Goodfellas

Where on earth do you start with Goodfellas? Of all the blog posts assigned, this was always going to be the hardest from my perspective. Not in the sense of difficulty and a hard up-hill challenge, but what ONE thing should I talk about from a film that has about a warehouse full of potential subject matters? Could I look at how Karen slowly slides further and further down into a hole of depression and becomes one of those mobster's wives she so despised at the hostess party? Did Tommy really get what he deserved and do we feel sympthy at the demise of a character who was essentially a dangerous lunatic? Did Henry deserve to get away with all his actions by "ratting out" on his friends? Should I explore the enourmous level of fore-shadowing that occurs in the film? Would Jimmy have really ordered the murder of Henry in Florida? Why has Ray Liotta only been in (with the exception of Smokin' Aces) in bad films since when he's so good in this film? Or perhaps the ultimate, should Henry have just listened to Paulie and stayed out of trouble, execpt of course in that instance, there would have been no film!
I chose finally to focus on a much broader topic: Why Goodfellas is the greatest gangster film of all time.
A controversial topic perhaps, in light of so many cinematic critics and historians so quick to rally around the first two parts of The Godfather, but nevertheless, I would not make such a statement if I did not believe it to be true.
My primary argument is that Goodfellas details in graphic detail that the life of a gangster was not as extravagant as the Corleones would like us to believe. These were immigrant families who often lived in the harsh neighbourhoods of New York in usually regular houses, not having the luxury of mansions found in the Corleone compound. It is because of this one feels slightly disconnected and at a distance from the family in The Godfather, but with Goodfellas and his iconic use of tracking shots, Scorsese puts us right in the middle of the action and we feel much closer and more involved with the goings on of the mafia in this film. When we are taken through the club and the wedding and introduced to everyone, it literally feels like we are there and along with Henry, we are now connected to a larger family. Arguably Goodfellas also excells in its depiction of the mobsters as ordinary men who would pass for unassuming if you were to walk past one of them and didnt know their business. We see them with their familes and photos of them on holiday which thusly makes them more human and believable in the eyes of the audience.
A key difference that sets Goodfellas apart from most gangster films and that Tarantino echoed in 'Pulp Fiction' is that these men are human and flawed with their own individual problems and they can make mistakes. The iconic scene in the Godfather when all the head dons of the rival families are assassinated flows smoothly and looks stunningly impressive. However, this is far from a true to life depiction of order in the mafia, no opperation could have worked that seamlessly, something would have to have gone wrong. In Goodfellas, the volatile Tommy is of course responsible for the cold-blooded murder of Billy Batts which sets everything in motion to see the downfall of the main characters. Henry and Jimmy are of course "pinched" by the FBI for the intimidation of the gambler in Florida and those involved in the large airplane heist refuse to listen to Jimmy and he has to have them all killed.
The fact that we can actually hear the thoughts inside Henry's head by narration, in another prime icon of Scorsese's work, further makes us feel involved and a part of the story and part of "the family" itself, in perhaps an unervingly effective cinematic device.
The visceral violence, break-up of friendships and marriages and murder perfectly depict the true life of the violent and un-trusting world of the gangster in East Brooklyn. Whilst Henry describes their appeal as being "better thasn the president of the United States" and whilst it is true that they hold high positions of power and influence and are wealthy, Scorsese highlights the aspect that exposes the harsh reality of such a way of existence where you could get shot by your "best friend" at any minute or arrested by the police and killed if you exposed your friends to get out of trouble.
All this amounts to why I truly believe that Goodfellas is the greatest gangtser film ever made. We are taken on a learning curve journey like Henry that whilst the rags to ritches story and appeal of being well-made, rich, powerful and respected is highly appealing at the start, Scorsese exposes to us through Henry's experience that the life of a gangster is like a venus fly-trap, where your luck could change at any minute and death could come at you and your family from all directions.
Just to be on the safe-side, I'll stick to just playing 'The Godfather' video-game to avoid any such lifestyle.

Bonnie and Clyde: True Romance?

