Where do dreams come from? Heaven? From the metaphorical corners of an individual’s heart? Perhaps both or neither, but in Hugo, a character named Georges Méliès opens his arms to his movie set and expresses jubilantly to “look around. This is where they’re made.” Hugo, an action-packed masterpiece directed by the all-time famous Martin Scorsese, truly captures the eminence of film history. With a most intricate plot, this film illustrates the art of movie-making, and further teaches an important life lesson regarding every individual in the existence of humanity. Flawless in all aspects of content, quality of filmmaking, and success in portraying the significant message intended for the viewers, Hugo makes its mark as a legend in the world …show more content…
Through most of the characters’ passion for filmmaking, this movie teaches the audience the great significance of film history. Many people in modern day tend to take film and its history for granted, but they do not realize the depth and effort that mankind has put into such a development. In Hugo, the theme of film history revolves around the entire production, and the audience sees flashbacks of Georges Méliès’ past that reveal his vital role in movie-making. By investing a deep meaning to the tale, viewers start to understand the great emotional and intellectual characteristics of movies. Additionally, Hugo himself delivers a message to his counterpart characters, which also serves as a lesson for the onlookers. He shows the audience that everyone has a part and purpose in this world. Protagonist Hugo Cabret says that “everything has a purpose, even machines. Clocks tell the time, trains take you places. They do what they’re meant to do.” Voicing through Hugo, the filmmakers illustrate how every individual has a reason to live and discover their calling. With a statement about the forgotten grandeur of film history and a valuable message to the crowd regarding one’s purpose, Hugo inspires and presents itself as a noteworthy and unforgettable
The only real way to truly understand a story is to understand all aspects of a story and their meanings. The same goes for movies, as they are all just stories being acted out. In Thomas Foster's book, “How to Read Literature Like a Professor”, Foster explains in detail the numerous ingredients of a story. He discusses almost everything that can be found in any given piece of literature. The devices discussed in Foster's book can be found in most movies as well, including in Quentin Tarantino’s cult classic, “Pulp Fiction”. This movie is a complicated tale that follows numerous characters involved in intertwining stories. Tarantino utilizes many devices to make “Pulp Fiction” into an excellent film. In this essay, I will demonstrate how several literary devices described in Foster's book are put to use in Tarantino’s film, “Pulp Fiction”, including quests, archetypes, food, and violence.
This is a movie in another movie that has a story from the past that is repeated nowadays: the same conflicts between exploited and exploiters, enslavement, injustice, protection of the public against those who put a price, and also the story of how the union of many sometimes gets what seemed
Film and literature are two media forms that are so closely related, that we often forget there is a distinction between them. We often just view the movie as an extension of the book because most movies are based on novels or short stories. Because we are accustomed to this sequence of production, first the novel, then the motion picture, we often find ourselves making value judgments about a movie, based upon our feelings on the novel. It is this overlapping of the creative processes that prevents us from seeing movies as distinct and separate art forms from the novels they are based on.
Through extensive research it is clear that many critics would agree, New Wave of French films has been unsatisfactory, although more than a few respectable films emerged from it. With the appearance of 1960s Breathless, there came a film (for it’s time) that is new, aesthetically and ethically. In a clean, yet rebellious way, Godard makes the statement, ‘Anything is possible when it comes to cinema, that there is no limit to the possibilities of film form.’ Godard understood the rules and clichés of cinema and had the guts to fool around around with them. Godard split ways from classic cinema to make a film that was at the peak of cinematic innovation, while simultaneously paying homage to those past films much like many artists were doing during that time. He innovated countless conventions and posed a scandalous new view for the time. Godard would continue to make great films, but it was Breathless that changed cinema indefinitely.
The debate over Casablanca and Citizen Kane has been a classic argument between film critics and historians alike because both of these pieces contain great cinematographic value, and are timeless pictures that have managed to captivate audiences well beyond their era. However, the real question at hand is which film is the greatest? Which film transformed the future of American film making? It is these questions that I as many others have, will attempt to answer in the following essay as I explain why I believe Citizen Kane has achieved the status of greatest film ever made.
A set of practices concerning the narrative structure compose the classical Hollywood Paradigm. These conventions create a plot centering around a character who undergoes a journey in an attempt to achieve some type of goal (). By giving the central character more time on screen, the film helps the audience to not only understand the character’s motivation but also empathize with his/her emotional state. Additionally, some antagonistic force creates conflict with the main character, preventing immediate success(). Finally, after confronting the antagonist, the main character achieves his or her goal along with growing emotionally(). This proven structure creates a linear and relatively easily followed series of events encompassing the leading character and a goal.
