The Hitchcockian Legacy

This was an essay I wrote about Alfred Hitchcock's Legacy in a Alfred Hitchcock course I took in the Fall of 2013. I analyzed the first thirty minutes of Brian De Palma's 1973 film "Sisters" and also a piece written by Richard Allen titled "Hitchcock's Legacy".

As long as their are those who love film, Hitchcock’s legacy as a film maker will live on. As long as their are those who want to create their own films, his legacy will also live on.  Occasionally those two types of people are the same person, like myself and countless others of my generation and past generations.  In several interviews I have seen with William Friedkin, director of “The French Connection” and “The Exorcist”, he has numerous times said that he learned the craft not through formal film school but by watching the films of great directors like Hitchcock and implored others to do the same.  His influence has impacted not only American cinema but foreign cinema as well.

In the reading, “Hitchcock’s Legacy” by Richard Allen, he writes that the young french film makers of the 1950s and 1960s were highly influenced by Alfred Hitchcock and revered him as a great Auteur.  Young French film makers like François Truffaut, Claude Chabrol, Eric Rohmer, and Jean-Luc Godard viewed Hitchcock’s films became a model for classical art cinema.  According to Allen, Claude Chabrol explored the shadow world that lurks beneath the veneer of bourgeois values. Like Hitchcock he used the duality of delivering a story on the surface but providing hidden meaning through depth.  For Francois Truffaut, Hitchcock appealed to him because of his cinematic technique.  He was interested in how Hitchcock would frame a scene.  Allen says that Truffaut concentrated on the plot surface and not quite as deep as Chabrol.  He is also responsible for the fantastic interview he did with Hitchcock in the early 1960s.  At first glance Godard seems like the antithesis of Hitchcock because his films seem so disjointed while Hitchcock contains such straight structure.  But, Godard is similar to Hitchcock in the sense that he is on a different level of auteur than Hitchcock but took him as a base.  Allen mentions that Rohmer’s films, while considered Hitchcockian, are cerebral, realist, lack drama, and suspense. So in a way they are the antithesis of Hitchcock.

American film makers, like the foreign ones mentioned above, also were influenced by Hitchcock.  My favorite decade of American film is the 1970s. I view it as a period of American film renaissance.  New young film makers arrived in Hollywood and provided a shot of new energy to American film that was desperately needed.  well known film makers like Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas, Brian De Palma, William Friedkin, and several others. While they all did not make Hitchockian films they all started out as film fans watching and learning from Hitchcock films.  My favorite living Director is Martin Scorsese and while he is mostly known for his gangster films, his 1991 film “Cape Fear” is his Hitchcockian film.  It is a remake of a 1962 with the same title and even uses the same wonderful Bernard Hermann musical score. He also uses the great Saul Bass to create one of his great title designs, like he did with Hitchcock on Vertigo, North by Northwest, and Psycho.  The character of Max Cady, although from the original film, is presented like a character straight out of a dark Hitchcockian nightmare in his relentless almost demonic presents on screen. He is frightening in the way that Norman Bates was frightening, on the surface a calm demeanor, but you get the feeling underneath lies something grotesque. While we get small glimpse through cracks in Bates‘ psyche in “Psycho”, we are treated to the frightening evil that is Max Cady.

It is interesting that Pat Hitchcock would say that Spielberg is the true heir of Hitchcock.  I must admit that it has only been over the last year that I have been able to look upon Spielberg as a serious film maker.  I used to think that he was too commercially successful and that he panders to a larger audience for financial success. Then I began to learn more about Hitchcock and how he was able to mesh both financial success and artistic film making into one.  Spielberg has been able to do the same throughout his career.  His first big success was “Jaws” a Hitchcockian film in the sense that it used its musical score by John Williams to create tension throughout the film. Also the use of implication throughout the the film was very Hitchcockian.  Throughout the the film you never get a glimpse as to what the shark looks like until the later sequences. All that is shown the viewer is the victims being taken underwater by the shark and their screams. It gets to the point that beach goers in the film are so psychologically afraid of the shark that even a mention of the word could have people running out of the water. It is said that Hitchcock made people afraid to take a shower after “Psycho”, with “Jaws” Spielberg made people afraid to go into the ocean.

