Do the BETTER Thing

Did Mookie do the right thing? I think everybody wants there to be a definite answer, yes or no, but these types of situations are not black and white. Like so many things in life, the right thing is a shade of gray and ultimately no answer will be satisfying (otherwise why would people still be arguing over this?). But I feel Mookie did the better thing by throwing the garbage can through Sal’s window, not because he needed to take revenge on Radio Raheem, but rather it prevented a dangerous situation from taking more lives. I proposed this idea in class, and was relatively shot down, but considering nobody else has come up with anything that provides REAL closure I’ll stick with my own observations.

Spike Lee was quick to point out on his DVD that critics cared more about the loss of white property than the death of Radio Raheem. This is wrong and there’s no way to argue that. However, in developing my theory, I think it’s also important to note that Radio Raheem nearly killed Sal, but nobody really cares about that either. If Radio Raheem was not killed by the cops, he still was going to be put in jail. Point being he was not coming back (this doesn’t condone him being killed though). After Radio Raheem died and the cops departed, they left a red hot crime scene where Sal and his two white sons were surrounded by an entire grief-stricken black neighborhood. They had nobody to protect them. Just the three of them (cornered against the pizzeria) versus an entire community.

What followed was Mookie threw the garbage can through Sal’s window and the riot broke out. Nobody can tell for certain WHAT WOULD HAVE happened had he not done that, but I don’t think many people believe Sal or his pizzeria could have escaped untouched. By throwing the garbage can through the window, Mookie diverted attention from Sal to the pizzeria and everybody was able to vent their pain on inanimate objects. Sal and his boys were allowed to walk away untouched (although they were still banged up from the fight before) and watched their home burn down from across the street. Was Mookie right to throw the garbage can through the window? I think the loss of Sal’s pizzeria is better than the loss of Sal’s life/health. Only one person died in that entire scene (Radio Raheem). Had Mookie not thrown the garbage can, that number very well could have been a lot higher.

Obviously there are holes in this argument. As I said in the beginning, nothing is black and white. Some things after the riot scene may contradict the theory, but hopefully it allowed you an alternative way of interpreting the end of the movie.

Remember Us, as simple an order as a King could give, Remember Us

“The Battle of Algiers” has no main character, for the most part it takes no sides, and if it were not for Iraq and other threats of terrorism, the movie would probably not be the least bit relevant in the modern world. I think these things to some extent detract from one’s ability to watch this purely as a movie and try to enjoy it. Fortunately for us, “The Battle of Algiers” quite simply puts the “art” in Art of Film.

I did not have a good time while watching this film because I did not understand it. At the time it was difficult for me to grasp how this could be a movie and not have a main character or tell a war story and not pick a side. I think it takes one complete viewing to understand “The Battle of Algiers”. The artistry comes in the film’s ability to depict a conflict and stay neutral over it. There are characters, but the viewer is not forced to connect with any of them. The two sides are the French and the FLN and the viewer gets to see both their virtue and their corruption. As Ann Hornaday from the Washington Post describes,

The greatness of "The Battle of Algiers" lies in its ability to embrace moral
ambiguity without succumbing to it. And although Pontecorvo has been rightfully
lionized for the realism of the film, its visual artistry -- the carefully
composed shots, their gestural grace, their unerring temporal and spatial logic
-- is as potent as anything by Goya.

Pontecorvo didn’t make “The Battle of Algiers” for the enjoyment of the viewers. It wasn’t made to thrill, to scare, to sell tickets, nor to win awards. I think it was made to show you what happened to the Algerian people. But the movie won’t force-feed you any lessons or themes. It simply shows history as non-biased as possible. And that is incredibly difficult to do. That alone is art. I think all this film asks is that you don’t forget it.

Film Noir Goes To Men's Wearhouse

Suits. The underground universal characteristic of film noir? If Out of the Past, Kiss Me Deadly, and Chinatown are any indication, men’s formal wear may just be one of the most telling characteristics that make a film noir.

