Pages

Popular Posts!! (You know the ones that get 5 views instead of 2)

Thursday, July 12, 2012

60's: Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho

So for today's ppst I'm going back in time a bit, to the 60's, which incidentally, I've been studying in history for this first semester.
My reason for this spur-of-the-moment-time-travel would be the fact that I took a look at my blog today and thought 'wow'.

I couldn't even tell what it was about! So I've decided to re-vamp it a bit. Have it make some actual sense and stick to my idea of actually reviewing books/films and current pop culture I'm into. Except for today. Today I'm actually posting a 'trying' piece of english literature. That is to say I wrote an essay on Alfred Hitchcock's 'Psycho' for my film class and thought 'why not post it here? It is a film review after all'

So here goes:


Alfred Hitcock was born in England. As a teenager he became more interested in films he began to visit the cinema frequently. The first film he directed was ‘Always Tell Your Wife’ a short comedy he but it was when he created ‘The Pleasure Garden’ a crime and romance film, that his career really began. ‘Rear Window’, ‘Strangers On A Train’ and ‘Rich and Strange’ were some of the many suspenseful action thrillers that Hitchcock created in his career. Alfred Hitchcock became famous for his thrilling films and was hence forth nicknamed ‘The Master of Suspense’ In 1960 Hitchcock created Psycho, one of cinema’s most infamous thrillers, made famous by the now iconic ‘Shower Scene’ 
Psycho is a film that really breaks with the classical film conventions, its created expertly by Hitchcock, utilising sound, mise en scene and camera angles. One of the most famous parts of the film psycho would have to be its soundtrack, its ability to set the atmosphere of a scene and its uniqueness to the film is quite extraordinary. We first expirience the effect of the music and its ability to tell a story and add to the plot in one of the earlier scenes; Marion, the protagonist, is packing her bags. As the camera pans away from a close up of the forty thousand dollars music that can only be described as ‘suspicious’ or ‘sneaky’ is played, this tells the audience, without being blatantly obvious, that Marion is planning to steal the money. The music is played once more as Marion is driving away, the music puts us on edge, the atmosphere is one of urgency and the music is played almost like a metaphor to Marion’s thoughts, scattered and conflicted, worrying but persisting with her plan. The soundtrack is utilized further to emphasize Anthony Perkin’s (Norman Bates) acting. While conversing with Marion, Norman begins to become agitated while talking about his mother, this is highlighted by some heightened and tense music, then immediately after some contrasting, softer, more wary music begins to play as Normans reverts to calmly talking about mad people, it really sets the tone of the scene, as if its not Marion sitting in the parlor, but you and you get the feeling that its not a comfortable place to be. Perhaps the most recognizable music of the film is the strings from the murder scene, its intense almost ear-piercing noise always comes as a shock. Hitchcock creates this suspense by, in the moments before the scene, gradually tuning out all background sound so that when the music does arrive, its big, loud and frightening. Hitchcock uses this technique throughout the film, every time Norman Bates attempts murder. Its as though the audience subconsciously recognizes that tune-out of sound and realizes what is about to unfold, raking up the suspense until the screeching of the violins bursts around the corner and breaks the suspense.
Much more subtle, at least to the occasional movie-goers eye, is the use of mise en scene.  In the Bates Motel Parlor scenes there are a number of stuffed birds. At first the initial purpose of the birds seems to be to show the audience how odd Norman is but they hold a deeper meaning. Each get a close up as Marion and Norman enter, the birds are positioned as predators, making those in the parlor seem like prey. The birds cast imposing shadows across the room, giving a creepy sense, which adds to the atmosphere of Marion and Normans conversation, as well as during the scene when Norman is watching her through the peep-hole. There are many other moments of deeper meaning and significance through-out the film. At the end of the murder scene we see Marion’s blood washing away with the water and down the drain. This could be simply interpreted as how easily the evidence was slipping away. But through Hitchcocks editing the drain is given deeper meaning. The camera fades from a views of the bloody water circling the drain, to an image of Marion’s eye, dead and watching, the gurgling drain now a symbol of Marion’s life, spiraling away and finally disappearing. During the murder scene there was a great use of close ups, often of the shower head and Marion’s face, the camera didn’t linger on these shots long and moved in quick succession between them all, giving a sense of urgency to the scene. Together with the violins, the acting of Janet Leigh and just the entire unexpectedness of the plot made this scene one of the most iconic from films today.
It was the murder of Marion, the main character, that broke from many of the classic ‘hollywood’ film story conventions, of that time and of today. It’s an extremely unusual and risky move to kill off the main character so early on in the film. In common story conventions you as the audience expect the main character to make it through to the end and succeed despite all odds. So this change was shocking and refreshing, it gave the movie an edge that really made it unique. As did the black and white film stock, another break from conventional films of the time. In the 1960’s directors were moving into the new medium of coloured footage. Hitchcock purposely decided to make the film in black and white. This decision ultimately enhanced the film, making the Bates House and Motel seem grimmer, even in broad daylight, which would have assisted with the production of the film greatly. They could film in such a way that everything was visible and the buildings did not seem out of place, as they may have if the film was created in colour.
Psycho is a film that is completely balanced, the appropriate mixing of sound, acting, mise en scene, camera, editing, lighting and pure shocks. Not one of these elements could be effective on their own, but Alfred Hitchcock had a way of making all these elements come together, like a perfectly fitted jigsaw. Giving the world a movie that put a tension in their stomachs, had them on the edge of their seat, fearing what would come next but overwhelmed with curiosity, like a true master of suspense.


