Persepolis

The film Persepolis is one that is unique in its design and story line. My personal reaction to it was a mix of slight kinship to disgust. I felt some horror at parts as well. I felt a great deal of kinship to Marji when she was talking to the men at her high school, about how she shouldn’t be required to wear a skirt because it would interfere with her learning in her art classes. Her “spunky” factor made me relate to her. Not necessarily with her taste in music, I personally abhor Iron Maiden and Michael Jackson, but I think the appeal came more for the shock factor, which I definitely understand. I felt disgust when watching her be distraught and live on the streets because of her boyfriend’s idiocy. She shouldn’t have let him have that much power over her, it was unacceptable. Finally, I felt horror at the mention of her Grandmother’s breasts; I personally didn’t need that mental image in the slightest. My ending feelings on the film are that it was alright, but I won’t die if I don’t have to see it again.

An Inconvenient Truth Verses Man On Wire

Both An Inconvenient Truth and Man on Wire are documentaries. However, one holds interest far easier than the other, Man on Wire.  Why is this? It all has to do with the non-diegetic elements, the way the information is presented, and the subject matter.

The first reason that Man on Wire is more entertaining, and keeps interest easier than An Inconvenient Truth is due to the non-diegetic (all sounds besides dialogue) elements. In An Inconvenient Truth, the only sounds that are present are Al Gore’s voice and his audience, which are diegetic. The video below portrays this aspect of Al Gore’s documentary.

No non-diegetic is used. This obviously doesn’t make for an exciting documentary, especially if the viewer doesn’t like Al Gore’s voice, which is pretty much all they hear. However, in Man on Wire there is background music. Police sirens were in the background when they were talking about the police after them, etc. It was a drastic difference, for the better.

The next reason that Man on Wire was more interesting is due to the way that the information gets presented. As mentioned above, in An Inconvenient Truth there is only Al Gore, and there really isn’t a plot to follow. Man on Wire has both a plot to follow, whether or not Phillipe will be caught, and  Phillipe, Jean-Louis, Phillipe’s girlfriend, “the Australian”, his two American accomplices; the list goes on and on of those who talk to the viewer. Some of the people don’t speak English either, so the viewer gets to read subtitles, though it isn’t like watching the movie Hero where the entire film is subtitles. That fact ensures that the viewer pays attention to the screen, making it more interesting.

The final reason that Man on Wire was more entertaining than An Inconvenient Truth is that the subject matter was more interesting. What keeps interest better, global warming or a man tightrope walking between the twin towers? An Inconvenient Truth doesn’t stand a chance.

Man on Wire definitely has much more going for it than An Inconvenient Truth. Thanks to the non-diegetic elements, style, and subject of the documentary, it wins hands down. That doesn’t mean that Al Gore’s documentary is bad, it just needs the viewer to really be interested in what he is saying.

Why are Zombies Popular?

Zombies, mindless animals that think only of eating flesh. What’s the hype with these rotting corpses? Why does everyone seem to be into zombies? There are so many different reasons that zombies get the reaction that they do, from the possibility of zombies being real to people wanting to be able to kill “morally”.

One big thing that makes zombies so popular is the fact that zombies, or a zombocalypse, may be in humanity’s future. When looking at the causes of zombies, they range from radiation (Night of the Living Dead), to a genetic virus (Resident Evil), to Haitian voodoo (White Zombie). While radiation is not viable, as proved by Chernobyl, the other causes are perfectly viable. The fact that they are viable, unlike the scientifically impossible vampires or shape shifters, makes them that much more appealing. 

The other key factor to zombie popularity is the fact that people have the inherent wanting to kill or do violence to others. The only thing that stops us is that it is morally wrong. With zombies however, it is ok. It is not like killing another person, where you will have social repercussions, along with legal ones. The anarchy created by the zombies makes all preconceived rules evaporate. In Night of the Living Dead, the cops go on a killing spree, finishing the “walkers”. They end up shooting the protagonist Ben, an ALIVE human. No repercussions, they don’t even bother checking to see if they messed up and killed someone they shouldn’t have.

Why are the Characters in The Nightmare Before Christmas so Cute?

Tim Burton’s The Nightmare before Christmas has some of the most interesting characters in animation. Tim Burton is known for making the grotesque likable, even to point of down-right adorable. But how does he do this?

