Introduction
Both the movies The Godfather and Scarface are some of the very few movies that have changed the movie-making industry in terms of the crime and gangster genre. Not only have they influenced some of today’s movies and even some of today’s cartoons such as Fat Tony in The Simpsons –the famous American animated sitcom, they have also fashioned several quotes or one-liners such as “I’ll make him an offer he can’t refuse” and the famous “Say hello to my little friend!” in both The Godfather and Scarface respectfully.
The Godfather, a 1972 American gangster film by Francis Ford Coppola, based on Mario Puzo’s novel of the same name. The movie revolves around the Italian American Corleone family, led by Don Vito Corleone who has three sons who are also involved in the “family business” excluding his youngest son – Michael Corleone who chooses not to. The entire movie is about the business in which they are kind and benevolent towards those who respect them (The Corleone family) and are ruthless and merciless to those who are against them. The movie is also about Michael Corleone succeeding his father and him being the next godfather.
The movie Scarface on the other hand is a 1983 American crime drama movie by Brian De Palma. The movie is mainly about Cuban émigrés, Tony Montana and his friend Manny Ray and their rise in the drug trade in Miami. The second half of the movie however shows Tony Montana’s fall from the top and how he not only kills himself in the movie, but kills all those around him as well – both due to the paranoia caused by the drugs he once used for his initial success in the movie. The movie also portrays the business amongst other drug lords.
Similarities
In terms of similarities, there are two points that have peaked my interest in both films. The first point would be, family. Throughout the entire course of both movies, no matter how much bloodshed or violence was carried out, the subject of family would always be given the utmost importance. In the movie The Godfather, family is of paramount importance as it is a “family business” after all. The family would always look out for one another and this can be seen in one of the scenes when Michael is seen protecting his father after his father is bed-ridden due to a failed assassination attempt. He protects his father by moving him into another room and then bluffing a few of Sollozzo’s goons as they visit the hospital to finish the job. This scene is the major turning point in the movie as it eventually influences Michael to join the family business by inspiring his first killing – Virgil Sollozzo and Mark McCluskey at Louis, an Italian American restaurant. The importance of family can also be seen in The Godfather in the beginning when he quotes:
“A man that doesn’t spend time with his family can never be a real man”
The movie Scarface also places importance in family matters. This can be seen when Tony visits his mother and his sister, Gina after a long time. This takes place after Tony has earned more money than he used to and he can afford to give his sister a necklace and his mother, a thousand dollars. However, everything turns sour when he tells his both his sister and his mother that they no longer have to work anymore as he has established himself as the breadwinner of the family. Tony’s mother then orders him to leave the house, as he is a disgrace to her due to the fact that he had to kill men in order to earn that type of money. Despite his mother driving him out of the house, he still gives his sister the money and tells her to give some of the money to their mother from time to time. This shows how much Tony cares for his mother knowing his mother thinks of him as scum. In terms of similarities, both of these movies do place a lot of importance in family despite their crimes and criminalities.
Another similarity that can be seen in both movies is the theme of respect. Respect comes second in order of importance, right under family. Throughout the course of both movies, the theme of respect is also viewed as status, which in turn portrays the amount of success one has had. The amount of respect one would have in The Godfather would determine one’s importance in the family and the amount of one’s wealth and riches however would determine how much respect one would have in Scarface. In the movie The Godfather, the very first scene of the movie portrays a man, Amerigo Bonasera, who seeks the Godfather for help. He tells the Godfather that his daughter has been beaten up by two young men and wants The Godfather to do “justice” onto them though the Godfather refuses and points out that his daughter is still alive. The Godfather then chastises Bonasera for not wanting his friendship, coming to him on his daughter’s wedding and asking him to kill for money. He then tells him he would carry out “justice” onto the two young men if he were to be friends with him and to address him as “Godfather” – a sign of respect. In the movie Scarface, respect can be seen throughout the entire movie. Over the course of the entire movie, Tony never backs down from arguments (excluding the one he had with his mother as family comes first in importance) and would always fight back. A very good example would be in the first quarter of the movie when he was insulted and called a dishwasher by Omar Suarez. He retaliated and tried to fight back with even though Omar pulled out a gun.
Differences
There are several differences that can be noted between The Godfather and Scarface. The first point would be the character Al Pacino plays. There is a vast difference between the character the character Al Pacino plays in The Godfather and the character he plays in Scarface. In the movie The Godfather, Al Pacino plays Michael Corleone, the son of Don Vito Corleone (also known as the Godfather). The character Michael is seen as a cool, calm and collected man who inherits the family business in the end. There is a scene in the movie when Michael kills Sollozzo and McCluskey by shooting both of them in the head after failing to negotiate with them. After killing them in a restaurant full (or semi-full) of people, he walks out quickly and drops the gun on the spot. He showed no emotion whatsoever throughout the entire meeting and showed no emotion after killing the two men. There are several scenes throughout the movie in which he is instigated yet he never truly yells at the top of his voice (not until Godfather Part 2 that is). Also, Michael is either seen to be wearing a suit or a tuxedo – enhancing his coolness no matter what the situation. However, in the movie Scarface, Al Pacino plays the total opposite as to what Michael Corleone is in The Godfather. Throughout the entire movie Scarface, Tony Montana is portrayed as a character that never backs down from a fight and is the one that is always instigating fights. Over the course of the entire film, Tony is seen to be shouting, screaming and cursing excessively at almost everyone. A very notable and famous scene is when he begins the killing spree by shouting the line:
“Say hello to my little friend!!!”
