Category: Reviews

Full Metal Jacket VS Hacksaw Ridge

Last weekend I was sitting with my family having family movie time, the film we chose was Hacksaw Ridge, directed by Mel Gibson. Firstly I loved the movie the CGI of the bombs was a bit meh but I couldn’t fault it anywhere else.

The biggest reason why I am writing this post is because; as I was watching it I noticed a lot of the scenes reminded me of Full Metal Jacket. So not only does this link in with my current unit but also made me feel like a film boff! so here are a few scenes I noticed to be very similar:

The obstacle course.

 

 

 

The room scene where they are standing by there beds and their leader is calling them names and shouting abuse.

 

 

 

 

 

The beating scene as punishment for being weak.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The rifle lesson.

 

 

Marching and chanting.

Full Metal Jacket

Full Metal Jacket

  • Release date: 11 September 1987 (United Kingdom)
  • Director: Stanley Kubrick
  • Music composed by: Vivian Kubrick
  • Budget: 17 million USD

Summary:

This film is Stanley Kubrick’s take on the Vietnam War. It  follows Private Davis, nicknamed ‘Joker’, through out the whole film. But we also follow the story of a rotund Private Lawrence, nicknamed ‘Gomer Pyle’ who struggles through basic training and eventually becomes psychotic and after killing his drill sergeant kills himself. Joker’s work however pays off and he graduates to the Marine Corps and is sent to Vietnam as a journalist where he covers stories on the war and eventually participating in a very brutal war.

My Review:

I really enjoyed this film, from the very beginning I was gripped. The very first scene is of the soldiers having their hair shaved off, the soldiers seem unhappy, Kubrick juxtaposes this scene by using happy lively music. This caught my attention as it seemed very bizarre but hinted at the film being a comedy. Kubrick makes you feel sorry for Pyle at the beginning but once he becomes psychotic I became scared of him as he became very creepy. Something that shows the age of this film is the sexist remarks towards women and how they are nothing more than objects, being a female I found these scenes revolting but I understand that when this film is set and the times it was made in it makes sense and really it only points out how badly women were treated it doesn’t fully condone the objectification of women. The ending was very poignant where Joker spared the woman sniper of her pain it showed that even though he was killing her he wasn’t killing her in vain, there was no way to save her so he was doing her a mercy.

Context

  • Research Vietnam war It was a war between the capitalists and the communists. Between North and South Vietnam and then America joined in.
  • Who won the war? The Communists in North Vietnam actually signed a peace treaty, basically they surrendered. U.S. Congress didn’t hold up their end of the bargain, effectively the military won. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hqYGHZCJwk|)

Film analysis

  • How is the film divided? It is split into the training and becoming a killer, it starts with Pyle not being crazy and then Pyle becomes crazy. The next section is working in a dull job at camp. Then being in the war and being active. The final stage is winning the war.
  • How do you perceive the relationship with the characters and their rifle? Sexual and respectful. Treats it like a woman.
  • Is the gun worshipped? Yes it is what makes them killers and that is what they strive to be.
  • What happens when the army tries to uniform soldiers? They become one person and they become dehumanised.
  • Do you have to loose your humanity in order to kill? I think you do have to partly when they have their uniforms on they are ruthless and want to kill. They act as though they are psychopaths and not human.
  • The Born to Kill symbol and the Peace symbol. What do they suggest? It satirises war as war is clearly not peaceful thousands upon thousands of people die due to it. The born to kill symbol shows how blood thirsty and inhuman they are.
  • Is a part of Joker lost at the end? No I don’t think so he still gives mercy to the female sniper which shows he still has remorse and cares.
  • Why do we hear the Mickey Mouse song? It brings all of the soldiers together and shows they have gone through living hell and come out of it together. It shows after all that killing they are still human, they may be broken but there is some humanity there still.
  • Have you watch other war films? Yes, Dunkirk.
  • Can you compare and contrast with FMJ? Dunkirk and Full Metal Jacket are both about war but FMJ is a comedy where as Dunkirk is extremely tense and serious. FMJ uses its witty dialogue to create humour. Whereas Dunkirk has very little dialogue meaning you focus more on the emotion the characters portray and there is less humour as the director of Dunkirk hasn’t tried to satirise war.

Here are the notes I took durning the film:

Scan

2001: A Space Odyssey

  • Release date: 10 May 1968
  • Director: Stanley Kubrick
  • Box office: $138–190 million

Synopsis: A black structure provides a connection between the past and the future. When Dr. Dave Bowman and other astronauts are sent on a mysterious mission, their ship’s computer system, HAL, begins to display increasingly strange behaviour. This leads up to a tense showdown between man and machine that results in a mind-bending trek through space and time.