The concept in general of the grotesque being made cute and appealing is seen in many different characters in the movie. From Oogie Boogie, being made of a pillow to Jack Skellington who is an extremely tall skeleton, they are made appealing. He has “creepy” characters, like a lake monster and a fat child, but they are not frightening in this film. Even Sally, who can sew herself back together, is one of the major protagonists in the film.

Why do these grotesque figures seem so appealing in this film? Tim Burton made them all very human like, which contributes. They have hopes and dreams presented in the film, the fat child even cries when he thinks that they cannot celebrate Christmas. Their “normal” feelings are only part of the equation though. The other reason why these characters are so appealing is that they are so innocent. The way they think Christmas works, to how they think Santa is “Sandy Claws”, their innocence is like that of a child. Because of that, they are more endearing.

In conclusion, this film does a great job of making preconceived notions about what skeletons and other Halloween monsters are like disappear. These grotesque creatures are made appealing by the fact that they have human-like qualities and portray a childlike ignorance.

The Significance Behind the Color Scheme of Edward Scissorhands

The movie Edward Scissorhands is one that Tim Burton put a lot of attention to detail in. His background is in animation and therefore he notices things others wouldn’t. He makes sure to have all of the town people in this film be in pastel colors, while the protagonist, Edward, is in black and white. The colors represented in the film have great significance.

The black and white versus pastel color scheme represents the outsider verses the world theme that Burton is known for having in his films. The protagonist, in this case Edward, is always seen in black and white, which shows the proof of which one is the protagonist. The rest of the cookie cutter town, as seen in the picture below,

Is a mixture of pastel colors. From their outfits to the color of their homes, its all bright and cheery. The general public is supposed to be happy and cheery, which is what the colors are showing. The dark and gloomy protagonist is shown in dark and gloomy black/white. The fact that Edward doesn’t ever wear color oin the film is proof that he doesn’t fit into the town, the cookie cutter pastel and seemingly happy town. It’s the outsider (Edward) versus the world (the town) theme that the colors truly represent..

Obsession Plays a Big Role

The Dark Knight, Singing in the Rain, Proof, High Noon, and The Prestige are all films that have been discussed on this blog so far. What do most of them have in common? One very simple trait appears in the antagonists, and sometimes protagonists alike. Almost all of them are obsessed with something, or someone. The Joker is obsessed with Batman, Lina with Don, Miller with Kane (vice-versa), and Borden and Angiers are obsessed with magic, and being the "winner".

First, obsession needs to be defined. According to dictionary.com obsession is the domination of ones thoughts or feelings by a persistent idea, image, desire, etc. The line to be drawn between commitment and obsession is a tricky one, and will differ depending on who is asked. The premise of commitment means that you care but at the end of the day, if you fail you won't be devastated for life. Obsession is all consuming, it takes over completely, and nothing else, not family or even health truly matter. Today there are some real-life people who are obsessed, like Evanna Lynch, who was obsessed with Harry Potter, but ended up playing Luna Lovegood, and David Tennet, who was obsessed with Doctor Who, but wound up being the second Doctor. Good came out of these obsessions, so good from obsession is obviously possible, but in the five films that have been discussed, will good also come from obsession?

The Dark Knight is an interesting film to examine when looking for obsession. The Joker is obviously obsessed, but with what is the question. According to the conversation from the movie:

The Joker: Oh, you. You just couldn't let me go, could you? This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. You truly are incorruptible, aren't you? You won't kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness. And I won't kill you because you're just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever.

Batman: You'll be in a padded cell forever.
The Joker: Maybe we can share one.
 

it can clearly be seen that The Joker is obsessed with Batman. The quote is showing The Joker's obsession with Batman; the idea of sharing a padded cell with him excites The Joker.