As he pulls out an M16 with a grenade launcher and shoots it at the door of his office that is surrounded by Sosa’s men. As the rampage continues, he is shot a considerable amount of times and is still standing due to the cocaine fueling his rage. In contrast to Michael in The Godfather, Tony is seen to be wearing casual clothes most of the time and only suits when he became successful. If one would notice, Michael also combs his hair all the way back neatly and Tony would just leave his hair in a mess – something that enhances the coolness and rebel character in both Michael and Tony respectfully.
Another difference would be the soundtrack between both movies. In the movie The Godfather, the main song would be Speak Softly Love, a slow song that is of Italian origin. This song has a traditional touch to it with the beginning of the song starting slowly, having a loud and powerful middle and a slow ending. The song beautifully follows the movie itself as the beginning is calm and relaxed – just like how the entire Corleone family is before the assassination attempt on Don Vito – the godfather. The middle part of the song though portrays the struggle between the different families and how the godfather loses his son – Santino Corleone. The ending part of the song however is comparable to Michael Corleone taking over the family business as it portrays hope for the family. Conversely, in the movie Scarface, the songs are more easily related to disco and pop in the 1970’s. Its fast-paced and hear-pumping music are in tune with the time the film Scarface was shot. Throughout the entire movie, there are scenes in which Tony and his business partners are seen in discos, the music in the soundtrack follows that theme and because of that – it is fast-paced (just like the movie). The lyrics of the song “Push It To The Limit” portray how one lives life full of risks – just like how Tony does by earning money illegally and how one can achieve anything by literally pushing it to the limit. All in all, I think the soundtrack for both movies were beautifully crafted to suit both movies as both movies would not have achieved as much as they did today if it weren’t for the background music to enhance the screenplay by the actors in both films.
Conclusion
Both The Godfather and Scarface are outstanding movies that topped charts all over the world due to its explicit violence. However, it takes one to notice the little details that make up both movies. Both directors ensured that both these movies have not just incorporated drugs, sex and violence into its script, yet a storyline that made the drugs, sex and violence make sense. The fact that family values and respect was incorporated into both movies sort of influenced the audience and made them believe and feel what the protagonists (Michael Corleone & Tony Montana) felt. Overall, I believe that if it were not for these two influential movies, many writers and directors of our present time would suffer from the lack of inspiration and some of the great movies today would not even have been possible at all.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
ET 15: SINGING IN THE RAIN: MUSICAL NUMBERS
“Singin’ In The Rain”, a film by Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen, is one of the most well made musicals ever produced. The movie is mainly about the evolution of the film industry and is also a tribute to all musicals. Throughout the entire film, there are three musical numbers that tell the story of boy and girl and how the romance blossoms– which are “All I Do Is Dream Of You The Whole Night Through”, “You Were Meant For Me” and of course – “Singing In The Rain”.
In the musical number - “All I Do Is Dream Of You The Whole Night Through” which had Debbie Reynolds perform with other dancers, conveyed the message of youth to the audience. The main color that the costumes that these young dancers wear are light pink, a very feminine color that is associated with the female gender. The costumes are also made such that it exposes the assets of a woman – the legs and breasts. Additionally, this musical number is also the very first part of the story of boy and girl – the part of how boy meets girl. The lyrics of the song brings forth the message of young love and how young girls dream day and night about the men they fall in love with. It is enhanced even more due to the fact that the casting is entirely composed of young women (including Debbie Reynolds)! If one even bothers to notice the other dancers accompanying Debbie, they are casted with longer and much bulkier faces. The fact that they casted slightly less attractive women as dancers and even placed Debbie in the middle of all of them created a sort of focus on Debbie as the main character’s love interest.
“You Were Meant For Me”, a musical number that included both Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds, is a personal favorite of mine. It brings forth the message of the romance blossoming. The way Debbie is dressed in this scene portrays a very feminine character. She is dressed in very light purple and is wearing a skirt – something we associate a typical female with. Gene however, is dressed as the typical male. Wearing white to symbolize the “good guy” and a top that enhances his chest area, it creates an image of “The Knight In Shining Armor”. In terms of the plot, this is the scene where the boy and girl find romance. They both find that they were destined to be together. The way Gene Kelly sets up the stage and decreases his power by letting Debbie tower over him portrays the message of she is his weakness and only Debbie will have control over him and in turn, Debbie is serenaded by Gene though at the end, it is Gene who has higher status to signify that he is able to take care of her, as the more protective partner. This musical number is almost the most important scene in my point of view as it informs the audience that the romance between both of them is blossoming and there is chemistry between the both of them. However, the romance is not at its peak, as they do not kiss even after the entire scene.
The third musical number – “Singing In The Rain”, a solo by Gene Kelly is also an important scene in the movie. In the beginning of this scene, both Debbie and Gene kiss for the first time in the movie, completing the boy meets girl story. This musical number is essential in this movie as it finishes the romance story with the boy kisses girl act. Also, as Gene Kelly begins singing, he struts happily on the wet pavement with confidence as he waves to the other passerbys that are rushing to their destination. This portrays that he has finally found that someone he intends to spend his entire life with and is not bothered by neither the rain nor anyone else for that matter. As he dances in the rain with that wide smile on his face, it also creates an image of a child that is playing in the rain. As he embraces the rain, there is a feeling of release of the passion and pleasure in him. He goes on playing around with the water – a symbol of pureness and clarity as he has found himself pure love and has now found clarity in his life.