A constant source of the break down of modern relatioships is that humans, as a species, are often rather self-centered and selfish. Thusly, its now an age old story that the couple falls out over the fact that niether is willing to go and do things with the other. If only these people had seen Bonnie and Clyde.
As with practically every gangster film, the charming yet cocky, sharply-dressed mobster has practically a neon sign above his head that attracts the ladies to him. Clyde has a criminal record, he's a complete free spirit and represents a bold and exciting way of life and crucially for Miss Bonnie Parker, an escape from her humdrum life as a waitress in simple small town America. What is really interesting to note, however, that unlike other 'gangster molls' who take a step back and just support their husband, Bonnie does not want to play second fiddle to Clyde, she very much wants to be on center stage in the spotlight with him. The danger of heists and hold-ups and the thrill of getting away with the money is just as appealing to her as the good looks and life of danger that Clyde offers. Thinking he has an ultimate grand plan after their life of crime, she abandons everything in an openly bold display off effection to follow him.
Their relationship on the surface can seen to be quite the odd and strained one, she is very possesive of him and tries to stop him having fun with his brother thusly driving him to be irritated and physicaly, she is often very demanding to push their relationship further, yet due to his imputence, he is unwilling to do.
If we are to look deeper into their relationship however, it is clear that they both have very strong and passionate feelings for each other. Bonnie is of course still deeply attracted to Clyde and greatful since he took her away and gave her a life of excitement that she'd been craving. She is also there to crucially offer emotional support for Clyde when things go wrong, therefore it is clear that he depends of her just as much as she depends on him. Clyde himself is very protective of Bonnie, whilst he knows that she is tough and can handle herself, he offers her the chance to get out and escape from the life of crime because he cares for her so much and doesn't want to see her get hurt. With the poems she writes and their general notorious acts of crime, Bonnie has also helped Clyde to get his celebrity status that he has always wanted and this allows them to make love for the first time as they are now so comfortable with each other.
It is of course a tragically doomed romance however, made that much more poignant by the fact that it is only really at the end of the film that they finally gel as a couple and are ready to settle down and end their crime streak. What is evenmore tragic is that they are seperated when they both get shot down, yet the high speed inter-cutting of their staring into each other's eyes is the final beautifully tragic true indicator that they were both very much in love and the space between them seemingly becomes that much more vast. The fact that they dont properly go down together intensifies the tragedy and hits the point home to the audience that they may have lead a life of crime and that they should be deplored by society, they were simply a couple in love who were dependant on each other to get by facing the grim reality of the depression and the established ruling class that they were both seeking desperatley rebelling against.

A Place In The Sun

It was tough this week to just select one topic to chose to write on. Ultimately I decided to chose an idea I had that we did not discuss in class and is a left-of-field idea. In the process of watching the film, several noir-like elements kept constantly surfacing such as the dark shadows and silouettes and the case of murder itself, but one question I pondered was: To what extent can Angela Vickers be viewed as a 'femme fatale'?
On outward appearances, the arguement can be made that she is not what is classically considered to be a femme fatale, Elizabeth Taylor is not the stereotypical blonde bombshell with the sharp and quick humour combined with the smoldering stare and sense of danger that surrounds her. In fact, she is one of the few characters in this film who is almost always well lit and with very few instances when shadows creep across her face. Her general attitude and behaviour as well is not on first examination aligned to that of the stereotypical femme fatale, she seems breezy, naive and most crucially of all to set her apart from the femme fatale, innocent.
Whilst watching, however, certain lines of her dialogue slowly began to make me view her as a femme fatale character. With such lines as "Tell Mamma" before kissing George, demonstrating an idea that she knows how to manipulate him by talking like his mother and then expressing a desire to, "Show you (George) off" demonstrates the idea that she's treating him like an object, and being a rich society girl, she carries herself like she is entitled to all the good things in life such as the lavish holiday we see her on and the attractive man. Although, I thought her most interesting line in the whole film was "Are they watching?"at the party when they first kiss, she is obviously slightly embarrased to be seen with him, eventhough they are roughly on the same level of social standing.
Perhaps the best way to look at her character with regards to a femme fatale is the fact that she is responsible for the breaking down on the relationship between George and Alice by inticing him in with her charms and causing George to murder Alice in order to be with her (feel free to take me up on that debate). Now this clearly indicates a femme fatale character, however, it has to be said that she is unaware of the relationship and the turmoil she has caused, a true femme fatale would be aware of her destructive actions and be doing it all for sport, enjoying her power over the man. Angela, however, is innocent of her "crime" and arguably she does genuinly seem to love George, she is all ready to deny her father's authority so that she can be happy with him, she even visits him in jail before his execution, despite what he has done, a true femme fatale would have just left him alone to suffer his fate.
In conclusion, it is obvious that Angela is not a femme-fatale, but rather a clever subversion of the notion of such a stereotypical character and is one of the few innocent characters in the whole film.

