Finally it is done. I wish I had spent a bit more time on higher quality drawings for it, but time was against me as I had a lot of frames to render.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Reservoir Dogs
One could expect a lot of that opening shot in the dinner. A bunch of guys sitting around a table, debating around Madonna's “Like a Virgin”, and an incredible camera work that spins around each character, even sliding behind their back to shift the attention to each other, in a way reminiscent of Hitchcock's use of the the technique in Rope when he would run out of film. The scene takes its time to unfold as we start to notice some of the characteristic of each actor. We also get a look at the incredible cast used in the film. It is not often that you get the feeling that every actor actually fits their characters. They do not push the characters unto themselves they simply happen to be their character. They leave “emerging from the restaurant like the Wild Bunch” (McCarthy:1991), the intensity of that shot serving as an establishing shot for the rest of the film, as it is one of the last times you get to see the whole crew together. Their will be more shots later on, but the rest of the film is mainly cut in different sections that explain the personal story of each character.
What comes next might seem at first as a big mumbo jumbo of stories, linked only by the failed robbery, yet it is cleverly structured and implemented into the flow of the sequence. The sudden change in flow and rhythm occurs when we are suddenly sent into a bloodied car interior, young Mr. Orange, superbly played by Tim Roth, is panicking, his stomach pierced by a bullet. This extremely strong visual sets the tone for the rest of the film, the immaculate white of the car a perfect canvas for what might have influenced quit a few other artists. We understand that everything has gone wrong. The car is driven by a nervous and edgy Mr. White, played by Harvey Keitel. He tries to calm down the shocked Orange, who keeps shouting that he is going to die. We then arrive in the main set of the film, a warehouse. This warehouse could not be any simpler and yet is masterfully used as every bit of its space is used as space for the composition’s of the shots, it's highly geometric structure giving rise to some very interesting shots. Orange is laid down on a slight slope of triangle, giving his blood free rein over its descent towards the future puddle it is going to create.
They are soon joined by Mr. Pink, acted by Steve Buscemi. He is also highly nervous, and is convinced that the police had been tipped off by one of them. His self-induced professionalism completely cuts him out of the traitor position or so he says, constantly saying that it could not be him but that it was someone, adding to the edginess of the whole situation as White starts to loose control. The enters to recently out of jail psycho, Mr. Blonde, calmly played by Michael Madsen. He brings with him a young police officer, whom I found excessively boastful seeing the situation he was in. In a torture see of anthology the “young officer is brutally tortured,” by Mr. Blonde, “in a scene that drove numerous fest viewers from the unspooling here, and may make even the brave look away. The worst is left off-camera,” (McCarthy:1991), as most of it is implied though we still get to see the pugnacious wound of his ear later on. Some extraordinary camera work punctuates the performance as it glides effortlessly around the set, cutting when needed, giving it an edgy feel simply based on the camera and the quick editing present.
The warehouse, by its nature creates a very theatrical set. The few amazing shots when they are all pointing at each other with a gun is now a classic. The set is well designed, and as more actors enter the fray, it seems only to expand despite the increase in mass inside it. The well oiled machine of a script that Tarantino has created is full of energy and as WH from Time Out London concludes:
“Despite the clockwork theatrical dynamics - most of the action is restricted to the warehouse - the film packs a massive punch.”(Time Out London)
Bibliography:
-Time Out London - http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/76614/reservoir_dogs.html
What comes next might seem at first as a big mumbo jumbo of stories, linked only by the failed robbery, yet it is cleverly structured and implemented into the flow of the sequence. The sudden change in flow and rhythm occurs when we are suddenly sent into a bloodied car interior, young Mr. Orange, superbly played by Tim Roth, is panicking, his stomach pierced by a bullet. This extremely strong visual sets the tone for the rest of the film, the immaculate white of the car a perfect canvas for what might have influenced quit a few other artists. We understand that everything has gone wrong. The car is driven by a nervous and edgy Mr. White, played by Harvey Keitel. He tries to calm down the shocked Orange, who keeps shouting that he is going to die. We then arrive in the main set of the film, a warehouse. This warehouse could not be any simpler and yet is masterfully used as every bit of its space is used as space for the composition’s of the shots, it's highly geometric structure giving rise to some very interesting shots. Orange is laid down on a slight slope of triangle, giving his blood free rein over its descent towards the future puddle it is going to create.
They are soon joined by Mr. Pink, acted by Steve Buscemi. He is also highly nervous, and is convinced that the police had been tipped off by one of them. His self-induced professionalism completely cuts him out of the traitor position or so he says, constantly saying that it could not be him but that it was someone, adding to the edginess of the whole situation as White starts to loose control. The enters to recently out of jail psycho, Mr. Blonde, calmly played by Michael Madsen. He brings with him a young police officer, whom I found excessively boastful seeing the situation he was in. In a torture see of anthology the “young officer is brutally tortured,” by Mr. Blonde, “in a scene that drove numerous fest viewers from the unspooling here, and may make even the brave look away. The worst is left off-camera,” (McCarthy:1991), as most of it is implied though we still get to see the pugnacious wound of his ear later on. Some extraordinary camera work punctuates the performance as it glides effortlessly around the set, cutting when needed, giving it an edgy feel simply based on the camera and the quick editing present.