Think about your favorite movie. When watching that movie, was there anything about the style of the movie that makes it your favorite? Have you ever thought about why that movie is just so darn good? The answer is because of the the Auteur. An Auteur is the artists behind the movie. They have and individual style and control over all elements of production, which make their movies exclusively unique. If you could put a finger on who the director of a movie is without even seeing the whole film, then the person that made the movie is most likely an auteur director. They have a unique stamp on each of their movies. This essay will be covering Martin Scorsese, you will soon find out that he is one of the best auteur directors in the film industry. This paper will include, but is not limited to two of his movies, Good Fellas, and The Wolf of Wall Street. We will also cover the details on what makes Martin Scorsese's movies unique, such as the common themes, recurring motifs, and filming practices found in their work. Then on
...uster film: Hugo by Martin Scorsese showcased and resurfaced the life of Melies and re-ignited the publics interest in his films. Melies was portrayed in the beginning of the film as a sour, struggling old man that owned a toy shop in a train station, but was enlightened when his talents and films were finally noticed again by the French community.
In his essay, “It’s Just a Movie: A Teaching Essay for Introductory Media Classes”, Greg M. Smith argues that analyzing a film does not ruin, but enhances a movie-viewing experience; he supports his argument with supporting evidence. He addresses the careful planning required for movies. Messages are not meant to be telegrams. Audiences read into movies to understand basic plotlines. Viewers should examine works rather than society’s explanations. Each piece contributes to Smith’s argument, movies are worth scrutinizing.
Connelly, Marie. "The films of Martin Scorsese: A critical study." Diss. Case Western Reserve University, 1991. Web. 07 Apr 2014.
It is no doubt that Martin Scorsese has heavily influenced the emulating of American film making from European influences. He is a prime example of a ‘New Hollywood Cinema’ director, not only from his ethnicity and background, but from his sheer interest in this form
The postmodern cinema emerged in the 80s and 90s as a powerfully creative force in Hollywood film-making, helping to form the historic convergence of technology, media culture and consumerism. Departing from the modernist cultural tradition grounded in the faith in historical progress, the norms of industrial society and the Enlightenment, the postmodern film is defined by its disjointed narratives, images of chaos, random violence, a dark view of the human state, death of the hero and the emphasis on technique over content. The postmodernist film accomplishes that by acquiring forms and styles from the traditional methods and mixing them together or decorating them. Thus, the postmodern film challenges the “modern” and the modernist cinema along with its inclinations. It also attempts to transform the mainstream conventions of characterization, narrative and suppresses the audience suspension of disbelief. The postmodern cinema often rejects modernist conventions by manipulating and maneuvering with conventions such as space, time and story-telling. Furthermore, it rejects the traditional “grand-narratives” and totalizing forms such as war, history, love and utopian visions of reality. Instead, it is heavily aimed to create constructed fictions and subjective idealisms.
“Entertainment has to come hand in hand with a little bit of medicine, some people go to the movies to be reminded that everything’s okay. I don’t make those kinds of movies. That, to me, is a lie. Everything’s not okay.” - David Fincher. David Fincher is the director that I am choosing to homage for a number of reasons. I personally find his movies to be some of the deepest, most well made, and beautiful films in recent memory. However it is Fincher’s take on story telling and filmmaking in general that causes me to admire his films so much. This quote exemplifies that, and is something that I whole-heartedly agree with. I am and have always been extremely opinionated and open about my views on the world and I believe that artists have a responsibility to do what they can with their art to help improve the culture that they are helping to create. In this paper I will try to outline exactly how Fincher creates the masterpieces that he does and what I can take from that and apply to my films.
Classic narrative cinema is what Bordwell, Staiger and Thompson (The classic Hollywood Cinema, Columbia University press 1985) 1, calls “an excessively obvious cinema”1 in which cinematic style serves to explain and not to obscure the narrative. In this way it is made up of motivated events that lead the spectator to its inevitable conclusion. It causes the spectator to have an emotional investment in this conclusion coming to pass which in turn makes the predictable the most desirable outcome. The films are structured to create an atmosphere of verisimilitude, which is to give a perception of reality. On closer inspection it they are often far from realistic in a social sense but possibly portray a realism desired by the patriarchal and family value orientated society of the time. I feel that it is often the black and white representation of good and evil that creates such an atmosphere of predic...
Movies take us inside the skin of people quite different from ourselves and to places different from our routine surroundings. As humans, we always seek enlargement of our being and wanted to be more than ourselves. Each one of us, by nature, sees the world with a perspective and selectivity different from others. But, we want to see the world through other’s eyes; imagine with other’s imaginations; feel with other’s hearts, at a same time as with our own. Movies offer us a window onto the wider world, broadening our perspective and opening our eyes to new wonders.