The Distinguishing Features Of Film Noir

Film Noir is a term coined from French film critics when they were commenting on the new dark and downbeat attitude of the wave of post war American films. The classic film noir period was between the 1940s and 50s in which time approximately 350 film noirs were made, most of which were simply B-features. Film noir was highly influenced by 20s German expressionist films, particularly in the use of a harsh contrast between light and darkness. The main influence on film noirs was the hardboiled pulp fiction detective stories which were immensely popular in America at the time, many of which were adapted into film noir films. Raymond Chandler is perhaps the most famous of these pulp fiction writers, having written the novels that inspired some of the most famous film noirs, such as ‘The Big Sleep’ and ‘Farewell My Lovely’. The most famous film noir director was Howard Hawks who was responsible for the successful adaptations of ‘The Big Sleep’ and many others.
From the distinguishing features of film noir, we can gain a great understanding of America in the in1940s and 50s, capturing the pessimistic and anxiety filled mood of a society at the dawn of a new age and still suffering from the after effects of the war. Throughout their history, film noirs have reflected the society from which they have been created, recent examples such as ‘LA Confidential’ and ‘The Black Dahlia’, both written by James Ellroy, focus once again on 50s corruption and anxiety as a comparison to events such as the gulf war and general feeling of mistrust in America. An even more recent example would be ‘Sin City’ which centers around today’s more violent and extreme world full of terrorism and threat and danger from everywhere. The distinguishing features of mood, male and female characterization and dark lighting will always be recognized as key indicators of a film noir.

Sullivan's Travels: Satirising the Film Industry and it's influence on other films