The warehouse, by its nature creates a very theatrical set. The few amazing shots when they are all pointing at each other with a gun is now a classic. The set is well designed, and as more actors enter the fray, it seems only to expand despite the increase in mass inside it. The well oiled machine of a script that Tarantino has created is full of energy and as WH from Time Out London concludes:
“Despite the clockwork theatrical dynamics - most of the action is restricted to the warehouse - the film packs a massive punch.”(Time Out London)
Bibliography:
-Time Out London - http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/76614/reservoir_dogs.html
Blairwitch Project
Growing really does influence your perspective of the world. The first time I saw the Blairwitch Project, I was utterly terrified. Being 12 doesn't help, and watching in the dark late at time neither. Today, having thankfully grown up, I had the opportunity of watching it again. The dissapointment was to the height of my expectations. I remember when I started to re-watch the Disney classics, and being so thrilled at seeing them again with a different eye, one trained to see animation, story and plot. Even though some parts where different from what I remembered, new ones opened up for my own pleasure.
This did not happen with the Blairwitch Project. A constant strain on the eye, some annoying acting (even if it was meant to be that way) and the most disappointing story line has not helped this film really born out of an impressive ad campaign and the thrilling peer pressure found in the school yards. The incredible buzz is what helped this film more than anything. Though I was thoroughly disappointed, one must look at this film objectively. The film itself might not please anyone, but its design, added to the ad campaign was extremely effective. It was the perfect way for a film like this to succeed.
When you learn that some people actually thought this to be true, the shock is quit important. An hyper-realistic documentary justifying the whole thing truly set some minds on a weird path to witchcraft and more esoteric rituals. Turning a folk story into a real story required some important thinking, something masterfully hidden in the film. From the beginning you get the feeling that you are actually following something that really happened.
This impression is sadly lost in some moments when you really get the impression that the actors are reading a script. Their constant want to keep filming is also a bit odd, yet it is in the end essential to the success of the film.
Time Out London affirm that it stays with you: the film issues a kind of shadow horror that only comes into play later, at night, when you want to forget it.”(Time Out London: 2009). This might be true for some teenagers in search of interesting sensations, but one always reaches a point when you are simply not affected by it.
The use of a portable camera was a first. This is the main reason for the success of the film. Its indomitable will to keep to this format gets in the way of the story at some points, yet the whole illusion would be lost if we had had some aerials view, or simply some more classic cinema shots. In the end it is a successful film in the box office and in its originality. It is a pioneer and that's it. Had it been made after another of the same type, I can assure everyone it would have been a flop.
Bibliography:
- London Time Out: http://www.timeout.comPublish Post/film/reviews/67979/the_blair_witch_project.html
This did not happen with the Blairwitch Project. A constant strain on the eye, some annoying acting (even if it was meant to be that way) and the most disappointing story line has not helped this film really born out of an impressive ad campaign and the thrilling peer pressure found in the school yards. The incredible buzz is what helped this film more than anything. Though I was thoroughly disappointed, one must look at this film objectively. The film itself might not please anyone, but its design, added to the ad campaign was extremely effective. It was the perfect way for a film like this to succeed.
When you learn that some people actually thought this to be true, the shock is quit important. An hyper-realistic documentary justifying the whole thing truly set some minds on a weird path to witchcraft and more esoteric rituals. Turning a folk story into a real story required some important thinking, something masterfully hidden in the film. From the beginning you get the feeling that you are actually following something that really happened.
This impression is sadly lost in some moments when you really get the impression that the actors are reading a script. Their constant want to keep filming is also a bit odd, yet it is in the end essential to the success of the film.
Time Out London affirm that it stays with you: the film issues a kind of shadow horror that only comes into play later, at night, when you want to forget it.”(Time Out London: 2009). This might be true for some teenagers in search of interesting sensations, but one always reaches a point when you are simply not affected by it.
The use of a portable camera was a first. This is the main reason for the success of the film. Its indomitable will to keep to this format gets in the way of the story at some points, yet the whole illusion would be lost if we had had some aerials view, or simply some more classic cinema shots. In the end it is a successful film in the box office and in its originality. It is a pioneer and that's it. Had it been made after another of the same type, I can assure everyone it would have been a flop.
Bibliography:
- London Time Out: http://www.timeout.comPublish Post/film/reviews/67979/the_blair_witch_project.html
Cloverfield
While the Blairwitch Project has had a definite influence on a large part of the population, its novel use of a personal camera for a feature film and supposedly real scenes, Cloverfield was the complete opposite. Again trying out the personal camera mode, it tries to trick the viewer into thinking that again it is real. Yet when Hollywood takes over an idea, you tend to notice it. Some have said that the more realistic you try to get with CG, the more obvious it is, and the more the audience feels tricked. Cloverfield, under its look of a cheap film is actually a multi-million dollars project, with incredible CG, a giant monster and a collapsing New York City.
