Jessie Savini
Experiential paper
Old Town Ventimiglia
On the Friday of our three day weekend, I was feeling adventurous. With no classes or responsibilities for the next three days, Europe was my canvas to do, go, or see whatever my heart desired. So I decided to go to Italy. I grabbed Michelle and Melissa, and off we went to the little town of Ventimiglia. This turned out to be one of the best decisions I made during my time in France. The day was nothing less than perfect, with the best part being the two hours we spent exploring Old Town Ventimiglia.
After wandering around for a few hours in what I now know is the new part of town, we ended up meeting a nice Italian woman named Maria. When we asked her about the history of the town and the nearby fortress overlooking the ocean, she told us that “every old European city has an Old Town. They all have an old church, and some will also have a castle nearby – and most are surrounded by some sort of wall which was built to keep pirates out.” Maria then told us that we needed to get away from the tourist scene in the new part of town to have an authentic Italian experience, and she was more than happy to share the secrets of her town with us. After telling us how to reach old town, she said goodbye and we went on our way.
And so we started the trek to Old Town. Over the bridge, under the tunnel, up the hill. How did she say to get there, again? Did we pass it? I could see the steeple of the church, but could not find out how to get there. About to give up, we decided to take a side street that we passed earlier to see where it led us. This “street” could not really even be considered a street – barely big enough for a motorcycle to have driven through, it was a steep uneven cobblestone road. Skeptical that we would ever find what we were looking for and not knowing if the dimly lit path would take us anywhere, I was about ready to turn around. It is a good thing we did not give up, because after a few more minutes we rounded a corner in our path and saw a scene which looked like something from a movie. We had found Old Town. And it was already what I expected and more.
Here we were: Old Town Ventimiglia. I heard children laughing in the distance, I saw clothes hanging to dry from windows above me, and I smelled bread baking in a small bakery nearby. Kids were playing soccer in the small piazza in the heart of town, while their mothers watched on from the steps of the church. I almost sensed that I was imposing on someone’s hidden secret that no one was supposed to know about. I felt like I was tiptoeing around someone backyard, a place that I did not belong. But no one seemed to mind. While we got a few questioning stares, most of the people gave us friendly smiles that seemed to understand our appreciation and respect for their town.
We explored the little town for hours. We went down little side streets, trying to get lost on purpose to see where it would take us. The sights, smells, and sounds were like nothing I had ever heard before. The town was remarkably beautiful in its own dilapidated way – the church, buildings, and shops each seemed to tell the stories of the history of town. I could smell delicious food cooking from the open windows of apartments above me. I could picture the homemade lasagna, gnocchi, and spaghetti that belonged to those scents. I could hear the friendly conversations as neighbors passed each other on the street – recognizing that everyone in town had probably known each other since childhood. I could only wonder what these people would think about me if they came to my neighborhood and saw how I lived.
Old Town was full of character and personality: there were kids playing soccer in the town square under the bell tower, there were old men sitting outside talking and looking like they were straight from a movie, and the women were gossiping and yelling from their windows to the other women. The views were also gorgeous; at the top of the hill that Old Town is perched upon we were able to see the whole town and the ocean coastline for miles.
As I sat at the top of the town and tried to take in everything I had seen, I began to understand why people would want to live there. Maria had told us earlier that the families of most people in Ventimiglia had been living there for generations, but I was not able to comprehend why people would stay in this tiny town until I witnessed the way of life in Old Town. I realized why the people of Ventimiglia would want to live the same repetitive life that their ancestors had laid out years and years before: it was the simple things in life that drew them back time and time again. Life seemed to move slower, and I felt as though I had traveled back in time about fifty years. The pace of life appeared much more leisurely in Ventimiglia, and people really seemed to savor each and every moment. It is an oasis of harmony. A little slice of heaven in a fast-paced and frantic world.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Another Year
Jessie Savini
Review 6
Another Year: 2010. Director: Mike Leigh. Screenwriter: Mike Leigh. Producer: Georgina Lowe. Cast: Jim Broadbent, Lesley Manville, Ruth Sheen, Oliver Maltman, Imelda Staunton. Running time: 130 minues.
Another Year left me feeling satisfied. Satisfied only that the film was not titled Another Decade, Another Century, or even Another Two Years. Because one year was more than enough and anything more that that would have been absolutely unbearable. It is not that the acting is bad, it is not that there is a terrible storyline, nor is it poor production quality. But it made my skin itch and I was more than elated when those beautiful credits started to role. The story was downright depressing; Mary (Lesley Manville), is an annoying fifty-something year old trying to get in the pants of her best friend’s thirty old son because she has no one to love her. Gerri (Ruth Sheen), the best friend, puts up with all of Mary’s crazy antics for reasons unbeknownst to her husband Tom (Jim Broadbent), or anyone who watches the movie, really. The film goes on to explore the troubles of Gerri and Tom’s friends, and show how each and every friend has their own misfortunes.
The film revolves around the lives of Gerri and Tom for a full year, with the year divided into four subsections by each season. Though Gerri and Tom are happily married, the film more or less is focused on their unhappy friends, and how their friends’ misfortunes affect them in different ways. First, there is the previously mentioned Mary, who drowns her sorrows in alcohol and constantly shows up Gerri and Tom’s house whether invited or not. Though at the beginning of the movie Gerri feels sympathy for Mary, the mood changes by the end of the movie when Gerri realizes the toll Mary has taken a toll on all of her other relationships. Then, there is Tom’s brother (David Bradley) who stays with the couple while mourning the death of his wife. Though Gerri and Tom offer their home as a place to stay so he is not lonely, there is nothing they can do or say to comfort this inconsolable man. Lastly, there is Tom’s childhood friend Ken (Parker Wight), who is a fatter, meaner, and sloppier male version of Gerri’s friend Mary. He is distraught over his pending divorce, and has resolved to be an unhappy and lonely man for the rest of his life. There is also the angry nephew, who did not seem to offer anything to the story except yet another unhappy personality.
