MYST #3

Manic    Watch movie trailer here

I watched the film, Manic, as the third movie in my spare time. I absolutely loved this film. It captured everything it was attempting to capture, and conveyed a powerful message. It's a movie about Lyle Jensen, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who is a troubled and angry person that is sent to treatment with others like him, so he can get help in fixing his life. While he's there, he gets in fights, learns about life, helps others, reinvents himself, and fixates on society's flaws. It was a very eye-opening film that addressed issues that aren't usually discussed. 

This was a low-budget film that didn't really make much money, but that's not what the directors and producers wanted out of it. Having Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel starring in the film, viewers would think it would be a "big-time Hollywood film," but they're wrong. It was made in 2001, before those two actors were as big as they are now, and shot on a low-budget using almost a shaky camera. I believe this was more effective in capturing the message because it really emphasized the gritty realism each character was facing. It helped highlight the trauma and pain that lead them to be there. The film was directed by Jordan Melamed, who doesn't have much experience directing, so he really did well with one of his first films.

The cinematic elements in this movie didn't necessarily make it great, but they were key factors. The way certain characters were lit on screen, helped the audience develop opinions and views on them. The good vs. evil with lighting was highlighted well. The cinematographer also did a good job at using up-close shots on objects/important things to either foreshadow an event or leave a message. Overall, I really liked this film and I would honestly give it a 5/5 star rating.

MYST # 2

Taken 2  Watch a trailer here

I watched Taken 2 for the second movie in my spare time. Honestly, I really did not like this movie whatsoever. It had decent cinematic elements and special effects, but the storyline was terrible.

I went in to the movie theater so excited to see it, due to Taken being so compelling the first time. My expectations were not met at all. The plot was stupid and basically pointless. Not much happened and it could have been so much better. Liam Neeson did a phenomenal job acting, like always, but it was just the storyline that through the film down the drain. It wasn't thrilling or compelling. He was much better in the first Taken though because the storyline helped him seem like much more of a badass.

The cinematic elements were good. They used a lot of high and low angled shots to capture the intensity of certain moments, but it certainly didn't make the movie great. The special effects of the guns and technology was good because it captured the realism. Certain aspects of the movie that I did like is how they addressed sex trafficking and almost how it affects the victims, like Kim (played by Maggie Grace). It was a decent movie on its own, but it was awful compared to the intensity and greatness of the first one.

Olivier Megaton directed this film, along with the first one. Although Taken 2 wasn't his best work, he still is a good director. He hasn't directed very "big-name" films, so that could be a possible reason as to why the film didn't meet expectations. However, Liam Neeson, being one of the most well-known "badass" actors of our time didn't do as well as he could have. He starred in phenomenal films prior to this one, such as Schindler's List, Star Wars: Episode 1, Batman Begins, Love Actually, The Dark Knight Rises, etc. He did not meet expectations whatsoever, even though he did relatively well. He is just such a great actor and I expected much more out of him. Overall, this movie kind of sucked and I would only give it a 2/5 star rating.

Group Project blog post

In our movie, The Three Little Pigs and the Big, Bad Banker, we took a spin on a classic story-book tale. The movie is about three brothers who are living during the Great Depression. They are struggling to get by in these hard times, while the bank is out to get them and their houses. The banker is trying to forclose the houses that cannot pay off their mortgages, and the youngest brother happens to be the owner of one of those houses. Robert Montgomery plays the youngest brother, who is also the main character. Coincidentally he is in love with the banker's daughter, who is played by Myrna Loy. The banker, played by Wallace Beery, will not listen to lovestruck daughter, who wishes to stay with the youngest brother, regardless of the status of his house and wealth. After the banker takes the youngest brother's house, he flees to his older brother's house, Clark Gable. Clark Gable plays a lawyer, who is having a hard time paying off his debts as a member of the middle class. They both end up fleeing to their oldest brother's house, who is played by Nelson Eddy. He is the richest and in the upper class, so the bank won't take his house. Clark Gable and the other brothers sue the bank and the evil banker, accompanied by Myrna Loy who goes against her father. They end up winning and getting their houses back.

We chose this as our movie because it addresses the financial crisis in the 1930s and provides the public with an example of bank corruption and how individuals are affected. The genre of this film is drama and romance because it is very real and conveys many serious messages. The romance part of the film between Robert Montgomery and Myrna Loy is perfect because they both acted in several romantic films in the 30s. This film will be directed by King Vidor and MGM will produce it. We chose MGM because in the 30s it was an up and coming studio that was prepared to make blockbusters and high-budget films, which we want our film to be. The actors chosen all have experience with MGM and have worked together. King Vidor is a director for MGM also. Myrna Loy is chosen as the leading female role because of her beauty and good looks for the camera. Robert Mongomery and Clark Gable were chosen for their big names and experience with acting.

