Hollywood Quality...But Overseas

       Here in America we are in a bit of a bubble and are absolutely obsessed with our own uber successful film industry, but there are others our there. We often think of all foreign films as being poor quality or beneath our level of interest, when in all actuality there many countries with wonderful production studios and excellent directors.

Two of the countries that are on the top of my “favorites list” for films, are Sweden and South Korea.  Even if you do not agree with the Hollywood film style, you cannot argue that the acting and production values are not well beyond amazing. I’ve always thought that  Asian movies have pretty corny plots and fake-looking acting, so when I saw my boyfriend suggested that we see a S. Korean film called “Old Boy” I said yes, mostly to humor him. I can say that I was pleasantly surprised with the satisfaction that I felt at the end of those two hours. I walked away having just watched a well written and well directed movie with believable acting and a fascinating plot. This movie also had a great twist ending that was completely shocking and unexpected. The actual storyline followed a path that would never be acceptable in American cinema, which is something that I enjoy about foreign films. They don’t necessarily conform to what society deems admissible; therefore they are free to explore new ideas and they can also show scenes that America’s rating system would immediately send back to the editing room.

From my experience, Swedish film is also excellent in quality and acting. Swedish movies to tend to move very slowly, but in the end there is just as much action and intrigue as a typical American film of the same genre, just a little more spread out. I feel that it maybe takes a more intellectual type to sit through one of these films, someone who actually looks for cinematic quality and doesn’t mind putting in the effort, as opposed to the viewer who is just looking for an easy thrill. In the past few decades Sweden has become much better known worldwide for its filming industry. A lot of this is due to director Ingmar Bergman, whose films are critically acclaimed and well known in America. In the recent past there have even been Swedish films showing at theaters in major U.S. cities, and not just as a special showing, but playing in a normal run alongside American movies. Let the Right One In is a vampire film, but a vampire film done right. This movie was received so well among American audiences that Hollywood decided to remake the film in English. The trilogy of Swedish movies that begin with The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo have all been released in Sweden, with the only the first movie being released in theaters here thus far, a remake of this is also in the works at Hollywood while the second and third have not yet made it to the states.

While the films of  “Bollywood” and “Nollywood” may be innovative and pertinent to their cultures, the Swedish and South Korean studios offer movies that will appeal to a mass audience while staying true to their country’s standards and beliefs.

Concept: International Film Industry

Blaxploitation

          Blaxploitation was a cultural film eruption. Between 1970 and 1980, there were over 200 films released by major and independent studios which showcased black characters and themes demonstrating they had enough of "The Man." Blaxploitation films crossed all movie genre borders. There were dramas, comedies, spaghetti westerns, cops and robbers, shoot 'em ups, love stories and tons of kung fu flicks. Contrary to popular belief, the name of the genre is actually a twist on the “sexploitation” and exploitation films of the 1960’s, not a term implying that Hollywood was using or exploiting black people or entertainers.

Before 1970 blacks were really only perceived as train porters, waitresses and shoe-shine boys. All of that changed in 1971 with Melvin Van Peebles' groundbreaking film, Sweetback's Baadassss Song. Sweetback  was the first "commercially successful" black-theme film that showed a black man coming out on top over the white establishment. Today, you cannot even think about cutting edge contemporary black directors like Spike Lee, John Singleton, Bill Duke and Reginald Hudlin without paying homage to Van Peebles. And if Van Peebles is the forerunner to black theme pictures, Gordon Park's Shaft  underlined, punctuated and ushered in the genre. Shaft  screamed, "Hey everybody, blacks can be tough action heroes like Eastwood, Connery and Bronson.

Black heroes were needed in the '70s because the media was busy portraying them as revolutionaries and militants. Many believed that the downside to the Blaxploitation genre was that it promoted violence and racial stereotypes. There were films like The Mack and Superfly which romanticized drug use and guns. However, there were also tender films like The Leaning Tree and comedies like A Piece Of The Action that were also part of the same genre.

Lately there has been a resurgence of  Blaxploitation fever in local art house theaters and touring film festivals. Some modern movies also display characteristics of the genre such as Quentin Tarantino chose to do in Jackie Brown -  a film starring Pam Grier that pays homage to the Blaxploitation movement.