These miserable characters are people whom I would not like to come in contact with, on or off screen. While watching the movies, I felt irritated, depressed, and miserable. Each and every character bothered me; Gerri bothered me because she willingly put up with Mary’s depressing misfortunes involving the lack of love in her life, an expensive car that would never work, and the garden that she could just never get to grow. Mary was the friend who always had something negative to say, and she brought the mood of the movie right down with her. Tom bothered me because he was not able to help his brother cope with the loss of his wife, but instead just let him have a place to sleep at night. He also annoyed me because he did not bother to even try to get help for his friend Ken, obviously a raging alcoholic whose life has no real direction.
All in all, this movie was a melancholy British version of the television show Desperate Housewives. Instead of living on the cookie-cutter Wisteria Lane, this group lived on Miserable Avenue. Instead of gossiping about who was sleeping with whom, they gossiped about who had the worst life out of everyone. Instead of getting together to talk over afternoon tea, they got together to drown their sorrows in bad alcohol. They are an unhappy group of friends, with very few positive things to say.
Along with being thankful that the movie was over, I left the movie feeling depressed. I was sad for Mary, and I was sad about the fact that I could be Mary in thirty years. Anyone could end up being Mary or Ken. Not a happy thought or ending to a movie. It was not fun to leave the movie at 10:40 in the morning (for some reason I went to the 8:30 screening) feeling so moody and sad. I understand the point of the film is to expose the realistically sad lives that many people lead, but this will not fare well at a box office. Movies are an easy way to escape reality, but this movie is reminiscent of the depressing lives that many people live, which is never an enjoyable thing to watch.
Review 6
Another Year: 2010. Director: Mike Leigh. Screenwriter: Mike Leigh. Producer: Georgina Lowe. Cast: Jim Broadbent, Lesley Manville, Ruth Sheen, Oliver Maltman, Imelda Staunton. Running time: 130 minues.
Another Year left me feeling satisfied. Satisfied only that the film was not titled Another Decade, Another Century, or even Another Two Years. Because one year was more than enough and anything more that that would have been absolutely unbearable. It is not that the acting is bad, it is not that there is a terrible storyline, nor is it poor production quality. But it made my skin itch and I was more than elated when those beautiful credits started to role. The story was downright depressing; Mary (Lesley Manville), is an annoying fifty-something year old trying to get in the pants of her best friend’s thirty old son because she has no one to love her. Gerri (Ruth Sheen), the best friend, puts up with all of Mary’s crazy antics for reasons unbeknownst to her husband Tom (Jim Broadbent), or anyone who watches the movie, really. The film goes on to explore the troubles of Gerri and Tom’s friends, and show how each and every friend has their own misfortunes.
The film revolves around the lives of Gerri and Tom for a full year, with the year divided into four subsections by each season. Though Gerri and Tom are happily married, the film more or less is focused on their unhappy friends, and how their friends’ misfortunes affect them in different ways. First, there is the previously mentioned Mary, who drowns her sorrows in alcohol and constantly shows up Gerri and Tom’s house whether invited or not. Though at the beginning of the movie Gerri feels sympathy for Mary, the mood changes by the end of the movie when Gerri realizes the toll Mary has taken a toll on all of her other relationships. Then, there is Tom’s brother (David Bradley) who stays with the couple while mourning the death of his wife. Though Gerri and Tom offer their home as a place to stay so he is not lonely, there is nothing they can do or say to comfort this inconsolable man. Lastly, there is Tom’s childhood friend Ken (Parker Wight), who is a fatter, meaner, and sloppier male version of Gerri’s friend Mary. He is distraught over his pending divorce, and has resolved to be an unhappy and lonely man for the rest of his life. There is also the angry nephew, who did not seem to offer anything to the story except yet another unhappy personality.
These miserable characters are people whom I would not like to come in contact with, on or off screen. While watching the movies, I felt irritated, depressed, and miserable. Each and every character bothered me; Gerri bothered me because she willingly put up with Mary’s depressing misfortunes involving the lack of love in her life, an expensive car that would never work, and the garden that she could just never get to grow. Mary was the friend who always had something negative to say, and she brought the mood of the movie right down with her. Tom bothered me because he was not able to help his brother cope with the loss of his wife, but instead just let him have a place to sleep at night. He also annoyed me because he did not bother to even try to get help for his friend Ken, obviously a raging alcoholic whose life has no real direction.
All in all, this movie was a melancholy British version of the television show Desperate Housewives. Instead of living on the cookie-cutter Wisteria Lane, this group lived on Miserable Avenue. Instead of gossiping about who was sleeping with whom, they gossiped about who had the worst life out of everyone. Instead of getting together to talk over afternoon tea, they got together to drown their sorrows in bad alcohol. They are an unhappy group of friends, with very few positive things to say.
Along with being thankful that the movie was over, I left the movie feeling depressed. I was sad for Mary, and I was sad about the fact that I could be Mary in thirty years. Anyone could end up being Mary or Ken. Not a happy thought or ending to a movie. It was not fun to leave the movie at 10:40 in the morning (for some reason I went to the 8:30 screening) feeling so moody and sad. I understand the point of the film is to expose the realistically sad lives that many people lead, but this will not fare well at a box office. Movies are an easy way to escape reality, but this movie is reminiscent of the depressing lives that many people live, which is never an enjoyable thing to watch.
Chongquing Blues
Jessie Savini
Review 5
Chongquing Blues: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Wang Xiaoshuai. Screenwriter: Yang Yishu. Producers: Hsu Bing-His, Zhang Hao. Cast: Wang Xueqi, Fan Bingbing, Quin Hao, Zi Yi, Li Feier. Running time: 110 minutes.
Lin Quanhai (Wang Xueqi) is a father who wishes to get acquainted with his son, Bo, whom he has not seen in many years. He wants to know his son’s girlfriend, friends, and everyone else in his life. Oddly enough, his son is no longer alive. He is searching to get to know the soul of his dead son, who was killed by the police after stabbing two people and holding a woman hostage at a shopping mall. At the beginning of the movie, Lin begins his journey to discover who his son was, figure out why he committed these violent acts, and determine whether his lack of parenting ultimately contributed to the death of his son.