The interesting think about this film is that when it was created nothing had been sent out to space so they had no idea what earth looked like from space and what other planets were like up close. One amazing thing they guessed was that in space there is no sound as space is exactly what it says, space.

Kubrick uses a lot of classical music in this film. One reason for using it in the ape scenes is to show that they have intelligence as classical music is seen as only for the intelligent.

In this scene the camera man is being hung upside down and moved round so the we get the vibe that the spacemen are walking upside down and on the side. This gives the effect of little gravity and it confuses the audience to believe it.

I can understand why audience left when they first watched this film. The first 50 minutes or so are just a build up to the full narrative. It introduces the black square thing and explains how humans became.

As you watch the film, note down how you would describe HAL: In the beginning you would believe that HAL is a super intelligent computer that has no feelings as it isn’t real. However, the other characters in the film mention that HAL has never failed or had a problem this foreshadows future problems and implies that HAL will go wrong or become evil. Other characters also mention HAL sounding proud over his job and his reliability. By the end HAL is evil and extremely power, however he still has this calming deep voice which contradicts his aims.

Place the following suggestions of the film’s main theme in order of importance or add suggestions of your own.  Do you think the film is:

  1. A visual experience
  2. What could happen if machines are given too much power.
  3. A journey (or ‘Odyssey) of mankind towards self knowledge
  4. An attempt to predict what life will be like in the year 2001.
  5. The influence of extra -terrestrials on human evolution.

(Above is my opinion of the order I think the suggestions should go in.)

Todorov’s theory in 2001: A Space Odyssey:

The story starts off with how man kind became what it is in the present, this just sets up what will happen later on. To create equilibrium you see the spaceship with the astronauts on it living a fairly normal life and HAL working as he should be, without fault. To create disequilibrium we then see HAL show faults in its programming which then makes HAL become evil. To solve this problem The astronauts have to shut HAL down which was difficult but they achieved it, this creates new equilibrium and therefore leaves the film with a satisfying ending.

The way that Mark understands the film: He sees it as a story of the evolution of mankind. It is interesting to see that other people see it and take from a different perspective.

The Shining Opening

Opening Scene:

How does the film open? What does the music suggest? The film opens with panning birds eye view shot of the mountains, this tells the audience where the characters are, they could be seen as establishing shots. Without the music this opening scene wouldn’t be as creepy. The music contradicts the beautiful setting and nature.

Describe the shots, count them and describe one by one:

There are 9 shots in the opening scene. They are all of the surrounding area of the hotel. They are very beautiful but the music disrupts the beauty and juxtaposes the beautiful setting. This could foreshadow bad things happening in the future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kubrick decided to have rolling credits in a bright blue colour. The colour is very out of place and looks unusual. This colour could connote unusual things.

There is also a yellow car, Kubrick uses yellow to stand out among all the greens and the surroundings. This causes the audience to look at the car specifically.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Describe camera work and scenery. This shot is the start of pioneering camerawork. The moving shots allow the audience to see all of the beauty of the land smoothly without jump cutting or cross dissolving from one frame to another.

Is there a sense of emptiness? Yes, all you see for miles is mountains with tiny roads and then suddenly we see the hotel all by itself. This could foreshadow the trouble that might happen and the lack of help they will be able to get.

What will the film be centred on? The film will be centred on the hotel as it is the thing that stands out among all the nature, it sticks out like a sore thumb.

Is there symmetry? Or one point perspective?  Yes here are some examples:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How does the size of the car emphasize the scale of the scenery? The car is very small against the surroundings, this symbolises the insignificance of the characters and could foreshadow people not caring if anything happens to them. So if said characters were to be horribly murdered not many would notice or care until it is too late.

Describe the editing. There are a lot of cross dissolves used. The opening scene is a montage of the area which lets the audience know where the narrative is being set. When Danny is on his trike and is turning round the corners you feel as though you are moving with the trike and are apart of the movie, this makes the horror genre more poignant as the audience feel as though they are there.

Witness for the Prosecution

On Sunday the 11th my Grandparent’s, Brother and I went to to County Hall, London to see Witness for the Prosecution on stage.

I really enjoyed the show the set up was really original and added a different feel to the whole show you felt as though it was actually happening and not a made up story. Here is a picture I took of the stage:

There wasn’t a live band but the music was set up in surround sound and was really effective. At parts where the set up needed to be changed the whole place went dark and this music played, it was really moving and set up the atmosphere.

