Good Will Hunting

What a film! I thoroughly enjoyed “Good Will Hunting.” I loved both Matt Damon and Robin William’s acting. Both of their characters were complex and dealt with deep psychological issues. I was very entertained by both the humor and the issues that were brought up in the film. The fact that a janitor with a past of abuse could be a brilliant person is a classic underdog story. But this movie was different for me. The daily way of life that was shown involving Matt Damon’s character and his friends made the ultimate success that he achieved even more remarkable. The emotion that was portrayed in the film was both realistic and compelling. These are two elements that I feel are integral to a great movie.

            The jokes and humor in the movie were great. They were a nice contrast to the seriousness of psychological issues. The scene where Damon’s character confronts the Harvard man in the bar, his joke of “$150,000 education that he could have gotten for $1.50 at the library was great. I was instantly pulled into the movie when the daily life of a “Southie” was shown I have been to Boston and love the accent and scenery in the city. The movie did a good job of showing the neighborhoods and the way of life that the people there lead. I thought the fights, baseball, and bar life really set up Matt Damon’s character and the end of the movie by showing a stark contrast to the brilliance he could achieve. I also thought that it showed the security and loyalty that Damon’s character felt by being around a group of friends like that.

            I really enjoyed the plot and found it to be quite unique. The plot was one that was very logical in that it followed a sequence that made sense to me. The professor at MIT saw something in Will which led to him getting counseling and in the end going after someone he loves. The movie wouldn’t have been as good if the plot was scattered or seemed illogical. Also, I thought the characters were very easy to relate to as a lot of people have a group of friends that they kick around with. Will’s character was complex in my opinion, but the movie portrayed his problem as pretty simple:  receive counseling so he could realize his full potential. However, getting Will to that point was also complex and a very tough thing to do because he resisted initially. Robin William’s character and his ability to break Will down was tremendous. He got inside of Will’s mind and got him to do effectively what he wanted him to do.

            The title of the film and also the name of Matt Damon’s character were highly significant to the film. The whole movie centered on finding the “good” in Will Hunting. By finding the good in Will Hunting, he could reach his potential and use his brilliant mind for a greater good. The name of Damon’s character is also important to me. The fact that his last name is an action is significant. By using his name as Hunting, the writers could tip off the viewers about looking for the goodness in him and what the movie was essentially about.

            One of the most affective parts of the film were the scenes without dialogue. Music was played and just scenes were shown. This was quite effective on creating more emotions within the viewer and also gave some time for reflection on the happenings of the film. I was very impressed by the power of the film and the inspiration that I felt from each scene. It is amazing how the Robin Williams’ character Sean is just as inspired from Will as Will is from him. This really taps into the viewer’s well of emotions and creates a belief that a person can do anything they want with some inspiration. When Will and Sean talk about the painting of the sea, I thought that it was very symbolic of both of their lives. Everything had seemingly fallen all around them whether it was Will’s turbulent upbringing and inability to trust people, or Sean’s wife dying. The painting means a lot to me because they both overcome “rough seas” by the end of the movie. Sean decides to travel and “put his chips back into the pot” and Will decides to go to California to meet up with his ex-girlfriend Skylar.

            I found the movie to be very inspirational.  The fact that Robin Williams was able to make Will see what he truly could be is exciting to me. The fact that Will took action on going after something he wanted at the end of the movie should be an inspiration to everyone. There is a lot to be said about breaking out of your mold and realizing your full potential in life. This movie reminds us of that. I give this film a 9 out of 10!

The King's Speech

The King’s Speech

            Being that The King’s Speech was critically acclaimed and nominated for a few Oscars, I was pretty excited to see it on the list of movies for this course. However, I was disappointed in the film. The acting by Colin Firth as King George VI really stole the show in my opinion. The agony and frustration that he struggled with seemed very real. The thing that most impressed me with his acting was the outbursts that he went thru when he became frustrated with the other characters in the film. They seemed so genuine and that really pulled me into the film. However, it was just not enough in my opinion to keep my full interest. I wasn’t emotionally connected enough to feel like the film was great. It was alright, but mostly boring and very slow moving due to the slow moving plot and the immense focus on dialogue.

            To start, I found it very confusing to decipher who the characters were. Obviously, I figured it out, but I feel like I may have missed a few things because I didn’t know who the characters were. I was immensely impressed by the set and the dress that was included in the film. Being that the film was set in the 1930’s and 1940’s; the film looked exactly like I would expect things to look like in that time period. The thing that really kept my interest was that the movie surrounded World War 2. I thoroughly enjoy history, so this fact definitely held my interest. However, the movie just wasn’t all it was cracked up to be for me.

            The movie contained a plot that was very much unified. By that, I mean everything stemmed from King George VI struggling with speaking and his speech impediment. The training and the struggles involved with it were a major part of the film along with the apprehension of people around him about owning the throne. Suspense was also involved in the film, but not in a way that most people would think of a suspenseful film. The most interesting part of the film for me, was wondering if the king would overcome his speech impediment, so there was suspense. The movie wasn’t even close to what I would call a thriller, but many of the viewers could relate to the personal triumph that the king experienced at the end of the film.