All in all, I think these three musical numbers were important as these three musical scenes made up the romance story between Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds. It was beautifully crafted such that their romance story was to take place in a story of the film industry. If it were not for these three famous scenes, dancing and music making in this era would not have been the same at all!
In the musical number - “All I Do Is Dream Of You The Whole Night Through” which had Debbie Reynolds perform with other dancers, conveyed the message of youth to the audience. The main color that the costumes that these young dancers wear are light pink, a very feminine color that is associated with the female gender. The costumes are also made such that it exposes the assets of a woman – the legs and breasts. Additionally, this musical number is also the very first part of the story of boy and girl – the part of how boy meets girl. The lyrics of the song brings forth the message of young love and how young girls dream day and night about the men they fall in love with. It is enhanced even more due to the fact that the casting is entirely composed of young women (including Debbie Reynolds)! If one even bothers to notice the other dancers accompanying Debbie, they are casted with longer and much bulkier faces. The fact that they casted slightly less attractive women as dancers and even placed Debbie in the middle of all of them created a sort of focus on Debbie as the main character’s love interest.
“You Were Meant For Me”, a musical number that included both Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds, is a personal favorite of mine. It brings forth the message of the romance blossoming. The way Debbie is dressed in this scene portrays a very feminine character. She is dressed in very light purple and is wearing a skirt – something we associate a typical female with. Gene however, is dressed as the typical male. Wearing white to symbolize the “good guy” and a top that enhances his chest area, it creates an image of “The Knight In Shining Armor”. In terms of the plot, this is the scene where the boy and girl find romance. They both find that they were destined to be together. The way Gene Kelly sets up the stage and decreases his power by letting Debbie tower over him portrays the message of she is his weakness and only Debbie will have control over him and in turn, Debbie is serenaded by Gene though at the end, it is Gene who has higher status to signify that he is able to take care of her, as the more protective partner. This musical number is almost the most important scene in my point of view as it informs the audience that the romance between both of them is blossoming and there is chemistry between the both of them. However, the romance is not at its peak, as they do not kiss even after the entire scene.
The third musical number – “Singing In The Rain”, a solo by Gene Kelly is also an important scene in the movie. In the beginning of this scene, both Debbie and Gene kiss for the first time in the movie, completing the boy meets girl story. This musical number is essential in this movie as it finishes the romance story with the boy kisses girl act. Also, as Gene Kelly begins singing, he struts happily on the wet pavement with confidence as he waves to the other passerbys that are rushing to their destination. This portrays that he has finally found that someone he intends to spend his entire life with and is not bothered by neither the rain nor anyone else for that matter. As he dances in the rain with that wide smile on his face, it also creates an image of a child that is playing in the rain. As he embraces the rain, there is a feeling of release of the passion and pleasure in him. He goes on playing around with the water – a symbol of pureness and clarity as he has found himself pure love and has now found clarity in his life.
All in all, I think these three musical numbers were important as these three musical scenes made up the romance story between Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds. It was beautifully crafted such that their romance story was to take place in a story of the film industry. If it were not for these three famous scenes, dancing and music making in this era would not have been the same at all!
ET: 14: SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN IN SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN rewrite
Singin’ in the Rain, a film by Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen has a musical scene of the same name in the film that is absolutely incredible through my eyes. There are many different views and ways others perceive this scene and I believe that I do see it a bit more differently from how others do.
In this scene, Gene Kelly portrays the man who is deeply in love with Debbie Reynolds and is not shy from hiding it. There are many close up shots of Gene’s face throughout the entire song and it ingrains this message of him being absolutely in love to the audience constantly. Like in the films ‘M’ and ‘Metropolis’, which had many close-ups on its actors, it was meant to create belief in the audience that the character is actually feeling that emotion during that scene. Also, all the three films had many full shots of its actors, displaying the complete head-to-toe of each character in order for them to make the audience feel what Gene is feeling. It aims to manifest a feeling in every single person that is watching the scene to WANT to sing and dance in the rain! (The beauty of it all is that most of us who did watch the scene – actually ended up humming to the tune outside class). Another important factor in which grabs the audience literally by the heart – is the tap-dancing. As Gene tap dances in the rain – the audience follows him and this creates the feeling of wanting to be his position (even if he was in the rain).
This scene though has its own meaning in terms of the sequence in the context of the whole movie. In the beginning, when Gene Kelly coincidentally meets Debbie Reynolds – it portrays the “Boy Meets Girl” moment when everything is new and fresh. As the movie progresses, Gene is seen to obsess and constantly think of her which leads up to the scene of him romancing her with the set-up of the studio – the “Boy Romances Girl” moment. The scene of Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the rain though, is the inevitable “Boy Kisses Girl” moment that I am sure, the scene most viewers tend to look forward to. The scene is blown out of proportion with Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the streets in the rain as he shows how happy he is after kissing Debbie.
The choreography on the other hand, says so much about how Gene feels in the movie and the how the little details are what make his happiness look so convincing. It starts out with him walking while sheltering himself from the rain with his umbrella. He then decides that there is no need for an umbrella – not even the rain could ever change how he feels about Debbie. He then walks with his head held up high, looking at the beauty of everything and then jumps onto a lamppost signifying he’s on top of the world at the moment. As the camera goes for a close up on Gene, one could see how in love he was with Debbie when he smiled from ear-to-ear as the raindrops fell on his face. He then starts tap-dancing with his umbrella and the dance starts to pick up pace as it progresses. There’s even a part when Gene avoids the falling drain water a few times but eventually just goes under it and enjoys the splash. It feels as if he’s afraid of it in the beginning but decides to take the dive anyway, like how some of us are afraid of love in the beginning yet we eventually take the plunge anyway. The dance becomes the most intense when he goes onto the street swinging the umbrella and then starts splashing the water with his legs like a child as if he’s free and absolutely nothing can stop him from feeling this overjoyed. Only until the policeman arrives and looms over his shoulder like a parent does to a child, does he bring himself back to reality.
