Cinematography- A review of Citizen Kane, Punch-Drunk Love, and Pan's Labyrinth

I would argue that Cinematographers have one of the hardest jobs on the set of a movie. Cinematography, by definition, is the ART of capturing images. Notice that ART is in all capitals, because the ART of capturing images is the hard pART. Anyone can capture an image, but when a professional Cinematographer captures a shot, that shot becomes like any other piece of good art. It will tell a story in itself, produce a distinct look, suggest ideas, and even evoke emotions. Just the shot is powerful enough to unlock a mental faculty like emotion, how crazy is that? Now, in order to make that happen, there are 5 elements (camerawork, lenses, filters, filmstock, and special visual effects) that have to be coordinated. All of these make the Cinematographer's job VERY difficult, so I have immense respect for the Cinematographers of the three movies that I watched this week; Citizen Kane, Punch-Drunk Love, and Pan's Labyrinth.

Citizen Kane is a 1941 classic movie starring, written, directed, and produced by Orson Welles... some people overachieve, this guy superachieved. And one of the things that he achieved was hiring visionary Cinematographer Gregg Toland. Known for his trademark "Deep Focus", a technique that allows the foreground, middleground, and background of a shot to be in the same focus, Toland was nominated for an Oscar award for Citizen Kane (he won one Oscar for the movie adaptation of "Wuthering Heights"). His astounding skill in the medium of film has inspired many filmmakers since his time, because he was so visionary. He practically wrote the book on camerawork by literally inventing many shots in the movie. One of my favorite scenes (and DEFINITELY my favorite shot) in the film is about 71 minutes in to the movie. It takes place in the Kane campaign headquarters, and the whole scene is filmed in 1 shot. Just one. The camera is juxtaposed so that it seems like it is on the floor, a mild high-angle, mid-long shot up at the screen, with a wide lens to get all the action. As the scene progresses, the camera slowly pans right, catching both Charlie Kane and Jed Leland in an argument. The characters, growing more drunk, make their way toward the camera, which does not move, and it goes from a mild high-angle shot to a severe high-angle shot, evoking an emotion of fear and seemingly suggesting ideas of tension and growing animosity between the characters. This clearly exemplifies the idea that the shot can affect your outlook not only on the characters, but on the themes of the film as well. The shot was genius, and was a turning point in the movie for me. It comes on as a little slow in the beginning, but I clearly noticed the revolutionary cinematography at this point, and became more involved with the film.


This film is widely regarded as one of the best of all time, and for good reason. The complex plot, fantastic filmmaking, and acting help it rise continually to film nirvana. It follows the story of Charles Foster Kane through the eyes of a news man, from his humble beginnings as an orphan to his rise to stardom, and then to his untimely demise, and the last words of a giant. In the opinion of this critic, it deserves 4/5 STATUES, Charlie's collectors item, for a timeless, visionary classic, that just wasn't always my cup of tea. (This one even looks like Orson Welles)

The next movie is a Paul Thomas Anderson film called Punch-Drunk Love, starring Adam Sandler, Emma Watson, and my favorite actor in the history of forever, Philip Seymour Hoffman. It centers around Barry Egan, a socially and mentally troubled business owner, who falls in love with a friend of one of his seven sisters, and comes to be extorted by a crooked mattress man who runs a phone-sex line. From the beginning, this film seems unusual. Shot in widescreen filmstock with a wide lens, it seems to want to make you uncomfortable. The shots, often coming from awkward angles, coupled with the sporadic and disjointed music evokes frustration and almost paranoia. It portrays the idea that everything is not alright in Barry's brain, and sure makes you feel it. My favorite shot in the movie comes around at about 81 minutes in. Philip Seymour Hoffman's character Dean is getting a haircut in his mattress store as the camera films him from a left angle. The camera swings slowly around as the characters look to a doorway and Barry's form comes into view. This great shot leads to a great scene, and Philip Seymour Hoffman performs the whole thing in a barber cape.

