scene also shows the attitude of disobedience, along with curiosity, in children. The Faun warned her not to eat anything from the Pale Man’s feast no matter how tempting the dishes look yet Ofelia, being a young child, sees no harm in ‘only taking one grape’, ‘what could go wrong if I just have a little?’. The temptations in a child are too strong to fight off and the more likely they would do something that they are told not to do, keeping aside how obedient they are normally. The audience sees Ofelia as a natural young child at heart who loves reading books and imagining a fantasy world come to life, while still having the innate attitudes that any child would have.
What would I do differently?
Personally, I enjoyed the film thoroughly mainly because of my love for the fantasy genre. Normally, a story like this would be expected to arise from a novel but the fact that it is an original screenplay is astounding. If this film were to be made now, by me, I would most likely make use of the motion capture technology for the Faun and the Pale Man since it would reduce time spent on makeup and would also be more comfortable for actors to perform in. Moreover, technology has advanced drastically since 2006 so it could potentially look as realistic as the bets makeup would achieve a final effect. To add on, if this film was written and directed by me I would make it in English since it is my strongest language, and I only know basic Spanish. Though the fact that it is set in Spain and is completely in Spanish is quite apt since it is unnatural for everyone in a film to ‘magically’ know English in a country where it is not its first language.
Cast: Bruce Willis [David Dunn], Samuel L. Jackson [Elijah Price], Spencer Treat Clark [Joseph Dunn]
David Dunn (Bruce Willis) is a security guard who is miraculously the lone survivor survives a highly fatal train crash, finds himself the subject of a theory that explains his good luck. When news of the crash is made public, a man who is excessively weak tracks him down to try to explain to Dunn about his unique unbreakable nature.
My rating: 8.5/10
Narrative aspects
M. Night Shyamalan is a brilliant storyteller with unique ideas and concepts. Within the world he creates, the detail is so well-rounded and there are continuity and consistency with everything, down to the slightest of cues that an audience may not even catch. At the beginning of ‘Unbreakable’, before the film even starts, there are a series of titles giving the audience information about comic books and their sales. At first, it seems completely random though later on the concept of comic books becomes a clear and main point in the story. Moreover, the scene with the birth of Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson), the protagonist in the story, and how he has a condition that affects the strength of his bones is addressed later on. Everything in the film has a purpose to serve, nothing is present without reason.
The theory of the Hero’s Journey could be applied to this film since it has a protagonist that follows the pattern of any classic comic character with having powers, called to carry out a duty for society hut refusing the reality of such abilities at first. The character development is done gradually, without fully relying on flashbacks alone. A mixture of previous encounters with dialogues addressing their past lives is used, with the choice of action and interaction with other characters giving clues to the audience as well as furthering the plot. An example is a scene where David Dunn (Bruce Willis), the protagonist, is on a train heading for his hometown Philadelphia and upon a woman asking if the seat next to him is free, discreetly removes his wedding ring from his finger. This action clearly indicates, before even meeting any other characters, that he is having some marital issues, perhaps a divorce in the process. M. Night Shyamalan executes such a device of ambiguity and implications without directly telling or showing an audience a certain angle extremely well. It involves an audience and sort of forces them to look at the film more deeply than just watch it for a pass time. Like any mystery thriller, details of the plot are shown one at a time so that the audience can absorb and keep on track with the fast plot and as the characters learn about conditions too.
The two polar opposites of characters, David Dunn and Elijah Price, are depicted brilliantly, with their abilities being at the other end of each other on the spectrum, to start with. Dunn is physically strong where Elijah is not though Elijah is mentally strong and extremely smart. Both characters come from different childhood backgrounds, deal with different kinds of people, have different jobs and personalities and yet they are linked to each other. The difference of their abilities, in a rather confusing way, is what makes them similar. David Dunn is supposed to be the superhero while Elijah Price is the supervillain, due to the actions they commit as well as given the comic book background this film pursues. It gives the film a sense of realism since the superhero aspect is not as fictional as in mainstream comic movies like the Marvel or DC Cinematic Universes. More than laser vision, flight or mind control, Dunn and Elijah enjoy and suffer, respectively, from physical characteristics that any human could actually have.
Like any Shymalan film, one is not complete without a plot twist. ‘Unbreakable’ introduces the classic character plot twist where the ‘enabler’ turns out to be nothing more than the real villain. It has the message ‘now you are worthy to fight me’ flowing throughout this turning point in the film. The twist would bring about a mixture of speculation and emotions from the audience watching. Some may like to see a sequel, where the relationship or rivalry between Price and Dunn progresses and where Dunn unlocks his true potential, like any superhero story.