To uncover the secrecy of Bo’s violent incident, he visits everyone who came in contact with him during his final moments: a young girl working at the cosmetic counter in the mall, a security guard, a doctor whom he held hostage, and the police man who shot him. He talks to each person in length about the events on the day Bo was killed in order to piece the puzzle together. Each person is able to give their side of the story and provide details of the event surrounding his son’s death, but the person with the most insight is the doctor. Since Bo held her hostage for several hours, she was able to talk in great length with the boy and uncover the truth behind his situation: he was mad at his girlfriend for breaking up with him, distressed over a fight with his best friend, and upset with his father for never loving him. She said that Bo was sorry for stabbing the cosmetic clerk and security guard, and that he instantly felt remorse for what he had done. The doctor also told Lin that the boy missed him, and talked about him in great detail during the hours she was held hostage. At the end of their conversation, the doctor commented that Bo would never have hurt her, and it was unjust that the police shot him to death.
During much of the movie, the camera tracks Lin from behind as he tries to clear his conscience and solve the mystery Bo created. All of the sporadic scenes with shots from behind represent the guilt that follows him as a result of being a deadbeat and distant father. They represent the heartbreaking emotions he rarely shows, and his guilty conscience of not being there for his son. Throughout the movie, these scenes become fewer and fewer because Lin begins to come to terms with his guilt and his second-hand involvement in Bo’s death.
Set on the Chongquing River, the location of the film contributes to the dark, gloomy, and mysterious feeling the film depicts. The river literally and figuratively represents the winding journey that the father has before him to come to terms with the death of a son. It signifies a way to escape from his former family (including Bo) and his present family, since all rivers lead to the sea where he works as a captain on a boat. It symbolizes the water of the ocean that his son loved so dearly, because he thought it could bring him closer to his distant father. This symbolism of water contributes to the film by further advancing the deep, dark, and twisted thematic elements of the story.
The movie is gloomy and melancholy. Every character is still in a state of disarray over the shocking death of this young boy. But it is not depressing. It does not leave the audience feeling disheartened over the events the story holds, but rather content that the father was able to reconnect with his son, though on poor terms. He was able to know his son, see his son (through a series of blurry photographs and a video), and solve the ever burning question as to why the incident at the mall occurred. He is able to figure out that though he is not entirely at fault for Bo’s death, his lack of parenting did unfortunately play a role in his downfall. He will also now be able to use what he learned about his son to be a great father to Bo Junior, Bo’s half-brother.
Every element of the film connected by the end to create a story that was bigger than itself. It was not only about a father seeking to uncover the truth about a son. It was about friendship, love, and guilt. It exposes generational differences, levels of the social class system, and corruption in the police force. Each and every element in the film combines to create a piece of art worth the recognition it has received.
Review 5
Chongquing Blues: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Wang Xiaoshuai. Screenwriter: Yang Yishu. Producers: Hsu Bing-His, Zhang Hao. Cast: Wang Xueqi, Fan Bingbing, Quin Hao, Zi Yi, Li Feier. Running time: 110 minutes.
Lin Quanhai (Wang Xueqi) is a father who wishes to get acquainted with his son, Bo, whom he has not seen in many years. He wants to know his son’s girlfriend, friends, and everyone else in his life. Oddly enough, his son is no longer alive. He is searching to get to know the soul of his dead son, who was killed by the police after stabbing two people and holding a woman hostage at a shopping mall. At the beginning of the movie, Lin begins his journey to discover who his son was, figure out why he committed these violent acts, and determine whether his lack of parenting ultimately contributed to the death of his son.
To uncover the secrecy of Bo’s violent incident, he visits everyone who came in contact with him during his final moments: a young girl working at the cosmetic counter in the mall, a security guard, a doctor whom he held hostage, and the police man who shot him. He talks to each person in length about the events on the day Bo was killed in order to piece the puzzle together. Each person is able to give their side of the story and provide details of the event surrounding his son’s death, but the person with the most insight is the doctor. Since Bo held her hostage for several hours, she was able to talk in great length with the boy and uncover the truth behind his situation: he was mad at his girlfriend for breaking up with him, distressed over a fight with his best friend, and upset with his father for never loving him. She said that Bo was sorry for stabbing the cosmetic clerk and security guard, and that he instantly felt remorse for what he had done. The doctor also told Lin that the boy missed him, and talked about him in great detail during the hours she was held hostage. At the end of their conversation, the doctor commented that Bo would never have hurt her, and it was unjust that the police shot him to death.
During much of the movie, the camera tracks Lin from behind as he tries to clear his conscience and solve the mystery Bo created. All of the sporadic scenes with shots from behind represent the guilt that follows him as a result of being a deadbeat and distant father. They represent the heartbreaking emotions he rarely shows, and his guilty conscience of not being there for his son. Throughout the movie, these scenes become fewer and fewer because Lin begins to come to terms with his guilt and his second-hand involvement in Bo’s death.
Set on the Chongquing River, the location of the film contributes to the dark, gloomy, and mysterious feeling the film depicts. The river literally and figuratively represents the winding journey that the father has before him to come to terms with the death of a son. It signifies a way to escape from his former family (including Bo) and his present family, since all rivers lead to the sea where he works as a captain on a boat. It symbolizes the water of the ocean that his son loved so dearly, because he thought it could bring him closer to his distant father. This symbolism of water contributes to the film by further advancing the deep, dark, and twisted thematic elements of the story.
The movie is gloomy and melancholy. Every character is still in a state of disarray over the shocking death of this young boy. But it is not depressing. It does not leave the audience feeling disheartened over the events the story holds, but rather content that the father was able to reconnect with his son, though on poor terms. He was able to know his son, see his son (through a series of blurry photographs and a video), and solve the ever burning question as to why the incident at the mall occurred. He is able to figure out that though he is not entirely at fault for Bo’s death, his lack of parenting did unfortunately play a role in his downfall. He will also now be able to use what he learned about his son to be a great father to Bo Junior, Bo’s half-brother.
Every element of the film connected by the end to create a story that was bigger than itself. It was not only about a father seeking to uncover the truth about a son. It was about friendship, love, and guilt. It exposes generational differences, levels of the social class system, and corruption in the police force. Each and every element in the film combines to create a piece of art worth the recognition it has received.
