Because I can...

I decided the only way I can really express my feelings toward the Coen Brothers is through Haikus, so, please, enjoy, it won't be difficult.

Oh Joel and Ethan
What you do, just cause you can
You have my applause.

Inspiration:
I just felt that in all three movies there were many instances where I thought the Coen Brothers made plot or artistic decisions, just because they could. Not that I really blame them, I suppose if I was of their elite caliber, I would probably enjoy messing with peoples heads, and leaving things to interpretation. I do find so amusement in watching people get so worked up about something that they start to try to defend it through physics, and I especially enjoy it when they clearly know nothing about physics, and can't understand that while the Coen Brothers are Geniuses they can't manipulate laws of physics (unless of course they used my law of physics breaking powers.) I am of course referring to the scene in No Country for Old Men where Bell goes to confront Chigurh. Part of me just wants to think that that the Coen Brothers enjoyed confusing people and making them feel inferior and incompetent once again. So no, I'm not going to debate where the heck Chigurh was, cause frankly, my theory is he had an invisibility cloak...think about it!

Razing Arizona:

An organized mess
Rrelatively positive
Whintey! could bear it.

I would have to say Razing Arizona did not prepare me in the least for the film to follow. While the movie had guns, it was represented in a far less threatening way, and a was surprisingly upbeat in a Coen Brother way. The movie didn't demonstrate the usual "happily ever after," but considering the actions taken by H.I. the movie defiantly ended on a positive note, and had a much happier optimistic ending that the movies that would follow.

Fargo

Put that ax down please...
Where do they come up with this
Wood chipper? Really?


I don't know if it was possible to prepare myself for Fargo. Not only the mass of blood, but the horrible Minnesotan accents, that I refuse to believe are based on reality. I wish they could have provided me with some comic relief, but I had a hard time enjoying anything between, wood chippers, face wounds, and crying child.

No Country for Old men:

Break the silence please,
I'm going to pee my pants
Chigurh really needs a friend.

Oh wow. I think the order in which we watched the three films was interesting because I think there was a progression from noise to silence. I still can't decided if Chigurh is more creepy when he talks, or when he doesn't, but I can say for certain that the long spaces of silence in the film were very unsettling. Razing Arizona had a lot more sound compared to No Country for Old Men, where little dialogue, and no background music accompanied the dark corners. So if Chigurh's tank didn't make you tense, the silences were there to fix that.

I think the scariest a part about No Country for Old Men is that I might of actually enjoyed it... but I haven't decided yet.

And Chigurh, If you're out there somewhere, let's be friends, it would make this world much more pleasant.

Kurosawa

I enjoyed the Kurosawa unit more than I anticipated. It only credits him, that while half the time I had no idea what was going on, I was still interested.

I don't know if I would say RAN was my favorite of the three movies we watched in class, but I enjoyed it. I'm usually not a viewer who groans at a black and white movie, but I really liked seeing one of Kurosawa's movies in color. I thought it was interesting because I would have expected from a director who hadn't been creating films in color, to not really know how to use color to his advantage. In RAN though, Kurosawa used extremely vivid, and complimentary colors. He used red when it was appropriate, and darks, when they were necessary.
I also felt that in RAN, there was more emotion in the plot. I think it helped to have the family relations, because in the other two film I often felt confused on why they were doing what they were doing, or in Yojimbo, who was on what side, but I felt in RAN, that it was easier to tell who was against who, and who was supporting who. I also really appreciated how Kurosawa manipulated sound in the movie. I thought it was an intellegent artistic choice to make when he switched from non-diagetic to diagetic in the a scene where there is a lot of blood and gore, it made you able to concentrate on the emotions of the scene, instead of being distracted by all of the chaos.

The Abyss

Abyss is one of my favorite words, and sadly, NOT one of my favorite movies.

in The Abyss, James Cameron did a wonderful job at....well nothing. I can't decide if I respect him more for overcoming these previous movies, and creating a masterpiece (the Titanic,) or if I've lost all respect at all.

It's easier for me to find similarities between The Abyss and Terminator, because I feel they are on the same playing field, which Titanic is not. If someone was to ask me what the plot of the Abyss was, I would struggle to come up with a response. Something about some lost nuclear submarine, which may sound intriguing, but trust me, it was not. I feel as thought the Abyss may have been a warm up for Titanic. Although it's not the focal part of the Abyss, James Cameron also created a romantic storyline between two, and they similar to Jack and Rose, in the Titanic, get separated by water. But that was the only similarity i could find between the two. Similar to the Terminator, I believe the character's were very flat. I didn't feel like they changed at all from beginning to end, or showed any different sides to the dull personalities they were given. I already briefly mentioned, but I thought the Abyss struggled to have a clear plot. It took about a good hour to get into what the the Abyss "was really about." It was as if the first hour was meant to set the scene, it was like a really really long fist chapter of a book, which is never a good thing.