Infer & Deduce: The film’s title is interesting since it is a characteristic that inanimate objects share. Thought, however, alludes to a human being, a character in the film that has the ability to be invincible. While watching the film, the title’s reason of choice becomes obvious since the audience is introduced to David Dunn, the protagonist with the ability of superstrength and to sense the wrongdoings a person has done or is going through. He has never fallen sick, nor had any injury, making him a person who is literally ‘unbreakable’. To counter, the first scene of the film involves the birth of Elijah Price though after learning about his medical condition that causes weak bones, the audience is aware that he isn’t the character that the film’s title is referring to.
Technical Aspects
Along with M. Night Shyamalan’s brilliant storytelling technique, his visual and cinematographic style of presentation is unique and engaging in some ways. Generally, in this film the camera shots and movements are carried out as though the audience is an outsider, poking into and eavesdropping on the conversations and lives of the characters. This gives a clear peek into the action on the screen while the audience feels involved in the story and in whichever way the characters are affected the audience would feel something similar. An example of this is the scene where David Dunn is sitting on a train on his way to Philadelphia and a woman takes a seat next to him. The camera doe snot make the usual jump-cuts from one character’s angle to the other as a usual presentation of a conversation would go but it is actually in one take, with the camera moving back and forth on the seats in front of them and creeping through the crack in the seats. This gives an audience the feeling that they do not belong there and while given a view of the characters on the train, they feel bad for sort of ‘listening in’ on a conversation. Moreover, this choice of camera movement and angle depicts the disconnection the audience has with Dunn since this is the first scene with him and they are not aware of who he is and what is his significance to the story.
The camera rarely stays still. Even in situations where the shot does not change, the camera dollys towards the subject slowly, keeping the pace constant and not boring for an audience. Shyamalan uses movement more than varying shot types, having many scenes in one take along with focusing on having many multiple characters in a frame to simultaneously display both reactions and attitudes. To add on, the camera acts as a direct insight towards what the characters know and find out, like for example, when Dunn exited the memorial service for the train crash, the camera would sort of follow his gaze and would only reveal scene cues when the character would notice them. Another very unique example of brilliant camera movement is when young Elijah Price opens up a present and finds a comic laying inside the box, only that it is upside down from his view. As he holds the corners of the comic and turns it to face him straight, the camera follows this action, taking the audience around in a complete turn of 360° till he finally can see the name and picture properly. It looks phenomenal, almost as it is a first person point of view angle.
Shyamalan also plays around with sound when he wants to convey a certain character reaction or emotion across to the audience. By manipulating the level of ‘noise’ in a scene, like a background ambience from people talking or cars driving, the audience steps into the mind of the character directly, understanding the emotions or the atmosphere in the fictional setting of the film. An example of this is the scene where Dunn finds out that after the train crash he is the only one that survived, without a broken bone. His shock and detachment from reality while absorbing that news is displayed by nothing but the sound of slow wind and silence in the background, while the camera focuses on Dunn during wide angled shots and medium-close up shots. Even though he is seen talking and interacting with his family members and people at the hospital, the echoey silence intensifies his feelings of mental trauma at the hint that something special is going on with him.
Favourite Scene
This scene puts Dunn in the spotlight, letting go of his inhibitions and letting his powers show him what he is capable of. Price pushes him to stop fearing the unknown and Dunn ends up at a station where random, mundane-by-look people rush past him as he stands in between the crowd. As a few people nudge into him by accident, he starts to find out about the horrid lives they lead, realising that ‘looks can be deceiving’. This message is actually quite close to the life outside the film screen, with audiences feeling the weight of how everyone around them leads such different lives and one cannot even imagine what the other is going through.
The way in which the flashes into the secret lives of strangers is depicted is clever since the camera is pointing down from a high vantage point, a high-angle shot. This is a smart decision by the director as it gives the audience the feeling that they are spying on the character Dunn is looking at due to the CCTV set up of the camera filming. Moreover, other than having a wide shot showing the entire set up of the location to give the context of their wrongdoings, the high angle makes them seem inferior in Dunn’s eyes since they can choose to do the right thing but yet resort to harming others.
David Dunn is shown to be at the edge of reaching above his abilities and being completely vulnerable. He could choose to make the wrongs right and turn the criminals in or feel the weight of the world being such a frightening place that he tries to forget everything he sees. The audience is curious to know how Dunn would react to realising that he has got psychic powers and that before it was just a lucky guess or feeling that he’d have about the man carrying the gun or about someone having drugs in their possession. Dunn becomes self-aware, empowered and determined.the audience is reminded of Dunn’s good side since after finding out about his powers, the first thing he does is go after a man who claimed a strangers house as his own and tied up the people who actually live there. The audience knows that these strong powers are in the right hands, with someone who could make the city of Philadelphia a better place.