Blue Valentine
Jessie Savini
Review 4
Blue Valentine: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Derek Cianfrance. Cast: Ryan Gosling, Michelle Williams, Mike Vogel. Running time: 120 minutes.
To love is to live and to live is to love, though the love may not last forever. As in the case with many modern love stories, Blue Valentine tells the story of love lost over time with little hope of reconciliation. The film illustrates the story of a couple falling in love as teenagers, and the same couple drifting apart later in their marriage. The fact that the movie is set in both past and present contrasts the severe differences in the relationship over time. The film is heartbreaking, but it is real; people fall in and out of love every day. People grow apart, get divorced, and move on. Love is one of the greatest joys in life, but it can also be one of the most painful experiences a person can endure.
One part of the film is a sweet love story, while the other is painful and dramatic. It tugs at raw emotions for anyone who has ever been in love, or who has ever wanted to be in love. The movie is a roller coaster ride of extreme feelings, going from happy to sad intermittently. The movie begins with the failing relationship in present day, but eventually backtracks to explain how the couple met and fell in love. The flashbacks of their happy past are placed sporadically throughout the movie, and are used to explain how the marriage came to be unhappy and unconstructive.
Not only is the story beautiful, but it is beautifully filmed. Each scene in the movie has a purpose and contributes to the success of the film. Every scene also accomplishes the goal of showing that love can be kind and gentle, but it can also be cruel and spiteful. The director does an exemplary job at illustrating that while Dean (Ryan Gosling) may be a good husband to Cindy (Michelle Williams), the conditions the family lives in are not ideal. Dean works as a painter and does make much money. He is seen so frequently with a cigarette hanging from his mouth and a beer in his hand that I can almost smell the smoke of the cigarette and the alcohol on his breath. His destructive antics frustrate Cindy, who comments during the film that he should get another job that he likes so that he “does not have to start drinking at eight in the morning to get through the day”. He rebuttals this by telling her that “the reason he likes the job is because he can start drinking at eight in the morning”.
Ryan Gosling’s performance in the movie is stellar; he is convincing, real, and emotional. My favorite scenes in the movie are when he interacts with his young daughter – I could tell how much he loved the child and how he never wanted to let her go, even though the child is not biologically his. Michelle Williams, the main actress, is very compelling in her role as a frustrated wife, mother, and nurse. She gained fifteen pounds to film the “present day” scenes, so it truly did seem as though time had elapsed. Both actors usually star in box office hits, so it was interesting to see them work on an independent film with a small budget.
The ambition and determination of the director, Derek Cianfrance, is exceptionally impressive. The film was a twelve year process with over sixty drafts of the script written before settling on the final version. He fought to keep the cast and crew that he wanted; while most other directors would simply replace one of the main actors, Cianfrance completely moved the set of the film to accommodate one of the actors. He also made the main actors, Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling, live in a small house together for a month on the same budget that the characters would have had in their lives. This situation helped the actors get into the roles of their characters, and definitely contributed the believability and authenticity of the movie. The director’s drive for a successful, artistic version of a stereotypical love story is undeniably accomplished in this film.
The movie does not tell what is going to happen to the couple because ending of their story is left unclear. Are they going to get divorced, have affairs, or reconcile? The audience is left to wonder for themselves, to make their own ending. It is up to every individual to decide what will become of the once feverishly happy couple. A romantic myself, I want to imagine that they got back together and were able to reconcile their lost love. I want to believe the couple was able to work through their problems to have a stronger relationship than ever before, though I know that is not entirely realistic. But it does not even matter if it is realistic or not, because I can be the director in my mind and finish the film however I want.
Review 4
Blue Valentine: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Derek Cianfrance. Cast: Ryan Gosling, Michelle Williams, Mike Vogel. Running time: 120 minutes.
To love is to live and to live is to love, though the love may not last forever. As in the case with many modern love stories, Blue Valentine tells the story of love lost over time with little hope of reconciliation. The film illustrates the story of a couple falling in love as teenagers, and the same couple drifting apart later in their marriage. The fact that the movie is set in both past and present contrasts the severe differences in the relationship over time. The film is heartbreaking, but it is real; people fall in and out of love every day. People grow apart, get divorced, and move on. Love is one of the greatest joys in life, but it can also be one of the most painful experiences a person can endure.
One part of the film is a sweet love story, while the other is painful and dramatic. It tugs at raw emotions for anyone who has ever been in love, or who has ever wanted to be in love. The movie is a roller coaster ride of extreme feelings, going from happy to sad intermittently. The movie begins with the failing relationship in present day, but eventually backtracks to explain how the couple met and fell in love. The flashbacks of their happy past are placed sporadically throughout the movie, and are used to explain how the marriage came to be unhappy and unconstructive.
Not only is the story beautiful, but it is beautifully filmed. Each scene in the movie has a purpose and contributes to the success of the film. Every scene also accomplishes the goal of showing that love can be kind and gentle, but it can also be cruel and spiteful. The director does an exemplary job at illustrating that while Dean (Ryan Gosling) may be a good husband to Cindy (Michelle Williams), the conditions the family lives in are not ideal. Dean works as a painter and does make much money. He is seen so frequently with a cigarette hanging from his mouth and a beer in his hand that I can almost smell the smoke of the cigarette and the alcohol on his breath. His destructive antics frustrate Cindy, who comments during the film that he should get another job that he likes so that he “does not have to start drinking at eight in the morning to get through the day”. He rebuttals this by telling her that “the reason he likes the job is because he can start drinking at eight in the morning”.
Ryan Gosling’s performance in the movie is stellar; he is convincing, real, and emotional. My favorite scenes in the movie are when he interacts with his young daughter – I could tell how much he loved the child and how he never wanted to let her go, even though the child is not biologically his. Michelle Williams, the main actress, is very compelling in her role as a frustrated wife, mother, and nurse. She gained fifteen pounds to film the “present day” scenes, so it truly did seem as though time had elapsed. Both actors usually star in box office hits, so it was interesting to see them work on an independent film with a small budget.