 

The picture above from http://photos.bravenet.com/272/478/925/3/1D2AA2D3A1.jpg , which shows the interrogation scene, presents how when Batman and The Joker are together, there's an air of insanity, of obsession, by using Dutch angle, which is the film maker's way of saying something's off, and a wide shot which really shows how close Batman and The Joker are to each other, symbolizing a relationship between them. However, at other parts of the movie, The Joker also seems to be obsessed with Chaos. He evens claims to be an agent of chaos. That pegs the question; can you have more than one obsession? In The Joker's case, the answer is yes. He wants Chaos to ensue, and to "play" with Batman until the end of time. The Joker isn't the only one obsessed in the film. Batman is obsessed with being Batman. Rachel writes a letter that Batman never gets to read, but the audience finds out that Rachel doesn't think Bruce will be able to live without his batman persona as can be seen in the first minute of the following clip:

The final character with an obsession is Harvey. Harvey's obsession doesn't happen until Rachel dies. He becomes obsessed with revenge, and "luck", with his coin deciding whether those who wronged him live or die. His obsession gets him killed in the end, while Batman's is forced to die because of Harvey. If Batman were to continue being Batman, then he would be on the run from the cops, believed to be a cop killer. The Joker's obsessions still continue. In the end of this film, no good came of any of the obsessions. The theme of this movie may be "the truth isn't as relevant as you believe", but obsession does play a key role throughout the movie. Personally I think that The Joker wouldn't have been The Joker without his obsessions, Batman's obsession is the only one that isn't too detrimental, and that Harvey, even though he was suffering from grief, had no excuse to go insane with obsession.

In Singing in the Rain there is far less obsession occurring. Don is committed to his work; Lina is the only one obsessed. She is obsessed with herself and Don Lockwood. The quote: "That's ridiculous. Everybody knows you're in love with me." shows how obsessed and deluded she is. She goes so far as to blackmail the producer to ensure she is number one. Don is another one of her obsessions. When she finds out that he has his eye on someone else she takes action.

Don Lockwood: [while filming a love scene] Why, you rattlesnake! You got that poor kid fired.

Lina Lamont: That's not all I'm gonna do if I ever get my hands on her.
Don Lockwood: I never heard of anything so low. Why did you do it?
Lina Lamont: Because you liked her. I could tell.
Don Lockwood: So that's it. Believe me, I don't like her half as much as I hate you, you reptile.
Lina Lamont: Sticks and stones may break my bones...
Don Lockwood: I'd like to break every bone in your body.
Lina Lamont: You and who else, you big lummox? 

She clearly believes that she is the gift to all men, she isn't afraid to play dirty to ensure that she gets what she wants. The quote means that she is too obsessed to get past the idea that she may not be the most important in the world. She is ruined by the fact that her obsession with Don Lockwood causes her to hate Cathy, the one Don truly loves, thus killing her career. Good does not result from her obsession and that's why the theme to this movie is that "vanity can be detrimental". I think this film was more difficult to find obsessions in compared to The Dark Knight because it's theme is much lighter and happier than The Dark Knight's.
 
The film Proof is one of the few movies that does not have obsession playing a role. The movie focuses more on insanity and depression, the theme of it is "how to determine if someone is crazy". These other psychological issues are what take place instead of obsession.
 
High Noon, a film with the theme of "don't abandon those who help you", surely can't have obsession. Wrong! High Noon's protagonist isn't the one obsessed this time though. The obsession, key to this film, comes from the antagonist; one who makes an appearance for maybe 2 minutes of the entire film at the end, Frank Miller. Miller is obsessed with revenge on Kane, the protagonist. The entire film relates to what should be done about Miller's obsession. Kane says stay and fight, the town says run away. Thus how they forsake/abandon him to battle Miller, giving the film its theme. The entire film hinges on Miller's obsession, making bad come from it, Miller dies, and Kane is fed up with the town, as he very well should have been.

In the film, The Prestige, two magicians are "in the grip of obsession to defeat one another" as film critic James Berardinelli quotes. In point of fact, the film's theme is "can good come from obsession?". Looking at Angier’s and Borden’s relationship, according to Michael Pollick, an expert on obsessed relationships, they obviously qualify as being in an obsessive relationship. They fit Pollick’s 2^nd and 3^rd stipulations easily. Angier goes digging for information on Borden to try to figure out his trick, and then Borden does the same. They even read each other’s journals to try to glean what the other was thinking. They try to copy each other (Stipulation 3); they end up with nearly identical illusions until Angier’s machine comes along. as shown in these pictures from:

 