Struggling to not write of James Cameron completely, I tried to find something I could commend him for. And I will say that Cameron, did challenge himself with the set. Nearly all of the movie is set underwater, with large machinery, and what isn't underwater, is set on top of water. Being able to still produce a film underwater, and still create camera angles, and shots, that could be created out of water, truly takes skill and dedication. I just wish he would have used it to a better cause than the Abyss.

Alfred Hitchcock

Alfred Hitchcock was a man of many talents. He created films that were unexpectedly suspenseful, through dialog-less scenes, and wronged characters

Hitchcock seemed to have a trend of developing the protagonist as a "wronged man." In 39 steps we found him running from a crime that he didn't commit, Hitchcock continued this in his other film North by Northwest, where the protagonist, being mistaken for someone else, also had to run from a crime he didn't commit. In both cases, running became a very dangerous en devour, both being nearly killed, more than once.

I found it interesting how Hitchcock was able to keep my attention (a difficult task considering my ADHD) through long scenes with little to no dialog at all. In Rear window, dialog was kept to a bare minimum, many times I felt like I was there with Jeff staring into Mr. Thorwall's apartment, and had to make sure to not make a sound, or sudden movements, as if Mr. Thorwall could see me.
Also in this movie I found it interesting how Hitchcock created a suspenseful situation. Different to many other suspense movies, there are long chase, and hiding scenes, but in Rear Window, there was only one, and Jeff couldn't run from it. Being Trapped in a wheelchair brought on a whole new level of discomfort. Jeff had had the upper had the whole movie until now. Having an apartment separate the two, gave you a false sense of security. However when Mr. Thorwall confronts Jeff face to face in Jeff's apartment, it's a quick adjustment when we realize there is nothing Jeff can do to protect himself, and Mr. Thorwall clearly has a strong advantage.

Stupid Man:

Me and James aren't on speaking terms after that.

I don't think I have ever been as disappointed in anybody as much as I am with James Cameron after watching the Terminator. WHAT A HORRIBLE "MOVIE"! I struggle to comprehend how James Cameron created something so wondrous such as the Titanic, and something so GOD AWFUL such as the Terminator.

Before watching the Terminator, I had no expectations, but I respected James Cameron so much that I was certain that he would somehow make termination look beautiful. However, I was disappointed. When watching Titanic Cameron create dynamic characters, and compelling story lines, in Terminator, the characters were boring, and the few story lines were crap!

Although its a stretch, a very very BIG stretch, and I would never EVER put Titanic and Terminator in the same league, I was able to find one similarity. I found the characters somewhat parallel. In both movies Cameron seemed to cast a "misunderstood hero" (who dies,) and a damsel in distress who is forced to fight for herself in the end.

what a waste of film.

Clinging for my Floor Lamp

Dictionary.com defines Titanic as: Of enormous scope, power, or influence, and James Cameron's film, Titanic, falls nothing short of that.

It's refreshing to come across a review that neither bashes the plot, nor the special effects, but instead commends them. Searching for a review I came across James Berardinelli's review, who claimed that Titanic was not only magnificent, but a rarity. James writes: You don't just watch Titanic, you experience it -- from the launch to the sinking, then on a journey two and one-half miles below the surface, into the cold, watery grave. I whole heartedly agree. When watching the movie, I often find myself clinging to the floor lamp in a desperate attempt to stay afloat, holding my breath as I hit the water, or the worst spreading my arm as if to fly. Point being...Titanic is a film that engages the audience, and a film where the stories, characters, and setting are so real that you can get lost in them. I think this plays a big role in why so many people don't enjoy the film, they're to afraid to throw themselves in it, they sit there and maybe watch, but they don't travel with it.

James Berardinelli also talks about James Cameron use of special effects. While I can (but struggle) to admit there are times when you can pick out the use of a green screen, you can not deny that James Cameron was committed to making an accurately detailed motion picture. James Cameron proved his dedication from the get go, when he announced that to get the shots he wanted, he was quite literally, going to recreate the Titanic, set it to sail, and watch it sink. A director with that kind ambition, should unquestionably be applauded, and I am saddened when he is not. Cameron knew to create the most realistic sinking, he had no way around it, he would have to actually sink a ship. Beradinelli writes: Cameron's flawless re-creation of the legendary ship has blurred the line between reality and illusion to such a degree that we can't be sure what's real and what isn't. I think this is why I find it so easy to get so involved in the movie, while it doesn't read as a documentary, it seems so real.

Titanic is an experience that no question, influences everyone it involves.

and the classical version of: my heart will go on just came on the stereo, and I didn't even plan that, I think its a sign :)