The ambition and determination of the director, Derek Cianfrance, is exceptionally impressive. The film was a twelve year process with over sixty drafts of the script written before settling on the final version. He fought to keep the cast and crew that he wanted; while most other directors would simply replace one of the main actors, Cianfrance completely moved the set of the film to accommodate one of the actors. He also made the main actors, Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling, live in a small house together for a month on the same budget that the characters would have had in their lives. This situation helped the actors get into the roles of their characters, and definitely contributed the believability and authenticity of the movie. The director’s drive for a successful, artistic version of a stereotypical love story is undeniably accomplished in this film.
The movie does not tell what is going to happen to the couple because ending of their story is left unclear. Are they going to get divorced, have affairs, or reconcile? The audience is left to wonder for themselves, to make their own ending. It is up to every individual to decide what will become of the once feverishly happy couple. A romantic myself, I want to imagine that they got back together and were able to reconcile their lost love. I want to believe the couple was able to work through their problems to have a stronger relationship than ever before, though I know that is not entirely realistic. But it does not even matter if it is realistic or not, because I can be the director in my mind and finish the film however I want.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
A place in between
Jessie Savini
Review 3
The place in between: 2010. Director: Sarah Bouyain. Producer: Sarah Bouyain Cast: Dorylia Calmel, Acita Ouedraogo, Nathalie Richard. Running time: 90 minutes.
I decided to see The place in between on a whim when I was not able to get into another movie, and I am very glad that I did. I did not know anything about the movie before going into it except for a two line synopsis, so I had no clue what to expect. Not knowing anything about a film going into it is sometimes better because you can be surprised and “get your mind blown”, as one movie critic once told me. I personally got a lot out of this movie, though, and it had a strong impact on me.
The movie carries the weight of deep masked sorrow and is full of buried feelings struggling to be exposed. The place in between tells the story of an adolescent black girl who is lost in her life and does not know who she is. She is seeking her identity and a place to belong in the world. At age eight, her mother sent her to live with a white family in Paris so she could get away from the hardships she faced in Bobo, the rural town she was born in. Years later, she comes back to the town in search of what she is missing and determined to connect with her birth mother. She only finds her aunt and cousin living in her childhood home, and neither of them even recognizes her.
She goes back the next day to explain who she is, and they embrace her in a warm welcome. They tell her how they have missed her, how they want her to stay with them, and how they want to become a family. Though she does not respond to their proposition, she does say she will stay for a while and get to know them. At this point in the movie the young girl does not know what she wants in life or who she wants to be – a girl living a life of luxury in Paris with an adopted family, or a young girl living with her blood relatives in a life of struggle and hardship. The rest of the movie shows her journey to find herself, her true identity. Her true identity is unknown; the movie shows that she feels like an outsider in both places both because of her physical appearance and her mental attitude about both situations. While living with her second family in Paris, she was obviously the only person of color in the family. She felt that she did not fit in even after ten years of living with them, both because of the color of her skin and her background. She even struggles with the fact that she does not look the same as everyone else in Bobo: she is light skinned and beautiful, while everyone else is very dark from working outside and the years of hardship are shown through the wrinkles on their faces.
Throughout the movie, there are brief flashes of her mother and what she is doing during the present day. She is living in Paris, working as a janitor in an office building. The movie showed the girl searching for her mother, asking everyone in town where she could be in hope that she would someday reconnect with her. She needed her birth mother to tell her who she was, and which path to take. All the while, it would flash back to the mother, show what she was doing while her daughter was searching for her, and expose how much the mother missed her daughter as well. She was unhappy and lonely without her daughter, but it was something she was willing to do in order to give her daughter a better life. At the end of the movie, the girl eventually discovers where her mother is living, but it does not show whether she will go find her or not.
The cinematography of the scenes in Bobo was striking and contributed to the overall mood of the story. It showed the tough life in this small town and how dirt poor the family was; it showed the beauty of every object – the hand painted vase in the back corner of the room, the smile wrinkles on the old aunt, and the intricately patterned hair scarves the women wear. The town was extremely poor and the cinematography helped expose how underprivileged the family really was; there was no running water in the house, the family barely had enough food to survive, and they all slept on one bed with towels as blankets. Everything in the town was covered in a thick film of brown dust, which represented the unsanitary conditions in which they lived. There was one particular scene which stands out in my mind: the girl is walking through the market and the camera is focused on her feet. I could see that her shoes were rundown and falling apart, the brown dust was covering her feet and legs, and the bottom of her skirt showed the wear and tear of many years of use.
This film was not only a story of lost identity. It was a story of communication, perseverance, and conflict. There is a language barrier between the young girl and her aunt, so her cousin must translate for them which makes everything even more difficult. There is also the element of determination; the girl is determined to find her mother and to reconnect with her past so she can get a sense of where she comes from. Lastly, it tells of internal and external conflict; she has the daily mental struggle as to which family to be loyal to, and both families struggle with letting her go. The girl is conflicted with the right thing to do, the right path to take.
I really appreciated this movie and the thoughts it provoked within me. I have been that girl. I think every girl has been that girl right there with me, and right there with the main character in this film. Everyone has a point in life where they question their identity and what they mean to the world, just as the young girl did. She was lost and needed to find herself, find where she was from, and find who she was in the present day. The ending of the movie left me to wonder what she was going to do; was she going to stay true with her roots and her birth-given identity of a black female in a rural village, or is she going to go back to her white family in Paris to live the luxurious life that they have? I like that the movie did not show what she was going to do because it could have ruined the film for me. I do not know what she should have done; both endings have complications which would have hurt her in some way, and I would rather not know which route she eventually took. I hope that her time spent in both places did help her find the girl within herself that she was seeking, and that she came out a stronger person because of it.
This movie was a glimmer of hope in all the bad movies I have seen lately. It was a small independent film, but there story was good and it was filmed well. Every element of the story was necessary; there was no fluff and everything pieced together perfectly to form a remarkable story. The cultural clashes she encountered were very raw and exposed the struggle with which background to choose. She comes to understand how different both of her backgrounds are, and how they are interwoven to make her who she is in present day.