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4JW3U4S74G_Hr6xCXi35QjI8Z6ershlZ2R3smqkDgYeH9X7JiFQUosZQr-P50Lnse9t3NV10zzh_pH0moE4x2z2EwPIRvJHdcR6FI8WdoxW5mi15nGj3UOvvd4xeioA3sJGcFcsU0tAs/s1600/PrestigeBot.PNG
 

 

http://nutshell-movies.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/vlcsnap-2012-01-09-13h40m12s225.png

 

 

 

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlgY_YJuVGYSFwWKav4nVNfSgus9-0eowljwCBmmZKTYavdRxbhpLKlkJ_taKFe5kP6glmCky5YwqZLOH0mR_8SfVdqEI9hC3HB7Yr5T3ZTwjl3-PP3FJn4UCkguZwGpG9vmneloOl5tk/s1600/Screen+shot+2011-01-09+at+22.54.17.jpg

 

 These pictures show how both the trick progresses and also just how similar they are. Angier becomes truly obsessed with getting the better trick, with beating Borden. When he goes to Tesla, Tesla notices immediately and the following conversation takes place:

Nikola Tesla: Go home. Forget this thing. I can recognize an obsession, no good will come of it.

Robert Angier: Why, haven't good come of your obsessions?
Nikola Tesla: Well at first. But I followed them too long. I'm their slave... and one day they'll choose to destroy me.
Robert Angier: If you understand an obsession then you know you won't change my mind. 

The quote clearly shows Angier admitting that he is obsessed. If nothing else if convincing, his own admission should be compelling enough. The machine he uses, as seen in the third picture, is really over the top. Borden is obsessed too though. He is actually two identical twins who pretend to be one another, sometimes under the alias of Fallon, sometimes being the "real" one. They go so far as to chop one twin's fingers off to continue to be identical. If that isn't enough proof, they also didn't let on to their two love interests that they were more than one person. It hurts their wife Sarah and daughter Jess. It then hurts the other twin's love, Olivia. It is presumed that Sarah figured out their secret, but since she hung herself because of her husband's "affair" we shall never know. Her death is just more proof of their obsession. The obsessions of these two (three) men cause them to kill one another, along with those they love, making no good come from them. I think that if Borden had bothered to tell Sarah and Olivia then the film would have ended quite differently and that Angier would have been the only one obsessed, because Olivia and Sarah would have been able to help Borden with his need to beat Angier.
 
Obsession is very important in a film's plot line. It can be found in 4 out of 5 films on average. In the films discussed obsession has only ended in death and/or heartbreak. Nothing good has resulted in the slightest, except maybe with Batman's obsession. In The Dark Knight The Joker obsessions were with Batman and chaos while Batman was obsessed with being Batman and Harvey's obsession was between luck and revenge. Singing in the Rain had Lina's obsession with Don, and herself. High Noon featured Miller's obsession with Kane. The Prestige was Borden and Angier obsessed with each other. Is it possible for good to result from obsession? From all of the evidence presented in these films as a whole, that would be a resounding no. What do you think?

Borden Obsessed?

In the film, The Prestige, the question is this commitment or obsession comes up a lot. When you can't discern the antagonist from the protagonist in a film, you know that obsession must be playing a role, making one character seem normal, then the other. One character that this effect a great deal is Borden, especially when you see the ending. It turns out that Borden has an identical twin, and that they live one life. This fact alone should be proof enough of his obsession, but there’s more. They don’t even tell the two women who they love that they are not always the same person. They are too obsessed with keeping the secret.
Borden has an identical twin, his name was Freddy, versus the “original’s” name of Alfred. They both also play a character named Fallon. In the film Alfred tells Angiers that they each lived half a life, as seen in the first 2 minutes and 30 seconds of this clip:

 

They even went so far as to chop off one twin’s fingers to ensure that they stayed identical. Commitment does not include dismemberment. Obsession leads to harming oneself, Borden has clearly crossed the line.

                The final piece of evidence of Borden’s obsession is the fact that neither Alfred nor Freddy tell those they love about their secret. Sara, Alfred’s love, seems to know at the end and commits suicide, but neither of them actually told her or the other woman, Olivia, the truth. When you can’t tell those most precious to you what is really going on, and harm your family, then that’s all the more proof of pure obsession. Borden is undeniably obsessed with his secret.