What would I do differently?
I thoroughly enjoyed the film, it’s ability to involve a viewer as well as the characters involved. It has a plotline that sets it out from the rest and is still enjoyable more than a decade later. Being an avid M. Night Shyamalan fan, I enjoyed exploring the pattern of production he has with character portrayal and story points.
If I were to make my own ‘Unbreakable’ I would have driven deeper into the powers that Dunn possesses and really show him tackling heavy obstacles that could really put his life in danger. The way in which the film is formed and structured, it seems as though ‘Unbreakable 2’ is a sequel we never got as an audience. Though however now, with Split being a brilliant success, Shyamalan’s third unofficial instalment in this series is set to release in January 2019, ‘Glass’, which focuses on Elijah Price and his storyline.
Cast: Matthew McConaughey [Cooper], Anne Hathaway [Brand], Michael Caine [Professor Brand]
A global crop shortage in Earth’s future along with a second Dust Bowl are causing the planet to become unsafe for living. A NASA physicist, Professor Brand (Michael Caine), is working on plans to transport Earth’s population to a new home through a wormhole in space, sending NASA pilot Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) and a team of researchers through the wormhole to find out which of the three planet choices could be a contender for mankind’s new home.
My rating: 10/10
Narrative aspects
The film combines a brilliant combination of scientific and mathematical fact, as well as the bond between people and humanity, and how survival is an innate characteristic in all of us. While there are a few moments that would make an audience laugh or chuckle and others that would probably result in a few tears shed, this film is no joke towards what the Earth could be heading for with its current state of pollution. Lighter moments keep the movie entertaining and recapture the audience’s attention.
It has a talented cast including Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain (Older Murph), Matt Damon (Dr Mann), Michael Caine, amongst many others. The film contains characters that are like any normal human being, wanting the best for their family and trying to do their best on their job. It shows a typical family relationship, in the beginning especially, with a sibling rivalry and a father who loves his children more than anything.
The film starts with a clipping of an old lady talking in what seems to be an interview. These kinds of clippings are spread over the beginning few scenes, making it seem as though the plot combines a majority of linear narrative with a few elements of non-linear. This helps to clarify certain points and set-up the story for viewers to understand more, that something happens to the human race and that all that is shown in the film is leading up to those old people being interviewed. However, when further watching the film, their words become more clear and understandable, allowing the audience to figure out what is truly happening. Like with any Christopher Nolan film, clues to its deeper meaning are sprinkled all over through dialogue, gestures and settings, maybe even flashbacks or flashforwards. This makes sure that the audience pays close detail to every point in the film, keeping them on their feet to spot out anything new or intriguing. Being an Auteur, a sensational director and screenwriter, Nolan uses the advantages of a well, thought-out script storytelling medium to communicate the way his mind works with the audience. He has a signature technique of having a sense of ambiguity up till the very end, and sometimes like in his film Inception, leave the audience with questions never to be answered. Interpretation is always open.
During the course of Interstellar as a visual journey, problems are in an abundance. As said and talked about in the film, the storyline follows Murphy’s Law, “The facetious proposition that if something can go wrong, it will”. After a single problem seems to be solved, the crew comprising of Cooper and Dr Brand, Doyle and Romilly, they are faced with another and in some cases a much more drastic one. It challenges the character’s capability to remain calm and maintain their logical reasoning ability to come up with a solution. The fate of the characters is on a constant shift, which in result keeps an audience captivated while wanting the best for the characters on screen. The characters are always challenged and watching them succeed or fail is phenomenal. Nolan’s characters are always well developed and have an immense depth which always enthrals an audience.
Infer & Deduce: The title of the film becomes clear when the meaning is searched online. “Occurring or situated between the stars”, which is what Interstellar introduces to the audience in the science fiction film. While some argued that it should have been called ‘Gravity’, appropriately since the film’s scientific element revolves around it but I feel ‘Interstellar’ better captures the film in one word.
Technical Aspects
Interstellar has a skeleton of a brilliant and multi-layered storyline, with characters bringing more depth and technical effects enhancing the appearance or emotional communication from characters and situations. Transitions are kept to the usual jump-cuts though in some instances while the scenes are quiet, and calm, fade-ins and fade-outs are used as a method to demonstrate forwards in time and further the plot in a less draggy sense. Being a film that is quiet and more dialogue-based than action-based, the aesthetics of the scenes are brilliant, with fascinating off-centre angles and close-ups, like placing the camera on a side wall of the spaceship.
