Battle of Algeirs

I liked this movie alot. Mainly because it was more of an action film then anything else we have watched so far this year. i also was a big fan of how the film was not following any particular character. i also feel that it is interesting because it relates to modern events like Iraq or Afghanistan. This movie brings up the issues of freedom and rebellion. The film shows how heros of the war were men and women who felt deeply for their cause and were willing to die for it. It is a movie that inspires everyone who watches it to stand up for what is right. It also shows how everyone can make a difference in the world. My favorite part of the movie was when Ali La Pointe was cleaning house in the casbah, for instance when he gunned down that one guy who was doing drugs and having sex with prostitutes. Or when the little kids beat down that drunk guy and then pushed him down the stairs. This movie is really good, I liked it so much i actually got my dad to go out and buy it for me.

Sunshine

In class we watched a romantic comedy called Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind. Now my initial impressions of what the film would be about were dead wrong. I thought it would be a movie more like 50 First Dates. Instead it was a more of a dual film. I didn't think it should fall under the category of Romantic comedy. Mainly because it was not romantic at all and it is not at all funny. If there was humor in that movie someone needs to explain it to me. The only romantic part of that film in my opinion was when Mary and Mark Ruffulo's character are jumping around Joel while they are high on marijuana. That was also the most comedic part of the movie. The film was no doubt interesting but a romantic comedy it is not. Though the movie was not my favorite I still found it quite interesting. I look quite forward to our next genera

His Girl Friday

After viewing the film His Girl Friday my initial thoughts were that the movie was completely overrated and not as funny as it should have been for a comedy. The humor involved in that film was not classic in my opinion because it wasn't funny. In my opinion for a film to be considered "A classic comedy" it needs to be funny in every generation up until the present day. The other thing I did not find too impressive is the actual speed and sound of the movie. The movie went to fast if you miss a single moment of dialogue in the movie you might miss a key joke or romantic comment. I also didn't like how they spoke a million miles an hour. Half the stuff that they talked about I didn't understand because they talked so fast. There were parts about the movie I liked. For example the way they portrayed Bruce as the nice guy, who gets the blunt end of everything. But I guess back then the nice guy did finish last. I wish we would have watched a movie that actually was a little funnier but you can't always get what you want. This was not my favorite movie but I guess it could have been worse.

Journal #3: Notorious

For starters I would like to apologize for my post being so late. I was pressed for time and did not get it done. Anyways I choose the movie Notorious written and directed by Alfred Hitchcock. I watched the movie and was completely blown away by the acting involved in it. The movie stars Ingrid Bergman and Cary Grant along with Claude Rains.

Ingrid was a great actress during her time. She is probably best known for her performance in Casablanca. Which was not her favorite role of her entire career. She won many awards through out her acting career, including an Oscar, Golden Globe, Tony, and Emmy award. She was most likely picked for the part by Hitchcock because of the performance that she gave in a previous Hitchcock Film. She was a very versatile actress because she could play the lady in distress or the strong willed women that she played in Notorious. Her personal life became very public and constantly criticized by the public. At one point she even was denounced on the senate floor. She exiled herself to Italy. Where she made Italian films for a while. This was consider one of her Greatest roles.

Cary Grant stars as Devlin in this film. His real name is Archibald Leach. I feel like he was chosen for this role because of his unusual accent. He just sounds like the suave slick super spy you might expect to see as a secret agent. He is also a versatile actor. He has played in romantic comadies and action movies. He was born in England and Ian Flaming thought he was the perfect James Bond. He portrays a dark and mysterious agent who falls for Ingreds character.

Claude Rains plays the villian in Notorious. He is best known for his role as Renult in Casablanca. I think that he was casted for the part cause of his previous experience with Hitchcock. He won a variety of awards through out his life. He was known as a character actor. Meaning he took the part very seriously.

In my opinion the movie Notorious is good because of the actors and the chemistry they each bring to the silver screen, they mesh well with each other. Watch it! it is a great thriller for how old it is.

Stage coach

For my discussion I decided to pick the theme of how in Stagecoach the non reputable characters are the ones of end up keeping the whole crew alive. For example how Dallas the common whore ends up caring completely for Lucy's baby cause Lucy is to exhausted to do it herself. Dallas ends up looking like the respectable women and Lucy looks like the lazy up tight prissy. Ford the director was trying to portray the well known saying that "you can't judge a book by its cover" I feel like he did this really well with Dallas and even more with the Ringo Kid. At first the audience is supposed to think that the Kid is a bad guy and as the movie goes on the Kid shows us more and more that he is a guy that has a reason for his broken ways and that he is out to dish the justice that the law won't. Another great example of this is how the Doc is a drunk and is banished from his town but then ends up saving lucy during her birthing! I feel like Ford did this on purpose to show people that the bad thing about people is that they judge others to quickly. thank you and good night!