I could go on and on about the many things that comprise this beautifully made scene. The fact is that this scene is viewed so differently from others. Nevertheless, it is similar on one point – that it is one of the best scenes one could ever make and it is enjoyed no matter when one watches it, especially on a rainy day.
In this scene, Gene Kelly portrays the man who is deeply in love with Debbie Reynolds and is not shy from hiding it. There are many close up shots of Gene’s face throughout the entire song and it ingrains this message of him being absolutely in love to the audience constantly. Like in the films ‘M’ and ‘Metropolis’, which had many close-ups on its actors, it was meant to create belief in the audience that the character is actually feeling that emotion during that scene. Also, all the three films had many full shots of its actors, displaying the complete head-to-toe of each character in order for them to make the audience feel what Gene is feeling. It aims to manifest a feeling in every single person that is watching the scene to WANT to sing and dance in the rain! (The beauty of it all is that most of us who did watch the scene – actually ended up humming to the tune outside class). Another important factor in which grabs the audience literally by the heart – is the tap-dancing. As Gene tap dances in the rain – the audience follows him and this creates the feeling of wanting to be his position (even if he was in the rain).
This scene though has its own meaning in terms of the sequence in the context of the whole movie. In the beginning, when Gene Kelly coincidentally meets Debbie Reynolds – it portrays the “Boy Meets Girl” moment when everything is new and fresh. As the movie progresses, Gene is seen to obsess and constantly think of her which leads up to the scene of him romancing her with the set-up of the studio – the “Boy Romances Girl” moment. The scene of Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the rain though, is the inevitable “Boy Kisses Girl” moment that I am sure, the scene most viewers tend to look forward to. The scene is blown out of proportion with Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the streets in the rain as he shows how happy he is after kissing Debbie.
The choreography on the other hand, says so much about how Gene feels in the movie and the how the little details are what make his happiness look so convincing. It starts out with him walking while sheltering himself from the rain with his umbrella. He then decides that there is no need for an umbrella – not even the rain could ever change how he feels about Debbie. He then walks with his head held up high, looking at the beauty of everything and then jumps onto a lamppost signifying he’s on top of the world at the moment. As the camera goes for a close up on Gene, one could see how in love he was with Debbie when he smiled from ear-to-ear as the raindrops fell on his face. He then starts tap-dancing with his umbrella and the dance starts to pick up pace as it progresses. There’s even a part when Gene avoids the falling drain water a few times but eventually just goes under it and enjoys the splash. It feels as if he’s afraid of it in the beginning but decides to take the dive anyway, like how some of us are afraid of love in the beginning yet we eventually take the plunge anyway. The dance becomes the most intense when he goes onto the street swinging the umbrella and then starts splashing the water with his legs like a child as if he’s free and absolutely nothing can stop him from feeling this overjoyed. Only until the policeman arrives and looms over his shoulder like a parent does to a child, does he bring himself back to reality.
I could go on and on about the many things that comprise this beautifully made scene. The fact is that this scene is viewed so differently from others. Nevertheless, it is similar on one point – that it is one of the best scenes one could ever make and it is enjoyed no matter when one watches it, especially on a rainy day.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
ET 14: Singin' In The Rain, Singin' In The Rain!
Singin’ in the Rain, a film by Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen has a musical scene of the same name in the film that is absolutely incredible through my eyes. There are many different views and ways others perceive this scene and I believe that I do see it a bit more differently from how others do.
Is the scene expressionistic? The real question should be – how is the scene not expressionistic? One would never see a man tap-dance in the middle of a downpour! However, the way the entire set is created for Gene Kelly to dance on does create a somewhat dream-like setting. It is dark, yet he expresses so much joy, which is in a way, contradicting one another, much like a dream. This scene can be compared to both films “M” and “Metropolis” in a way as well. The entire scene is shot in the middle of a city full of buildings and the viewers are not shown the roofs of the buildings, similar to how most scenes were shot in “M” and “Metropolis”. Although it is similar in that specific way, it is entirely different in terms of what the protagonist, Gene Kelly expresses as compared to the other two protagonists in “M” and “Metropolis”. As Gene Kelly dances and sings under the pouring rain, he expresses joy and happiness of being in love with the lady of his dreams – Debbie Reynolds. If one were to notice his facial expressions (up until he meets the police officer), one could actually feel how smitten he really is for her. The look he has on his face makes the audience feel as if nothing could ever go wrong, as he has already found the one that he intends to spend his entire life with for the rest of his life – a “happy ending” if you will.
This scene though has its own meaning in terms of the sequence in the context of the whole movie. In the beginning, when Gene Kelly coincidentally meets Debbie Reynolds – it portrays the “Boy Meets Girl” moment when everything is new and fresh. As the movie progresses, Gene is seen to obsess and constantly think of her which leads up to the scene of him romancing her with the set-up of the studio – the “Boy Romances Girl” moment. The scene of Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the rain though, is the inevitable “Boy Kisses Girl” moment that I am sure, the scene most viewers tend to look forward to. The scene is blown out of proportion with Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the streets in the rain as he shows how happy he is after kissing Debbie.