Now someone who took the most from Hitchcock is Brian De Palma.  His early films in his filmography especially, like “Sisters”, “Carrie”, “Dressed to Kill”, and “Blow Out” all can be said as having Hitchcockian elements to them.  The first thirty minutes of his 1973 film “Sisters” contains several Hitchcockian elements.  Right from the opening credit sequence there is a Hitchcockian nature to the film with a Bernard Hermann score. The score is not only in the credit sequence but permeate throughout the film.  The first scene features Margot Kidder as blind woman entering a locker room where she begins to undress with an on looker in the room.  De Palma is showing someone who is being a voyeur, like Hitchcock did with Jimmy Stewart in “Rear Window”.  As she is undressing there is a freeze frame in which it is revealed that it is part of a “reality” game show called peeping tom, further displaying the voyeurism theme. De Palma also uses Hitchcockian camera movement in the film.  The scene at the restaurant opens up on a closeup of a statue of a monkey and then pans slightly out then dolly shots over the restaurant to the table where Danielle and Phillip are sitting.  It appears he uses a crane shot in the scene where Danielle and Phillip are lying on the couch kissing each other. The shot starts overhead and then slowly pans down to Danielle’s thigh to reveal a nasty scar, while an ominous Hermann score sends a message to the audience that this is something important. Another Hitchcockian element is the idea that Danielle has split personality between her and her sister Dominique, similar to Norman Bates from Psycho.  Although it is not revealed within the first thirty minutes, I could deduce that based on how heavily the film is relying on Hitchockian elements.  The murder scene seems like an homage to the shower scene in “Psycho”. The murderer even uses a knife similar to the one used in “Psycho” but in this case because it is the 1970s the scene can be much more violent on screen than in “Psycho”.  The obsessive ex-husband reminds me of Jimmy Stewart’s character in “Vertigo” in the way he seems to be infatuated with Danielle.

The Perfect Crime

This was an essay I wrote on the third episode of the third season of the television series Alfred Hitchcock Presents titled "The Perfect Crime" starring Vincent Price. I originally wrote this essay in an Alfred Hitchcock course I took in the Fall of 2013. Since I referenced the events of the episode a lot,  I also included a link to the episode from Hulu.com.

A common thread that is spread throughout most of Hitchcock’s directorial filmography is that of death and/or murder.  Spanning six decades, from the 1920s to the 1970s, Alfred Hitchcock made films that featured death as a common theme.  In several of those films death was a result of murder.  The theme of murder would be one of many themes that would become part of his legacy as a film maker.  Along with certain themes, a specific style in which he would make his films would comprise what is known today as Hitchcockian.  His television series, Hitchcock Presents, would also use the Hitchcockian style in its episodes, especially those Directed by Alfred Hitchcock himself.  For example, the season three episode three “The Perfect Crime” , aired on October 20, 1957 was Directed by Alfred Hitchcock.

In Nicholas Haeffner’s book on Alfred Hitchcock he mentions how affective he was at selling his persona and his films to an audience.  By the late 1950s Hitchcock was a very popular and well known Director amongst audiences not only on the big screen but also the small screen.  In the television series Hitchcock would appear on screen and talk with the viewers.  This episode, “The Perfect Crime”, starts off in the usual way with the iconic Hitchcock silhouette and accompanying theme music.  The camera pans over to Hitchcock sitting in a chair wearing a hat and smoking a pipe, looking very similar to Sherlock Holmes.  Although he does not mention who he is emulating, he hints at it by saying “Good evening lady and gentlemen and Dr. Watson wherever you are.”  To make a reference to one of the most famous fictional private detectives of all time right before the episode that has a murder mystery storyline in it is a smart tactic by Hitchcock and his writer’s.  Chances are they are most of the viewers are already familiar with Sherlock Holmes, so Hitchcock uses that to his advantage and also adds his own comedic charm to it.  The exorbitant amount of bubbles coming out of the pipe and him frantically swatting to pop them while commenting on the perils of bringing a pipe to bed is a nice light comedic moment before we get into a story about murder.  Something he did throughout his filmography was have the ability to switch from comedy to drama and sometimes mesh the two together.