In all three of the film noir’s we watched in class, probably around 80% of the men were in suits. Now given that most of the stories are about detectives, this makes sense that the protagonist would sport a trench coat and the villains would be outfitted just as classy. But when you give some thought to it, what other film genre can make the claim that most of its characters wear suits? Perhaps spy movies, but really aren’t these just a modernized extension of the detective story line?

Chinatown was no exception to the suit rule; in fact, Jack Nicholson’s character’s attire inspired me to restart my search for a white suit. A few people in class mentioned that since Chinatown was in color it made it less of a film noir. But one of the bonuses of color highlights a different feature of film noir: Jack Nicholson’s suits. I counted at least four different colors throughout the course of the movie. Coupled with the fact that Jack Nicholson is a sexy beast, this movie certainly would have lost a lot if it wasn’t in color. Nicholson and the supporting cast are decked out in suits for nearly the entire movie.

So, in honor of Jeff Foxworthy, “If the movie yer watchin gots dudes in suits in it, it might just be a film noir.”

Would you like to comment?

I’m up for avoiding work as much as the next guy, and I’m sorry to all of you people who would read this if you were still forced to, but I feel compelled to ask if anybody else is actually reading these things now that comments are no longer required. I was always motivated to try at these assignments knowing that other people may actually read them. However, without user feedback I have a sinking feeling that my posts are going to deviate farther and farther away from their usual “quality”.

So I would ask of anybody who is still reading this to comment on this post (just one!). If you don’t, then I suggest you STOP reading this because things are about to get really, really stupid (just kidding Klobs).

Don't Miss This Pay-Per-View Showdown Mike Hammer vs. Jeff Bailey!!!

So in class we’ve all been complaining about the questionable quality of Kiss Me Deadly and all of its ridiculousness. Well since I have to make-up a blog, I’ve decided to do a head-to-head battle between Mike Hammer and Jeff Bailey, and maybe along the way prove that Kiss Me Deadly really wasn’t THAT bad.

Bailey and Hammer are both the male protagonists in their respected film noir movies. I’m going to avoid comparing them against the really obvious stuff (they’re both detectives…) and try to focus on the aspects that characterize their characters as film noir. Namely, 1) Fatal Downfall, 2) Fighting style, and 3) Love interest.

For the sake of the comparison I’m going to assume both men died. If Hammer wasn’t killed by the explosion he would have died eventually so it really doesn’t matter. But what led to their fatal downfall? Hammer discovers near the end of the movie just how big of a mistake he made when he assumed Christina’s roommate was legit. By not following through with his detective duties, he made a fatal assumption that the girl could not possibly be a fake/spy. Although the extents of the consequence of his actions aren’t quite clear, the director does hint that when the girl opened the box it unleashed a nuclear holocaust. Jeff’s flaw was predictable and cliché. He fell for the girl he was supposed to bring back for his boss, she killed a man, tried to frame him, and ultimately everybody died. Unlike in Hammer’s case, most of the casualties were the characters in the movie. I’ll give the point to Hammer because his fatal downfall not only endangered him, it threatened the entire world.

Both Hammer and Jeff get to show off their fighting ability in their respected movies, but that’s not what I’m grading. For this battle, I’m talkin’ style. Hammer gets some good fight scenes, the notable one where he throws popcorn in an assassins face and then punches him down several flights of stairs. Hammer also has a pretty good move in the pool house when he paralyzes some thug, but the camera doesn’t give the viewer any glimpse as to what is going on. I think everybody knows what I’m going to say for Jeff. You can’t beat taking a man out with one punch. Yes, it’s an amazing showcase of strength, but the style with which he went about doing it gives him the point. Walk in, punch, take the papers, light a cigarette, and leave. That borders Clint Eastwood awesomeness.

It wouldn’t be film noir without femme fatales and that secret love interest. Or in Hammer’s case, love interests. Hammer had to endure women literally throwing themselves at him for the length of the movie. Perhaps the closest woman to him, and ultimately the woman he maybe falls for, was his partner Velda. It was obvious Velda was crazy for Mike Hammer, but unfortunately for her, she had to compete with countless other women for his attention. In Out of the Past, the movie fluctuates out of flashbacks and Jeff’s girlfriends. In the present he hooked up with Ann, in his past he had a mixed up relationship with Kathie. Ultimately Jeff’s past catches up to him (out of the past…) and he find himself with Kathie again. Only this time, Jeff did not fall for her lies and instead turned her over to the authorities-at the cost of his own life. I have to give the point to Hammer on account of his apparent irresistible studliness.