The CGI in this film is captivating and highly realistic, with accurate depictions of space and other elemental entities we have an awareness of. The film’s pre-production staged consulted with mathematicians and physicists to calculate measurements, of Gargantua the black hole, and principles for the film so that the science is of the highest accuracy. The film has not one moment where the visual effects look far from actuality. It is quite intriguing to think about what is animation and what is not, because everything is so well rendered. Along with the computer-generated imagery, Nolan shot the film on two different cameras which give the altered final look of the film of some scenes having the full screen 16:9 aspect ratio and some scenes being widescreen (with those classic movie black bars on the top and bottom). Nolan used IMAX cameras on many occasions as hand-held, something many could not imagine doing at all, which resulted in the full-screen shot scenes. The difference is subtle though noticeable for viewers who are attentive as well as those who have watched the movie a couple of times. This technique can be seen in other Nolan films as well, like Dunkirk.
The films original soundtrack, composed by Hans Zimmer, effectively captures every single moment’s mood by pure and rich Orchestra instrumental pieces. The film sort of depends on the music to convey a certain emotion since there isn’t much action happening on the screen. Where other films get the sound-in-space concept a bit wrong, ‘Interstellar’ cleverly trims music to an abrupt stop when necessary. One example is when Dr Mann fails at docking his spacecraft into the space station, causing it to explode. The music rises to its peak then, at the moment of the blast, everything falls silent. The lack of audio is impacting, sometimes creating a much larger effect than rather having a booming explosion. Silence is sometimes the loudest of sounds.
Favourite Scene
This is probably by far my favourite scene as it starts with introducing the audience to the unknown nature of a black hole and what it could actually be like, in the mind of the film’s creators of course. To add on, it finally solves the many questions the audience has over the course of the film which has drowned them into confusion and curiosity.
Cooper, sacrificing his life to save Dr Brand since the weight of the spacecraft would be too high for them to escape to safety with him on board, ends up being pulled y the forceful gravitational pull of Gargantua and has comes to terms with his demise, only to be surprised by falling into a fifth dimension where time is a physical moment. finding that he is stuck in an infinite loop of every moment in Murph’s, his daughter, bedroom, he finds ways to communicate with her by morse and binary code, only to realise that he was her ‘ghost’ all along.
The signature plot twist is what would stupify the audience in any Nolan film and ‘Interstellar’ is no disappointment. All the puzzle pieces spread across the two and a half hour film come together and form a mind-blowing picture, an unforgettable film plot that makes one question if the concepts are in fact plausible. ‘Interstellar’ is a brilliant combination of science, society, humanity and survival, and that is what makes it stand out from the rest. The way science is presented in this film, along with the dream-like nature of this fantastic plot twist involving Cooper in actuality sending himself to make sure civilization is saved is beyond comprehensible. The paradox in this film is something one ponders on. On top of the narrative aspects of this scene, the special effects are as great as any of the others in this film. The scenes are so well edited and synchronised with the ones shown previously right at the beginning before the entire mission started. This film is an amazing example of how films can actually make the creator’s dreams and imagination a reality.
What would I do differently?
To be honest with my view, and the view of many film enthusiasts, Christopher Nolan is a legendary director and screenwriter whose films were always worthy of time spend watching, while they tickle the part of the mind that wants to see a challenge and he thrilled. His skilful cinematography coupled with his art of captivating storytelling are both a match that makes the audience want Nolan’s world’s shown in his films to be some part of reality or experience the phenomena within them.
I would not even imagine changing anything in the film and much less reach up to the high standard Nolan sets for his films. Though if I had to influence some aspect of the film I would reduce the runtime down a little. At some parts, for an audience who like to see conflict or have the action set out in front for them, they would feel a little bored. Since it’s a film that requires strong listening skills to understand all the dialogues and the importance of each of them, a shorter film length would be, in my mind, a little more appropriate. But of course, Nolan’s films are not for everyone and he does not target them for the wider, majority of an audience so the runtime is perfectly adequate.
Having an instructor, Terence, with terrifying teaching methods, Andrew Neiman has ambitions to rise up in his elite music conservatory, Shaffer’s Jazz Orchestra, and his ambitions quickly turn into obsession as his cruel teacher pushes him to the brink of his ability and sanity.