The choreography on the other hand, says so much about how Gene feels in the movie and the how the little details are what make his happiness look so convincing. It starts out with him walking while sheltering himself from the rain with his umbrella. He then decides that there is no need for an umbrella – not even the rain could ever change how he feels about Debbie. He then walks with his head held up high, looking at the beauty of everything and then jumps onto a lamppost signifying he’s on top of the world at the moment. As the camera goes for a close up on Gene, one could see how in love he was with Debbie when he smiled from ear-to-ear as the raindrops fell on his face. He then starts tap-dancing with his umbrella and the dance starts to pick up pace as it progresses. There’s even a part when Gene avoids the falling drain water a few times but eventually just goes under it and enjoys the splash. It feels as if he’s afraid of it in the beginning but decides to take the dive anyway, like how some of us are afraid of love in the beginning yet we eventually take the plunge anyway. The dance becomes the most intense when he goes onto the street swinging the umbrella and then starts splashing the water with his legs like a child as if he’s free and absolutely nothing can stop him from feeling this overjoyed. Only until the policeman arrives and looms over his shoulder like a parent does to a child, does he bring himself back to reality.
I could go on and on about the many things that comprise this beautifully made scene. The fact is that this scene is viewed so differently from others. Nevertheless, it is similar on one point – that it is one of the best scenes one could ever make and it is enjoyed no matter when one watches it, especially on a rainy day.
Is the scene expressionistic? The real question should be – how is the scene not expressionistic? One would never see a man tap-dance in the middle of a downpour! However, the way the entire set is created for Gene Kelly to dance on does create a somewhat dream-like setting. It is dark, yet he expresses so much joy, which is in a way, contradicting one another, much like a dream. This scene can be compared to both films “M” and “Metropolis” in a way as well. The entire scene is shot in the middle of a city full of buildings and the viewers are not shown the roofs of the buildings, similar to how most scenes were shot in “M” and “Metropolis”. Although it is similar in that specific way, it is entirely different in terms of what the protagonist, Gene Kelly expresses as compared to the other two protagonists in “M” and “Metropolis”. As Gene Kelly dances and sings under the pouring rain, he expresses joy and happiness of being in love with the lady of his dreams – Debbie Reynolds. If one were to notice his facial expressions (up until he meets the police officer), one could actually feel how smitten he really is for her. The look he has on his face makes the audience feel as if nothing could ever go wrong, as he has already found the one that he intends to spend his entire life with for the rest of his life – a “happy ending” if you will.
This scene though has its own meaning in terms of the sequence in the context of the whole movie. In the beginning, when Gene Kelly coincidentally meets Debbie Reynolds – it portrays the “Boy Meets Girl” moment when everything is new and fresh. As the movie progresses, Gene is seen to obsess and constantly think of her which leads up to the scene of him romancing her with the set-up of the studio – the “Boy Romances Girl” moment. The scene of Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the rain though, is the inevitable “Boy Kisses Girl” moment that I am sure, the scene most viewers tend to look forward to. The scene is blown out of proportion with Gene Kelly dancing and singing in the streets in the rain as he shows how happy he is after kissing Debbie.
The choreography on the other hand, says so much about how Gene feels in the movie and the how the little details are what make his happiness look so convincing. It starts out with him walking while sheltering himself from the rain with his umbrella. He then decides that there is no need for an umbrella – not even the rain could ever change how he feels about Debbie. He then walks with his head held up high, looking at the beauty of everything and then jumps onto a lamppost signifying he’s on top of the world at the moment. As the camera goes for a close up on Gene, one could see how in love he was with Debbie when he smiled from ear-to-ear as the raindrops fell on his face. He then starts tap-dancing with his umbrella and the dance starts to pick up pace as it progresses. There’s even a part when Gene avoids the falling drain water a few times but eventually just goes under it and enjoys the splash. It feels as if he’s afraid of it in the beginning but decides to take the dive anyway, like how some of us are afraid of love in the beginning yet we eventually take the plunge anyway. The dance becomes the most intense when he goes onto the street swinging the umbrella and then starts splashing the water with his legs like a child as if he’s free and absolutely nothing can stop him from feeling this overjoyed. Only until the policeman arrives and looms over his shoulder like a parent does to a child, does he bring himself back to reality.
I could go on and on about the many things that comprise this beautifully made scene. The fact is that this scene is viewed so differently from others. Nevertheless, it is similar on one point – that it is one of the best scenes one could ever make and it is enjoyed no matter when one watches it, especially on a rainy day.
Monday, June 20, 2011
ET 13: Boy Meets Girl: Two Treatments
Both films, Top Hat and Singin’ in the Rain had unforgettable “Boy Meets Girl” moments that had their songs playing in my head for days, after watching them in class which were “Isn’t this a lovely day” and “You were meant for me” respectively.
In both of the films, the pairs Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers, in Top Hat and Gene Kelly/Debbie Reynolds, in Singin’ in the Rain had brilliant yet entirely different settings and scenery during their entire “Boy Meets Girl” scenes. In the beginning of the scene of “Isn’t This A Lovely Day”, you could see that Fred was making the first move as he tried to charm Ginger under the gazebo with the play on words relating it to the situation they were in. Gene Kelly in “You Were Meant For Me” however, played the more dominant male role. He also attempted to charm Debbie by physically changing the scene by releasing machine-made mist and switching on a sunset background for the set. Both males however, have the same intention of winning the girl over by pulling them in, for a dance. Both Ginger and Debbie however had different looks on their faces during both of those scenes. Ginger Rogers played the more resistant role as she walked away and constantly looked anywhere else but at Fred as he tried to charm her. Debbie Reynolds on the other hand had many pauses as she portrayed many look of uncertainty as she looked as if she questioned the possibility of love between herself and a superstar like Gene Kelly.