References

http://blaxploitation.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaxploitation

http://www.blaxploitationpride.org/

http://www.jahsonic.com/Blaxploitation.html

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070350/

Hollywood on a Witch Hunt

The Red Scare and the ensuing Hollywood Blacklist, and Hollywood Ten decisions are a very embarrassing example of the American attitude. Our country’s government and highly regarded religious leaders were destroying these people’s lives in the name of “preventing” communism, but only succeeded in practicing the very things that they were preaching against. The U.S was appalled when we watched Hitler go on a rampage, rooting out Jews and killing them, but is the witch hunt that happened in our own country not as bad just because we didn’t kill anyone? This is still an example of targeting a specific person or group that did not fit a certain mold, or agree to conform to specific ideals. What a surprise that once again, money is the root of the problem, and that the people behind the money could sway public opinion. Just because these people had ideas that did not conform to what may have been socially or morally acceptable, this was an opportunity to oust them once and for all. It is really sad that this was blown so out of proportion, to the point of causing suicides and exilation.

Visual or Psychological Thriller...

The horror genre has been around since the very beginning of filmmaking. As you can imagine, the major plots are getting a bit worn out after ninety-plus years of usage. If you see enough horror movies, you can begin foresee the next scene. It becomes a repetitive sequence of recycled scare tactics. This is especially common in visual horror movies, whereas psychological thrillers still possess some interesting plots, especially the ones with the twist endings. People love to be scared because it gives them a thrill that everyday life lacks. You can watch these movies and be totally enraptured by the monsters, devils, and zombies for 2 hours, emerging from the theater covered in bits of greasy yellow popcorn but completely unharmed.

Movies like Saw and the Halloween series were good for maybe the first one or two, but do we really need twelve of each? Movies like these can be pumped out a million times a year and still get an audience, which shows our society’s unending interest in this genre. Unfortunately, good psychological thrillers take a little more thought to create, and are thus, are few and far between. In my opinion Alfred Hitchcock will forever be the king of psychological thrillers. He is by far my favorite filmmaker of all times. Dial “M” for Murder, Rear Window, and of course Psycho, are all phenomenal examples of the perfect way to create suspense. A modern director that I think did a great job (up until The Last Airbender, haha) at creating interesting and thought provoking suspense movies, is M. Night Shyamalan. You could be scared all the through a movie and have the protagonist turn out to not actually be scary at all, or vise versa. Although I really do enjoy a good cheap scare every now and then, if I had to choose between the two I would go with the more thought provoking, psych thriller option.  A new sub genre than I came across in this past year made me realize, do I really have to choose? I’ll use these movies as examples, but please don’t judge me. I don’t think that they are the pinnacle of perfection, but I do like the idea. The first one I saw was a Spanish filmed called “REC”, like the record button on a video camera. If I had to total up the “scary action” in the film, it might total ten or fifteen minutes, but the movie was done so well that the whole audience was on the edge of their seats for the entirety of the film. You did not even see the protagonist, or have any idea of what it might be until the last 20 minutes of the movie. You might think that this sounds like a gyp, but I know that I came out the theater totally satisfied. There is also a REC 2, but I didn’t think it was as scary because you already knew what you were going to see. The other film that I thought pulled this tactic off nicely, was Paranormal Activity. Even though I don’t think that this film executed its “scares” as well as they did in REC , I did admire the director for the amount of time in the movie during which absolutely nothing took place, while still keeping the rapt attention of the viewer.  Both of these movies were filmed in the Blair Witch style, where either the lead character is filming, or the film is taken from a security tape.

I really admire the way that both of these films do not give you much to go on throughout the viewing, keep you holding your breath, and then wait until very near the ending to reveal what is really happening. So for me, this style of film nicely solves the question of Visual vs. Psychological Horror.

Concept: Visual vs. Psych Thriller

What is a "man"?

Although we are well past the days of cowboy westerns and 80’s muscle-bound thrillers, many of the age old male stereotypes and expected performances still exist. Both males and females are just getting used to accepting a character that does not conform to the image that typecast actors such as John Wayne or Jeanne-Claude Van Damme imprinted on American minds.

 Recently there has been an influx of well produced, smart comedies that feature more down to earth,  average looking, emotionally capable males. This new style has proven wildly successful, showing a public craving for a more realistic depiction of roles that is closer to everyday life.

A few of the movies that I have recently seen that fit into this category are Scott Pilgrim with Michael Cera as the awkward, slightly dorky but loveable video-game-obsessed star, Cyrus starring John C. Riley – a below average looking guy with no social life who ends up winning the heart of Marissa Tomei’s character, Forgetting Sarah Marshal with Jason Segal as an out of shape and average looking but talented guy, and lastly The Hangover; a movie with a pretty attractive cast except for the slightly overweight, scruffy, bearded character, played by Zach Galifianakis, who unexpectedly outshines everyone else because of his hilariously dry wit that is extremely popular with society right now.