The episode stars Vincent Price as a very successful detective named Charles Courtney and James Gregory as an unsuccessful defense lawyer named John Gregory. Gregory confronts Courtney about a case involving a murder by a man named Harrington of a man named Ernest West. But, before he brings up such a case they have a very casual conversation about murder.  Specifically, Courtney’s trophy case of mementos from his victorious cases and an empty spot awaiting the perfect crime, or how he puts it the perfect murder.  This casual chatting about murder reminds me of the discussion that Charlie’s father and his friend have in “Shadow of a Doubt” when they were discussing how one would commit murder and get away with it.  Their conversation is more comedic but what the two conversations have in common is the casualness in which such a serious subject is discussed.

Through this casual conversation Courtney seems to exhibit some of the characteristics a of a classic Hitchcock antagonist.  He is a wealthy egotistical individual who seems to have gained a lot of wealth and positive standing in the public’s eye.  He remarks that his trophies represent perfect memories of imperfect crimes.  Although he says that they are not monuments to his brilliance but tombstones to the stupidity of criminals regards, one can not help but think he is merely being modest as to not appear to be egotistical. But, then he goes onto to say that he can not find a real challenge hence why he holds out hope for the perfect crime. He seems bored by all the  trophies, as if they were all the cases were to easy.  His biggest fault and ultimately the biggest fault of any of Hitchcock’s antagonists is their ego. They think they are perfect or at least present themselves in that way.  In this instance the fault in Courtney’s perfection is revealed to the audience in one Hitchcock’s famous plot twists.

About midway through the episode after Courtney has smugly explained how easy it was for him to discover Harrington as the killer of West, Gregory reveals that Harrington was not the killers and he can prove it.  Courtney dramatically rises to his feet, with the camera shot just neck high revealing the look of disbelief on his face. Then there is a great cut to the Hitchcock silhouette as a dramatic score plays.  The silhouette seems like a silent message by Hitchcock to the audience reminding them that it is the Hitchcockian twist that they familiar seeing in his work.  Courtney of course must dismiss his claim as false because in his mind he can never be wrong, especially a case that has already resulted in the execution of the man he found to be the murderer.  But in true Hitchcockian fashion the truth is revealed by Gregory not only to Courtney but to the viewers as well. Not only does Gregory reveal the truth but he has monologue within his revelation that is a direct strike at who Courtney is.  He exclaims that at last those like Courtney will know the taste of defeat and humiliation, brought down to some level of the ordinary. Then I think he makes the grave mistake of trying to hold this truth over Courtney in the form of blackmail.  He literally goes nose to nose with Courtney and his ego and as he says his reputation does not allow mistakes. So Gregory pays the ultimate price for his confrontation in what I perceive as a second Hitchcockian twist.

After their brief heated confrontation, Courtney seems to retreat for another drink off camera. The camera holds on Gregory who turns his back to take what he assumes is a victory drink and then from off screen the arms of Courtney move around his neck, then fade to black.  The quickness by which the arms of death position themselves around the neck of Gregory must have given the viewer a jolting fright.  That quick action is the second Hitchcockian twist in the episode.  The next scene begins with the press taking pictures of Courtney as he shows them around his home. He has the same calm exterior that he had earlier in the episode.  I find the moment when he describes how efficient his oven is that he uses for ceramics to be great. The way he utters the word “efficient” twice and looks down at his wrist indicates that it is significant.  Also the way he describes the vases as being made with a “special” kind of clay.  Hitchcock was a master of using implication in his films.  The oven and the clay pot imply that Gregory was killed and his body was disposed of in the oven. But of course given the time it was made that can not be shown on screen.

Hitchcock arrives at the end of the episode to provide an epilogue.  He enters the room in which the episode took place but all the furniture have sheets placed over them as if no one lives there any longer, implying that Courtney has been caught. He points to the spot that the vase was in and explains that Courtney had been caught when a woman knocked it over and when it broke it revealed pieces of Gregory, like his gold filling. Hitchcock even makes a joke using the Humpty Dumpty nursery rhyme in reference to fragments of Gregory. A flash of his dark humor shows through. Coincidentally the woman who knocked over the case is now a darling of the press like Courtney was.  Hitchcock also ends the episode with another joke that cleaning women all over the world have been trying to knock over vases so they too can become famous.  Leave it to Hitchcock to end an episode that revolved around death and murder with not one but two jokes.   

"Hip to be Square"

This was a paper I wrote about the character of Patrick Bateman from the film "American Psycho" directed by Mary Harron.  In the paper I tried to make the argument that his character is a warped refection of the value system within his society. 