In relation to choreography though, both films are comparable in many ways. In terms of dance, both scenes had tap-dancing though had different intensities of it. In Singin’ In the Rain’s “You Were Meant For Me”, as Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds danced – they demonstrated more waltz-like dances and were much more elegant. Tap-dancing in their scene was short and light in order to preserve that sweet romantic scene they both had. Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers’ dance in Top Hat’s “Isn’t This A Lovely Day” however portrayed something entirely different. Their dance started off with Ginger shadowing Fred which moved on to Fred somewhat challenging Ginger to keep up with his pace. As they progress, they soon try to match each other’s taps and they begin a more fast-paced dance as compared to Gene and Debbie’s dance. The lyrics of both songs fit really well with their respected scenes. “Isn’t This A Lovely Day” by Irving Berlin in Top Hat, is the perfect example of taking a bad situation and changing it into a love song. As Fred Astaire sings as he describes the thunder and lightning, he also relates it to how being with Ginger, even on a rainy day would be a beautiful day in his eyes. “You Were Meant For Me” by Ignacio Herb Brown, like its title, described how both Debbie Reynolds and Gene Kelly were made for each other and how they were meant to be together. The way the spotlight is on both of them makes it look as if their love really was meant to be and the lyrics to the song only intensified the scene even more than it already was.
In conclusion, both “Boy Meets Girl” moments in both films had really beautiful ways of portraying that spark of romance. The lyrics of the songs chosen accompanied by the dances really does enhance the scenes of both films making it truly remarkable and unforgettable.
In both of the films, the pairs Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers, in Top Hat and Gene Kelly/Debbie Reynolds, in Singin’ in the Rain had brilliant yet entirely different settings and scenery during their entire “Boy Meets Girl” scenes. In the beginning of the scene of “Isn’t This A Lovely Day”, you could see that Fred was making the first move as he tried to charm Ginger under the gazebo with the play on words relating it to the situation they were in. Gene Kelly in “You Were Meant For Me” however, played the more dominant male role. He also attempted to charm Debbie by physically changing the scene by releasing machine-made mist and switching on a sunset background for the set. Both males however, have the same intention of winning the girl over by pulling them in, for a dance. Both Ginger and Debbie however had different looks on their faces during both of those scenes. Ginger Rogers played the more resistant role as she walked away and constantly looked anywhere else but at Fred as he tried to charm her. Debbie Reynolds on the other hand had many pauses as she portrayed many look of uncertainty as she looked as if she questioned the possibility of love between herself and a superstar like Gene Kelly.
In relation to choreography though, both films are comparable in many ways. In terms of dance, both scenes had tap-dancing though had different intensities of it. In Singin’ In the Rain’s “You Were Meant For Me”, as Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds danced – they demonstrated more waltz-like dances and were much more elegant. Tap-dancing in their scene was short and light in order to preserve that sweet romantic scene they both had. Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers’ dance in Top Hat’s “Isn’t This A Lovely Day” however portrayed something entirely different. Their dance started off with Ginger shadowing Fred which moved on to Fred somewhat challenging Ginger to keep up with his pace. As they progress, they soon try to match each other’s taps and they begin a more fast-paced dance as compared to Gene and Debbie’s dance. The lyrics of both songs fit really well with their respected scenes. “Isn’t This A Lovely Day” by Irving Berlin in Top Hat, is the perfect example of taking a bad situation and changing it into a love song. As Fred Astaire sings as he describes the thunder and lightning, he also relates it to how being with Ginger, even on a rainy day would be a beautiful day in his eyes. “You Were Meant For Me” by Ignacio Herb Brown, like its title, described how both Debbie Reynolds and Gene Kelly were made for each other and how they were meant to be together. The way the spotlight is on both of them makes it look as if their love really was meant to be and the lyrics to the song only intensified the scene even more than it already was.
In conclusion, both “Boy Meets Girl” moments in both films had really beautiful ways of portraying that spark of romance. The lyrics of the songs chosen accompanied by the dances really does enhance the scenes of both films making it truly remarkable and unforgettable.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
ET 4 NEW : Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will
In the production of the films “Birth of a Nation” and “Triumph of the Will”, it was obviously intended for the producers to influence the audience of both films to side with the protagonist(s) who are the Ku Klux Klan and Adolf Hitler respectively. During those troubled times, the general public who were in the midst of all the chaos and war, needed, a hero. The Ku Klux Klan and Adolf Hitler took advantage of the turmoil, and turned it to their advantage through the power, of film.