If you’ve been keeping track, that’s Hammer 2 – Bailey 1. I’m not saying Kiss Me Deadly is in any way a better movie than Out of the Past, but you have to admit Hammer was a much more exciting main character.

Two Things in Life are Priceless: Mastercard and Memories

Something that has really bothered me since watching Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is the idea that anybody would ever consider erasing their memories. I can understand that maybe the notion of forgetting certain embarrassing moments in life could, perhaps momentarily, seem appealing, but I can’t fathom how somebody would actually erase parts of their life if given the chance.

Assuming you’re not completely absentminded, everything in life triggers a memory. Looking at a telephone triggers memories of conversations. Maybe scotch tape sends you back to arts and crafts projects in kindergarten. Everything in the world has the ability to trigger a flashback, even if the two things are completely unrelated. Want proof? That’s why it’s so easy to space out in school. So my first point is that it’s ridiculous to think that deleting targeted memories will erase them for good, because just about anything could trigger them back. And those memories may be linked to something else! Let’s say you and your girlfriend went to an oxygen bar on a date. If you deleted that memory, would you also delete the memory of breathing? It wouldn’t work any other way because simply breathing could conjure up those memories. So do you die? The whole idea is ludicrous!

Furthermore, unless you’re a completely irrational person, people usually learn from their past experiences to determine how they act in the future. So in that sense, erasing memories is like stopping forward progress. Everything about your past, both the good and the bad, make up who you are in the present and who you will be in the future. This isn’t my opinion, this is just life. So no matter how painful parts of your life may be, it is likely that those very parts you wish you could forget are some of the most important things that have happened in your life. If you don’t learn from your past mistakes, then you’re all the more likely to repeat them in the future. Erasing memories basically ensures this.

It's All Over When the Cute Girl Cries

No guy can stand it. No matter how tough you think you are, no matter how much you can bench, or how much facial hair you can grow in a day, when it comes to crying all men are created equal. We hate it, society teaches us it’s weak, and when confronted by a crying person we’re left defenseless. For Hildy Johnson, crying was her ace of spades that she played on Walter Burns to break his macho act. His Girl Friday is yet another example of the male species weakness to a woman in tears.

Walter put on a show pretending he wanted Hildy to leave him for Bruce. She believed him too, but he could no longer pull off the stunt when Hildy started crying. Hildy breaking down into tears was the turning point in the two lovers’ final fight which prompted Walter to reconcile their problems and get back together. In other words, once the girl cried, he didn’t stand a chance.

For me and my fellow men, it is a natural response to try and be comforting. Our primary objective is not to fix what’s wrong; first it’s to stop the waterworks. A woman in tears is too much to bear for our hearts. No man can look at that and not feel remorse or sorrow. Crying has the power to break even the most evil and twisted hearts. So how powerful is the act of crying? In His Girl Friday it led Walter and Hildy to get remarried. What other human phenomenon can produce this type of result?

What Happens in the Old West, Stays in the Old West

As we come ever closer to the season seven premiere of Scrubs, the best TV show you’re probably not watching, I find it increasingly difficult to concentrate on other films, nonetheless dated Westerns. In the words of Dr. Bob Kelso, “It’s a hip-hop world son. Either keep up or get out of the way!” My point? Western’s are just not relevant in this day and age. I’m not so ignorant as to proclaim that watching Western’s has no benefit on people, any great movie can teach you something. But everything that makes a Western a Western is old-fashioned, dated, and is not something you would find in the 21st century.