Even though these types of movies have a huge following, I think that the requirement of extreme masculinity in all men is still in the back of American minds. While I was looking for some inspirations for this blog post, I ran across an article in an internet publication titled “The Sorry State of Masculinity in American Movies” that particularly targeted some of the movies and actors that I just mentioned and perfectly depicts the sentiment that I am referring to. Here are some of the comments: “Films such as Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Knocked Up and Superbad show that the young male box-office stars of today’s romantic comedies are goofy schlubs and nerds. As unlikely as it seems, actors such as Segel, Seth Rogen, Michael Cera and Jonah Hill (Superbad) now define the paradigm of a Hollywood romantic lead. Cary Grant they are not. They’re not even Hugh Grant. They may know the appeal of sex, but they have no sex appeal…Yet this is Hollywood, and these pathetic, if well-meaning, losers inevitably end up with the hottest chicks. They represent a kind of wish fulfillment for most men, who can’t imagine scoring so high…The triumph of the schlub wouldn’t be so significant if the young actors Hollywood is now pushing in dramas and action movies had anything like the masculine heft we have come to expect from our celluloid heroes. It’s hard to think of a male find under 40 who has the innate, old-fashioned ability to project “manliness” as a natural quality... Where are today’s equivalents of the actors Hollywood once offered as symbols of effortless masculinity - John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Gregory Peck, William Holden, Burt Lancaster, Steve McQueen, Paul Newman and Clint Eastwood?... So, what do modern Hollywood’s images of masculinity tell us about maleness today? Some suggest it is a belated response to feminism…But do we really want our modern day Hollywood movie stars to be like anyone we know?”(1)

         

While I have no problem with macho, testosterone filled action movies like the recently released Machete- a tribute to grindhouse films, or The Expendables- a movie that united a handful of muscle bound action stars from the 80’s, or even movies that feature lead characters who personify the epitome of male perfection, such as Brad Pitt, George Clooney, or Bruce Willis, I think that the new style of “everyday guy” is exactly what the masses are craving. After all, don’t the box office numbers reflect this? While it is fun to watch beautiful people on screen, is there really anything wrong with showing a scenario that more closely parallels a real life?

Sources:
(1) The Sunday Times, April 27^th 2008 http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article3805205.ece

Concept: Masculinity, The Social Construction of Gender

Women in Film

      Female roles and positions in American film and filmmaking have improved considerably over the last few decades.  Instead of films where the “strong woman” role seems visibly forced, there have been quite a few openly accepted and thoroughly enjoyable movies with strikingly dominant female leads.

        

      I think that the film “Jackie Brown” is a prime example of an exceptional picture, done by an amazing director (Quentin Tarentino), which features a lead character who is both African-American and a woman. Jackie Brown was based on a novel called “Rum Punch” by Elmore Leonard and Tarantino actually changed the main character’s race from white to black for the film adaptation (1).  This movie plays a bit on the Blaxploitation films of the ‘70’s but without the racial stereotyping. Jackie (played by Pam Grier) is a well dressed, intelligent, and well spoken black woman who works as a flight attendant. Although Jackie does run into some trouble with the law and is helped out by a male accomplice, her character still manages to maintain a cool demeanor, classy sex appeal, and dominant composure throughout the film.

     

          Another one of my favorite films is “Bound”, starring Gina Gershon and Jennifer Tilly. This film incorporates situations where females are both better planners and critical thinkers than their male counterparts, and depicts a realistic portrayal of a lesbian relationship in a mainstream film. This movie has an intriguing storyline, was very popular nationwide, and was a huge forerunner for the social acceptance of gay and lesbian feature films. Corky (Gina Gershon), a lesbian ex con hired to work in an apartment as a plumber, meets neighbors Caesar (Joe Pantoliano), who launders money for the Mafia, and his girlfriend Violet (Jennifer Tilly). The two women have a love affair and decide to steal $2,000,000 that Caesar has in custody before he gives them back to Mafia boss Gino Marzone. Caesar is set up by the two scheming women as a scapegoat in their plan.(2)

         

     Although this film may not be the most intellectually stimulating of it’s genre, I think that it did a good job in portraying the equality of the two lead characters (Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt) as married, dueling assassins for competing agencies. It is a comedy, so while both characters still have their “blonde” moments, the female is never depicted in the classic Hollywood style as a damsel in distress, or any less capable than her husband.