As was clearly highlighted both in clas and in the process of viewing the film, oneof the key components of the comedy in 'Sullivan's Travels' is that of layer of satirical jokes aimed directly at the film-making business itself of the time.
The film opens with a screening of Sullivan's new film to the studio producers, who begin to quickly de-construct it in order to get what they want to see in the film in order to make a profit. "With a little sex in it" is the humourously repeated demand by one of the executives, which would be later imitated in Tim Burton's 'Ed Wood' in the lines;
"What is the one thing, if you put it in a movie, it'll be successful?"
" Tits"
Despite the code still being in full swing, producers, as displayed in these two examples, were clearly desperate to try and get away with as much saucy and racy material in their films as possible as they knew it would see big profit and audience attendence numbers. When viewing other films from around the same time, it is truly remarkable to see how in some instances, such as Veronica Drake in the shower, the director was able to get past the code.
It is argued that Sturges' aim behind the film was to prove that whilst hard hitting drama's can be effective, as the final line of 'Sullivan's Travels' highlights, there really is something to be made out of just making people laugh. It is ironic that this line should come from Sullivan himself, since at the very start of the film, he was grossly adament against comedy and musicals.
"How can you ctalk about a musical at a time like this?"
In order to advance as a film maker, he believes he must make a gritty epic that "holds a mirror up to the world" to relfect the dark times or the Depression, using 'O,Brother Where Art Thou?' as a reference source to highlight the plight of the nation's tramps and forgotten men. With regards to comedy, it is also interesting to note how Sullivan berates the classic comic films involving "keystone chases, bathing beauties, custard pie" when later in the film, we see an almost tribut to such stlye of comedy with the boy's high speed car and the mayhem going on inside the land yacht as they try to follow him. As previously mentioned, the film also contains a bathing beauty in the form of Veronica Lake in the shower.
With regards to Veronica Lake's character, she is the embodiment of the dazzling Hollywood beauty and the film's clear love interest however, the stereotype is turned on its head as she has no name throughout the film, this does the opposite of not shaping her character as a plot device however, she is sassy, has a quick wit to keep up with Sullivan and doesnt mind getting dirty and dressing down living amoung tramps. She is the very antithesis of the blonde bombshell stereotype that studios use(d) to sell their films.
The concept that still exists today of film makers or studios seeking to be seen to be sympathetic on certain issues and tragedies is clearly lampooned in the film, of course Sullivan has no idea at all of the hardships of life on the streets, but to his credit, he does in fact walk the walk with regards to gaining the proper experience in perhaps the film example of method acting for a film. This notion of exposing celebrities in the film business to appear foolish and knowing nothing of real life harships has become a staple effective plot for hit comedies such as 'Tropic Thunder' and 'Galaxy Quest', where the actors are actually thrown into a real life dangerous situation to see how they would really cope.
The clearest comparrion film I can make to 'Sullivan's Travels' is that of under-rated gem, Kiss Kiss (Bang Bang) which is like 'Travels' but in reverse, where the low-life crook, Harry Lockheart (Robert Downey Jnr.) accidently stumbles into the film industry and all its prospects whilst Sullivan was so desperate to escape it in order to get the feel for his part.
It will of course remain a sad yet undeniable fact, that depsite the best intentions to gain laughs from the audience and mock the industry, the films will always still be a product of that same business, and the actors themselves not playing characters too far from the truth of how they themselves would act in such situations/

'Goldiggers of 1933'- The Forgotten Man/Plot

I was thoroughly enjoying the film whilst watching it in class, that is however, right up until the end of the film and its final number of 'The Forgotten Man'. Now I am not denying for a minute that it is a spectacular final number with an important message conveyed through it, however, my argument here is focusing on how I feel the end to the film was inappropriate and greatly effected my overall enjoyment of the film.
Whilst the final song serves the purpose that this classical era of musicals required to end the film/show with it's biggest and most spectacular number, I felt that in this instance it was a bad way to end the film. Admittedly, within the context of the film being set in the depression and the musical itself revolving around the same theame, "The Forgotten Man" serves as an effective reminded of the harsh reality that the real people in the film and its audience find themselves, brutally depicting the tragic fall of the soldier returning from way, scared and bruised and facing the darkly tragic long depression-era lines for bread and soup after being promised bonuses for being veterans. With this attitude in mind, 'The Forgotten Man' also serves to be an effective juxtaposition to the film's opening number of 'We're in the Money' which can be interpreted and mirroring society's downfall from rich and prosperous to towntrodden and desperate.
My argument behind 'The Forgotten Man' is supported by the fact that it has nothing to do with the ending of the narrative plot. I am aware that with this classical musicals, most of the big numbers had few (if any at all) tenuous links to the actual plot itself, but "The Forgotten Man" feels so far out of place that it completely jarred with my enjoyment an d the progression of the narrative plot itself. In studying the final actions of the characters themselves, it is clear that all three girls are/will be happily married to rich and successful men. They have been recieving lavish present after lavish present including dresses, hats, furs and even a dog and have been attending dances whist still trying to take the hapless bankers for the proverbial "ride". This coupled with the men themselves being incredibly rich and well off, suggest that they themselves have nothing to worry about in this dark time, they'll get their happy ever after with their love and their money, therefore after this happy ending, "The Forgotten Man" seems to be a completely innappropriate ending to the film and lacks the emotional gravitas and effect it is meant to have on the audience.
It was interesting to learn that "Pettin' in the Park" was originally intended to the final number, whilst I would uphold other people's objections that this might have been an overly shmaltsy way to end the film, I agrue that it would have suited the notion of the "happy ending" far better. I personally would have ended the film with "The Shadow Waltz" as to my mind it was by far the most impressive musically and visually with the neon violins. In addition to this "The Shadow Waltz" could have better represented the final calm that the characters felt that now they were set for life and the worry being finally over for Lawrence no longer cutting off Brad's allowance and his newfound love for Carol (incidentally, the forgiveness end scene also felt far too rushed and implausable, Lawrence quite litterally goes from being full of anger towards his brother one minute to completely forgiving him the next).
A brilliant point was also raised in class that it seems almost insulting that a billionaire should be writing the almost funeral-durge that encapsulates the feelings of the down-todden men suffering in the depression when he himself has no such worries or cares and is certainly not writing from experience. The ladies too have now become so far removed from their past life of being poor and sharing the same clothes that their singing of "The Forgotten Man" can also be seen to be highly hypocritical. With this in mind, arguably the final number should have been 'We're In the Money', the women have achieved their aim of no longer being poor and having rich and successful men to spoil them with whatever they ask for and the men now have wives and all the money they need to protect them from falling to the same level of the fallen men who the musical is supposed to elevate to strong survivors.
In summary, 'The Forgotten Man' falls flat as a final number due to the fact that the idea that the film is set during the depression is almost unbelieveable as throughout the film we have seen nothing but fantasticly extravagant sets, fancy dances and a seemingly endless procession of displays of wealth from framed cheques and lavish clothing, numbing any feeling of being in the grasp of oneof the most desperate times in American history.