            There was a strong indication of characterization of King George VI thru his dialogue. While most people would characterize characters by what they say, King George VI was characterized by how he spoke and his struggles with speaking. I found it ironic because we often see leaders as great speakers and being very strong linguistically. In the film, I felt that the king was characterized as less intelligent because of his speech by others around him in the film. This can be seen by how he is mocked by his brothers as well as the apprehension people show in the film when he is in line to ascend to the throne when his brother gives it up. Obviously, as viewers we know that this characterization is false, but the characters in the movie often seem to look down on George VI because of his speech.

            The title of the film is also very important. Before seeing the film, I automatically assumed it was about a speech the king had given or was going to give in the film. While I was correct, I also think the argument can be made that the film is literally about how he spoke. So, the title has a double meaning in my opinion. It is literally about a speech he gave regarding England declaring war on Germany in World War 2, but also focuses heavily on how he spoke and the process of improving his speech.

            The most riveting part of the movie was the end. I am sure this is how the writers and director wanted it. I was literally waiting for King George VI to screw up as I’m sure a lot of viewers were. This was very interesting as this was a great story of personal triumph over something that a person was struggling greatly with. As viewers, we could really relate to working for something extensively and being put in a heated situation where our work is put to the test. I liked the film, but not as much as I thought I would. I rate the film a 6 out of 10.

Blog #2 On the Waterfront

On the Waterfront

            A film surrounded gang and mob activity is definitely something that peaked my interest. Knowing that Marlon Brando was in the film also made me excited to view the film. I was especially interested in comparing it with other mob movies such as The Departed, which is one of my personal favorite movies. Before seeing the movie, I was excited to see the growth and evolution of mob movies and compare the two movies a little bit. Other than previously viewing mob type movies, I had no background for “On the Waterfront.” This made me open to the film and the ideas in it. However, a little background may have helped me identify some of the actors and characters in the film. When that identification happens, the viewer can really focus on the film and the symbolism of the events in the film.

            Once again, the film was hard for me to track down. I ended up watching it online just as I had watched “Casablanca.” It was hard to keep my interest with a lot of other distractions around. Watching the movie in a theater would have been a much, much better option. The viewing environment has such a huge effect on the movie. If full attention is not paid to a film, the viewer can miss a lot of dialogue and meaning in the scenes. Therefore, a film can be much more intriguing and thought-provoking if there are no distractions. Also, the people you watch it with can really set a tone for the whole film. If the people you watch it with are willing to pay attention and not be distracting, the viewing experience is much more enhanced. I watched On the Waterfront alone, which allowed me to focus a bit more. The audio was a little quiet compared to other films I have recently seen, so again my interest level was affected by that.

            I have noticed that in many mobster movies, a religion aspect is used. In “On the Waterfront”, the usage of a priest presents a stark contrast. It seems that directors and writers of mob movies draw a thin line between the crimes the mobsters commit and having a deep belief in religion. I feel that they do this to create an emotional aspect for the viewer. They paint the mobsters as “normal” people much like the viewers, but the crimes they commit make them much, much different. This draws the viewers in because of the “common man” theme, but these men have a very dark side with criminal problems. I found it interesting that the film uses the aspect of D&D (Deaf and Dumb) when questioning people about the mob activities. I have seen this a lot in other films where mobsters won’t talk about the other mobsters, but this is the first film I have seen that has put a label on it.

            Once again, I was smitten by the lead female actress in a film. I thought Ingrid Bergman really popped in “Casablanca.” Eva Marie Saint is no different for me in “On the Waterfront.” She really stands out in her scenes in the film. While I didn’t find her overly attractive in the movie, her blonde hair accompanied with her acting and dialogue really pulled me into her character in the film.

            What made this film so interesting to me and I would imagine, other viewers, is the universal theme of personal struggles that the characters went thru with the union. Anytime there is death of a loved one, an emotional attachment is created with the viewers. These feelings of loss and mourning will last until the end of time, no matter how old the film is. There is a strong moral implication involved in this film because someone was murdered and people have information about the murder but, because of the mob activity, people aren’t inclined to talk. This is a great moral dilemma that creates the drama that good films are all about.

            Upon researching the film a little more after viewing it, I found that it was filmed on location in Hoboken, New Jersey in the slums and alleyways. I am not sure if this was standard practice in those days, but wow….did it add the realism of the film. I also learned that the film was based on a series of newspaper articles detailing the corruption on the water in some boroughs of New York. This just adds to the effect of the film for me. To know that it was based on a true story, adds to the great emotional effects of the film. I think that if a person knows that the events in the film they are watching are real or have a good chance of being realistic, they will be more emotionally invested in the film.

            As stated in the textbook “The Art of Watching Films,” Marlon Brando’s character achieves a triumphant victory in the film. Brando’s character Terry Malloy attains dignity by leading his fellow shore men against their corrupt union even though he reveals his personal feelings regarding failure about his boxing career. He feels like he isn’t anything because of his supposed failures in boxing. He seemingly tries to make that right by his work in leading his co-workers in rebellion in the film. This is highlighted in the book in Chapter 2 as the struggle for human dignity. Brando achieves his dignity thru a different avenue in the movie. He displays the courage he thought he didn’t have previously with the shore men.