Review 3
The place in between: 2010. Director: Sarah Bouyain. Producer: Sarah Bouyain Cast: Dorylia Calmel, Acita Ouedraogo, Nathalie Richard. Running time: 90 minutes.
I decided to see The place in between on a whim when I was not able to get into another movie, and I am very glad that I did. I did not know anything about the movie before going into it except for a two line synopsis, so I had no clue what to expect. Not knowing anything about a film going into it is sometimes better because you can be surprised and “get your mind blown”, as one movie critic once told me. I personally got a lot out of this movie, though, and it had a strong impact on me.
The movie carries the weight of deep masked sorrow and is full of buried feelings struggling to be exposed. The place in between tells the story of an adolescent black girl who is lost in her life and does not know who she is. She is seeking her identity and a place to belong in the world. At age eight, her mother sent her to live with a white family in Paris so she could get away from the hardships she faced in Bobo, the rural town she was born in. Years later, she comes back to the town in search of what she is missing and determined to connect with her birth mother. She only finds her aunt and cousin living in her childhood home, and neither of them even recognizes her.
She goes back the next day to explain who she is, and they embrace her in a warm welcome. They tell her how they have missed her, how they want her to stay with them, and how they want to become a family. Though she does not respond to their proposition, she does say she will stay for a while and get to know them. At this point in the movie the young girl does not know what she wants in life or who she wants to be – a girl living a life of luxury in Paris with an adopted family, or a young girl living with her blood relatives in a life of struggle and hardship. The rest of the movie shows her journey to find herself, her true identity. Her true identity is unknown; the movie shows that she feels like an outsider in both places both because of her physical appearance and her mental attitude about both situations. While living with her second family in Paris, she was obviously the only person of color in the family. She felt that she did not fit in even after ten years of living with them, both because of the color of her skin and her background. She even struggles with the fact that she does not look the same as everyone else in Bobo: she is light skinned and beautiful, while everyone else is very dark from working outside and the years of hardship are shown through the wrinkles on their faces.
Throughout the movie, there are brief flashes of her mother and what she is doing during the present day. She is living in Paris, working as a janitor in an office building. The movie showed the girl searching for her mother, asking everyone in town where she could be in hope that she would someday reconnect with her. She needed her birth mother to tell her who she was, and which path to take. All the while, it would flash back to the mother, show what she was doing while her daughter was searching for her, and expose how much the mother missed her daughter as well. She was unhappy and lonely without her daughter, but it was something she was willing to do in order to give her daughter a better life. At the end of the movie, the girl eventually discovers where her mother is living, but it does not show whether she will go find her or not.
The cinematography of the scenes in Bobo was striking and contributed to the overall mood of the story. It showed the tough life in this small town and how dirt poor the family was; it showed the beauty of every object – the hand painted vase in the back corner of the room, the smile wrinkles on the old aunt, and the intricately patterned hair scarves the women wear. The town was extremely poor and the cinematography helped expose how underprivileged the family really was; there was no running water in the house, the family barely had enough food to survive, and they all slept on one bed with towels as blankets. Everything in the town was covered in a thick film of brown dust, which represented the unsanitary conditions in which they lived. There was one particular scene which stands out in my mind: the girl is walking through the market and the camera is focused on her feet. I could see that her shoes were rundown and falling apart, the brown dust was covering her feet and legs, and the bottom of her skirt showed the wear and tear of many years of use.
This film was not only a story of lost identity. It was a story of communication, perseverance, and conflict. There is a language barrier between the young girl and her aunt, so her cousin must translate for them which makes everything even more difficult. There is also the element of determination; the girl is determined to find her mother and to reconnect with her past so she can get a sense of where she comes from. Lastly, it tells of internal and external conflict; she has the daily mental struggle as to which family to be loyal to, and both families struggle with letting her go. The girl is conflicted with the right thing to do, the right path to take.
I really appreciated this movie and the thoughts it provoked within me. I have been that girl. I think every girl has been that girl right there with me, and right there with the main character in this film. Everyone has a point in life where they question their identity and what they mean to the world, just as the young girl did. She was lost and needed to find herself, find where she was from, and find who she was in the present day. The ending of the movie left me to wonder what she was going to do; was she going to stay true with her roots and her birth-given identity of a black female in a rural village, or is she going to go back to her white family in Paris to live the luxurious life that they have? I like that the movie did not show what she was going to do because it could have ruined the film for me. I do not know what she should have done; both endings have complications which would have hurt her in some way, and I would rather not know which route she eventually took. I hope that her time spent in both places did help her find the girl within herself that she was seeking, and that she came out a stronger person because of it.
This movie was a glimmer of hope in all the bad movies I have seen lately. It was a small independent film, but there story was good and it was filmed well. Every element of the story was necessary; there was no fluff and everything pieced together perfectly to form a remarkable story. The cultural clashes she encountered were very raw and exposed the struggle with which background to choose. She comes to understand how different both of her backgrounds are, and how they are interwoven to make her who she is in present day.
Recien Cazado
Jessie Savini
Review 2
Recien Cazado: 2009. Genre: Drama. Director: Rene Bueno. Writer: Rene Bueno. Cast: Babriella Vergara, Jaime Camil, Otto Sirgo, Angelica Aragon, Ruben Zamora, Magi Avila, Khristian Clausen . Running time: 109 minutes.
I wanted to see Recien Cazado because I was curious as to what comedies in other cultures and languages are like. I wanted to know if they were different than comedies that I usually see, or if they were similar to American comedies. I quickly found out that this one at least was very different than movies that I usually watch. I do not know if it was just a poor example of Spanish comedy, but it was absolutely terrible. And when I say terrible, I mean it was so bad that I wanted to walk out of the movie many times. The jokes were corny and just a little bit too raunchy. The plot did not make sense, and the actors reminded me of soap opera actors – they were overdramatic and mediocre at best. To be fair, though, I will say that there were a few people in the movie theatre that laughed at the jokes and seemed to enjoy the movie. This actually leads me to believe that the story of the movie simply did not transcend the cultural barrier (maybe the language did not translate well, or maybe I was not able to appreciate their humor) but either way, I did not enjoy it.