Lilly aka Babyface

It clear from watching the film in class that Barbara Stanwyck's performance as the deadly seductive Lilly is certainly deserving of thorough analysis in order to highlight its grand importance in the history of cinema. One can argue however that perhaps we will never be able to fully understand Lilly as a character and the debate could be endless as to deciding upon her true personality.
Whilst of course it is clear to the audience what her motivations are for the way she behaves ie a lust for money and status, it can be debated as to what is indeed the real root cause behind her actions. The arguement can be made that she is so desperate to escape her old life of oppression under her father and being constantly "eyeballed" and propositioned by the drunken men in her father's seedy speakeasy that she is determined to be in a position of power and standing far removed from such circumstances. This would offer a slightly sympathetic view of the character of Lilly, however, another perspective could simply be her inherent lust for power and money. As instructed by the shoe maker, she will "use men" to get what she wants. From this perspective, Lilly can be seen to be almost pre-empting the femme fatale character, a staple of 40s-50s film noir. This is an easy comparisson to make as like many of the stereotypical femme fatales, Lilly uses her beauty to seduce men and make them seemingly forget their common sense and devote themselves entirely do her and once she is done with them and moved onto a man higher up in staus or wealthier, she completelty shuns them, and as shown in the film, this ultimately leads to their downfall.
Of course, despite her golddigging ways and cruel and cold attitude to men, it can be said that Lilly is a step forward fro the importance of women not only in cinema, but in real life. She is forceful and strong-willed, she deliberatley (albeit violently) turns down the advances of the politician in a perfect example of pre-code filming and also despite her sleazy way of getting to the top of the pile at work, she is actually shown to be working and therefore we cannot simply dismiss her character as simply just out for getting what she wants in the simplest way possible. She surprises both the audience and Trentholm towards the end of the film by actually holding down the job in Paris which again is a clear example of her breaking of the stereotypical golddigger or fallen woman image.
The key scene where the audience make up their mind about Lilly's character is to be found at the end of the film. After she has gotten off the cruise boat and envisioned the faces of all her previous lovers, she appears to decide that she actually is in love with Trentholm and is shown to actually care for him and no longer for his money. Throughout the film she only ever used her seductive smile or cold glare, but here at the end, she is visably distressed and upset over his attempted suicide. Because of this reaction, many people instantly change their opinion of Lilly and believe that her emotion she is displaying is genuine. The ending is of course quite against the grain of usual fallen women film in that she doesn't reach a tragic end, the alternative ending infact stated that she and Trentholm infact live "happily ever after" by getting by as normal members of society without excessive riches. The other way to view the final act is through a cynical lens, she openly stated that she was determined to get the other half of the million dollars that she was after from Trentholm and without the alternative ending tacked on, if one still lacks sympathy for Lilly (as I did) then we only have the parting shot of her "apparent" change of heart to go on. Who is to say that once Trentholm got better, or if at all, she wouldnt go back to her old ways seeking out rich men with power and wealth.
Ultimately it is down to the indivual viewer's perspective as to weither or not they feel symapthy or agravation towards Lilly at the end of the film. Any form of arguement would be deadlocked with no conclusion over the version that we saw in class, however, if we had seen the alternative ending when we hear about what happens to them later in life, then the assumption that she truely had repented from her ways woukld have been far clearer to understand and more of an audience-friendly ending which some who prefer the ambiguiety of our version's ending, would see as a traditional Hollywood cop-out.