The greatest problem with the Western is that the characters are becoming completely un-relatable. Making the protagonist in “Unforgiven” an old washed up cowboy certainly broke genre traditions, but the movie was forced to enter the fantasy realm because of it. Imagine William Munny in the modern day. For the sake of comparison, I’ll pick the most absurdly atrocious movie I can think of, “Pootie Tang.”
If you can fathom it, imagine William Munny plucked out of the Wild West and thrown into Pootie Tang’s world. He’d be an old man on a horse in the ghetto overwhelmed by moral decay. Even when ignoring all advances in technology, our culture as depicted in Pootie Tang is drastically different than the old West. The language barrier would be an enormous learning curve. Pootie would cry, “I'm going to sine your pitty on the runny kine!” Now considering I don’t even know what that means, how would you expect the likes of William Munny to? Or any character from a Western movie. The problem is the audience is more sophisticated than they are.

“Pootie Tang” is not a fair comparison because it represents today’s culture with 0% accuracy, but it does capture our state of mind. I don’t dislike Western’s, but I think as they age they’re beginning to feel antiquated. Unless Western’s can find a way to appeal to the modern world, they will very quickly become a dead genre, if they not already are. It’s a hip-hop world son. Either keep up or get out of the way!

We All Blog in a Yellow Submarine

On top of the TV in my room are three of my favorite movies of all time. It is an illustrious award to be granted a spot atop of my television, so it came as no surprise that one of the movies is also on Roger Ebert’s list of great movies. In all of its obsolete VHS glory, this movie is The Beatles “Yellow Submarine”.

“Yellow Submarine” came out in 1968 and it is basically a 90-minute long music video featuring twelve Beatles songs. The story revolves around Paul, John, George and Ringo and their quest to save Pepperland from the Blue Meanies, who hate music and happiness. The story is actually really accessible to little kids, which is important considering that this is around the time that Walt Disney started releasing animated movies. The plot is certainly engaging, and the art design is magnificent, but this movie would basically be pointless without the Beatles soundtrack. As Roger Ebert put it in his review,

With 11 songs by the Beatles [Yellow Submarine] certainly has the best music track of any animated film

There are a total of 12 Beatles songs played throughout the entire movie. Most of them are immediately recognizable such as “Eleanor Rigby”, “Yellow Submarine”, “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds”, and others. Most of the popular songs from their album Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band made their way onto the movie soundtrack. What’s more interesting is that some of the Beatles most popular songs were actually commissioned to be put in “Yellow Submarine”. “All Together Now” and “All You Need Is Love” made their debuts in the movie and today are now well known staples.

The Beatles agreed to make “Yellow Submarine” in order to get out of three-movie deal without actually appearing in a third movie. The voices are done by professional voice actors, so the only real Beatles you get are the songs (this is not really a bad thing). The movie could be described as a Beatles musical since the songs are used to accompany what’s happening on screen (or maybe the other way around). As the submarine passes through the Sea of Time, we see the Fab Four age rapidly and become old men to the tune of “When I’m Sixty-Four”. When the Beatles meet a new friend, Jeremy, a miserable loner creature, they sing “Nowhere Man”. The storyboard was most likely crafted to best utilize the songs and still make sense with the plot, despite whether or not they’re really necessary.

A lot could be said of the animation and the art direction in “Yellow Submarine”, even today it stands as one of the most uniquely crafted movies around, but without The Beatles music behind it the movie would flop. The soundtrack makes the movie immediately accessible and enjoyable to anybody at any age. The music is that powerful and that influential. The Beatles music gives the movie its psychedelic, peace-loving flavor that makes it unremarkably a product of the 60’s. And if you don’t like that, you still have the songs to fall back on. With arguably the best rock album ever recorded as your predominant soundtrack, you can’t really go wrong.

Snakes on a Stagecoach

Believe it or not, there are many similarities between "Stagecoach" and "Snakes on a Plane". For those of you who are not familiar, "Snakes on a Plane" is a pretty self-explanatory movie about a plane full of people getting attacked by snakes. The snakes were put there to kill Sean Jones, a kid who witnessed a murder committed by Eddie Kim, a notorious gang leader. "Snakes" and "Stagecoach" are similar in how they confine people from multiple social standings in a small place endangered by a common threat. In "Stagecoach", the characters are trapped in a stagecoach as they try to outrun the Native Americans to Lordsburg. "Snakes on a Plane" is a modernized version of this, where the characters are trapped on an airplane as they try to avoid the snakes.