            The ending was when it all came together. I felt a strong emotional attachment to Brando’s character Malloy. After testifying against his union boss Friendly, Brando is denied being hired as a shore man even though everyone else is hired. This really created empathy as well as sympathy for me and is a universal theme in the movie. Everyone feels bad for a person that is an outcast because they did what was right. The moral struggle really reached a head towards the end of the film. The people involved with the film did a great job of building up to last scene where the suspense and action reach an apex. The emotions that were brought out in me made this film a really good film. Brando and Marie Saint made the film for me. Their acting drew me in. I would recommend this film to a lot of people. The contrast in mob films is a significant one. There was a lot of focus on dialogue with a few action scenes, which seems to be reversed in modern day mob films. The very end of the film, where Brando appears to receive a job is the ultimate scene where the viewer leaves feeling good about the film. However, a big question remains, how did Terry end up? What kind of problems did he encounter after the fact? Overall, I would give this film a 7.5/10.

Blog #1 Casablanca

I was excited to watch Casablanca as it is often quoted or brought up in many forms in society whether it is other films, books, or magazines. I had never seen the movie, but I was excited to see it. In reference to Chapter One of the textbook, I really had no background on the film other than knowing it was plotted in the time of World War 2. I think it was beneficial to me that I did not know much about it because my excitement was heightened and I paid much more attention to the scenes. The movie was hard for me to track down. Most of the movie stores did not have it on DVD, so I tracked it down online. This made viewing it a constant battle.

            The idea of “letters of transit” to travel freely around Europe and ultimately to the U.S. is an idea that creates much drama. Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) is torn between the woman he loves, Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman) and helping her and her husband with the papers. This is the classic “love” dilemma. Help the one you love or be selfish and keep her around. That dilemma surrounded by World War 2 makes for a great drama that is only helped by the superb actors in the film.

            The first thing that I really noticed in the film was the fascination with the planes that are seemingly going to America. But what I will really remember is Bogart’s strong, distinct voice. To me, he takes over every scene he is in because of his words. I could literally listen to him all day long. His voice is a great contrast to the bustling crowds that are frequent in the film at the café or in the streets. Also, the dialogue seemed to be very well-done and thought out. Again, I feel this is the doing of Bogart and Bergman. The music is also very good in the film. “As Time Goes By” is a very catchy tune that I really enjoyed in the film. Ilsa looked very sad and confused when Sam, the house pianist was playing the song before Rick stormed in to tell Sam not to play that song.

            What made this film so emotional is the fact that you can see Rick’s despair in seeing Ilsa again and the struggle that he goes thru in deciding if he should give the “letters of transit” to Ilsa and her husband Laszlo. The main idea is one of moral implications. What should Rick do? Should he be selfish or do the right thing for the woman he loves? I would think that almost every viewer of the film can relate to Rick in a situation where they were torn over someone they cared deeply about. The writers and director of the film develop a great contrast between Rick being a very manly character and a romantic at the same time. He has a strong voice and it is revealed that he ran weapons to Ethiopia, so when Rick is shown in scenes with pain in his face, the viewer can really see the despair he is going thru. This is referenced in Chapter 2 of “The Art of Viewing Films” as an emotional effect. The viewers are really drawn in to the emotional side of the film when they empathize with Rick and his feelings.

            The movie at times, was a little dry. The action scenes of the movie few and far between, which was a tad disappointing especially knowing that it is set in the time of World War 2. The fact that it is a love story makes this a little more understandable. The main thing that made me interested in the film was the connection between Rick and Ilsa and what was going to come from it. I believe that was the main goal of the film’s writers and directors and why it was an immensely popular film.

            The acting in the film was outstanding and seemed to involve many classic actors of the time. The actors did a great job of conveying their emotions to the viewer. I thought Bogart was outstanding. In my opinion, most of his emotions were seen thru facial expressions and tone of voice, which were very effective for his character in the movie. I believe that his role was more of a personality actor in this film. He is dialogue was very sincere and direct and his voice was amazing. It did not seem like he was being anything other than himself.

            The music and sound effects were also very well done as they alerted viewers of major events that were about to transpire. Another very cool thing about the movie was the lighting and use of shadows. In one early seen, Bogart is off camera, but you can see him smoking a cigarette while talking to another character. I thought this was a very unique idea for the time of this film. This also really highlighted Bogart’s dialogue for me. The ending line of the film “Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship” made me laugh out loud. It was a comical way to end such a serious film and a very fitting end to it as well.

            Overall, I enjoyed the film. However, I do not think it reached my expectations. I am into thinking films with a little more action. I was drawn into the emotional side of the film a little bit, but not as much as I would have liked. I didn’t quite empathize with Bogart enough to be fully drawn in. However, I do feel like this was part of how his character was supposed to be. The film was very well done and I thought Bergman and Bogart were very, very good in it. I would give this movie a 6.5/10.