       

           

             Maybe my favorite movie of the year so far was a Swedish film called “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”.  It is the first film from a Swedish trilogy that was widely released in the U.S. The actual title in Sweden translates to “Men Who Hate Women”, but as usual, America has strange issues with some wordings, so the name was changed for the U.S. release. The movie is pretty graphic and depicts scenes of a male character sexually assaulting the lead female, who also happens to be a lesbian named Lisbeth Salander. This movie is filled with mystery and action. Due to the graphic rape scenes it shows what this poor girl went through and why her hatred was so strongly fueled. At the same time as being exciting and horrifying, this film shows the tender side of Lisbeth when she is not enacting revenge; she is involved in a relationship and labeled a lesbian, but is struggling with feelings of attraction to another human being who happens to be a man. I was excited to find out that they are going to be remaking this film as a U.S version. Maybe our country is evolving into a more accepting society…  

           

            This last year, and for the first time ever, a woman filmmaker won the “Best Director” Oscar for “The Hurt Locker”. Yay for women! Katheryn Bigelow did a phenomenal job at recreating a totally realistic depiction of modern war that is so close to the hearts of  many Americans right now. It was interesting to see her victory over her famous ex husband’s picture, Avatar,  and I was glad that her movie was not a romantic comedy. I can’t say that I have not enjoyed my share of chic flicks, but come on! Jennifer Aniston and Katherine Heigl, break out of that stereotypical mold! Try a new style or genre!

Sources:

(1)  Information on novel adaptation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackie_Brown_(film)

(2)  Synopsys of "Bound" - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115736/

Topics:  Sexual Orientation, Female Filmakers, The Women's Film

Surrealism

I am currently studying art history as well as cinema, and since our class readings only skimmed the surface of Surrealism in art, I thought that I would take this opportunity to delve a little deeper into a subject that I really enjoy.

The aggressive momentum of the Dada movement that emerged during WWI was very short lived. In 1924 The First Surrealist Manifesto was published in France; a text that was written in an absurdist style, and which showed different examples of Surrealism through art, poetry, and literature. Most of the artists who were previously associated with Dada joined the Surrealism movement and explored ways to express the world of dreams and the unconscious through art. Not surprisingly, the Surrealists found ways to incorporate many of the Dadaist’s improvisational techniques. They believed that these methods were imperative to engage the elements of fantasy and to activate the unconscious forces that reside deep within every human being. The Surrealist’s main desire was to explore the inner world of the psyche, where fantasy thrived. The Surrealists had a special interest in the nature of dreams, inspired in part by the ideas of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung. They viewed dreams as providing the arena in which people could move beyond their environment’s constricting forces to reunite with the deeper selves that society had long suppressed. One of the leading Surrealist thinkers, Andre Breton, wrote “Surrealism is based on the belief in the superior reality of certain forms of association heretofore neglected, in the omnipotence of dreams, in the undirected play of thought…. I believe in the future resolution of the states of dream and reality, in appearance so contradictory, in a sort of absolute realty, or surreality.” So basically the Surrealists ultimate motivation was to unite the aspects of outer and inner “reality” together into a single position.

   

  The projection in visible form of this new conception also required new techniques of pictorial construction. The Surrealists adapted some Dada devices and invented new methods such as automatic writing (this was just spontaneous writing using free association) not to reveal a world without meaning, but more to provoke reactions of a subconscious experience. At this point Surrealism began to develop along two different lines. In Naturalistic Surrealism, artists present recognizable scenes that seem to have metamorphosed into a dream or nightmare image. Artists like Salvador Dali and Rene Magritte are examples of artists who embraced the naturalistic style. Other artists gravitated to the contrasting style of Biomorphic Surrealism. Biomorphic art is said to be the creation of art without conscious control. It focuses on the power of natural life and uses organic shapes, with shapeless and vaguely spherical hints of the forms of biology.

 There are a few really unique artists who are associated with Surrealist movement that our “Surrealism folder” did not highlight. One of these is a Swiss artist named Meret Oppenheim. Sculpture especially appealed Oppenheim because of its concrete tangibility, which in turn made his art all the more disquieting. Oppenheimer’s functional fur-covered teapot captures the Surrealist flair for transformation.

Giorgio De Chirico was an Italian painter who referred to his works as “metaphysical”. Chirico found hidden reality in the late autumn afternoons, when the long shadows of setting sun transformed open town squares into spaces where the buildings evoked a disquieting sense of foreboding.

Joan Miro was Spanish artist who was most famous for using the Biomorphic style of Surrealist art. Although Miro resisted association with both the Dada and Surrealist movements, Andre Breton called him “the most surrealist of all”. Miro devised a new painting method where he began by making a scattered collage composition with assembled fragments cut from a catalogue and freely reshaped to create black silhouettes with dramatic accents of white and vermillion.