Comparisons can also be made between the characters. Samuel L. Jackson's character, Neville Flynn, is the John Wayne of "Snakes on a Plane". Both Flynn and Ringo are ruthless and powerful characters who are forced into the position of protecting everybody else on the plane/stagecoach. It is not their mission to save everybody, but they take on that duty because they are heroes. Jones and Ms. Mallory hold the highest social standing in their respected means of transportation. Both are tried to be kept separate from the "lesser" characters. Jones, who is important because he is set to testify as a witness to put away a gangster, is isolated in first class away from everybody else on the plane. Ms. Mallory cannot be separated from everybody in the stagecoach, but she is left alone whenever the stagecoach stops and before and after she delivers her baby.

Both "Snakes on a Plane" and "Stagecoach" combine people from all realms of the social hierarchy into a closed-off "mini-society". "Stagecoach" includes every character from the Western world: escaped convict, banker, prostitute, army wife, drunken doctor, and your regular cowboys. Once confronted with danger, social rank becomes less important in the stagecoach. Gatewood selfishly suggests that the passengers prematurely leave for Lordsburg without letting Ms. Mallory and her newly born child rest. Gatewood's character is also found in "Snakes on a Plane" as Paul, a grumpy British businessman. Paul sacrifices another passenger's dog to a boa constrictor for his own safety. The passengers on the plane eventually storm first class, where Jones is located, to escape the snakes but also endanger Jones. Every member of each class was forced to work together in order to survive.

Well Mise-en-Scene by Welles

"Citizen Kane" was a revolutionary movie in respect to it's use of mise-en-scene. The story of Charles Foster Kane's life was told through a series of flashbacks. Welles used make up and costumes to help the viewer determine what time period the movie was currently in. We first meet adult Kane as a dashing young man only interested in his newspaper. Overtime, Kane grows rounder and his hair recedes. Welles does an excellent job of contrasting young Kane to old Kane to help the viewer make sense of the flashbacks. This is true of most of the other characters, such as Susan, Leland, or Thatcher.

Since "Citizen Kane" tries to recount the life of Charles Foster Kane it requires many settings. Some of the settings in the movie were created using paintings, such as the opening shot of Xanadu or Kane's political rally. Welles contrasts all of Kane's various houses, starting with the small, humble winter cottage he grew up in as a boy to the very extravagant Xanadu palace. At the end of the movie, we see Kane and Susan together in Xanadu. The setting is notably empty aside from various statues. Yet Kane's basement is overflowing with his life's belongings. This shows how Kane grew up to be a man who owned everything he wanted but still led an empty life.

"Citizen Kane" uses high key and low key lighting to felsh out character traits. The most notable of these is the reporter who is trying to discover the meaning of the word Rosebud. The reporter is always in the dark on the bottom right side of the screen. This choice in lighting takes the attention away from the reporter and concentrates it all on Kane. Welles likes to use low key lighting during the major turning points in the movie. When Susan tries to commit suicide, he employs low key lighting to reveal her distress and insecurity about her marriage and her singing. When Kane fires Leland, Welles again uses low-key lighting to emphasize the contrast between the two characters. "Citizen Kane's" unique use of mise-en-scene helped establish it as one of the best American movies ever made.

Journal #2: Pan's Labyrinth is A-Maze-ing

Anybody who says they don’t like foreign films or that they don’t match up to American films has clearly never seen “Pan’s Labyrinth”. Forget any misconceptions you may have about this movie, because it is a piece of art that must be experienced to fully understand. No, this is not the greatest foreign film ever made, but it is the type of movie that sticks with you for weeks and haunts your brain. Directed by Guillermo Del Toro, “Pan’s Labyrinth” spins an epic tale of a little girl’s magical adventure, which when paralleled to the brutal tortures committed by her fascist father, the captain, combine to deliver a potent look into the nature of good and evil that will leave you second-guessing it’s reality.