So hopefully you enjoyed that insight. I actually got a great mark for it, and yeah, I know this is  a really technical take on the film.

Monday, April 23, 2012

The Hunger Games Review

The following post details: My experience of going to the Hunger Games Midnight Premiere, the hype (or lack of) at the cinema, my 'psycho fan' nature that may well have ruined the experience (through over-zealous hyping in the days leading up, weeks and yes, you got me months (and I mean seriously distant from the premiere date) to the movie) My final review of the Hunger Games, both a spoilerish and a non-spoilerish one, for those who haven't read the book or seen the movie, which won't actually be a review because all it will be is me encouraging you to watch and/or read the goddamn thing. Plus over-critical fans and my opinions on THEIR opinions. 


Here we go: Well I've been away for a little while, and I suppose that it may have come as a slight disappointment for you to find out that after going on about the fact that the Hunger Games was to become a movie, I didn't like it.

Okay. Not true. I kinda, wait I did like it. But I guess the book was just too amazing, nothing could compare. And here's just a little something I have to get out of the way, I won't mention it again just don't dispute me on it:

THE SOUNDTRACK WAS AWFUL I HATED IT. THE ELEMENT OF SOUND WAS NOT UTILISED TO ITS FULL EXTENT AND POTENTIAL.

There, the end. So lets get into it!
On the 21st of March (Yes the 21st, that is not a memory error that is the correct date, I swear on my life - if I'm wrong just chuck me in the Hunger Games) I went over to my friends place after school where we all hunger out, OH DEAR GOD LOOK AT THAT GRAMMATICAL ERROR, I wrote 'hunger' instead of 'hung' that word is just so subconsciously stuck there in my brain. Anyway, as I was saying we all hung out until about half past eleven (Thats 11:30 for all you lazy people out there) pm, just making sure we are on the same page. All because I was going to the MIDNIGHT PREMIERE OF THE HUNGER GAMES. Okay, sorry for all the caps.

The place (cinema) was surprisingly empty, they sure didn't fill out the whole theatre, but hey, what can you do? Most people would be bothered to get up this late on a school night, it just messes with you and stuffs you up the next day. So in we marched, me and about 3 of my friends, where we soon met up with another four of our friends and our crazily-pre-ordered-tickets were soon slashed and we were in. Yeah the 'low amount of people' and the fact that there were still tickets available made me feel pretty bad about going all 'psycho fan' on my friend, who for some reason was placed in the unfortunate position of buying the tickets, and pressuring insanely that we must grab those tickets the DAY they came out (Feb 22nd, in case your interested) Putting an light ending to that story I'll just go with saying that we all got our tickets over a month in advance.

The movie was nice, I think I'll have to see it again to appreciate it properly, or something. I had one too many bones to pick (But hang on a sec, I'm about to go and be a hypocrite, just you wait)

Afterwards my Mum came and picked me up, we got Mcdonalds (Because they are open 24Hrs thank god) and that was the night, of course with the viewing in between.