Journal #2: Pulp Fiction

I picked the movie Pulp Fiction off of Time's Great 1oo list. The reason I picked this movie over some of the other movies is because I have seen it before and I really enjoyed it. I also was looking forward to this particular journal because I could go more in depth with the movie i picked.

Pulp Fiction was written and directed by Quentin Tarantino. The film stars John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson, Bruce Willis and Uma Thurman. Travolta and Jackson play two L.A. hit men. Willis plays a boxer and Uma is a Mob boss's wife.

The storyline is well all jumbled up. Which is well classic Tarantino. That is well one reason that makes this movie so amazing. He takes a story and shows the viewer all of the movie in a different sequence that is not chronologically correct. I would not go as far to say that the way he told the story is new but I will say that he definitely brought it back into mainstream culture. This movie is the second of Tarantino's films that he shows the movie out of sequence. The other being Reservoir Dogs. So plot wise the main story would have to be the story of Jewels (Jackson) and Vincent Vega (Travolta) and the things they had to go through to get this briefcase for their boss. The catch is what is inside the briefcase. You watch along waiting for a point to the movie or a lesson. But it never comes maybe that is why the movie is among the greats simply because it is different and it has been embedded into pop culture since.

The movie plot seems realistic and believable. The dialogue is real life and that is another aspect that helps the movie in twin itself into the modern movie era. The best part of the movie in my opinion is the acting. The chemistry that Travolta has with Jackson and Thurman is amazing. The cinematic aspects of the film are good as well. Tarantino uses longer lasting shots than most movies. the low angle shot of the Wolf is really cool. It makes him seem super powerful.

I sugest if anybody likes a new and different movie experince I would watch Pulp Fiction!

Heat

I am writing about my favorite film of all time Heat. Starring Al Pacino, Robert De Niro and Val Kilmer. The film was written and directed by Michael Mann. There are so many reasons I love this movie I could not say all of them if I wanted to. For starters one great thing about this film is the all star cast. The way Mann has two of the greatest actors face off is so cool. Pacino is a cop who is always on the job. While De Niro is a master thief who ends up finding himself facing off with Pacino. The two characters are each others opposites. The thing i like most about the movie would have to be the ending. The final scene of the movie is so classic you just have to see it to believe it. Mann put the perfect musical score for when Pacino is holding De Niro's hand while De Niro is dying and then the plane flys over it is just amazing.

The film I chose to do my first entry about was 300. The review was written by Glenn Whipp, a film critic for the LA Daily News. I chose this review so I could defend the film from this critic. Glenn in his opinion says that 300 is nothing more than a film for homosexual men. As he put it,

Yes, "300" is the most homoerotic action movie ever made

In my opinion that is a just a bunch of none sense. How can he say that 300 is a homoerotic film? Why because the movie doesn't cover up the Spartans "junk" well enough for this guys standards? Glenn needs to get over his homophobia and fast. The movie 300 is about a group of men fighting not about romancing over girls. Glenn also seems to think that the movie is to fake to be good. Or as the critic himself said,


feels suffocating in its artificiality

Now this quote is talking about both Sin City and 300. Wow, the film is supposed to look fake and mimic the graphic novel on which it is based. Another part of the movie I disagree with Glenn about is the amount of action in the movie. In his review he states that,


The commercials would have you believe that "300" sets some kind of new benchmark for modern adventure movies. True enough, provided you've never played a video game or if you prefer your action to be bloodless (i.e. fake) and boring.

This critic has to be the only critic in the world that thinks that 300 does not have enough gore and blood. Again I will have to disagree I thought that the movie had plenty of blood and action. Watching those guys fighting off the Persian army led by Xerxes was amazing. When they fought the immortals I personally wanted to learn how to fight like that. Maybe the only thing that Glenn and I agree on is the story line of the movie.


The movie is a faithful-to-a-fault adaptation of Frank Miller's graphic novel about the Battle of Thermopylae

Having read the graphic novel the movie follows very closely to the story. I am glad that the screen writer of the movie stuck close to the actual novel. Finally I have to disagree once more with poor and confused Glenn. He beleaves that all the Spartans are taking steriods. or as he said,

use their 'roid rage to hold off Xerxes' horde of a quarter-million Persians.

Glenn is right warriors should not fight back when someone is trying to take their land. Honestly if people didn't get angery and fight off oppressors their would be no America and he would not have been able to write his reveiw.
Now I know it seems like I am attacking the critic. When in fact I am trying to defend a film that is being unfairly judged. But of course everyone is intitled to their own opinion just like everyone can defend their feelings too. So maybe next journal I will chose a critic I agree with.

movies

i like movies