Locust Valley Film Festival

After watching each and every film that came out of the Film Festival, there was one film that caught my eye in terms of how they presented themselves. The Other Half by a student from Wheatley High School . The main factor that attracted me to this short film was the cinematography for one thing. It was very pristine the way that this student set up the film composition as apposed to a unbalanced mess by some other students. The Other Half was the psychological breakdown of how a surplus amount of schoolwork can ultimately decide the fate of a young student. The opening shot of the dolly in through the school hallways demonstrates the students understanding of lighting. The lighting in this shot is interesting as it appears as the camera moves forward it leaves behind a path of shadows casting on the lockers to the sides where the light is focusing on the main subject, which is the student in this case. The narrative in the background also gives a subtle explanation of the character analysis of this young student as well. The film also explores low key lighting where the subject appears to be in the light while the background is compiled with shadows. In the part where the students appears to be doing his HW in his room, the camera tilts up slowly to add to the calm tone of the audio. You could also note in the classroom scene that the camera dollys to the subject being the student almost as he's the central focus and no one else around him is important with the quick editing dissolve. The young student also does a great job in terms of acting as he using "body language" to his advantage by the clinching of the fists, throwing of the desk and grabbing of his hat. By this gesture, the audience has a better understanding as to what the character faces in terms of emotions. The scene where the student is writing near the library bookshelves shows how ambient lighting can act as an appropriate source of light for the film as well as the dolly. I admired when the director decided to film the fence in the foreground while the actor walks in the mid ground almost symbolizing the way character feels, almost locked up and has no where else to turn to. I find it interesting the director is more of a fan of pans/tilts rather than close ups in this film. The framing of the hand dripping a pool of blood couldn't have been frame much better and with the audio, Mad World, in the background almost creates a perfect environment of what this director is trying to express. Alot of people have disagreed with the way this film ended and to that i disagree. The ending where the student is laying on the his bed covered in his HW sheets reminds me of Robert Deniro in Brazil. Both examples are similar in that these HW papers cause the downfall of this character and are what drive this character to the point of disappearance. For Brazil, it was more of Deniro's despise of capitalism that the very thing he despises, receipts for example, ends up the cause for his disappearance. While both examples may cause an area for questioning each scene accomplishes it's goal in subtle symbolism. My only concern of this film however is that the plot structure is unclear to most audiences and that it could have used more work. Either than that, this film is very poetic and presents a unique style that for a student's work, it surpasses my initial expectations.

The Blind Side

I think it was interesting to see a different outlook on this film as opposed to the majority of criticism that I hear. It's interesting how loose this film is related toward the actual book by Michael Lewis, in the way the main character, Michael Ohrer, acts in the book as opposed to the modified version in the Blind Side. When movies say " based on a true story", they never really say to what extent is it based on. The Texas Chainsaw massacre claims the events that occurred in the film were based on "true events" when in actuality, it was loosely based on the killings of serial killer Ed Gein, by only a small portion. What really set off this in author in particular was how a film like this can be Academy Awarded with a story that is so flawed. I also think that his movies have it's traditional values all mixed up and drift toward the line of what's realistic and whats not. It leaves the audience with the message that with a big heart and a bigger wallet that you have the ability to change someones life. In a different perspective, the director of this film wanted to make a film that targeted a specific audience. He rather cater to a large audience of middle aged Americans than to the minority of people who actually read the book and distinguished the flaws. If you compare the two movies, Dangerous Minds, and , Lean On Me, you notice although they have similar plot structure, there execution is much different. Reason being is in my mind the thought of Morgan Freeman, someone who has has been in the perspective of those inner city kids, has a better understanding as the problems there suffering. For that, i think Morgan Freeman is a more believable character than Michelle Phieffer as a ex-marine, and that audiences can relate to Freeman's character better. As you can see the Blind Side shows it's effort in appealing to a broader audience, yet falls short to believable realism in the plot structure.

Mr.Wells Reviews a Current Film

Metropolis can be classified more than another science fiction film due to the fact that it tackles a great amount of detail which needs to be recognized. The film brings not only film elements to consider but offers movie buffs a great deal of psycho-analytical factors to explore. The H.G. Wells article tears apart Metropolis in a negative way by dissecting flaws in the film's plot as well as accurate information. The major flaw that separates the film and this article is that the article fails to notice the cinematic achievements that Metropolis accomplishes. They rather exploit the "architectural" failures that this film is unreliable with. It also presents an argument involving the worker's ideology and their connection to the "efficient" machine. I especially like how he manages to refer to this movie as "dull" when you have transformation scenes like Mary's, where the lightning is poetic and the effect look impressive for the standards of 1920. The architecture of Metropolis shows signs of Expressionism in which the shots of the futuristic city in the film resemble paintings that came out of the Expressionist era. Wells also forgot to see the intent of the director rather than basing his criticism on "invalid facts" that the film contains. Lang was powerful in showing the dark side of capitalism through shots where the machines would malfunction to the point where it would drive people to insanity. Lang shows his quirkiness through Freder as his character is portrayed comical (wardrobe and facial expressions), yet love struck over Maria to the point where he becomes one of the workers that she shows sympathy towards. Metropolis is an example of pure cinema at it's finest with innovative architecture, influences on future films ( Blade Runner, Brazil), and a certain presence that cannot be matched simply by other sci-fi films