German Expression + Hollywood= Sunrise

I remember seeing a commercial about a car where the narrator says it was designed in Germany, and then made in America. That saying definitely applies to the film, "Sunrise."
“Sunrise” has all the qualities of a German expressionist style film but it was made in Hollywood. Its director was F.W. Murnau, was already famous for German-Expressionist films like “Nosferatu” and “The Last Laugh,” whose camera work was groundbreaking.
German Expressionism was an artistic movement to reflect mood and emotion stylistically in the work of German Films. They used set designs that had outrageously preposterous sets. In addition, they had designs painted on walls and floors to represent lights, shadows, and objects. The filmmakers’ artistic control over scenery, light and shadow to augment the mood of a film was very appealing to many filmmakers. All of these elements are evident in this film.
The film is about a love triangle between The Man, The Wife and The Woman from The City. The Man tries to kill his wife so he could live with The Woman from the City. He couldn’t bring himself to do it. The rest of the film shows The Wife forgiving The Man and also rekindling their romance. There was one scene where The Wife nearly drowns from the storm but is rescued at the last moment. In the end, The Woman from the City heads back home as The Man and The Wife live happily with their child.
Furthermore, there were groundbreaking technologies used in the film. There were these long dolly shots that were never really used in a Hollywood film before. Also, this was one of the first films to have sound. No wonder people are calling this the “Citizen Kane” of the Silent Era.

Czech New Wave Cinema Daises (1966) directed by Věra Chytilová

Czech New Wave Cinema

Daises (1966) directed by Věra Chytilová

Czech New Wave Cinema (1960’s)

™Disgruntled with the communist regime that had taken over in Czechoslovakia in 1948, students of the Film and TV School of The Academy of Performing Arts in Prague (also known as FAMU) became the dissenters of their time.

™Their objective in making films was to make the Czech people collectively aware that they were participants in a system of oppression and incompetence which had brutalized them all.

Style of Czech New Wave Cinema

™Long unscripted dialogues, dark and absurd humor, and the casting of non-professional actors.

™The films touched on themes which for earlier film makers in the communist countries had rarely managed to avoid the objections of the censor.

™During the Communist era, "high art" was often perceived as a tool for avoiding the censor, as direct expression was prohibited.

Daises (1966) directed by Věra Chytilová

Summary

Summary: Two teenage girls, both named Marie, decide that since the world is spoiled they will be spoiled as well; accordingly they embark on a series of destructive pranks in which they consume and destroy the world about them.

RECEPTION

“Each of my films has met a certain resistance on the part of authority”

•Denounced for “having nothing in common with out Republic, socialism, and the ideals of communism”

.

•In 1972, six years after Daises was released, a government committee terminated Chytilova’s contract with the government run Czech film studio Barrandov

•They cited her films as “experimental by nature, uncommitted and pessimistic,” as well as “elitist”. Government banned the film, and Chytilova was banned from making any films between 1969 and 1975.

™ Chytilova herself suspected these allegations were largely due to misogyny, and speculated the real reason the government had a problem with her films was because she was a woman.

™She meant it to be a coded critique of its protagonists – critics shallowly saw the antics of the protagonists as meaningless and wasteful (especially for wasting so much food), and ignored the ending where the girls were punished. Chytilova felt the film was misunderstood.

™Collaboration between three key Czech New Wave luminaries (Vera Chytilova, - director/screenwriter, Ester Krumachova – screenwriter and set designer, Jaroslav Kucera - cinematographer)

™In interviews, Chytilova stated she wanted the film to be “a philosophical document in the form of farce”, and a “bizarre comedy with strands of satire and sarcasm.”

™“because the concept of the film was destruction, the form became destructive as well” – this accounts for the episodic nature of the film. It plays more like a series of adventures than a typical beginning/middle/end narrative. Note too the surrealist cinematography of Jaroslav Kucera. He experiments with many techniques that add to the film’s feeling of destruction and chaos.

™Stars two girls- Marie 1 and Marie 2 – nonactors- going on a rampage of gluttony, destruction, and excess.

™Chytilova stated she meant her protagonists to be “parasites”, calling the whole film “a parable on the destructive force of nihilism and senseless provocation”

™Meant to be a critique of bourgeois idea of women as “pretty accessories”, or fashion models, and Chytilova insisted she meant to critique and not condone their excesses and exploits.

™Godard thought that the film treated its subjects too lovingly to be a real critique.

™The film contains many references to marionettes and mannequins. This is meant to highlight how vacant and self indulgent they are, so she literally postures them as dolls.

™ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md-LwM0s9fY&feature=related

™Images of food and eating – in line with the parodies/critiques on consumption Chytilova mean to comment on.

™http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCb6TCiIG3s&feature=related

Comparing Knife in the Water (1962) and Frantic (1988); Dir. Roman Polanski.

Recently, I watched two of Roman Polanki’s films -- His debut feature, Knife in the Water (1962) and his later Hollywood production, Frantic (1988). Over two and half decades apart, the two films are markedly different in story, feel, and production value. However, I’ll note three (plus one as a bonus) consistencies between both films.

First is Polanski’s reoccurring use of the “dirty” frame. Either in the wide shots-- Harrison Ford’s suit-jacket covering the entire left side of the frame as he questions the concierge about his wife’s disappearance--or the close-ups--a piece of the hitchiker’s cheek as he gazes at Leon Niemczyk’s emotionally estranged wife--Polanski uses the dirty frame to create an intimacy with the character who is viewing.

Second is Polanski’s attention to ambiguous relationship tensions. In Frantic, Harrison Ford’s beloved wife is missing, yet he is constantly being eyed by his much sexier and much younger partner in crime, Michele. The obviously unhappy wife in Knife is constantly exchanging glances of compassion and interest with the hitchhiker, as her husband stands idly by.