“I have to return some videotapes” is something Patrick Bateman says when he is confronted with a situation that he needs to escape from.  Returning videotapes was also a common practice for people living in the 80s and 90s, so it is a perfectly logical excuse to get out of any situation. Patrick Bateman is a character who is very much a man of his time.  He has successfully fit into the society in which he lives.  But, Bateman’s value system is a contorted reflection of his society. 

An early scene in the film depicts Bateman’s morning routine.  The music is a repetitious piano music accompanied by a relaxing voice over narration by Bateman. The narration is a way for him to tell the audience about himself, specifically the particular details about his morning routine. Through this scene he depicts how obsessed he is with his physical appearance.  He likes to take care of himself through a balanced diet and rigorous exercise.  It is Interesting that he chooses the word “rigorous”, not just a normal exercise routine, but one that is extraneous because his body is so important to him.  His body is so important to him because he wants to project the best image of himself that he can.  Even the remark about how many stomach crunches he can do, is intended to impress us as the viewer.  Our approval as viewers and the approval of others within his society are important to him.

 

His entire morning routine is done in a ritualized manner. Every chemical he applies to his face and body is done in a particular structured order. The purpose of this ritual is to show that he prefers things to be done in a proper order, as later evidenced in some of the murders he commits.  The briefs shots we see of his apartment during his routine are also indicative of him wanting to keep his life in a particular order.  The apartment is very plain looking with all white furniture. All the appliances in the kitchen are a plain metallic steel. There is no semblance of personality within the place, no particular characteristics that would let a visitor know whose place it was.  I view it as a social commentary on his society how plain and un unique people are within it.  More evidence of that can be found in the next scene I want to look at.  

The next scene I want to address is the “Business Cards” scene.  In the scene we see several of Bateman’s colleagues from the stock broking firm.  There is a particular shot of three of them conversing on one side of the room, while Paul Allen speaks with Bateman. What is noticeable about that shot is that they are all dressed relatively the same way and with the same haircuts. Both Bateman and Paul Allen are dressed the same as well.  What this shows yet again is that Bateman is living in a society lacking in uniqueness.  They are almost interchangeable parts within their society.  Allen even mistakes Bateman for another broker because he wears the same glasses, wears the same suits, and even goes to the same barber.  Of course he must mention that despite that he still has the better haircut.  Yet again the need to look better than anyone else arrises.

I feel the heart of this scene comes when Paul Allen is leaving the room and hands his business card to Justin Theroux’s character Bryce, who mentions that he has a reservation at Dorsia for 8:30 on Friday night.  First when Allen hands the business card to Bryce there is a whoosh sound effect that seems to emphasize its importance.  The same sound effect is used when Bateman immediately whips out his business card almost to counter the action of Allen. Bateman is obsessed with being atop the hierarchy in his male dominated society and he views Allen as a threat to his position.  Dorsia is a place that he and his colleagues can not get a reservation at on a regular day, let alone a prime time like Friday night, so they are jealous of Allen, one even remarks that they think he is lying. But, Bateman views this jealousy as another form of admiration for Allen, which is why he brings out his new business card.  He immediately boasts about the particulars of his card assuming they will be instantly impressed. Then his colleague Van Patten pulls out his card to upstage Bateman, which Bryce acknowledges in a positive way, much to the dismay of Bateman. Then to upstage both cards Bryce must pull out his own card. Bateman must salvage the situation by seeing Allen’s card because he needs to solidify his own male ego by having a better card than Allen. The body language of his colleagues as Allen’s card is produced is telling of just how perfect it is, they too are threatened by Allen but not to the extent Bateman is.  The perfectness of the card is shattering to his ego, making him sweat and shake so much that he can not even hold the card for more than a few seconds.  As this whole scene shows, Bateman and his colleagues are reflective of an egotistical society, the difference is that Bateman needs to do obscene things when his stature in that society is threatened.