WFTP is about a young man charged for murder of an old lady he became friends with. He is pleading as innocent and all the evidence seems to be pointing to the fact that he is actually guilty, even his wife turns against him.

Not all is as it seems and the end is so unpredictable and shocking that the performance finishes and the audience just sit there stunned contemplating everything that happened.

This next bit of reflection is based on Todorov’s theory:

The performance starts off with someone being hung and once this very dramatic opening has started and has gripped the audience normal life begins. We first meet the main character walking into a lawyers office (equilibrium). Everything starts to go wrong when people start pleading the guy as guilty (disequilibrium). New equilibrium is achieved when he is released as innocent. Until there is another change in the narrative. WFTP doesn’t really follow Todorov’s theory fully but you can see a rough outline.

Dr. Strangelove

Brief Facts:

  • Release date- 29 January 1964
  • Director- Stanley Kubrick
  • Thriller/Comedy
  • 1h 45m

Summary:

Dr. Strangelove takes place during the cold war which happened after WWII. The cold war is all about the tension between Russia and America and the threat of nuclear war. Dr. Strangelove is about Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper who decides to drop a nuclear bomb, he unknowingly knows this will start a nuclear war and in turn end the world. Meanwhile in the White House war Room, President Merkin Muffley is having to come up with ideas on how to prevent this war and to somehow deactivate the bombs, even though the bombs have been rigged so that they can’t be deactivated. This is where an ex Nazi scientist- Dr. Strangelove is introduced and he reveals there is a way to prevent the bomb from exploding. Unfortunately Ripper is the only one who knows the recall code which is needed to deactivate the bombs.

Then another disaster comes to the attention of the government where they find out the Doomsday Machine has been which created by the U.S.S.R. This machine is able to release a bomb that will in turn destroy Earth as it is so powerful.

Luckily the White House war room people are able to discover the recall code and get all the pilots to turn around. Or so they thought, one air craft doesn’t get the message and Major T.J. “King” Kong sacrifices his life to release the bomb that got jammed. Kong rides the bomb to his death.

Dr. Strangelove theorizes about life for what remains of humanity at the bottom of mineshafts as mushroom clouds cover the earth.

  • What do the signs around the air base say?

Which is ironic as they end out bombing another country which in turn kills many and destroys practically everything.

 

 

  • Whats the effect of Peter Sellers playing multiple roles in the film?

The whole point of Peter Sellers playing multiple roles is that it is meant to be funny as it seems as though he is fighting with himself. The roles he plays are:  President Muffley (left), Dr. Strangelove himself (center), and Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake (right).

It also gives the audience an American, British and German point of view and shows the conflict between the world. It shows that the war is not with others but ourselves.

Another reason is that Columbia Pictures saw that Kubrick’s success for ‘Lolita’ was based on Seller’s acting and capability in playing a single role with multiple identities. They thought this would mean that ‘Dr. Lovestrange’ would be just as successful; which they weren’t wrong about whether or not it was for this I don’t exactly agree.

  • What does Kubrick seem to be saying about the original motivations for war?

Kubrick implies that the motivation for war is a massive joke and pointless, Kubrick does this by getting the American to ring up the Russian (the enemy) tells them he doesn’t want to bomb them and gives the Russians the coordinates so they can blow up the American bombers, which seems like a joke it makes it seem like the solution to war is as simple as a phone call.

  • What effect is created by music and speech given by the B52 pilot?

The music on the B52 is ‘When Johnny comes marching home’ it sounds quite serious yet it has proud undertones that sound like the cliche music you hear when soldiers are marching off to war. The count down of miles from target was very effective as it builds tension. The audience are left wondering whether or not Major Kong would fix the doors or not, in the end it creates more comedy due to the bomb being released and Kong riding quite happily to his death.

  • Would the film have a different impact on the audience if it were in colour?

The black and white connotes the unhappiness and upset in the world, without the black and white I think you would still be able to tell this as you can see the upset and disruption in the world

  • How does Kubrick manage to make Strangelove a comedy and a thriller at the same time?

Kubrick tries to keep the film lighthearted by adding in jokes and making the characters do funny things but with the theme of war running throughout the film it is difficult to not be serious all the time this is where the thriller part comes in as you are constantly on edge hoping that the bomb wont be dropped and the world won’t go to  pieces.

  • There’s only one female character. What’s her role?