Scarface vs Scarface

As I am an enourmous fan of the ganster film genre, in particular Brian de Palmer's 80s epic staring Al Pacino, I was thoroughly looking forward to watching the original in class on Wednesday. While watching, the similarities between the two pieces as well as drastic differences both proved to be truly fascinating. This weblog will be focused on the importance of certain aspects that were used in both films whislt taking into account the reasons behind the substantial differences and what they reveal about the world of cinema at their time of release.
The most obvious idea that is found in each film is that the main character is an immigrant in America, Tony Camonte from Italy and Tony Montana from Cuba. Their immigrant status is vitally important as it stresses the idea that both characters have come in search of the American Dream, which in their minds is to be rich and incredibly powerful (as the poster for de Palmer's Scarface proclaims; 'He Loved The American Dream, With A Vengence'). The notion of their lust for power is not only indicated through the plot that shows them slowly climbing higher and higher up the crime world's ladder, but it is also epitomised by the characters' love of the phrase; 'The World Is Yours', a creed which they both live to fullfill. In Hawks' film, Scarface's appartment looks out to a large billboard with these words, which inventively are focused in on at the end of the film as the lights go out to symbolize Scarface's death and loss of his power. In de Palmer's version, in keeping with the film's gaudy 80s aesthetic, Tony Montana makes an even bigger statement of his power, having these world enscribed on a giant golden statue of Atlas holding up the world in a fountain. As with Hawks' Scarface, Tony Montana symbolically collapses dead into the pool in front of the statue to mirror the message that Hawks conveyed.
With regards to the visable difference to the films, it of course has to be remember that whilst the 1932 Scarface was released just before the Motion Picture Production Codes of 1927 and 1930 fully took effect, it was taking great risk with the censors who were keen to stamp down on violence, firearms, murder, siding with the bad guys, riddicule of the law and explicit details of the art of crime. Now that we have all seen the film and learnt of these censor restrictions, it can certainly be said of the original Scarface that it was incredibly taboo-breaking. There were multiple examples of the previously listed "forbidden" material from start to finish, and it can even be argued that were it not for the lack of blood, the Scarface of 1932 can be described as being every bit as violent as it's 1983 counterpart. A further key difference to note between the films is the time periods in which they are set, the 1932 version depicting the now 'classical' gangsters of the day with their identical cars, liquor rackettiering and almost businessman-like dress sense of hats and suits. The 1983 version is far more focused on the gaudy and materialistic 80s, best represented in Tony Montana's open-button shirts and enourmous gold-a-plenty mansion (not forgetting of course, his very own tiger).
Perhaps the most crucial difference of all can be found in the vastly opposing attitudes towards Gangsters and the criminal underworld in each film. Hawks's film was under the pressure from to not make the bad guys out as the heroes and make sure they get their come-uppants. It can of course be argued that ultimately, Hawks failed in this task, as despite his attrotious behaviour to others and his sister in particular, his confident swagger and almost playfullness keep him as a likeable character. Conversely, di Palmer was without such restrictions, taking the brutal malice and arrogance of Tony Montana to the extreme yet somehow, Al Pacino's performance makes the audience root for him, perhaps located in the great cinema tradition of being drawn towards the poweful, wise-cracking (and highly quotable) anti-hero. Whilst such an idea would have been detestable and shot down by censors in Hawk's day, thanks to the modern idea of the 'Cinema of Cool' in which gangsters and lawbreakers are seen as the most dynamic on screen that allowed Tony 'Say Hello To My Lil Friend!" Montana to become a cult icon of near aspiration. (Which could possibly explain my framed film poster for the 1983 Scarface taking pride of place on my wall)