The very next scene is the scene where Bateman confronts the homeless man names Al.  I find it interesting that this scene immediately follows the business card scene because it depicts how Bateman acts when his stance in society is threatened and is a commentary on how his society treats the poor.  The only way he can re-establish his place in the societal hierarchy is by showing his superiority over someone weaker than him.  He chooses a homeless person for a couple of reasons, first because he views them as inferior people to himself, making it easy prey for him, and second because they are the exact opposite of what he is. He even goes as far as to flat out say that to Al right before he kills him.  Bateman believes that he can get way with murdering a homeless person because the society in which he lives in does not even recognize them because they are so far beneath them in their societal hierarchy.   But what is interesting about the scene is the manner in which he speaks to Al.  He is standing over the man as he sits in the gutter pleading for help. What this scene shows is not only Bateman’s contempt for the poor but because he is a reflection of his society, it also depicts his society’s contempt as well.

A scene that I feel connects with the three previous scenes that I mentioned is the murder of Paul Allen.  Even though he has killed poor Al after feeling threatened by Allen, the threat still lingers and he must get rid of it permanently.  When Allen is sitting drunk in Bateman’s apartment, Bateman must go through a specific ritual, similar to his morning routine. He begins with berating Allen with an intellectual soliloquy on his views about the popular band Huey Lewis and the News.  This shows that he needs to feel intellectually superior.  What is interesting is that he chooses their song “Hip to Be Square” as their masterpiece.  His choice is not coincidental because it is a song about the pleasure of social conformity and importance to have friends, which is a notion that Bateman is a living embodiment of. He is pretending to be hip while living in a square society. He conforms to social norms because that is what is expected of him.  He is a social commentary about how hollow his society is.  

While he is telling Allen his thoughts on the band, he goes through a series of personal checkpoints.  He has already laid down newspaper and covered his white furniture. He wears a clear poncho like a raincoat to catch the blood splatter.  He values the idea of physical cleanliness, so taking such precaution is normal for him. But it also exhibits the idea that no matter the act that is being committed a proper order and cleanliness is most important.  While he is killing Allen, he yells out “Try getting a reservation at Dorsia Now.”  I believe those words are important because they explain so much about why Bateman is killing Allen. He is killing Allen because of his values of jealousy, male dominance, and a fear of his stance in society.

The value system that Patrick Bateman exhibits throughout the film, although extreme, depicts the value system of society.  But it can also be viewed as a cautionary tale for our society.  If we adopt the same values of the society in which Bateman lives, we are in danger of becoming just like Bateman.  What is frightening about that notion is that Bateman’s values are very human.  The feelings of jealousy, wanting to be physically attractive, wanting to portray a great image, wanting to be wealthy, and as hard as it is to say we all have that feeling of wanting to be better than those around us, are human emotions.  Bateman is just an extreme form of those very human feelings.  As disturbing as this may sound there are already Patrick Bateman’s living among us.  They may not commit the same heinous acts as him, but a similar mindset is there.        

Underworld: Awakening Movie Review

This film is clearly the worst in the entire Underworld film franchise, which is unfortunate because while it is not necessarily an amazing set of films, they have for the very least been very enjoyable.  As someone who is a general fan of the franchise I went into this film with optimism and was thoroughly let down. As I am sure other fans were as well. Initially I was confused why it was released in theaters in January, a month that is really notorious for bad movies, but after watching it I can see why a studio would want to give it the least amount of competition at the Box Office as possible. It is an overall bad movie with very few redeeming qualities.

One of the redeeming qualities is Kate Beckinsale reprising her role as Selene from the first Underworld film "Underworld"(2003) and "Underworld: Evolution"(2006). She looks the part, sounds the part and is the part. The character of Selene should be portrayed by no one else other than Kate Beckinsale. It was great how seamlessly she slipped back into a character that we as viewers had not seen her portray since 2006. Unfortunately the film put other actors around her who were average to poor at best except for Charles Dance. Many may know him for his current role of Tywin Lanister on the television show "Game of Thrones".  In the film his appearance, although all to brief, and character radiates authority and toughness to the point where you realize that this guy is not to be messed with.

Another positive attribute to the film is that visually looks very good. Whether you watch the film in 3D or just a regular 2D Blu-Ray on an HDTV or if you had the opportunity to see it on the big screen, you will be very happy with the way it looks.  The action in the film does exactly what it needs to do, entertain the viewer.  It is fast, stylized with some slow motion, and will satisfy an action fans needs. Unfortunately what the movie gains in terms of its aesthetic and entertaining appeal is dwarfed by what it lacks in terms of plot and any kind of substance.