“Pan’s Labyrinth’s” is set right after the end of the Spanish Civil-War. The movie begins to the main character, Ofelia, played by Ivana Baquero, discovering a fairy in the woods. Ofelia is a young girl who is completely immersed in fairy tales. Upon reaching her father’s military base, she discovers ancient ruins and meets a faun who sends her on a three part mission to reclaim her throne as the princess of the underworld. While dealing with her magical adventure, Ofelia is troubled because her mother is pregnant and becoming very sick. Ofelia does not like to acknowledge her new father, the captain, and refuses to call him dad. Baquero puts child actors in the States to shame and is just as terrific as she is terrifying on screen. Even without actually being able to understand what she says (the entire film is subtitled) she comes off mysterious and preoccupied with her fairy tales. Her childhood innocence stands completely opposite to the captain. Her father is a merciless military captain, played by Sergi Lopez, and is quite possibly one of the most cruel and heartless characters that can be found in modern cinema.

It is a common misconception that “Pan’s Labyrinth” is a movie about magic and mythical creatures. While this is true, it is also important to understand that this movie earns its R rating—and then some. When the viewer is first introduced to the captain, we see him interrogate two peasants thought to be rebel spies. They claim to be hunting rabbits, but before they can be properly searched, the captain hammers in one of the peasants face with the butt of his gun and then proceeds to shoot the other. Del Toro shows us ALL of the of captain’s brutality and senseless violence. We are further shocked when the Captain pulls a rabbit out of the peasants pack and he walks away emotionless and completely undisturbed.

For the viewers that are not fluent in Spanish you should be informed that “Pan’s Labyrinth” was not re-dubbed in English and is completely subtitled. The subtitles are fantastic and were written by Del Toro himself, but it is unfortunate that you must pay so much attention to the bottom of the screen to understand what’s going on. “Pan’s Labyrinth” has won Oscars for make-up, cinematography, and art direction. Unfortunately, non-Spanish speakers can not appreciate all of that during the first viewing because it requires a fair amount of concentration on the subtitles to keep up with the story. They go by so quickly that not paying attention for as little as 30 seconds can prevent you from understanding the entire scene.

“Pan’s Labyrinth’s” most significant achievement is the creation of Ofelia’s magical world and its ability to still stay rooted in reality. The costumes are magnificent, but not overly fantastical that they would be mistaken for Disney characters. The faun and the pale man, both controlled by Doug Jones, are fearsome mystical creatures. The sets help set the mood for the characters. The crypt where Ofelia meets the faun is the full realization of a child’s fairy tale with its aging stonework and earthly-looking ruins. But it is located just outside the captain’s military base and it never feels completely distant from the village, only hidden.

“Pan’s Labyrinth” deserves the title of “great movie” and justifies being near the top of anybody’s Netflix queue.

Gotta Love The Foreign Films

This is a movie I made for German class. I thought I'd show it off and try to boost the view counter on Youtube. It's my German rap; the lyrics and music are my own (with another kid). If you're in for a good laugh, take the comments on the bottom and put them through any German to English translator. The movie didn't go well with the actual German people, but you can learn some good burns from it.

My Movie, My Musical, My Fun

I don’t think people can truly appreciate the “art of film” until they try making a movie themselves. Thanks to various school assignments I think most students have at least participated in a movie project. Unfortunately, movie assignments from school are rarely much fun because they’re too structured and must actually be (gulp) educational. But that should not deter people from making movies for their own enjoyment. You’ll find that when you unleash you’re creativity, there’s no shortage of good ideas for making movies. To show you what I mean, and to maybe work up some hype for myself, I’m using this journal as the first preview of my latest project: The Michael Vick Musical.

For those of you that don’t know (click here for more info), Michael Vick was the starting quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons. He is currently due to go on trial this winter for various charges of animal cruelty. Vick had been sponsoring and competing in dog fights at his house. Since then, he has lost all of his sponsorships, he has been suspended indefinitely from the NFL, and odds are he’s going to be sent to prison.

The musical I’m making is meant to capture the pain of the Falcons’ fans caused by the Michael Vick scandal. It’s the story of two hardcore fans and how they deal with the disappointment of lost dreams and a fallen “hero”. Vick will not be cast into the movie, but we will ceaselessly make fun of him.