I love this movie! It has a brilliant plot, sensational actors, and is just plain entertaining. That deserves, in this critic's opinion, 5/5 broken windows.

The last film that I watched this week was the all sci-fi, all spanish Guillermo Del Toro epic, Pan's Labyrinth. This film follows the story of Ofelia, stepdaughter of an evil Captain in the Spanish Civil War. When Ofelia and her mother, pregnant with the Captain's son, come to stay at his headquarters, Ofelia meets Pan, a faun who tells her that she is destined to be the princess of a magical world. The keyword for this movie is Special Visual Effects. Director of Photography Guillermo Navarro composes his shots flawlessly, and won an Oscar for the movie, and it is stunning in the camerawork department, but the people who really, REALLY deserve their Oscars are Eugenio Caballero (art director), Pilar Revuelta (set director), David Marti, and Montse Ribe (makeup artists). Everything that really makes this movie unique comes from these five people (including the DP), because the real hallmark of the movie is the effects on the characters Pan and Pale Man that were created almost entirely in the physical, without CGI. Actor Doug Jones deserved something for his role as both of these characters for sitting in makeup for at least 5 hours and learning the Spanish language solely for this movie. And the effects are certainly noticeable. Film is an art form, and everything in a film is a separate work of art. The more art that can exist in the physical medium of the movie, without the assistance of CGI, contributes immensely to the natural feel of a film. This film feels very natural, and the flawless Cinematography really makes the fantastic world of the labyrinth come to life (cliche alert).

Overall, this film is a flawless testament to the marvels of film-making and Cinematography, but this horror-and-gore-hating critic takes 1/2 of for being not quite my cup of tea. Overall, 4.5/5 fauns, who creep you out the whole time, but turn out to be good friends in the end.

............noooooooooooooope. Still creepy. That noise he makes just... yeesh.

Mise En Scene- A review of Wes Anderson's "Moonrise Kingdom" and the classic Hitchcock thriller "Strangers on a Train"

Mise en scene is a technique used by filmmakers to create an aesthetically pleasing shot. Literally, the phrase "Mise-en-scene," is French for "placing on stage," and the 5 elements of mise en scene (Setting, Human Figure, Lighting, Composition, Movement/Placement) must be in check to create a balanced image onscreen. Many directors use what is called the "rule of thirds," to keep the elements of mise en scene balanced by dividing the frame into 9 equal squares, like a tic-tac-toe board. By placing items the background and coordinating human figure and movement/placement based on the standard of the rule of thirds, a balanced and often symmetrical image is created. 

Undoubtedly, the master of mise en scene in today's film scene is director Wes Anderson. With his extremely distinct, symmetrical style, he creates a world inside his films that feels very natural. It almost makes the viewer feel oddly comfortable while watching. The most recent Wes Anderson film that I have watched is his 2012 production, "Moonrise Kingdom". This movie is no different than any of Anderson's other films; it is still shot in his distinctive style. So, we'll jump right in...