Based loosely on: Experiences of the film’s director Damien Chazelle
My rating: 9/10
Narrative aspects
This film is made up of a touching story involving a dedicated and obsessive artist who wants o be the best at their art, playing music. It is filled with the sense of motivation rather than lowering one’s self-esteem, and thus excelling and pushing the boundaries of someone’s potential. The film starts with the main character’s, Andrew Neiman, background and enlightening the audience with who he is and what he does while showing what his true passions are. This is important to understand the future choices he makes throughout the film, and which lead him to his desired success at the end. Andrew steps up on the ladder of perseverance no matter what the hardship. It is a bildungsroman at its core, while the characters around him give him a nudge negatively or positively so that he ensures that his dream becomes a reality. With a linear narrative, it starts from step one and moves to step two next and on, from being part of a mediocre band at Shaffer’s, then advancing to the performing band and heart of Terence Fletcher, all while working on his social interactions and meeting a girl. In the end, the film has a well-rounded plot from the rising action to the slightly ambiguous resolution.
This film also sheds light on the trials faced by an aspiring musician, or any artist in general, clearly depicting the message that “the real world isn’t for the ones with the faint of hearts”. Cases of emotional and psychological trauma have been found after being such music or extracurricular groups, where the environment is competitive and mistakes are something that is forbidden. Through Andrew, any musician even if not exposed to being part of such a highly-ranked music group lie Shaffer’s Jazz Orchestra, would feel disturbed and greatly affected by all that he goes through the entire film. In one scene, Andrew cannot seem to get the tempo right for the song on the sheet music and he starts to take the strategy of his teacher. The audience sees him swearing at himself with pure anger and self-loathe, while his palms and fingers start to blister and bleed. It is an uncomfortable image and one that could make someone look away from feeling despair as Andrew starts to hate himself for the moment just so he can play the part like he knows he can. It is a powerful scene that shows the extent to which a human being can perform if pushed to the limit.
Infer & Deduce: According to my personal interpretation, the reason behind the title of this film, ‘Whiplash’ could be one from the name of the injury caused to the neck by the sudden force of hitting an object (like sitting in a car and hitting a pole or another car at a high speed). This could mirror the effect of Andrew playing the drums as he’s seen devoting his entire energy capacity to it and almost earning the permanent injury of some sort of muscle cramp to his arms or his neck for that matter. Looking at the definition of Whiplash, it could also mean “an abrupt snapping motion or change of direction resembling the lash of a whip” or “to beat, hit, throw, etc., with or as if with a whiplash”, which both apply to the intensified display of behaviour by Andrew the protagonist.
Moreover another explanation that is quite plausible is that the two main songs for this film are called ‘Caravan’ and ‘Whiplash’, with the latter being the one that actually led to Andrew breaking up and being put to the ground by Fletcher, who humiliated him in front of everyone at practice for the first time for not being able to play with tempo (which I analyse further below). This broke him down and actually changed his mindset about the whole jazz school and their teachings. Andrew grows more determined to get the music right and it is after being scolded in class for not being able to play the song ‘Whiplash’ on his instrument, the drums.
Technical Aspects
There are no visual effects in this film nor any choreography that could be said for movies like ‘Baby Driver’ or ‘Inception’, or ‘La La Land’ by Chazelle as well. However, the emphasis is put on the transition, and the jump-cuts to be precise. A film about music and musical performances, all ensembles have cleverly timed cuts to the beat as well as interesting placement of the camera. These are mostly made of extreme close-ups of the instruments the musician is playing which can be prominently heard in the song at that particular moment, with their hands appearing the still shots as well.
A scene after Fletcher scolds Andrew about not being on time with the tempo (analysis below), Andrew finds a wave of motivation and starts practising intensively. This scene has very swift jump-cuts between different parts of the drum kit, which are all close-up shots, and in sync with the drum beat. It heightens the fast pace of the music and effective;y portrays the heated moment Andrew is going through while playing, how he uses his entire energy capacity to play out on the drum kit. To keep the attention off of the actor for a few moments, the close-up shots emphasise on the instruments and the capability they are made for.
This distraction from the actor forms a brilliant miniature montage of shots while it is intelligently done to avoid the main question on everyone’s mind: “Is Miles Teller really playing the drums?”. Reading an article about the topic, it stated that Teller is a talented drummer and was part of a band though he played rock music in his past, which is extremely far from the jazz played in the film. He spent a couple of months learning and training in the jazz field of music to have the realistic effect of playing, however, the music pieces and other demands by Fletcher are quite complex. Thus, Chazelle used the art of clever editing and shot positions to at times fill in a double to play the drum pieces, which is why the emphases on the instruments fit in well. He took playing music pieces to the next level when making ‘La La Land’, where Ryan Gosling, playing Sebastian the protagonist, actually learnt all the piano songs from knowing nothing at all, and which resulted in having long one-take shots that clearly show that there is no double present.
