Acting- Oscar-level performances from starring actresses in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?", "Misery", "Blue Jasmine", and "Triangle"

Acting. Like in any other aspect of a good film (Cinematography, Screenwriting, Scoring, Special Effects), the members of the team have to be both hardworking and absolutely committed to the job. They not only have to memorize lines and set spots, but they have to make you believe that they are a made-up person, someone who they are not. The have to be smart, intuitive, able to think on their feet, and have total control over their emotions. There are nine elements that make up an actor's ability: Character Development, Relationships, Believability, Voice, Physicalisation, Facial Expression, Improvisation, Interpretation, and Objective.

The film "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" is a timeless 1966 classic starring our first nominee, Elizabeth Taylor. An American actress, she was born in London in 1932 while her parents were on business. Always renowned for her beauty, she was cast in many films from as early as 10 years old, but she was not only a pretty face. She proved in this film that she possessed astounding acting ability, and she won an Oscar award for her performance. From the beginning, she does her character, Martha, proud. She plays the part beautifully, in the most ugly way. Martha is stubborn, brash, loud, standoffish, inappropriate, rude, and not a very good hostess, and Taylor plays the part very believably. Also, her Facial Expressions, Voice, And Physicalisation are perfect. She plays Martha's crazy emotional roller coaster to a tee, as they say. In a scene about 80 minutes in, she uses her emotional control to its fullest ability, switching between four or five different emotions with facial expressions to match (The scene is a fight between Martha and her husband George, played by Richard Burton, who deserves an honorable mention for this film, as he was positively brilliant). She goes from sadness to anger to envy to sarcasm, all without a seam to show! Her vocal range and facial manipulation is so believable that it made me feel like I was being fought with (And Martha fights dirty). Her physicalisation is great too. She uses hand gestures and walking patterns to an advantage as she rants all around the scene. This film also does a great job of establishing character Relationships and History, while all taking place within a few hours of the wee morning through the use of dialogue between George and Martha, showcasing their bitter marriage, troubled pasts, and most of all their mysterious son...


In overview of the film, it is a phenomenal representation of a life in general, from the colossal fights to the meltdowns, and the games that we, as humans, must play with ourselves sometimes to make both shattered relationships and bitter, hateful lives, bearable. And I can proudly say that I am definitely afraid of Virginia Woolf (Whoever she is). Both Taylor and Burton's performances give this critic cause to rate it 4.5/5 glasses of bourbon, because God knows there were many more than that downed in the film.
 




The next film is "Misery", a 1990 thriller based on the Stephen King novel of the same name. It follows the story of author Paul Sheldon (played by James Caan) and his meeting with our next nominee, Kathy Bates, playing his "Number One Fan",  Annie Wilkes, the Dragon Lady. Through the conveyors of a snowstorm and a casual stalking, Sheldon ends up injured in a car crash, from which Annie rescues him and takes him back to her home in a remote, snowy town. He soon realizes that he is a prisoner, and through a series of unfortunate events, she comes to know the fate of her favorite character from his books, and makes him write a new ending in which she lives. Bates' performance as the Dragon Lady won her an Oscar, and what a performance it was. First of all, her believability as a serial baby killer, homicidal maniac type is OFF THE CHARTS! Its as if she was born to play the role (cliche alert). Secondly, her ability for Physicalisation, Voice, and Facial Expression, much like Elizabeth Taylor's, is very impressive, although different. Whereas Taylor was channeling anger, sadness, and maybe a little crazy here and there, Bates channels all of those, mixed with what smells like pure, unfiltered insanity. She first shows these chops when Annie first flaunts her crazy stripes, a scene about 17 minutes in. She goes from innocent criticism to (tension mounts) a full-on crazy, yelling, electric boogaloo, in seconds only! That kind of emotional fluctuation can only be found in a serious, gifted actor/actress. And when she's done ranting, raving, and spilling tomato soup, she goes right back to "normal" (?) ...until later when she gets a little crazy with the lighter fluid.

Overall, the Oscar-level acting, thrilling plot, and startling cinematography earn this film 4.5/5 hobblings, for a painfully enjoyable flick.

The third film is a new 2013 comedy/drama with an Oscar-winning performance from the stunning Cate Blanchett, our next nominee. She plays a lonely New York socialite, moving in with her underachieving sister in San Francisco after the arrest and eventual suicide of her filthy rich, charming, smooth-criminal type husband Hal (Alec Baldwin). It is here that we find our lead, Jasmine, who has developed a little habit of talking to herself as if she were having a past conversation (the flashbacks are intermingled PERFECT in this film, I loved it) so she seems a little crazy. She has nervous breakdowns, psychotic episodes, and angst-filled crying sessions in short time throughout the film, and Blanchett plays them all... just... stunningly.

She changes her emotions better than any of our previous nominees, able to go from normal seeming to crazy and back in the blink of an eye, but I think that the predominant emotion that Blanchett carries beautifully for Jasmine throughout the entire film is sort of an aloof insensitivity. From her posture to her tone of voice to her oh-so-subtle facial expressions, she plays that socialite attitude perfectly. My favorite scene is right at the end, when the dominant themes come to fruition. Ginger is in another dead-end relationship with a loser, Cate blew one herself and has started talking to herself again, with fervor, and the theme, ladies and gentlemen, is that people never change, especially Jasmine. Sitting on a park bench, hair wet, playing "Blue Moon" in her head for the umpteenth time, talking herself through the first time she met Hal, she makes herself look perfectly crazy, without any flaws in conveyance anywhere. She is believably insane, in a way that is just a step up from some other forms of crazy we've looked at.

Overall, this is a flawless Woody Allen film that has all that this hopeless romantic wants and needs, and the acting is, needless to say, phenomenal. This critic says 5/5 extramarital affairs, because Hal had like eight bunches of them in the film.

The last film is a Direct-to-Video thriller called "Triangle", starring our final nominee, Melissa George. This thrilling horror follows the story of Jess, a single mom who goes on a yachting trip which doesn't turn out too well. After the yacht crashes, the group finds refuge on a passing ship, the Aeolus. Jess becomes involved in a series of unfortunate events, and gets stuck in a time loop eventually, where the only answer to her problem is to kill everyone on board. This begins an emotional trip for the already unstable Jess, and her startling descent into madness is quite believable. Her face emotes fear, panic, disturbance, and best of all, pain, throughout the entire film. In one scene, around the midpoint, she is guiding a wounded Sally around the boat. As they go around a corner, and Sally starts to fade, they see a horrific sight; hundreds of dead Sallys from past time loops lay on the deck, and both Sally and Jess snap, and become completely insane. Jess' facial expressions emote complete horror, and its hard to duplicate that kind of talent for fear.

In overview, Triangle is a great horror film that I actually wouldn't mind watching again, despite my fear of horror. I rate it 4/5 things to kill people with, because there were quite a few :)


And, without further guilding the lily, and with no more ado, the Oscar goes to.........







                                                  CATE BLANCHETT


For her brilliant performance as the Leading Actress in Blue Jasmine

Thanks for reading!

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.