Cinematography will be highlighted in this movie to really influence the way the characters are portrayed to the audience. The cinematographer will be James Wong Howe because he is known for his use of shadows. We had the idea for shadows and lighting to help the viewer decide which characters were good and which were evil. The banker will have a half-lit and eerie face to give the audience a mysterious and negative emotion towards him, while the other "good" characters will be fully lit and almost glowing to show their innocence.

The Hays Code affects our movie because we couldn't go as far as we wanted to with the relationship between the youngest brother and the banker's daughter. We also couldn't go as deep with the corruption of the banker, due to the influece of American opinion. We plan to shoot this film in black and white to show the contrast of lighting between characters.

The only thing I would have done differently, if I was working on my own instead of being in a group, is making the film on a lower budget and a much- lower scale. I feel like the message would have stuck with the audience longer if it was filmed on a low-scale because it would have captured the gritty realism of the time period and harsh times. I feel like the high-budget and huge picture film sugarcoats the true message trying to be portrayed. But the big-picture film does provide the audience with a happy ending and typical Hollywood plotline, which would make us a lot of money, so it is good.

Formal Film Studies

I chose to watch three post Vietnam war films that essentially protested the war. The films I viewed were Apocalypse Now (1979), The Deer Hunter (1978), and Combat Shock (1984). My main discovery after analyzing is that symbolism, style, and cinematography make these war films great.

Apocalypse Now was written and directed by Francis Ford Coppola. The film follows Captain Willard, played by Martin Sheen, who is sent on a mission to find and kill Col. Kurtz. This film depicts Vietnam war as a downward spiral to madness. The movie was nominated for eight Academy Awards and won two Oscars for sound and cinematography. The movie starts off with a high angle shot of an island, as if the viewer was flying over it, and then proceeds on to a scene in which helicopters are flying over a village. There are shots of the helicopter flying down to the village and the village fighting back. These scenes help the viewer feel like he or she is a part of the film and in the Lieutenant's crew. The use of high angles in this movie  greatly influences the perception.

Specific camera shots play an important role in this film when Capt. Willard finally encounters Col. Kurtz, who has gone AWOL. The first look we get of Kurtz is a close-up where half of his face is lit-up. This shot lets the audience see Kurtz and get a good idea of what he looks like, but also leaves an eerie feeling. Another important scene is before Willard kills Kurtz, Kurtz is positioned in the doorway. He is almost entirely black and it's a shot of his whole body. We get a dramatic feeling from this shot as Kurtz awaits his death.


The Deer Hunter was the next movie I watched. It was directed by Michael Cimino and featured big name stars: Robert De Niro, Christopher Walken, and Meryl Streep. It is a film about three young factory workers from Pennsylvania, Michael, Steven, and Nick, who enlist in the Vietnam War. They encounter many horrors throughout the war and end up being captured by the Vietcong as prisoners of war. At the prison camp, they are forced to play Russian Roulette each other, which is a famous scene in the movie. The movie won Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Walken), Best Editing, and Best Sound. When the movie first came out, it was praised for concerning the psychological and social aftermath of the Vietnam War. Its symbolism is the greatest factor in that. It is an in-depth examination of how the war affected the lives of people. The film doesn't take a specific political stand on the war, but actually depoliticizes it. The movie turns the war into a play on morals and how negative and positive characteristics of the trio make it a deadly and destructive drama. The real enemy in the war is left out in this film, so it ends up being about internal struggles with masculinity and morals.

Combat Shock was by far the most different and unique film of the three. Being a low budget film, it did not have the realistic feel that the other two movies had, but used surreal elements that added to the insanity of the movie. This movie is about a disturbed Vietnam war veteran, Frankie, who struggles with post-war life. He is unemployed and broke, surrounded by junkie friends, constantly being nagged on by his wife, and dealing with his deformed baby. This movie opens with an intense flashback from the war. Then we get to see the depressing life that the Vietnam veteran post-war as the movie progresses with several hallucinations and flashbacks from the war. Buddy Giovinazzo wrote and directed this film on an extremely low budget, which captured the gritty and cruel world of a destitute Vietnam war veteran. This movie is praised by many for being a masterpiece due to its gritty realism, but others see it as one of the ugliest and most depressing film of the decade. Its unique style captures the horrors of the Vietnam war and provided an example of how it completely destroyed one veteran's life.


All three of these films are about the Vietnam War and how it affects the lives of veterans. They all have unique stylistic elements that set them apart from other films. These films marked a turning point in American history because during the Vietnam War, there were no films made showing the harsh reality of the war. These films opened the eyes of many throughout the nation and embarked a whole new outlook on the war. They are unlike Hollywood films prior because they addressed the Vietnam War negatively and expressed the cruel reality of it. Each director took a risk in making the films, and all of them provoked mixed reviews. Overall these films impacted American media by conveying political, social, and cultural messages that were not normally addressed. Each film did this differently through certain symbolic and stylistic elements.