Favourite Scene
Being the first time he plays in Terence Fletcher’s band, Andrew Neiman entered the room with a positive vibe though it starts to turn into humiliation once he cannot get the tempo right of the song ‘Whiplash’. He witnesses the true side of Fletcher, being terrifying a having now care for not embarrassing the musicians he conducts. Before Andrew knows it, all his motivation and self-esteem shatters into nothing.
This scene is one of my favourites since it really shows the brilliant acting done by J. K. Simmons, Fletcher, as well as Miles Teller, Neiman. Keeping the performances by these astounding actors aside, the scene conveys a powerful force of emotion from the teacher to the student to the other students in the room and then to the audience, in a sort of four-dimensional cycle. Everyone is frustrated and confused during this scene on screen, with Fletcher getting angry about Andrew’s incapability of playing the song on the right tempo, then Andrew feeling frustrated that whatever he is doing is wrong. In result, the other musicians are frustrated as well since this new-comer is supposed to be good, as they have heard, though does not prove that point at all. The audience then feels the frustration of the characters in the scene and further experience confusion, and dread to how this scene would play out and escalate.
To add on, Fletcher tries so hard to act nice for the many times at the start that Andrew messes up until the audience is immensely surprised with him hurling the chair at the drummer, who is close to not dodging it. It is at this moment that the viewer knows that what Fletcher says and does is real and that no one wants to be on his bad side. It is an attitude like this that would make one start to question his ethics and feel reluctant towards wanting him to interact with anyone in general. Amongst the storm of cursing and shouting, the camera also glances to the other musicians in the room for a moment. They constantly stare at a single spot, fearing for their lives as it seems. It becomes apparent that Fletcher has treated others in the band with the same attitude before.
With this scene, the reality of working in a highly competitive and professional setting grows clear. Personally being a musician, I felt appalled through the entirety of the film while watching it. I would never have the courage to be part of something so prestigious or qualified. Observing Andrew’s determination was inspiring for me, he acted as a minor role model for me, but the thought of having a tutor like Fletcher always brings a return back to my mind, shadowing over my confidence.
What would I do differently?
The film was touching and a seemingly close example to what an audience would expect would happen in such a competitive industry, and how people would be treated. However, it is quite of a traumatising representation for both the characters to go through and the audience to watch so having a slightly less intensified effect of the torture and psychological problems one is surprisingly susceptible to with such a venture. It instils fear into the viewer, which could in turn maybe push them away from pursuing their passion for music or any of the arts, while for others it may motivate them more. Though the film may be a magnified negative portrayal of reality, it is extremely effective and leaves a memory as well as an emotional effect to think about on the audience, which the director intended on.
Moreover, I would work on changing the image of the teacher that some criticised at the end, with his attitude being that he feels accomplished because without having pushed Andrew to where he did, the drummer wouldn’t have reached the great performance at the end of the film. In a loose sense, it makes it seem as the film is justifying the torture and hard-pushing to be done on students to open up and reach their limits, which is quite horrid actually. Surely, the director did not intend on it to be received by some like this as it was all about Andrew’s own motivation and willpower that led to his success, and that Damien Chazelle, the director, loosely based the film plot on his own experiences as a young drummer.
Cast: Brad Pitt [Lt. Aldo Raine], Christoph Waltz [Hans Landa], Diane Kruger [Bridget von Hammersmark]
Lt. Aldo Raine collects a group of Jewish soldiers to commit violent acts of punishment against the Nazis, during the first year of Germany’s occupation in France. The team of soldiers join with German actress and secret agent Bridget von Hammersmark to bring down the leaders of the Third Reich, who then allies with theatre owner Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent) who seeks to avenge the Nazi’s execution of her family.
My rating: 8/10
Narrative aspects
This film has taken its inspiration from historical events, precisely World War 2, though is completely fictional. It is presented with a division between scenes called ‘Chapters’ which gives it a different feel, as though looking through a book of events. This technique enables the audience to anticipate what would happen in the scenes that follow a chapter title as well as if it is a visual representation of a novel:
Chapter 1 – Once upon a time… in Nazi-occupied France
Chapter 2 – Inglourious Basterds
Chapter 3 – A German Night in Paris
Chapter 4 – Operation Kino
Chapter 5 – Revenge of the Giant Face
Character portrayal and development are strong points in the film, as it follows the storylines of different groups of characters: Aldo Raine and his soldier team, Shoshannah Dreyfus and Frederick Zoller (Daniel Brühl), and Lt. Archie Hicox (Michael Fassbender) and Bridget von Hammersmark, who then all meet at the climax scene location of the theatre and are met with the main antagonist from time to time. This technique keeps the film engaging for the audience as well as creates the set up for the ‘grand finale’ and the opposition of the Nazi-supporting members.