This storyline of Recien Cazado closely resembles What Happens in Vegas, which is an American romantic comedy about two people meeting in Vegas and getting married during a night full of drunken mistakes. Starring Ashton Kurtcher and Brittany Murphy, this movie premiered in 2008 and was much better than its Spanish counterpart. That being said, as I begin to think of what to write about the plot of this movie, I can’t seem to think of anything to write. The storyline of Recien Cazado consisted of many small trivial stories put together that kind of come together to form the larger story of a man and a woman falling in love. It seemed to me that they did not want the movie to be predictable, so they threw in small subplots to try to throw the audience off. It didn’t work. Instead, the audience is left wondering how this pertains to the story, and the movie is still extremely predictable. Basically, the main plot of Recien Cazado tells the same story of a man and a woman who drunkenly get married the first night they meet. The next day, the man does not remember a thing from the night before and wakes up to find a marriage certificate on his bedside table. Upon seeing this, he freaks out, wakes his new “wife” up, and says he wants to get a divorce. The woman does remember the events from the previous night, though, and decides she wants to wait to get a divorce until after she gets her period - to make sure she is not pregnant from the night before. Sounds a little bit ridiculous, right? She begs him to wait until she gets her period in three weeks, and he eventually agrees.
The rest of the movie is about their new marital lifestyle, and the problems that come with being “married” in this strange relationship. They can’t stand each other; the two main characters fight throughout the entire movie, yelling loud in Spanish and even throwing things at each other during one scene. The husband, a suave playboy who previously brought home different ladies from the bar every night, is sexually frustrated and angry that his wife will not let him go out with other girls. Through all the fighting and yelling, they realize that they actually do have a connection and there is chemistry between them. To be honest, the story implies there was supposed to be chemistry between the characters, but the actors completely lacked any amount of chemistry on screen. After two weeks of living together, the woman’s ex-lover comes back into her life and asks her to marry him on a whim. It was at this point that she realizes that she is in love with her “husband” and does not want to be with any other man.
There is an unexpected twist at the end; the marriage was a hoax. The man’s mom hired the woman to marry him because she wanted to teach her son a lesson and distract him from his “playboy” ways, which eventually worked. After spending a few miserable weeks without each other, the two realize that they cannot live without each other and reunite as lovers in the last scene of the film.
In my opinion, forty-five minutes of the movie could have been cut out and the film would have been much better. All of the fluff and insignificant subplots deterred from the main story in the movie in a negative way, and harmed the overall effect of the movie. Also, I think the main actress was terrible and the casting director could have found someone different for that role who actually knew how to act. Her main role in the movie was to act like a tease and tempt her husband, which she correctly did by never wearing much of anything. There were scenes in the movie when they would be sitting around eating dinner, and for some reason she was eating dinner in a bra and underwear or lingerie. It did not seem to make sense at all; the lack of clothes just left me wondering why she would not just put some clothes on because I had to see it for an hour and forty minutes and just agitated me for some reason because it would not happen in real life.
I was very disappointed in this movie. The idea of the movie was good; it could have been a fun romantic comedy to lighten my day and make me smile after seeing several depressing movies. But it did nothing of the sort. It pissed me off, and I wish I had left because the movie took two hours of my life that I will never get back. I guess I should not be surprised that it was so terrible with the storyline that it had, but the film was still a letdown.
Review 2
Recien Cazado: 2009. Genre: Drama. Director: Rene Bueno. Writer: Rene Bueno. Cast: Babriella Vergara, Jaime Camil, Otto Sirgo, Angelica Aragon, Ruben Zamora, Magi Avila, Khristian Clausen . Running time: 109 minutes.
I wanted to see Recien Cazado because I was curious as to what comedies in other cultures and languages are like. I wanted to know if they were different than comedies that I usually see, or if they were similar to American comedies. I quickly found out that this one at least was very different than movies that I usually watch. I do not know if it was just a poor example of Spanish comedy, but it was absolutely terrible. And when I say terrible, I mean it was so bad that I wanted to walk out of the movie many times. The jokes were corny and just a little bit too raunchy. The plot did not make sense, and the actors reminded me of soap opera actors – they were overdramatic and mediocre at best. To be fair, though, I will say that there were a few people in the movie theatre that laughed at the jokes and seemed to enjoy the movie. This actually leads me to believe that the story of the movie simply did not transcend the cultural barrier (maybe the language did not translate well, or maybe I was not able to appreciate their humor) but either way, I did not enjoy it.
This storyline of Recien Cazado closely resembles What Happens in Vegas, which is an American romantic comedy about two people meeting in Vegas and getting married during a night full of drunken mistakes. Starring Ashton Kurtcher and Brittany Murphy, this movie premiered in 2008 and was much better than its Spanish counterpart. That being said, as I begin to think of what to write about the plot of this movie, I can’t seem to think of anything to write. The storyline of Recien Cazado consisted of many small trivial stories put together that kind of come together to form the larger story of a man and a woman falling in love. It seemed to me that they did not want the movie to be predictable, so they threw in small subplots to try to throw the audience off. It didn’t work. Instead, the audience is left wondering how this pertains to the story, and the movie is still extremely predictable. Basically, the main plot of Recien Cazado tells the same story of a man and a woman who drunkenly get married the first night they meet. The next day, the man does not remember a thing from the night before and wakes up to find a marriage certificate on his bedside table. Upon seeing this, he freaks out, wakes his new “wife” up, and says he wants to get a divorce. The woman does remember the events from the previous night, though, and decides she wants to wait to get a divorce until after she gets her period - to make sure she is not pregnant from the night before. Sounds a little bit ridiculous, right? She begs him to wait until she gets her period in three weeks, and he eventually agrees.
The rest of the movie is about their new marital lifestyle, and the problems that come with being “married” in this strange relationship. They can’t stand each other; the two main characters fight throughout the entire movie, yelling loud in Spanish and even throwing things at each other during one scene. The husband, a suave playboy who previously brought home different ladies from the bar every night, is sexually frustrated and angry that his wife will not let him go out with other girls. Through all the fighting and yelling, they realize that they actually do have a connection and there is chemistry between them. To be honest, the story implies there was supposed to be chemistry between the characters, but the actors completely lacked any amount of chemistry on screen. After two weeks of living together, the woman’s ex-lover comes back into her life and asks her to marry him on a whim. It was at this point that she realizes that she is in love with her “husband” and does not want to be with any other man.