The Importance Of Colour In 'Redskin'

'Redskin' is a 1929 film which was an early example of the use of two-strip technicolour in film. Not only was this use of colour important with regards to the great advances of filming techniques but would prove crucial to enhancing the experience and message behind this film in particular.
To begin with, the title itself can be disected to highlight its importance with regards to the motivation behind the film and the film's plot. It was part of a revolution in film theory that was tired of the stereotypical and prejudiced depiction of the Native American in cinema as the nomadic savage. 'Redskin' aimed to present a more true to life representation of the Native American man with full intelligence and humanity through the character of Wing Foot (as played by Richard Dix). Whilst some may view the title of 'Redskin' perhaps as stereotyping in itself, it is through a watching of the film, that we the audience see Wing Foot boldy procclaiming that he is "Proud to be a Redskin" after a vicious entounter with his fellow prejudiced white students has caused him to want to return to his true roots. Therefore the importance of colour in the title can arguably be said to encourage pride in the Native American culture as opposed to an attempt at stereotyping.
The most noticeable use of colour in the film is without question, the use of colour during the scenes with the Native tribes and the outdoors which is used to directly contrast the black and white of the scenes in the city, school and university. Whilst some accounts of the film detail that this was purely for reasons of budget constraints, I argue that this was a deliberately iconic use of colour decision made by the director. The black and white of the city can be seen to extenuate the dull oppressiveness of the white man's culture through the eyes of the Natives in comparison to their previous, nature-filled surroundings. This is the most obvious metaphor to highlight with regards to the absence of colour, a more subtle angle could be to highlight the notion that as he has tried to assimilate so hard into this society, he is no longer recogniseable as a Native American. This notion is also carried through the fact that Dix himself was a white actor, when he first returns home to his father, he is clearly pale-faced, however, in a key use of makeup colour, the longer he spends in the wilderness, the darker and redder his skin turns, showing that he is returning to his Native roots.
The tribal grounds themselves are full of colour, red is particularly dominant on clothing and rugs perhaps to highlight the notion of pride in being a 'redskin' but also to display that they are a vibrant culture and firmly stand out in the dull and arid dirt desert. It is also key to note that whenever the white charatcers are on the tribal lands, their costumes are usually of dull pastal colours again as a deliberate attempt to display that the important characters that the audience should focus on are the Natives.
It is clear that the importance of colour as symbolism is still important and a great cinematic technique thanks to this example in 'Redskin'. Without it, such films as 'Sin City' or 'Sophie Schroll: The Final Days' would never have existed.