While all the characters created by Tarantino are multi-layered and complex, one character strikes out as different. SS Colonel Hans Landa, played by Christoph Waltz, nicknamed ‘The Jew Hunter’ for obvious reasons due to his interest in killing the Jews hiding in Occupied France, is depicted as quiet and not brutal in his actions yet is very clever and chooses his words of speech very carefully. He himself would not commit any acts of killing and the only commands, but despite that, the audience immediately develops a distaste for Waltz’s well-played character. This could be because of his rather scheming demeanour or how Tarantino chose to show ‘The Jew Hunter’ doing an act he is known for in the first scene of the film.
Infer & Deduce: Immediately looking at the title of the film, one would notice the words being misspelt. There are many theories as to why this is so, with one being to avoid censorship by misspelling the second word, and another being to give tribute to the 1978 war film by Enzo G. Castellari but still have a difference in name for when people search for it online.
Technical Aspects
Tarantino effectively uses certain camera shots, movements and sequences to portray emotions and intent of the characters, and the furthering of the plot. One great example is the opening scene, Chapter 1, where the entire span of twenty minutes consists of cuts between shots but all seem to be as if filmed in one whole take. The editing of this sequence is seamless, and with such a lengthened span of conversation, an audience member would strongly anticipate a twist to occur at any moment. At one point in the sequence, the camera starts to move around rather than remain in the same spot, heightening the tension created and also revealing the secret that the family of Perrier LaPadite, a French farmer, is hiding the Dreyfus family from the Nazis, who are seen hiding under the floorboards in the basement when the camera pans down. When the scene reaches its own climax, the camera starts to zoom in to the two characters present, Hans and Perrier, to clearly show the expressions on their faces to the probably dreading audience.
The above only serves as one example of the film where every shot is intended to serve a deeper meaning, much like the entrance scene of Lt. Aldo Raine, Chapter 2, where the first shot is a wide-angle from a heightened point. As shot analysis deduces meanings of such a choice, a high-angled shot usually signifies the insignificance of the characters shown or making them look slightly powerless, which could well be applied to this scene since the soldiers here are quite disposable. Moreover, the camera shifts to be placed behind the soldiers assembled in a horizontal line and a dolly shot follows Aldo walking back and forth. This could be deduced as showing the scene from the point of viewing of the soldiers yet not being a first-person point of view shot. It portrays the firm ‘pep-talk’ by Aldo in an effective way, making the audience feel as if they are being recruited for working on his team. Also, from the moment an audience sees Aldo, they know that he is a character of great will and superiority.
Furthermore, smaller aspects of the film play their important roles as well, with embedded subtitles creating ease for a viewer not able to speak in German, French and in one scene, Italian. With this technique, Tarantino gives the film a more realistic and ‘homely’ feel, taking the audience back to a time and place where not everyone would know how to speak English. The music choice is iconic in Tarantino films, being classical or old-school, or having intense instrumental compositions that heighten when the scene does.
Favourite Scene
Though a worthy contender for this category is the first scene of the film (Chapter 1), my favourite takes place during Chapter 4, where Lt. Archie Hicox and Bridget von Hammersmark are met with SS officer Major Dieter Hellstrom who notices that Hicox’s accent is “odd”. When Hicox uses the wrong hand gesture to indicate the number three (without the use of his thumb), the Major realises he is an undercover German soldier. And so, like any Tarantino film, violence and a worthy showdown ensues.
This scene captivated my attention as it depicts the observational skills of the men present, that such a small mistake like omitting the use of Hicox’s thumb gave his identity up. Moreover, the scene uses long still shots that create a stronger anticipation in the audience after the notice that the Major has realised something. The Major smoothly transitions into accusing Hicox as not being a German, rather than shooting him at point blank, which represents the character as clever, like the majority of others in this film. Moreover, Hicox plays the conversation very intelligently while reasoning with the Major and having the upper-hand of another man on his side, who points a gun at the Major as well.
Being quite a violent scene, in the end, initially, it is one that is rather quiet and still, which settles the alarm felt by an audience. Though then having the charm of a Tarantino film, jumping to a sudden outburst of gunshots, bloodshed and noise, watching the film makes one unable to predict what to expect and when.
What would I do differently?