From the first shots of the movie, I noticed the flawless symmetry. The first scene of the movie introduces some of the characters: the members of the Bishop family. This scene introduces the Bishops in a way that is totally unique, because their names are not used until the end of the scene and there is no dialogue. The scene is narrated by a record, playing a recording describing the different parts of an orchestra, and as each perfectly composed image of a different member of the family fills the screen, a different part of the orchestra plays, already giving a feeling of the characters' personalities. The shots used in this scene practically define the Composition element of mise en scene. All of the images composed throughout the entire film fit the rule of thirds seamlessly, and make the viewer feel comfortable. Its almost like a perfect, symmetrical universe exists on this magical "New Penzance Island," until about 5 minutes into the film. The first scene has ended, and the new scene introduces a narrator-esque character, who seems to know a lot about the events that will transpire in the next 3 days... Anyway, this guy jumps on your screen and the whole world explodes, because this guy breaks the rules! You see, Anderson places this character in areas that don't fit in with the rule of thirds, making the viewer feel suddenly uncomfortable. I believe that he does this for a reason, possible to represent for the viewer the fact that this character doesn't really belong there. After all, he does know the future. Moving on to the element of Lighting, the very next scene showcases just that. This film uses very natural lighting, contributing again to that comfortable feeling that the viewer gets, and the introduction of the Khaki Scouts and Scout Master Ward at Camp Ivanhoe is a perfect example. The lighting gives the image the prime feeling of a warm summer morning, a feeling that would not have been achieved by using any other lighting but a natural, sunlight-esque lighting. You get the idea, the film makes you feel comfortable, big deal, right? But... yeah, big deal. This isn't a feat easily tackled; think of all of the movies that you've seen that attempted the same thing, but some other aspect (maybe one of the other elements of mise en scene) was just out of whack and really turned you off, I'm sure you can think of something. No, this is a genius film composed by a genius director who, in this most basic art-form that film is, thrives by taking every small detail into account and recognizing how it affects the rest of the image. Take the Human Figure for example; there is a scene later in the movie where Sam and Suzy, the young lovers of the film, enter the shot from either side and start to dance. Even then, they always fit in the tic-tac-toe squares and keep the feeling alive.

Overall, this is a fantastic film. Like, it's amazing. Like IT'S SO AMAZING AND I LOVE IT VERY VERY VERY MUCH. But I don't want to have to sing its praises. Go watch it. This reviewer gives it 5/5 Lefty Scissors, Suzy's weapon of choice, for great plot, cinematography, directing, cast and acting and just plain great mise-en-sceniness.

Great, now I've got to follow up that little piece of amazingness with something... oh wait!

BUM... BUM... BAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Its the movie that will make you never want to talk to strangers on a train, the Hitchcock thriller "Strangers on a Train."

Now, I watched this film alone, in the dark, on a laptop,  with headphones... and it didn't scare me at all. Its not that kind of thriller, folks! This one makes you think. It follows the story of one Guy Haines, tennis player extraordinaire, and a stranger that he meets on a train (go figure), one Bruno Antony, who turns out to be crazy (spoiler alert). This crazy man proposes a crazy idea to Guy, that turns out to be not-so-crazy to him. In fact, he'd... kill to see it through. Anyway, this movie is like Apollo Creed to the young scrapper Moonrise Kingdom, like the old champ. Alfred Hitchcock sure knew what he was doing with a thrilling plot, but he definitely supplemented the plot with some great mise en scene. He still follows the rule of thirds, although not with the same swagger and panache as Wes Anderson, but the lighting is a different story. Whereas Anderson uses natural light, Hitchcock uses very hard, unflattering light to give the image a suspenseful and almost dangerous tone. In one scene, Guy ascends to Bruno's father's room to warn him of the plot. He enters the room, almost pitch-black, the only visible image is the outline of a man. Then, a bright lamp flicks on, revealing Bruno's face in a huge, plot-twisted grin. You get the feeling that maybe Alfred Hitchcock knows a little something about the mind of a crazy person throughout the film. He is so meticulous in his attention to detail, from the shots to the costumes to the looks on the actors faces. He was obsessed with the details, both in his plot and his film. Even something as simple and seemingly backburner as the Setting of this film evokes an emotion of fear and paranoia, from a tennis court (where an expertly composed shot shows Bruno in the bleachers, eyes fixed on Guy from out of the crowd) to a mansion.

Overall, this excellent, pioneering thriller had mise en scene level 99, but just not that 100 that a film like Moonrise Kingdom has. I still loved the movie. OH MY GOODNESS THE FINALE OF THIS FILM IS SO GGGGGGEEEEENNNNIIIIUUUUUSSS! Just watch it. Not saying that the rest of the film isn't totally fantastic, but it's worth it just for the finale. This reviewer gives it 4/5 Creepy-Bruno-Strangling-Hands for being a classic, amazing thriller with a flawless finale, that just wasn't as good as Rocky.