First off I'll launch into my Very Detailed Spoilerific Review (More like a pros and cons list):




The Hunger Games, what I liked about it;


- The acting, it was great, I thought they did a great job with the slightly measly bits of script that each person had. 
- The arena, that thing was done well, I liked the forest settings, which really just matched with what I'd imagined in the book picture perfect. 
- The casting, I guess this couples in with acting but still, the cast did a great job. 
-The editing/animation CGI whatever you call it, of those muttations, they looked good and not at all like mannequins or half done animations (cough cough to a certain franchise)
- That feast scene, gosh that was done well, and Thresh, I really liked Thresh in the books, I found myself imagining his journey and getting emotionally attached to it so I really enjoyed him getting screen time. It gave the little suzanne-collins-fangirl inside of me just a little bit of time to squee
- The way they handled Katniss' backstory, her unresponsive mother, dead father ect. It was well done, alongside some superb acting.
- Okay, Apart from that shaky-camera shot I really admired the camera-work of this movie, it was done in an interesting way and not at all conventional Hollywood. 
- CINNA!! He's just awesome. Cuddos to the actors and everything that just pulled his character together.


What I didn't like (Oh here we go);


- THE SOUNDTRACK. Thats the end of that rant.
- That hand-held, non-dolly moving shot. I just eurghh! It worked fine the first time round but the fact that it just kept showing up! Everywhere! An without the appropriate sound behind it the effect of the shot just doesn't shine through.
- The handling of the on-screen relationship between Katniss and Rue, you just didn't get to see enough bonding or really have time to develop an attachment, to care about their friendship. So when she died, I just wasn't feeling it, again the soundtrack side of things wasn't helping either. Bloody Senacre Crane got more screen-time than Rue.
- The short-ness of Katniss and Peeta's time in the cave, I know, I know, the books have much more flexibility with this than movies do, but it just felt half done you know?
- The interview scenes, something just felt missing. The spinning-fire-dress moment was very anti-climax.
- President Snow. He didn't look intimidating, more like Santa Clause than a child-murderer. He just didn't ooze power, he seemed like someone who'd be booted from presidency in the next election (If Panem had them)
- Berries. The final scene with the berries. Pretending like you will eat death-berries is pretty rebel, but actually putting them in your mouth THAT IS BADASS!! Why people? Why didn't it happen!?


What Surprised Me;


- Haymitch's character, it was just downright refreshing, to be able to explore this character whom, during Hunger Games 1, we didn't get a very large insight to. 
- The soundtrack, obviously.
- The uprising in eleven, I just didn't expect it. I didn't mind it, there is going to be an uprising anyway, why not introduce it to the audience earlier? It surprised me and was taken well however I can feel that there would be some nitpicks out there who would think it strays too far off plot. 


What was funny;


- The whole scene where Haymitch walks in smiling at Katniss and gives her the thumbs up. It was just too good. A great bit of film that resonated so well with Haymitch's character.
- When Katniss almost stood on Peeta's face. Come off it, we're kids and we giggle. 


Obviously the plot and storyline was amazing, the lighting was used effectively, especially in those final arena scenes. I was feeling the suspense when those Muttations were let loose, and I did genuinely jump when it leapt out of nowhere (I was holding my drink at the time and clipped the straw across my face - it hurts)


Finally: What I was really surprised that people complained about as I didn't really mind.


- Madge. Okay, I'm sorry, but since when has Madge ever been a major plot point? I'd actually run into people more concerned with the absence of Madge than Rue's underdevelopment or Snow's Grandfatherlyness. 'But Isobel, this is the girl who gives her the mockingjay pin, like the fact that it belonged to her aunt, who died in the Hunger Games and incidentally, was a friend of Katniss' mother isn't important?' And I'm afraid to newsflash you with the harsh reality, but no. It is not. Aside from the fact that it would be worth about 10,000 headaches for a director to try and incorporate that into a film and then try and get the poor audience to understand why its actually important, but Madge and her background story, its only a spin off tale really. Designed to give the story a little more flesh, depth. Madge is not even a SUPPORTING CHARACTER, just to get that out of the way. 


- The cornucopia. 'Its all messed up and weird shaped' 'Why isn't it gold' 'Thats the cornucopia? I thought it was the muttations' Are among the many arguments thrown out there by crazed fans who were upset that this architectural crime could possibly ruin the movie. I have two words for you: Directors Interpretation. Or producers, whoevers artistic call it is, its still climbable.


- And now for one of the most ridiculous complaints (oh and it was lengthy and heated) I'VE EVER HEARD: 'I can't believe Peeta threw the bread out the front of the bakery, its supposed to be the back!'
Wow. That just took nitpicking to a whole new level. 


Anyway. Thats it for me, I'm seriously tired. In fact I'm might even give the film another go, without that critic inside me.