Third, is the filmmaker’s unique use of the slow built tension. So slow is Polanski with his exposition (or letting us know what is actually exposition) that half-way through each film I asked myself “what has really happened up to this point?” However, one could argue that the final climactic pay-offs are that much more rewarding for the audience.

Finally (and as a bonus) is Polanski’s inclusion of seemingly swanky jazz soundtracks. Though each film had a different composer, they each seem to apply intense saxophone solos at odd times--while the characters are resting in a taxi cab, or relaxing on the deck of their sailboat. Perhaps Polanski hopes to allude to the intensity of the final climactic moments that will come an hour later, and five minutes before, the film ends? No matter, the use of unusual music is interesting, and makes you question the importance of every moment in each film.

Une Femme est Une Femme (1961) • Dir: Jean Luc Godard

"A Woman Is A Woman" is sometimes described as a tribute to the American Musical. While I agree that is an element within the film, I don't feel that statement is accurate. There are a few scenes that definitely fit into this general statement, however, the film as a whole sticks out as one of the more playful French New Wave films that I've seen. While I've seen the fast cuts, the illogical editing and the evidental self referentialism in other works. Particularly Godard's other classics, Breathless and Pierrot Le Fou, however, here it feels more childlike and for the sake of enjoyment on the part of the filmmakers and actors, than to be "experimental." Some of these approaches seem to be brought to new heights. The awareness of other films in particular sticks out as characters from Jules et Jim and Shoot the Piano Player show up in scenes essentially to comment on those films.

A large part of the charm comes from Anna Karina's engaging portrayal of Angela. The exotic dancer at the center of the plot. Well, what plot there is. The film isn't really held together by a plot so much as a series of vignettes connected by characters who's motivations remain the same. If there is an arc to mention, it's quite a shallow arc. But despite that, it kept me on board enjoying how the characters interacted and reacted to each other. Karina almost felt like the predicessor of the quirky pixie indie movie love interest that has been so played out in the last 10 - 15 years (I'm looking at you Zooey Deschanel and Natalie Portman), but with more natural character traits, even as she reacts unnaturally to the world around her. When asked what she wants and she replies that she wants to be in a musical, followed by fast cuts of Karina and Jean - Paul Belmondo striking poses between cuts. In these fast moments as they switch from pose to pose, the characters are essentially aware of the editing. We know that characters have been aware of the audience, or the camera, or that they're in a film, but in this case they're aware of the editing. That's where the genuis lied for me, in the awareness of the editing and the fun that everyone could be having if only they were in this film along with Karina.

Children of Paradise - Muhammad Ahmad

Marcel Carne’s “Children of Paradise,” is arguably one of the best French films of all time. The film, which was set in France in the early 1820’s, was filmed over a two-year period, between 1943-1945. Besides the great story, sound, and footage, one of the main reasons this movie is hailed to be such a classic is the time period it was shot in. The movie was made during World War II and it endured the hard times, and uplifted many people. The movie was filmed secretly, in spite of the Nazi invasion of France. The film, which wasn’t released until 1945, after the liberation of France, was the most expensive film shot in France up to that time. The final production costs totaled to be around fifty-eight million francs.

“Children of Paradise” was a story about woman named Garance, who had four different men that were in love with her. Each man had a completely different background. The men included an actor, an aristocrat, a criminal, and a mime. The movie is broken up in to two parts. Part one is called Boulevard du Crime or Boulevard of Crime and part two is called L'Homme Blanc or The Man in White.

In the beginning of the first part we see Garance get accused of stealing a man’s gold watch and then we are quickly introduced to the character of Baptiste the Mime. Baptiste stands up for her, gets her out of the problem, and then falls in love with her. This scene stands out to me because of the great camera movement in the shot before Baptiste appears. The shots were held fairly long. I also like the editing when Baptiste appears; it helped portray him as a jovial and dynamic character. We can also tell there is something under all the joy. The story picks up in part two, which is seven years later. It ends with Garance reuniting with Baptiste and running of with him. It also ends with Garance’s protector, Count Edouard being killed. Garance leaves with Baptiste without knowing of his death.

I found one of the strongest qualities of this film to be the screenplay. All of the character had a complex individual story and eventually they became intertwined. In the end and it all came together into one conclusion. Marcel Carne collaboratored with Jacques Prevert to come up with the screenplay. The intelligent script was nominated for a screenplay Oscar.

Noz w Wodzie

“Knife in the Water” is an interesting and thoroughly enjoyable film for many reasons. This was Roman Polanski’s first feature, and despite a title with the promise of a thriller, it is really more of an intellectual and psychologically-tense art film. The story is about a snide, gruff husband and detached, drab wife who pick up an enigmatic hitchhiker after almost running him over. For reasons unknown the husband invites the young man to join them for an overnight trip on their sailboat. The man and the boy begin, for lack of better of term, a verbal then physical cockfight, that culminates in an unexpected way.

This is not a run-of-the-mill thriller like one would expect. I was expecting someone to murder someone else in this film, but the director was smarter than that. The film is really about the male ego, and the stupid if not downright dangerous things men will do to stoke theirs. This film review published in 1963 when the movie was released sums things nicely: “The odd sort of personal hostility that smolders in many men who have trouble asserting their egos in this complex modern world is casually, cryptically and even comically dissected by the probing camera of Roman Polanski in his Knife in the Water… he (Polanski) flashes the chemistry of sex – the natural bestowal by the woman of her token of sympathy upon the more pathetic of these rivals and then her ultimate display of contempt for both immature male creatures. It makes for a neat ironic twist.” (http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9C01E5D8113DE63BBC4151DFB6678388679EDE)