ashrich_13

2. The cinematic codes used in this film were, I believe, the ones that pursued greatly a major contribution to the general theme and primarily created the atmosphere that was appropriate and all-encompassing. Of course the camera work, as I have mentioned earlier, helped a lot in terms of the creation of spatial relationships between characters and also in making good use of the actors' capabilities. But the one thing that stood out in my observation as something that had given a lot of significant meanings all throughout the film was how every shot was lit.

It is interesting to note how the lighting changed when two of the major characters, Beth and Calvin, were talking outside the house (when Calvin just arrived from visiting Dr. Berger). They were positioned in such a manner that the light coming out of the door from the house seemed ghastly but cathartic. By this time, Calvin was trying to talk to Beth about Buck's funeral – one of the major things that she was avoiding ever since Buck died. What I thought about this was that the "exterior" was lit in the way that only the face of Calvin was highlighted and everything else was dark. Beth was right beside the door and in a few steps, could go to the dark-lit part where Calvin was standing or go right inside the house where the light source was coming from. The significance of this to the general theme was Beth's avoidance of the dilemma represented by her trying to go inside while Calvin tries to force her to talk about it and stay in the darkness. Also, Beth was trying hard to convince him to go inside and not talk. The lighting, in this particular scene, created a two-sided inference of whether the major issue should be confronted or not. This was represented by the dark and the well-lit sides of Calvin's and Beth's and how it opposed and contrasted each other.

Also, another group of scenes to note is how Conrad was lit every time he visits Dr. Berger. His first visit, it seemed like additional light sources were used. Fluorescent lights inside Dr. Berger's office and the ones coming from outside the windows highlighted the characters and the set. Conrad was well-lit in this particular scene and it is interesting to note that this created a sort of irony in the sense that his first visit was actually the time where he concealed most about what he feels regarding Buck and his agony towards his death. In comparison to this, the second and third instances of the visits actually made an interesting shift from being well-lit to highlighting only a portion of his face with orange as the dominant colour. The third visit, specifically, was where he was shown lounging on a chair and this was the moment where he tried to open more about his feelings. He was then more comfortable talking about Buck's death and in some sense, he already trusted Dr. Berger. Then in the succeeding visits, it goes back to being well-lit paralleled with his again, trying to swerve from discussing his feelings and actually denying his problem and neglecting the need to confront it. After this, the lighting sort of varies with his decision to open up or deny his inhibitions. Furthermore, his last (and considerably most emotional) visit to Dr. Berger was the most darkly-lit of all instances. This was particularly where he told him everything – about how he felt when Buck died (it was shown as if he was talking to Buck through Dr. Berger) and what has become of his relationship with his mother.

As part of mass media and the primary source of communication in the society, broadcast companies such as television and radio play a pivotal role as ISAs. They are mostly in the private domain, operate through persuasion (or in more intricate terms, through ideology) and are founded by material existence (broadcast stations and outlets). In the film, UBS is a seemingly ordinary television company which is considered as the "fourth network" (after CBS, NBC and ABC) and is radically losing in the ratings game. As a consequence, the opportunity that the executives of the company took illustrated the rabid measures that each partakes on to rate and subsequently profit from such programs. The industry initially depicted was that on a deteriorating streak, it is close to being shut down out of bankruptcy. So since every program on television is expected and assumed to sell good in both the audience and advertising markets, immediate program-cutting and redeveloping measures would surface. This is where to which came the idea of taking advantage of certain situations to supply the network with the profit needed for survival. Primarily in this instance, the sacrifice of responsible journalism in exchange of skyrocketing ratings through a novelty news show. There is an apparent depiction of the anchorman whom the network wanted us to believe was a critic "denouncing the hypocrisies of our time". In due course, he was portrayed as a puppet merely used and controlled to satisfy the audience's viewing pleasure. He was the industry's tool to regain its impetus and to redeem itself from being salvaged by low ratings and relatively lower advertising density. He was the sacrificial lamb, a test run for trial and error. He was materialized as a media product that is packaged to influence the audience but in reality, was cut off his own mental and emotional stance. What we could suppose in this film is that the ability of an ideology to persuade people into succumbing to certain beliefs was extremely obvious on the part of the anchorman and also on the role of the audience as the receiver. Both were lead into believing that one complex and profit-motivated idea is a projection of the truth – a truth that is tangible and impersonal. The capacity of the television industry to maneuver the faith of one person or social group into the creation of a hyperreality is a succulent perpetuation of an ideology built to transform and subject the society to a monocentric faith.

