Francois Truffaut’s The
400 Blows is one of the most important films of the French New Wave and one
of the most intensely moving coming of age stories ever to be put on screen.
The director’s first film, made before his 27th birthday, the movie
is an exemplar of Truffaut’s best qualities as a filmmaker: his clarity,
honesty, directness, his simplicity and deep feeling. A semiautobiographical movie,
The 400 Blows follows the 12 year old
Antoine Dionel (Jean-Pierre Leaud,
who would reprise the role another four
times), typecast by his mostly absent parents and socially incompetent
teachers as a troublemaker and a liar, and lets us share in his minor joys and
sorrows. The film’s personal nature is made obvious even before the opening
credits, when we find out the film is dedicated to influential critic of Cahiers
du Cinema and Truffaut’s mentor, Andre Bazin. The sense of intimacy
and immediacy continues through the first few shots of the movie, long fluid
takes of the middle-class quarters of the city in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower.
This is a Parisian’s Paris,
seen in traveling shots of the empty streets and buildings and low angle shots directly
under the tower, not the postcard cityscape establishing shots.
Intro
I love movies. I have loved movies all my life. I grew up on them. When I was eight years old, I managed to convince myself I would make movies when I grew up. Now I am in the process of getting a degree in Film Studies. I write about film more than ever before, partly because I have to for my classes, mostly because I enjoy it, because I have something to write about. Sometimes it helps me understand the film better; sometimes it helps me understand myself better.I created this blog as a place to showcase my work, and also as an incentive to keep writing reviews, analyses, and essays over breaks, when there’s no one here to grade me.I have tried many times, and failed, to explain in a coherent manner why it is that I love films. Here is my best—and most coherent—guess.
Sunday, October 12, 2014
Sunday, September 21, 2014
Baggage: Objects and Spaces as Markers of the Emotional Journey in Wes Anderson’s "The Darjeeling Limited"
Objects and spaces define the near-maniacally meticulous, color-coordinated, carefully framed and trinket-filled worlds of Wes Anderson’s films. Characters’ possessions and surroundings create and communicate their identities and serve as markers of their gradual evolution throughout the movies, the changing relationships between objects, spaces and characters defining their transformation as they undergo emotional and often physical journeys. Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in the director’s The Darjeeling Limited (2007), the director’s most conventional road movie to date. The film features all the trademark characteristics of a Wes Anderson movie: a nostalgic concern with the past and an exploration of childhood, “literal or prolongued” in the form of young men in a state of arrested adolescence clambering for spiritual fulfillment, sibling rivalry and family drama, absent parent(s), feelings of meaninglessness, repressed grief and suicidal depression, tonal tension between irony and sincerity, and almost obsessively detailed composition (Orgeron 42). It also contains Anderson’s most blatant—and blatantly, self-consciously clichéd—exploration of the journey theme and its reflection in the film’s production design, costuming, and setting.
Friday, August 29, 2014
Through the Looking Glass: Buster Keaton’s "Sherlock Jr."
Over sixty years before Woody Allen had his characters pop off the screen and into the film’s reality in The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985), Buster Keaton had done the reverse. In Sherlock Jr. (1924), the most silent of all silent clowns played a movie projectionist studying to become a detective. Falling asleep in his booth, he dreams himself into the picture, simply walking down the aisle and into the movie-within-a-movie, where he finds he is at the mercy of film space and film time. While he stands still, maintaining his space-time continuity, the “unreal,” cinematic environment surrounding Buster undergoes the editing process. His universe instantaneously shifts from a park to a desert, to an ocean, to a snowdrift, and the character, although maintaining complete control over himself and his actions, is powerless against the filmic montage that changes his physical surroundings.
The scene epitomizes and exaggerates the conditions in which Keaton the
filmmaker has placed Buster the character throughout his career. In film after
film, he battled immense natural forces and huge mechanical objects which were
beyond his control; in film after film, he simply reacted to the environment
and the situation as pragmatically as possible, generally in ways that would
solve his problems. Again and again, with elegance, poise, and superb command
of his body—at once the most malleable and most tensile of physical
objects—Buster made impossible physical stunts look not only possible, but
effortless. He used no stunt doubles, no tricks, no sleights of camera or
editing.
Keaton’s creative ideas as director, his inventiveness and
determination, parallel his ideas as a clown. When cinematic wizardry is used,
as it is in the montage sequence of Sherlock
Jr., it makes Buster’s life harder, not easier. But the sequence is more
than just stunting. It is perhaps Keaton’s clearest realization of the cinema’s
mechanical basis, his greatest expression of control over the first and
ultimate machine of his career—the camera, that unique mechanical object
capable of representing and reshaping reality at the same time. Because, as
much as Sherlock Jr. pretends to be about
something else, it is a film about film. By taking us inside the picture
alongside Buster—and constantly telling us we are, indeed, watching illusion
unfold—Sherlock Jr. drops its light
comedic premise (about a young man’s wish to become a detective and his
romantic troubles) and becomes an almost abstract, unwaveringly funny, look at
cinema itself.
Friday, August 15, 2014
The Middle of the Road: Alexander Payne’s Journeys
“I
had been sitting on this Nebraska
script even when I did Sideways,”
writer-director Alexander
Payne said in May 2013. “But I didn’t want to go back to a road-trip movie
right after that. I was really tired of shooting people in cars. It’s a drag”
(qtd. in Alexander). Despite these misgivings, the filmmaker returns, again and
again, to road trips. Recurring throughout Payne’s work is the idea of a
pivotal physical pilgrimage that doubles as a journey of self-discovery for his
typical protagonist, a damaged but basically good person riddled with unease
and inner disenchantment.
In
About Schmidt
(2002), Sideways (2004), The Descendants
(2011), and most recently Nebraska (2013), Payne
cannot help but place his characters on physical, psychological, and emotional
journeys, ones that might not have a clear destination but which will take the
protagonists—and the viewers—to completely unexpected places. More often than
not, origin and destination merge, and the characters end up where they had
started; they return home, whether that is symbolized by an actual location or
by family connections or romantic relationships. The writer-director utilizes
the dynamics of the road movie not to express the more common theme of a
yearning for escape, but instead to emphasize the psychological primacy of
belonging, establishing and—significantly—accepting one’s true home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