D.W.Griffith: A Man of Vision and Contradiction

Upon the study of Griffith’s contribution to cinematic history, it is evident that he was a very contradictory man, as described by David A. Cook;
‘a provincial southern romantic with pretensions to high literacy culture and a penchant for...melodrama’. Here we already see a form of contradiction in terms as melodrama was viewed by some of being of a lower class of literature and the 'pretentions' in Cook's description make it sound as though Griffith was far from being as clever as he believed himself to be.
Each film he released seemed to drastically oppose the other, an early film of his called ‘The Rose of Kentucky’ centres around a southern man who refuses to join the Klu Klux Klan and in fact fights against them. To have 'The Rose of Kentucky' to be followed by‘The Birth of a Nation’, a very openly racist film which glorifies the KKK is truely a bizzare progression. It is also equally difficult to determine exactly what precise vision Griffith truly had for his films. Whilst he seemed one minute to revel in the storm of controversy that ‘Birth of a Nation’ had created, he then complained that people were not admiring its technical expertise and historical accuracy.
Two of Griffith's films after "Birth of a Nation" also seem to be some sort of attempt at repentance for the offence he caused with it. "Intollerance" is a profoundly anti-war film that observes the battles in history of various nations, whilst the lower-key "Broken Blossoms" highly romanticises the grace and gentleness of the Chinese culture as embodied by the store owner who looks after the young girl who is abused by her father. Griffith even goes so far as to make the white male father the villain of the piece as opposed to the Chinese man, one could argue, however, that despite an attempt to show his humanity, Griffith has still fallen back onto the use of a stereotype as the actor playing the Chinese was infact white and made to look like a stereotypical image of a Chinese person.
Many film critics and students are too quick to dismiss Griffith's work due to the high level of racism. I believe, however, that whilst the open display of vile prejudice and vulgar spin on history, ‘The Birth of a Nation’, should be recognised first asGriffith’s vision to prove to the world that film could be used as an art form to deftly convey a comprehensive narrative to an audience that would evoke great reaction and discussion, whilst thoroughly displaying his brilliance of mastering new filming techniques that had never been seen before. It is evident that Griffith has achieved this as to this date it is cited as one of the most important films ever made and can still provoke discussion and debate. Griffith’s overtly grand and extravagant vision with regards to the study of ‘The Birth of a Nation’ has done nothing to effect his great achievements that the history of cinema should recognise for pushing the boundaries of what could be done with film that would pave the way for everything to come afterwards.

Film Fanatic Intorduction!

Hi everyone! Oli here! I'm from Swansea University in the UK here at WSU for an exchange year and seriously already LOVE English 339 as anyone will tell you I'm OBSESSED with films! I also do the film reviews for The Daily Evergreen and back home in Swansea I ran the Film Section of the newspaper there called The Waterfront. I've even been very lucky enough to have a mini-scetion of my writing published in a UK magazine called Total Film. My fave film genres are horror and comedy and anything that's abit weird and left of centre! Fave directors are Tim Burton, Quentin Tarantino, Sam Raimi, Christopher Nolan, Edgar Wright, Peter Jackson, John Carpenter, Martin Scorsese, David Fincher, Kevin Smith and The Coen Brothers.

Plus here's a list of my fave films!:
Sweeney Todd:The Demon Barber Of Fleet Street, The Dark Knight, Donnie Darko, Repo! The Genetic Opera, The Nightmare Before Christmas, Shaun of the Dead, Ghostbusters, The Evil Dead Trilogy, Drag Me To Hell, [REC], Inglorious Basterds, Ginger Snaps, This Is Spinal Tap, Beetlejuice, Sleepy Hollow, Ed Wood, Mars Attacks!, The Hangover, In Bruges, Watchmen, Batman, Batman Returns, Edward Scissorhands, The Corpse Bride, The Life of Brian, Control, Coraline, Hot Fuzz, Tropic Thunder, Kiss Kiss (Bang Bang), Dodgeball, Anchorman, Snakes on a Plane, Being John Malkovich, Suspiria, Serenity, The Thing, Escape from New York, Star Wars Trilogy, Pirates of the Carribean Trilogy, 30 Days Of Night, Sunshine, Little Miss Sunshine, Garden State, The Big Lebowski, The Crow, Moulin Rouge!, Sin City, Back to the Future Trilogy, Batman Begins, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Braindead, No Country For Old Men, The Adams Family 1 and 2, Fargo, American Psyco, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Whithnail and I, Pulp Fiction, Resevoir Dogs, Kill Bill, Blade Runner, A Clockwork Orange, Night Watch and Day Watch, Clerks1&2, Alien and Aliens, A Nightmare On Elm Street, Sherlock Holmes, Fight Club, Zodiac, Grindhouse, Halloween, Night, Dawn, Land and Diary Of The Dead, Team America:World Police, Pan's Laberynth, Se7en, Saw Series, South Park Movie, The Running Man( Best Worst Film Ever!!!)