In Luchino Visconti's La Terra Trema, long takes are frequently used rather than montage. It is almost entirely composed of one-shot sequences, thus clearly showing the concern to cover the entire action in interminable deep-focus panning shots. Instead of cutting the sequence into fragments of shots by montage, Visconti made use of camera panning in shifting of focus between characters. This was exemplified in scenes of conversation and when another character enters or exits the dimensions of the shot.

The long takes used in this film also added to the extraction of emotions from the actors, realizing that almost all of the actors are neophytes (some of them are real-life Sicilian fishermen, guards, and villagers). Long takes are very helpful to actors since in montage, the acting should be filmed as many times as the technique requires. Also, parts of an actors performance are sometimes cut in order to make way to the technique which will be used. In this manner, the momentum of the performance, as well as the realism it may suggest, is being ruled out.

The primary reason for this is that the film was supposed to be Visconti's documentary on the life and industry of poor, Sicilian villagers who are usually discriminated by wealthy businessmen. And as the documentary-style is maintained, the existence of long shots will obviously come into place. No montage is needed because the objective is just to film what really takes place. Nothing more, nothing less.

I liked the film House of Flying Daggers the least among all of the films we watched in class primarily because for me, it was just a typical Kung-Fu movie. After watching it, I appreciated the well-crafted twists in the story, involving the revelation of Mei's (Zhang Ziyi) and Leo's (Andy Lau) characters. But still, I disliked the fact that Zimou Yhang still chose to include overly-manifested and exaggerated fight scenes. With his reputation as a critically-acclaimed director, I was disappointed when I felt that most of the time, the fight scenes were more highlighted than the theme itself.

The acting was average, most of the time inconsistent especially with regards to Takeshi Kaneshiro's, His was, at times, very confusing and his facial expressions are not as emotional as Ziyi's and Lau's.

The ending was really hilarious; the guys fought for like, more than a day, they stabbed each other plenty of times on different body parts but it was still long before one was killed. Whatever happened to the idea that the audience nowadays seek for the theme beneath a film and not just its entertainment value? Fantasy is not quite an issue for me, its just that I'm so fed up with these kind of films since I was a kid. My parents bored me to death as they watch Jackie Chan and Bruce Lee marathon flicks on a daily basis. I think its just time for Asian cinema to come up with themes that can exude their culture more than just martial arts. Besides, there are lots of stuff in Asian culture that can be considered as themes. This might give the audience a wider array of opportunities for a great movie experience.

Of all the films we've watched in class, my favorite is the film about a girl that'll change our lives, Amelie (The Fabulous Destiny of Amelie Poulain). I first heard about this film on my freshman year in high school and I neglected it just like what I've done to European and Asian films (I was so into Hollywood before). Still, I was curious when I saw the movie poster, showing Amelie with a giggly yet mysterious smile. Often I tried to search for a copy of the film but I ended up buying poorly-written, Hollywood teenyboppers. So it was really a good experience when we got to watch this on class.

I chose Amelie mainly because its theme is unique for me. I am really fond of films with very colorful characters, those who are not usually found in every society. Amelie might be very typical externally speaking. She's just an ordinary boarder working as a waitress in a ghastly restaurant. We might have seen that kind plenty of times already. But personality-wise, Amelie is unique, being curious on everything she's unaware of and trying to deal with the people around her while being herself all the time. She's childish, she throws stones at ponds to ease with her problems, but quite inspiring. She encountered certain traumatic experiences in her childhood, but still she preserved her colorful personality.

As much as I've enjoyed the color of Amelie's personality, I was absolutely entertained with the color used in the cinematography. In the whole film, the yellowish tone of the color was maintained. It was advantageous for me since I am relaxed with this kind of tone, unlike those in films that are too dimly-lit or too bright. I don't know exactly why, but I think it psychologically relaxes my mind (and my poor vision).

In general, I liked the film because it doesn't preach, it tends not to change our perspectives in an instant. It just clearly shows us how slowly we could improve our own lives and at the same time, try to improve others in our own little ways. There are some flaws in the film's realism, especially in the animation-side, but I still enjoyed the whole of it. It was just like daydreaming, and then waking up having a dose of heartfelt optimism.