Tracy Reed was the actor that played ‘Miss Foreign Affairs’. The reason she was the only woman in the film was to show that war is like a woman you can’t win and you can’t lose, this satirises the whole idea of film. The fact that Reed was also constantly in a bikini shows the inner thoughts of men and their sexism, this could show their closed mindedness towards most things which therefore relates to the way they approach war (thinking that they are always right).

  • What does the movie tell us about the time it was created?

It tells us about the conflicts of the Cold War as this was made during that time. Fun Fact! The release date for this film had to be delayed due to the Kennedy assassination and would have been seen as mocking towards the terrible murder.

  • How can we relate the satire of Dr. Strangelove to the global conflicts today.

Donnald Trump wants to bomb everyone and is currently on bad terms with Korea.

Brexit, as the UK are leaving the EU and are wanting to become independent.

  • Take 1 screenshot and discuss what aspect you find interesting.

This screen shot optimises the film, it shows the war theme which is the serious aspect of the film and the comedy side. It also shows the satire involved in the film as Kong is standing on top of a bomb (which could explode at any moment) like it is the ground.

Bibliography:

Everybody’s Talking About Jamie

On the 7th of February some students from Year 1 and 2 Film and TV went up to London to the Apollo Theatre to watch ‘Everybody’s Talking About Jamie’. On this trip not only did we get to watch the performance but we also got to have a chat with the director (Jonathan Butterell) and a tour of the theatre.

Summary:

‘Everybody’s Talking About Jamie’ is based on a true story about a 16 year old boy who is gay and has big dreams of becoming a famous Drag Queen. However, he has to fight for his dream and overcome the opinions of his Dad, teachers, peers and himself. The moral is: it is difficult to get past what others think but ultimately you are your worst enemy, if you can overcome yourself then you can achieve anything. Not only does Jamie have to fight through the opinions of being gay and starting a career in Drag he also wants to wear a dress to prom, this obviously causes a lot of controversy through out his community and one eye opener is that his careers teacher completely disapproves of this idea. It really does  show how prejudiced and closed eyed people really are. Not only is he shunned by his teachers but he is also disowned by his dead beat Dad. Luckily he has a loving Mum that would do anything for her son, a supportive best friend who is also being retrained under society rules and a second mum who doesn’t care what anyone thinks and only wants the best for Jamie.

Talking to the Director:

The director (Jonathan Butterell) first heard about Jamie’s story when he watched the BBC documentary :

Jamie’s story instantly clicked with Butterell as he saw Jamie as a ‘working class Sheffield boy’ (Butterell, 07/02/2018) just like himself, he felt the story deep in his heart and knew he must do something. Interestingly enough Butterell started off his career as a theatre actor and never intended to be a Director, he landed the job by accident.

Once Butterell obtained the rights to create the show he spoke to the ‘real’ Jamie a few times and then not again until three years later when the play was almost finished and just needed the approval of Jamie and to finish off the final touches. He assures us that the ‘real’ Jamie really enjoys the play even though there are some very emotionally challenging scenes.

Butterell’s main advice for us budding media people was to only produce things that you love or else there is no point. ‘You have to love a project to do it justice’ (Butterell 07/02/2018). This actually makes sense to me as I have worked on projects that I have no interest in and they ended out pretty bad.

Another thing that interested me was that Butterell mentioned he dislikes musicals and yet he has just made one, this made me question why and whether he has changed his musical to suit his style. His answer was that he has made the songs more pop and hip not only to suit his preferences but also for the people in Jamie’s community as they are the type of people who would turn their noses up at the idea of a theatre performance. I think his dislike for musicals forced him to make something that is refreshingly new and has made theatre more modern, which therefore makes it more approachable for the younger generation.

Connor (a student from year 2) asked how he chose his actors. Interestingly he said he chose his lead actor (John Mccrea) to play Jamie as he is committed, could sing and dance but also didn’t stereotype his character. This final point I disagree with as I thought Jamie was a very stereotypical gay man who does Drag, but then again who am I to say; maybe the ‘real’ Jamie is like this!

Ultimately I really enjoyed the play it was funny, charming and at times emotional. It portrayed the struggles members of the LGBTQ community face and how they overcome it to live the lives they deserve. Overall Jamie is his own hero. It is also worth a mention that even the students who weren’t keen on going but didn’t want to spend a day in college enjoyed it more than they expected they would some might even go so far to say they loved it!

Scan

Context:

  • A mothers undying love for her child.
  • A father who is not around and would prefer to forget he has a son as he is ashamed of Jamie.
  • Overcoming yourself and being your own hero.
  • The struggles for the LGBTQ community.
  • Bullying