There is an unexpected twist at the end; the marriage was a hoax. The man’s mom hired the woman to marry him because she wanted to teach her son a lesson and distract him from his “playboy” ways, which eventually worked. After spending a few miserable weeks without each other, the two realize that they cannot live without each other and reunite as lovers in the last scene of the film.
In my opinion, forty-five minutes of the movie could have been cut out and the film would have been much better. All of the fluff and insignificant subplots deterred from the main story in the movie in a negative way, and harmed the overall effect of the movie. Also, I think the main actress was terrible and the casting director could have found someone different for that role who actually knew how to act. Her main role in the movie was to act like a tease and tempt her husband, which she correctly did by never wearing much of anything. There were scenes in the movie when they would be sitting around eating dinner, and for some reason she was eating dinner in a bra and underwear or lingerie. It did not seem to make sense at all; the lack of clothes just left me wondering why she would not just put some clothes on because I had to see it for an hour and forty minutes and just agitated me for some reason because it would not happen in real life.
I was very disappointed in this movie. The idea of the movie was good; it could have been a fun romantic comedy to lighten my day and make me smile after seeing several depressing movies. But it did nothing of the sort. It pissed me off, and I wish I had left because the movie took two hours of my life that I will never get back. I guess I should not be surprised that it was so terrible with the storyline that it had, but the film was still a letdown.
Monday, May 17, 2010
The Reef
Jessie Savini
Review 1
The Reef: 2010. Director: Andrew Traucki. Writer: Andrew Traucki. Producer: Michael Robertson. Cast: Kieran Darcy-Smith, Gyton Grantley, Damian Walshe-Howling, Zoe Naylor, Adrienne Pickering. Running time: 89 minutes.
I decided to see The Reef because I have a bizarre attraction to movies involving sharks, and this particular movie sparked my interest. Though strange, these dangerous and mysterious animals fascinate me for some reason unknown to even myself. It may be my curiosity of the threat that these creatures offer, the thrilling component shark attack movies present, or my interest in the unknown that still surrounds sharks. Either way, I had high expectations for this movie; the first screening of the film was full before I was able to get a seat, so I decided it must be a film worth seeing. The film was a bit of a disappointment since I had high expectations, but it was still a descent movie for a person who enjoys a thrilling story about shark attacks.
Based on true events, The Reef is an action thriller that tells the story of four friends embarking on the trip of a lifetime - spending a week sailing a yacht in the Great Barrier Reef. When their yacht suddenly capsizes on the second day of the trip, they are stuck with a choice: either staying on the sinking yacht and waiting for help, or swimming to a small island with twelve miles of open sea between the boat and the island. Deciding to swim for help, the four friends leave the boat’s stubborn captain behind on the sinking yacht and begin their journey in search of safety. When the decision is made to swim, the two girls of the group panic about the thought of miles in open water and the fear of what lurks beneath them, but the men in the group, their love interests, comfort them. These relationships intertwine the feelings of lust and love throughout the plot of the story, with the main focus on passionate feelings from two past lovers that are reignited during the trip.
An element of suspense mirroring that of a psychological thriller exposes itself when the friends realize they cannot see their yacht in the distance anymore, and they suddenly begin to envision what creatures are lurking in the deep water surrounding them. After several false sightings of sharks that stem from their unsettled nerves, the group truly finds themselves in grave danger: they are in the presence of a hungry fifteen foot great white shark. The shark circles around the group several times threatening to attack, and then it seemingly swims away. The rest of the movie captures their attempt to stay alive and get to safety while being stalked by a great white shark. The shark eventually kills the friends one by one, until only one person makes it to the island unharmed. Commentary at the end of the movie informs the audience that neither the yacht nor the boat’s captain was ever found despite an extensive search, and that the sole survivor was found alive by fishermen the day after she reached the island.
The plot resembles the storyline of a stereotypical shark movie which has been created time and time again with minute changes in plot for each film; the account of the true story in The Reef has a remarkably similar plot to movies like Open Water and Deep Blue Sea just to name a few. For the clichéd shark attack story that it presents, the film was overall made well and was an effective thriller, but I had a few complaints about what could have been done to better the film. First off, the movie was overly dramatic several times when it didn’t need to be. Within the first two minutes after the boat capsized, one of the friends went on a rant about the group needing to save themselves by swimming to land or else they would die of dehydration and no one would ever find their bodies. Though it was only one scene, it seemed unnecessary and agitated me. Also, the characters looked too aesthetically perfect to be realistic; after snorkeling all say in the ocean they still had perfect hair and makeup – which I know to be unrealistic from personal experience. The only other thing that bothered me was the actual shark. A synopsis of the movie says the shark is a “fifteen foot great white” but the characters in the movie never described the shark in any more detail than saying it was “big - really big”. It also did not look fifteen feet long on the screen and most of the shots of the shark were poor computer generated images which were not entirely convincing.
On the positive side the film was effective and accomplished the goal of an action/adventure thriller it desires because I was anxious, restless, and frightened throughout the movie. I was on the edge of my seat most of the movie. Director Andrew Traucki was effective in providing startling and unexpected shocks which kept the movie from being too predictable and as a result I must have jumped in my seat upwards of ten times. The combination of underwater camera angles of the group splashing in fear and ominous music contributed to the anxious feeling I got while watching the movie; these elements were not overdone to the point where it was ridiculous and laughable, but they were used just enough to obtain the desired effect on the audience.
Overall, the film is entertaining if nothing else. I would not consider it to be particularly mentally stimulating, but it is engaging. I left the film feeling content with what I had seen – not happy, not distressed, but satisfied with the content of the story and the way it was revealed. It was not too gory, the attacks were not especially graphic, and the love story did not take away from the main theme of the film. The movie must have done a good job of scaring me, though, because I honestly had a nightmare about sharks the night after I watched it, and because of that I will probably not be getting in the ocean anytime soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
