Reviews

I think that the film was o.k. but because the film's plot was like a mixture of Kramer vs. Kramer and Rain Man, I did not see anything new to make me excited. The acting of Sean Penn and Michelle Pfeifer was very well fitting but the child's role and her acting was what disturbed me most. She is said to be 7 years old and Sam's mental age is also said to be 7 but how come the little girl can act like a 30 year-old grown up? She is so much grown up that it feels she can even look after his father but it was so unrealistic to portray a 7 year-old as an extremely mature girl.

Also the film was far too long. It could have made its statement in 2 hours as well. There was too much subthemes like the problematic lawyer (yes i know it was important for the well-being of the plot but from time to time it made me lose the main theme), the never-going-out neighbour. But these are also not very much elaborated either. It was as if all of those plots were loosely fitted to the main plot to underline the statement of `all you need is love to raise a child`. 5/10 and that's for the good performances of Sean,Michelle and Dianne Wiest.

quoting from Philippe Moins and Jan Temmerman's book called a painter-filmmaker's journey:

after `chromophobia`'s narrative lead with drums beating, `Sirene` looks like a much less linear, more meandering, atmospheric and poetic film, even if the context to which it refers has links with society and its defects... everything here is more nervous, faltering with black edges, much like the pteranodons which dominate the scene with their heavy flight... the only notable presence, a little fisherman, brings back nothing but fish-skeletons in his baskets, and the entire city, with its cranes and its mooring cables, appears like a pile of nets and fish-bones, carcass of a declining industrial universe... as an idyll between eerie representations (a bow ofa ship and a siren), `sirene` was perceived as an early denouncement of the degradation of the environment. today, the film comes to us both as a poem dedicated to freedom and as a sarcastic vision of the order imposed by human society.

ok i should admit i liked the first 10-15 minutes of the film. it seemed to have very much to tell.. but after it with the darth vader joke and all that stuff it started to stink. the jokes became cheaper and cheaper and i found myself trying to stop yawning. how can such a meaningless film be shown on a festival? i know that there are far more better spanish films than this one. so if this was your first spanish movie, dont ever get to think that the rest is like this!

73 years ago, Vertov came up with the idea that cinema shouldnt be a copy of a copy of a copy... of theatre or literature. in this documentary-labelled film of Vertov, we see cinema standing on its own two feet. without the aid of literature, Vertov has created his own literature with the genuine camera movements and editing techniques. such an ordinary day with ordinary people doing their ordinary jobs.. despite showing such ordinary clips, while watching the film, i found myself absorbed into the screen. the parallel existence of being born and dying, getting married and divorcing, men working at factories and Vertov's wife doing the editing both passionate about their works. although we have always known the existence of life and death, marriage and divorce, passion for work and although we have read several poems, writings or seen couple of plays upon these topics, maybe it was the first time that both of them are shown to us without exaggeration-as a part of reality. this is the reason why The Man With The Movie Camera is a very simple and a very complicated film both at the same time. like life itself..

There can be no doubt that costumes were highly important in The Last Laugh. The topic was actually build upon a costume anywise. The doorman's uniform was a symbol for prestige, high-honor, the key to be well treated in every situation. He was giving extreme importance to his outlook while he was working as a doorman. We saw this when he was twisting his mustache in front of the hotel. Not only him but also his family and his neighbors even show great respect to his uniform as well. Neighbors stop patting their carpets not to spread dust on his uniform, men bow and take out their hats when he passes by, at home niece's mother sews the button of the uniform with great care... It seems that by doing all this, they are appreciating the prestige the costume has brought to their lives and in a way showing appreciation by keeping it in perfect shape. Last Laugh there wasn't much of a contrast in terms of colors. The contrast was in terms of the different treatment the doorman received after his job loss. It was clear that after the loss of his job, nobody was friendly to him anymore. Also the contrast between the rich and the poor was underlined. There was a parallel editing of the ex-doorman drinking his soup in the toilet and the rich people having their dinner at the hotel's restaurant.

There were lots of dolly ins and outs, tracking movements, dialectical montage, close-ups and parallel editing in it. Dollies are often used in shocking situations. It is used when the ex-doorman's relative sees him working at the toilet. As it is a shocking situation, camera dollies-in very fast to the woman's horrified face. The same function of dolly-in occurs when the ex-doorman comes to the hotel in the morning and sees from far away the new doorman. It is a fast dolly as well. With these unexpected dollies, the audience is always kept tense knowing that the reality may strike at any moment. Dialectical montage is seen quite a lot of times as well. It occurs when the doorman looks left and then we see the wedding dress. Therefore we understand that it is the dress he is looking. On the whole doorman's uniform seems to be controlling his life and that he is blindly obeying what the uniform brings to him. In this way, he is like a citizen unquestioning the authority of the government. Finally, Last Laugh is a classics which have influenced and will continue to influence other artistic works through generations.

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is based on a delusion of a madman. Whole film occurs in the studio, which is designed in an expressionistic way. There are roads that go up to the sky, chairs with no sitting places, buildings which combine with unrealistic angles… Shooting the film outside the studio would have completely destroyed the film's atmosphere. It would have been weird to find out that a madman's delusion is just like our reality. Because he is not expected to perceive things in the same `normal' way like we do, shooting the film in the studio and creating the madman's own world was the only way to show the wickedness of his reality. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari uses costumes in a functional way as well. We see Dr. Caligari dressed in complete black colors and wearing an overcoat as if he is trying to inform us from the beginning that he is the villain of the movie. On the other hand Jane, Francis' love (narrator), who is symbolizing purity and grace in his mind, is always seen in white dresses. However, as the ending draws closer, when Dr. Caligari is seen sleeping in his bed, he is wearing a white costume. As he was regarded as an innocent doctor by most people, his outlook changes to white as well. At the same time the audience is implicitly warned that seeing a person dressed in white (acting innocently) does not mean that he/she is actually innocent.