Both films were equally powerful in terms of their entire structure of shots and transitions. Firstly, in the film “Birth of a Nation” by David W. Griffith, the scenes were carefully arranged to portray the heroism of the Ku Klux Klan. Like in most films or movies we usually watch, the director would intentionally arrange the heroic scene followed by the enemy causing trouble or destruction which would continue on and on without the audience noticing. Similarly, in “Birth of a Nation”, if one were to notice, the scenes were in the same order as well! The scenes would alternate between the scenes of the African Americans causing havoc, the Caucasians being terrorized by the African Americans and lastly, the Ku Klux Klan on their horses riding to the rescue. This would lead the audience to believe that the Ku Klux Klan were heroes on their way to bringing justice to the African Americans. However, in Leni Riefenstahl’s “Triumph of the Will”, she opted for something a little different. In the very beginning, the audience is shown the clouds and eventually the city of Nuremberg. This was deliberately done to depict God’s view from the sky – a ruler and a conqueror, which was Adolf Hitler at the time over the German land. As he descended from the sky, like how most holy deities do, the people greeted and saluted his presence. The scene was brilliantly made to illustrate Hitler’s God-like presence over the Germans.
There were many other aspects that made both protagonists in both films appear melodramatic. The music playing in the background played a massive significance in exaggerating characters and the plot. In David W. Griffith’s “Birth of a Nation”, the music playing in the background expressed the hopelessness of the Caucasians as they were terrorized and killed by the African Americans. As the Ku Klux Klan arrived and rescued the Caucasians from the African Americans though, the music then shifted to a more relaxed nature – as if everything was safe now, which portrays the Ku Klux Klan as saviors. Like in my previous paragraph, Leni Riefenstahl’s approach was slightly different in the film, “Triumph of the Will”. As Hitler descended from the sky on an airplane, the music playing in the background was intended to make him appear as the leader to salvation. One could notice the smiles and the light in every supporter’s eyes as they managed to catch a glimpse of their leader, which made most of them appear relieved and reassured. Together with the massive amount of supporters’ deafening cheers, Leni Riefenstahl really did manage to bring out the most out of the scene. The music would then continue to play as Hitler continued to parade through the tens of thousands of supports in the city of Nuremburg – to create a long-lasting effect on the audience on how powerful and respected he really is.
In conclusion, through the art of film, one is capable of bringing out the potential out of every scene. As all of us are only human – we are constantly swayed by our emotions all the time. Directors exploit that weakness through different types of music together with the fact that the screen that people watch it through is similar to that of a window – a limited view of reality. Through film, one views reality through the eyes of the director, or in this case – the director’s own view on reality itself.
Both films were equally powerful in terms of their entire structure of shots and transitions. Firstly, in the film “Birth of a Nation” by David W. Griffith, the scenes were carefully arranged to portray the heroism of the Ku Klux Klan. Like in most films or movies we usually watch, the director would intentionally arrange the heroic scene followed by the enemy causing trouble or destruction which would continue on and on without the audience noticing. Similarly, in “Birth of a Nation”, if one were to notice, the scenes were in the same order as well! The scenes would alternate between the scenes of the African Americans causing havoc, the Caucasians being terrorized by the African Americans and lastly, the Ku Klux Klan on their horses riding to the rescue. This would lead the audience to believe that the Ku Klux Klan were heroes on their way to bringing justice to the African Americans. However, in Leni Riefenstahl’s “Triumph of the Will”, she opted for something a little different. In the very beginning, the audience is shown the clouds and eventually the city of Nuremberg. This was deliberately done to depict God’s view from the sky – a ruler and a conqueror, which was Adolf Hitler at the time over the German land. As he descended from the sky, like how most holy deities do, the people greeted and saluted his presence. The scene was brilliantly made to illustrate Hitler’s God-like presence over the Germans.
There were many other aspects that made both protagonists in both films appear melodramatic. The music playing in the background played a massive significance in exaggerating characters and the plot. In David W. Griffith’s “Birth of a Nation”, the music playing in the background expressed the hopelessness of the Caucasians as they were terrorized and killed by the African Americans. As the Ku Klux Klan arrived and rescued the Caucasians from the African Americans though, the music then shifted to a more relaxed nature – as if everything was safe now, which portrays the Ku Klux Klan as saviors. Like in my previous paragraph, Leni Riefenstahl’s approach was slightly different in the film, “Triumph of the Will”. As Hitler descended from the sky on an airplane, the music playing in the background was intended to make him appear as the leader to salvation. One could notice the smiles and the light in every supporter’s eyes as they managed to catch a glimpse of their leader, which made most of them appear relieved and reassured. Together with the massive amount of supporters’ deafening cheers, Leni Riefenstahl really did manage to bring out the most out of the scene. The music would then continue to play as Hitler continued to parade through the tens of thousands of supports in the city of Nuremburg – to create a long-lasting effect on the audience on how powerful and respected he really is.
In conclusion, through the art of film, one is capable of bringing out the potential out of every scene. As all of us are only human – we are constantly swayed by our emotions all the time. Directors exploit that weakness through different types of music together with the fact that the screen that people watch it through is similar to that of a window – a limited view of reality. Through film, one views reality through the eyes of the director, or in this case – the director’s own view on reality itself.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
ET 4: BIRTH OF A NATION AND TRIUMPH OF THE WILL
In the production of the films “Birth of a Nation” and “Triumph of the Will”, it was obviously intended for the producers to influence the audience of both films to side with the protagonist(s) and also develop similar beliefs as theirs. However, there are specific talking points in terms of realism, structure, melodrama and propaganda in relation to both films.
Like I said in my first paragraph, both stories revolve around influencing the audience, or in this case – brainwashing. They both portray the good in themselves (protagonists) and how they are depicted as saviors of the current time at the time or even – the solution to the troubled times of war. In my opinion, it is done much better in the film “Triumph of the Will” as everything that was recorded, actually happened. You could practically call it a documentary of Hitler’s visit to Nuremberg. However, in the film “Birth of a Nation”, the black people were obviously white people disguised with make-up on which questions their credibility on the generalization of black people. The biasness on the Caucasians was also apparent and it stuck out like a sore thumb. The realism of both films clearly depicted the biasness and the “good” of the protagonists.