How can one take a movie likes this seriously. It's lack of plausible story only adds to the pain of watching a film through a portable camera. Add in a pseudo romantic quest to save a princess lost in her high dungeon, here a New York skyscraper, and you get a “navet” as the French would say, which means a bad film. It tries to be original, doing the same intense marketing campaign as Blairwitch, yet failing to deliver in the end. It has had success, and many have gone saying that it is a metaphor for 9/11, except with a giant monster, which, I am sure is not called Godzilla simply for copyright reasons. Not to mention that obviously the main character is leaving for … ready for a big surprise? Japan! Too bad for him, Godzilla has left it's homeland, coming to New York City the day before he left. Could thing he didn't leave the day before.
Roger Erbert describes well the discrepancies found in the film.”The leaning high-rise contains Beth (Odette Yustman), who Rob feels duty-bound to rescue from her 49th-floor apartment near Central Park. The others all come along on this foolhardy mission (not explained: how after walking all the way to Columbus Circle they have the energy to climb 49 flights of stairs, Lily in her high heels). Part of their uptown journey is by subway, without the benefit of trains. They're informed by a helpful soldier that the last rescue helicopter leaving Central Park will have "wheels up at oh-six-hundred," begging the question of how many helicopters it would take to rescue the population of Manhattan. ” (Erbert:2008)
The film is successful in representing the new century. Most of the footage we see today isn't filmed by professional journalists, but by people with cell phones. Looking at the situation in the Arab world today, where most of what we see comes from these small devices, Cloverfield takes on that mantle. Is this how we would record a catastrophe of that size? Empire have their own reasoning.”Is this attack so terrifying because it has obvious shades of 9/11 or because the handheld camerawork leaves us disoriented, glimpsing the enormous creature only when Hud’s view quivers that way? It’s both. We live in a time when global violence is recorded not by professionals, but by shaky-handed bystanders with camera phones. We believe bad camerawork and suspect professional broadcast of hiding something from us. Stripped of the comfort of rhythmic editing and frenzied strings that tell us it’s time to be scared and instead served the sort of frantic footage we associate with unfathomable terror brings a new, more primal fear to the monster movie. It starts, bizarrely, to feel like something that could happen. ” (Empire:Olly Richards)
Bibliography
Erbert, Robert: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080117/REVIEWS/801170302
Richards, Olly: http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=135091
How can one take a movie likes this seriously. It's lack of plausible story only adds to the pain of watching a film through a portable camera. Add in a pseudo romantic quest to save a princess lost in her high dungeon, here a New York skyscraper, and you get a “navet” as the French would say, which means a bad film. It tries to be original, doing the same intense marketing campaign as Blairwitch, yet failing to deliver in the end. It has had success, and many have gone saying that it is a metaphor for 9/11, except with a giant monster, which, I am sure is not called Godzilla simply for copyright reasons. Not to mention that obviously the main character is leaving for … ready for a big surprise? Japan! Too bad for him, Godzilla has left it's homeland, coming to New York City the day before he left. Could thing he didn't leave the day before.
Roger Erbert describes well the discrepancies found in the film.”The leaning high-rise contains Beth (Odette Yustman), who Rob feels duty-bound to rescue from her 49th-floor apartment near Central Park. The others all come along on this foolhardy mission (not explained: how after walking all the way to Columbus Circle they have the energy to climb 49 flights of stairs, Lily in her high heels). Part of their uptown journey is by subway, without the benefit of trains. They're informed by a helpful soldier that the last rescue helicopter leaving Central Park will have "wheels up at oh-six-hundred," begging the question of how many helicopters it would take to rescue the population of Manhattan. ” (Erbert:2008)
The film is successful in representing the new century. Most of the footage we see today isn't filmed by professional journalists, but by people with cell phones. Looking at the situation in the Arab world today, where most of what we see comes from these small devices, Cloverfield takes on that mantle. Is this how we would record a catastrophe of that size? Empire have their own reasoning.”Is this attack so terrifying because it has obvious shades of 9/11 or because the handheld camerawork leaves us disoriented, glimpsing the enormous creature only when Hud’s view quivers that way? It’s both. We live in a time when global violence is recorded not by professionals, but by shaky-handed bystanders with camera phones. We believe bad camerawork and suspect professional broadcast of hiding something from us. Stripped of the comfort of rhythmic editing and frenzied strings that tell us it’s time to be scared and instead served the sort of frantic footage we associate with unfathomable terror brings a new, more primal fear to the monster movie. It starts, bizarrely, to feel like something that could happen. ” (Empire:Olly Richards)
Bibliography
Erbert, Robert: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080117/REVIEWS/801170302
Richards, Olly: http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=135091
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Final Story board
A bit messy, I will clean it if I have the time. I had to use those drawings to do the animatic, which is a bit disappointing but their really wasn't enough time to do each drawing separately, which again annoys me because the few I did in larger scale look much better. Oh well, time is of the essence so that's life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)