Quentin Tarantino is famously known for making films that are violent and brutal, with a hint of unpredictability. If I were to attempt at making my own take on the Inglourious Basterds I would, in my taste, reduce the violence or minimise the display of bloodshed and gore to reach a wider audience of film-watchers that would avoid having the trauma of witnessing such gruesome acts and scenes. having said that, Tarantino definitely places his auteur mark on this film by giving the audience what he is known for. It is a kind of professional and creative stamp that can allow one to realise who this film is made by.
Cast: Richard Gere [Martin Vail], Edward Norton [Aaron Stampler/Roy], Laura Linney [Laura Vinneable]
Martin Vail, a defence attorney, is used to taking up jobs for money and stature though stumbles upon a case involving a young altar boy, Aaron, accused of butchering the archbishop of Chicago. Initially wanting to only save the boy’s life from a life sentence, he delves and uncovers the dark secrets of the Church and their doings.
Based on: “Primal Fear”, written by William Diehl
My rating: 8/10
Narrative aspects
The film tells the story through the medium of a court case bringing a lot of legality to the film. It enthuses an audience with the element of suspense and curiosity, making them want to know what happens next, but moreover, the use of lawyers and the court location which the whole story revolves around, allows this film to stand out from the rest. As the pattern of usual crime films go, the involvement of a crime-fighting division like the FBI or CIA is common (like the Jason Bourne &James Bond series’ and The Silence of the Lambs), thus having the nature of what lawyers do to prepare for a case and how they succeed/fail is an effective attention-grabber.
Moreover, the linear story narrative enables the film to avoid being overly complex, which does not distract a viewer from the plot itself, a crucial point of consideration in a crime thriller. The character development is brilliant in this film as it includes no flashbacks to their pasts yet it includes implicit details that form a backstory for them, through dialogue choice, body language and even the choice of where and when do they use swearing (which this movie contains a decent amount of). To add on, the film is in his when it comes to depicting the reality of plot points, even though it is fictional, based on a novel. These include the use of the law, as stated above, the element of a psychological disorder (DID – Dissociative Identity Disorder) and cases of Church misconduct.
Infer & Deduce: The title of the film and novel suggest a heightened sense of fear for the unknown, where Martin Vail has no clue about whether his beliefs of Aaron being innocent is the whole truth, or towards the last few minutes of the film where the reality of Aaron’s character is revealed. Every character depicts some sort of fear, whether it being the loss of their job, going to jail or confronting their ‘inner demons’.
Technical Aspects
The film uses a wide range of shots and camera movements to emphasise certain emotions or indicate a particular plot point or setting, like close-ups to focus clearly on the emotions of a character and aerial shots over specific locations to perhaps signify how minor characters are in a larger world.
Editing techniques avoid distracting the audience from the main story, only consisting of cuts and fades. The use of special effect makeup is well done since it does not look as fake as it could for films made during the 90s when compared to how advanced technology and makeup skill has become now.
An interesting aspect this film used was incorporating scenes and short shots of the camera footage Aaron’s psychologist had filmed of her sessions with him. This provided a clear view and insight towards how the psychologist felt as well as makes the audience feel as though they are really part of the whole story. Furthermore, the clips were given the in-camera effects in editing which also divided it from the regular film shots.
Favourite Scene
The last seven minutes of the film is a complete turning point for the plot since a plot twist had already been established with Aaron uncovering his multiple personality side. Aaron Stampler, played by Edward Norton, is in his jail cell when Martin pays him a visit to give him the good news about his release. Upon leaving Aaron requests if Martin could apologise on his behalf about injuring Laura’s, the prosecutor, neck. This exchange follows Aaron’s claim of not being able to remember anything from the court that day and set forth the reveal of his true identity.
This scene is the most capturing for me, right after Aaron bursts into Roy who is his alter at the court, since when an audience would expect a calming resolution after the climax, the plot literally “slaps” them with another twist that was never foreseen. It is a brilliant way of keeping the film in an audience member’s mind long after the credits start rolling.
Moreover, the choice of shots in this scene (close-ups and cut-ins of the characters hands) increase the tension of the scene as do the pauses between character dialogue. When Aaron starts clapping after a lengthened moment of silence, the audience immediately knows that they and the characters in the film should not have ‘judged a book by its cover’.
What would I do differently?
Personally, though the movie was brilliantly put I would have shortened the run-time length of it because it did drag on a little at certain points. Moreover, I would have liked to see a little more of the characters backgrounds sort of play into how they react and work with the court case, perhaps shedding light to the trauma Aaron experienced as a child and why he stammers as a grown individual, which is what I would bring forward to the production of the film and storyline.
Auteur Theory 