Also when Dr. Caligari comes to get a permit to exhibit at the fair he has a very bad posture. He is leaning downwards and he is in one corner of the scene. This makes us interpret that he is a sly person who is different from `normal' people. Lighting was one of the crucial points in Caligari. Because of the financial problems of Germany at that time, lights were painted. There were also lots of contrast in terms of black and white as if trying to make a clear-cut distinction between the good and the evil. When Cesare comes to kill Mr. Alan (Francis' friend), we see the murder from the shadows of both men. Also when Cesare is on his way to kill Jane, we see his shadow on the wall. As he is wearing a black costume as well, there seems to be no difference of himself from his shadow probably meaning that he is a part of the night with his diseased soul. However there's hardly any camera movement in the film.

in Caligari there is hardly any movement. Everything is stage-like and different angles are not usually used in one scene. Close-ups are usually done by narrowing the iris. There was only one panning and it was in the police station when the wrong suspect was arrested. Camera made a slight pan movement in attempt to show the small crowd's faces. It seems that this movement does not hold an artistic importance in the film.

While Caligari can be regarded as representing the complete authority of the government over its citizens, Cesare seems to represent the obeying people. In the film, Caligari says that Cesare has slept for 23 years meaning that people are made to do things and that they are not complaining while doing them. On the whole, Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is a masterful piece of German Expressionism which every cinema lover should see at least twice in his life.

a man saves an "interesting" type of bird's life and takes it to his home. but the bird (or bird like human or whatever) slowly starts to ruin the man's freedom to eat or to go outside. all the food is eaten by the so called "bird" and while the man is trying to escape, bird eats his lower part of the body. with the help of a phonograph, he manages to escape from the house but cannot escape from his destiny.

this 9 minute masterpiece has used the animation techniques very smartly although it has been done in 1979. the idea was not explained with cliché techniques either. from the film I understood that a man who helps another might dig his own grave by doing this. cause the one whom you have helped may not help you back. besides he/she can even harm you. so I think this short film was arguing whether one should be individualistic or not (with a pessimistic view.

a must see for all short film and animation addicts.

other than the strong plot and the professional acting, another important factor is the visual structure of this film that made it a classic. the s-rule was perfectly done in the extreme long shots of the valley. this gave the picture a whole lot of depth and made me forget that i was watching a 2-dimensional thing. the diagonal lines in the mine and in the church, use of foreground objects, these factors all gave the picture depth. other than depth there was art in those frames. every piece of frame in itself was like a photograph taken with great care. each character was put in the frame according to the rule of thirds thus making every single inch of the frame useful. also lighting was changing according to the plot. when the big boys decide to go to america, there are lots of shadows in the house thus making it unable to see the mother's and father's faces clearly. probably in a situation like that, they would not have wanted their faces to be seen clearly either. so John Ford acted in accordance to the personalities of his characters. i think these are the underlying factors which made this movie a whole time classic.

first five minutes of `E La Nave Va` was what attracted me most from this movie (not meaning that the rest of it was not interesting). i thought that it should be a silent movie but then i realized that there were some inaudible voices coming from the background. then i asked myself whether there's a problem with the sound system or not. but just as i was thinking about this, voices started to be audible. and the black and white movie became coloured when the ashes were taken to the ship with ceremony. i guess the purpose of using black and white and silent cinema techniques before the ship scenes was to underline the fact that the important factor in the film was the ship itself. life without the ship was black and white (probably meaning boring and full of cliches). but when we enter the world inside the ship (or when we enter the world through Fellini's eyes), we see that there are lots of differences from reality. and that makes the ship coloured! Fellini had created so many symbols including the rhinoceros and the ship itself. but these symbols are not so clearly defined so after watching the film, the audience leaves with some question marks. even if you are not interested in the plot, watch this for a good visual treat. Fellini has reminded me that the cinema is an art which underlines the importance of visual structure.

the movie seems to be based on a good plot but it is enriched with so much junk that the beauty of it disappears after 20 minutes. but much more important than that while i was watching this movie, i saw microphones hanging over from the scene. the first time i thought it was a mistake. but it couldn't be because there were fish poles all over the movie. so i thought that the director did it on purpose. the reason can be that this is a movie which holds lots of artificial stuff in it. so the director may have asked himself "how can i make it more artificial?" by fish poles.. after an hour of watching Company Man, the only reason i kept on watching in interest was because of these fish poles. Because it made me feel as if i was in the crew directing the whole thing. but hey maybe that was what the director was trying to do anyway. a 5 out of 10!

what would you do if you see a camel standing in your garden? don't say it won't happen.. suppose it did you would probably call the police or ask someone for help. well that's not the main characters of "Duze Zwierze" did for sure. instead they wanted to keep it as a pet and as a result a good movie with symbolism at its peak came into scene..

camel is a symbol of something i do not want to mention. because it is the real essence of the movie.but it's symptomatic meaning seems to be that most people are afraid of what they don't know and they don't want to add uncertainty to their lives even if everything is going as boring as it could ever be. therefore it is very logical that the society doesn't want the camel as a pet.

it was a funny movie too. the "horse tax" on the camel made me laugh and at the same time think about with how much unimportant stuff a government can deal with! and while these scenes were shot, camera angles are changing accordingly so you sometimes feel pitiful for Mr. Sawicki and on others you see the government workers so small that you understand they are useless.

it was not a realistic movie for sure but i do not think that realistic P.O.V. should be a criteria in evaluating a movie. was it original? definitely. and finally every aspect of the movie had an important role for the whole film so that means there was a total unity.

when you see this film you will see how a society limits people's behaviors and actually we are not free because of the laws we make ourselves..