Now although I’m calling this a musical, I’m not writing a full score of music for the movie. I’m using a mix of popular sad songs and playing those over the movie (whether or not that’s exactly legal…). Some of them will be lip synced and some of them will be used to capture the mood of the scene. The list is as follows:

Bad Day by Daniel Powter
Far Away by Nickelback
So Long, So Long by Dashboard Confessional
Hemorrhage (In My Hands) by Fuel
Better That We Break by Maroon 5
Stab My Back by All-American Rejects
How To Save A Life by The Fray
Everybody Hurts by R.E.M.
Love Hurts by Nazareth
Hide And Seek by Imogen Heap

Most of these songs are really recycled, have been overplayed, and are washed up. However, that’s exactly the look I’m going for.

So far I’ve finished editing the last scene of the movie. I still have to film the whole beginning… It’s a fun movie and I’ve been able to shape it the way I want it without having to fulfill any grading requirements. If you’re reading this and are interested, the movie will probably make its way to YouTube once everything is finished.

Journal #1: Saving Private Ryan From Reviewers

In a true masterpiece, it should only take a few minutes for film viewers to be drawn into a “great” movie. Although I’ve watched more movie clips in class over the past two weeks than I can count with two hands, only one of them truly stuck out to me: “Saving Private Ryan”. Upon reading Kenneth Turan’s review (published in the Los Angeles Times) I was unexpectedly shocked to find out he did not enjoy the same things I did. Both of us can agree that “Saving Private Ryan” is one of Spielberg’s masterpieces, but Turan came to that conclusion for different reasons than I did. Turan writes than “Ryan’s” greatest strengths are its battle sequences.

A powerful and impressive milestone in the realistic depiction of combat, Saving
Private Ryan is as much an experience we live through as a film we watch on
screen.

I agree a war movie would be lacking without terrific battle scenes. “Saving Private Ryan” does not have that problem, as it does an excellent job of capturing the confusion, terror, and chaos of war. But while the fighting certainly adds excitement and realism to the movie, this is only half of what makes “Saving Private Ryan” a masterpiece. Turan obsesses with the accurate presentation of combat and the realistic gore. He describes in detail of soldiers catching on fire or men with their intestines hanging out but at times his writing sounds like that of a gitty thirteen-year-old boy. This can easily be misinterpreted by readers making them think that the movie is shallow beyond it’s ability to thrill. What drew me into the story was the dynamic between the characters and how Spielberg portrayed them as normal people cast into roles they didn’t want. Turan disregards this and claims the movie has a poor script.

As the squad moves through crises toward the elusive Pvt. Ryan, what impacts us
most are invariably scenes of action: sometimes fire fights, sometimes
unexpected deaths, but never the dialogue the men trade. Just as the soldiers
speculate that Capt. Miller has been artfully reassembled from old body parts,
so "Private Ryan's" script has been put together from familiar and shopworn
material.

He overlooks the fact that the soldiers in “Saving Private Ryan” are regular Joe’s plucked from the streets and thrown into combat. Captain Miller is an 8th grade English teacher. He isn’t supposed to enlighten the audience to the meaning of life; he’s a soldier who’s fighting to stay alive. The dialogue between the soldiers is written to capture what people actually say on the battlefield. I find it hypocritical that Turan applauds the realism in the combat scenes, but can’t appreciate the realism in the dialogue. Perhaps someone needs to explain to Turan that a war story is as much about the people in the war as it is the war itself.

Hypocrisy aside, Turan and I can both agree that “Saving Private Ryan” is a testament to Spielberg’s skill as a director.

"Saving Private Ryan" is a startling reminder of exactly how spectacular a
director Spielberg can be when he allows himself to be challenged by a subject
(in this case World War II) that pushes against his limits.

I was unaware, and was somewhat shocked to find out, that Spielberg was the director behind “Saving Private Ryan”. I am guilty of having written him off as a kid’s director whose greatest work was E.T. This discovery is certainly exciting for me as I am now eager to explore what other movies bear the Spielberg name.