In terms of structure though, both films had brilliant techniques that capitalized on the shots of the scenes. In the film “Birth of a Nation”, they had many long shots of the Klu Klux Klan dressed in white whilst riding on their also dressed in white – horses. This is obviously to sway the audience into thinking the Klu Klux Klan are heroes. In one of the scenes I remembered, was a close-up shot on a little girl crying amidst the chaos, which I felt made me feel pity for the terrorized family. However, after replaying scenes of the blacks being hit on the head and making a mockery out of them, my sympathy for the whites faded almost instantly. In the film “Triumph of the Will”, they had a considerable amount of Bird’s eye view angles on the Nazi followers and also many low-angle shots of Hitler when he was giving his speeches. I suppose both angles were used to portray the belief and power of the army and how they were more than capable of winning battles.
Both films also showed melodramatic qualities. In fact, both films were practically made as melodramas! Firstly, when the Klu Klux Klan were riding on their horses on their way to “saving the day”, the music that played in the background made them feel as if they were heroes. The music also changed when they shot the blacks terrorizing the house. In the film “Triumph of the Will”, in the very first shot of Hitler’s airplane in the sky through the clouds, the music playing made him look like a God descending from the skies as he emerged from the plane after landing. Secondly, in both films, the majority of the public seemed so happy when the protagonist(s) was present. An example would be when the Klu Klux Klan in “Birth of a Nation” paraded through the white public and when Hitler in “Triumph of the Will” landed as the German citizens cheered and raised their arms in respect for him.
Both films also had a clear depictions of them being propaganda. In the film “Birth of a Nation”, it had a scene where black people were seen taking off their shoes and drinking in public. It could not have been any clearer how the film had the intention of practically destroying the image of every black citizen. Conversely, the film “Triumph of the Will” had a different approach. In the film, there were hundreds and thousands of Nazi followers, which had much more impact in terms of credibility. The massive amount of supporters demonstrated the power and control of their leader – Adolf Hitler.
In conclusion, after watching both films, I am beginning to suspect the hidden meaning in every film or movie I watch. The fact that everything I see could influence my current or future decisions scare me. Maybe, reality as we know it could be a manifestation of many hidden meanings. If so, I am also beginning to understand Leni Riefenstahl’s quote of how “reality doesn’t interest me”.
Like I said in my first paragraph, both stories revolve around influencing the audience, or in this case – brainwashing. They both portray the good in themselves (protagonists) and how they are depicted as saviors of the current time at the time or even – the solution to the troubled times of war. In my opinion, it is done much better in the film “Triumph of the Will” as everything that was recorded, actually happened. You could practically call it a documentary of Hitler’s visit to Nuremberg. However, in the film “Birth of a Nation”, the black people were obviously white people disguised with make-up on which questions their credibility on the generalization of black people. The biasness on the Caucasians was also apparent and it stuck out like a sore thumb. The realism of both films clearly depicted the biasness and the “good” of the protagonists.
In terms of structure though, both films had brilliant techniques that capitalized on the shots of the scenes. In the film “Birth of a Nation”, they had many long shots of the Klu Klux Klan dressed in white whilst riding on their also dressed in white – horses. This is obviously to sway the audience into thinking the Klu Klux Klan are heroes. In one of the scenes I remembered, was a close-up shot on a little girl crying amidst the chaos, which I felt made me feel pity for the terrorized family. However, after replaying scenes of the blacks being hit on the head and making a mockery out of them, my sympathy for the whites faded almost instantly. In the film “Triumph of the Will”, they had a considerable amount of Bird’s eye view angles on the Nazi followers and also many low-angle shots of Hitler when he was giving his speeches. I suppose both angles were used to portray the belief and power of the army and how they were more than capable of winning battles.
Both films also showed melodramatic qualities. In fact, both films were practically made as melodramas! Firstly, when the Klu Klux Klan were riding on their horses on their way to “saving the day”, the music that played in the background made them feel as if they were heroes. The music also changed when they shot the blacks terrorizing the house. In the film “Triumph of the Will”, in the very first shot of Hitler’s airplane in the sky through the clouds, the music playing made him look like a God descending from the skies as he emerged from the plane after landing. Secondly, in both films, the majority of the public seemed so happy when the protagonist(s) was present. An example would be when the Klu Klux Klan in “Birth of a Nation” paraded through the white public and when Hitler in “Triumph of the Will” landed as the German citizens cheered and raised their arms in respect for him.
Both films also had a clear depictions of them being propaganda. In the film “Birth of a Nation”, it had a scene where black people were seen taking off their shoes and drinking in public. It could not have been any clearer how the film had the intention of practically destroying the image of every black citizen. Conversely, the film “Triumph of the Will” had a different approach. In the film, there were hundreds and thousands of Nazi followers, which had much more impact in terms of credibility. The massive amount of supporters demonstrated the power and control of their leader – Adolf Hitler.
In conclusion, after watching both films, I am beginning to suspect the hidden meaning in every film or movie I watch. The fact that everything I see could influence my current or future decisions scare me. Maybe, reality as we know it could be a manifestation of many hidden meanings. If so, I am also beginning to understand Leni Riefenstahl’s quote of how “reality doesn’t interest me”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)