To me as a viewer, running time and plot pacing go hand in hand because usually one dictates another. This film has a running time of 88 minutes, which includes an opening and closing title sequence as well as recap at the beginning of the previous films in the series which featured Selene as the main character. So with all that extra time being taken up with nothing to do with the plot, you have a short film to start out with getting even shorter, to the point where to me it feels like an extended episode of television series on pay cable as opposed to an actual feature film. Due to the short run time the plot pacing is too rushed and nothing really stays with a viewer long enough to be memorable. Also the few new characters we meet have so little screen time that they forgettable, with the exception of Charles Dance who makes the most out of his screen time.

In addition to the short running time hindering the film, the plot itself also did help by being cliched and predictable.  It also uses a plot device that I am not a huge fan of, which is jumping forward in time, in this case 12 years into the future.  That is a technique that is typically used in television series where the producers believe it necessary to jump forward in time to explore certain story lines that they may not be able to do because of the threat of cancellation.  I believe the purpose of the time shift in the film is to make it stand on its own without much connection to the previous films. By doing something such as that, and having a recap at the beginning, they wanted to be able to have those not familiar with the franchise be able to jump right in and watch the film. The problem I have with that is the film is not strong enough to stand on its own(siting the problems I mentioned previously) and the odds are that if you are a fan of the franchise you will look upon it more favorably because of your familiarity with it than someone viewing it for the first time. But a fan could be disappointed because of its disconnect and reduced quality it has in comparison to the previous films, so therefore you may alienate them and are stuck somewhere in the middle.  The filmmakers were stuck with a task of trying to get new viewers and keep old ones watching and for me they did not do that. That is not to say that there can not be both first time watchers and previous fans enjoying this film because of course film is subjective and depends on the individual.

Without giving away the ending, it is left wide open for yet another film, in most cases this is supposed to make me as the viewer want more but in this case it left me asking, really? do I really want more? It felt like an ending that you see in the Resident Evil films where they purposely end on a cliff hanger to lead into another film. The film does not leave me wanting more, yes it was nice to see Kate Beckinsale as Selene, Charles Dance was a surprise, and it was good to see The Underworld style vampires and werewolves, but the film as a whole was just forgettable.  The action was visually great but there was nothing I had not seen before and can not be seen in other action films.  I am giving "Underworld: Awakening" 2.3/5 stars.

Green Lantern Movie Review

The most disappointing movie of the summer for me. My expectations may have been too high or something similar to that. I was really let down by how underwhelming this film was, when it could have been so much better. After watching Thor and X-Men: First Class I was really hoping that this would be on somewhat the same level as them and it really was not or perhaps close. But, I would have to say this is a distant third or perhaps even fourth, depending on what I think of Captain America.

Although overall disappointing, there were some things I did like in the film. I very much enjoyed the look of the film. Visually the CGI looked really good and I am confident that the Blu-Ray is going to look great when it comes out. Green lantern Suit is entirely CGI and yea it looks like it but you do get used to it. The Planet Oa looks great and the effects with the Green Lantern ring look great.

I did not have any problem with Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan. He does the best he can with the script that he was given. Hal Jordan is a cocky, sometimes hot headed, test pilot and Reynolds plays that role well. It is when his character goes deeper that he has trouble with. It is not so much his acting ability but the writing is poor. Despite script issues I still like Reynolds in the role. You can tell that he really was invested in this role and actually wanted to do justice for the fans. As a Green Lantern fan I appreciate him for that. If there is a sequel I hope Reynolds is the Green Lantern and they give him a better script to work with.

The rest of the cast suffered from the same problem as Reynolds, average script. Mark Strong plays Sinestro, a powerful Green lantern, who despite having little screen time was good. I would have liked to see more of him and hope there is a sequel because he will play a much bigger role. The last scene he is in is a foreshadow for a sequel if there is one and I really hope there is. Also please do not recast his role because if you look at the comics and look at Mark Strong's Sinestro they look very much a like, so the casting was good in that respect.

There are technically two villains in this film. One is Hector Hammond and the second is Parallax. They were both kind of a joke. I Parallax is essentially a giant cloud of smoke who feeds on fear. The problem with that is that it is not really a character it is just a thing and as a viewer I just do not care about Parallax. It also does not help that Parallax only appears briefly throughout the film until it gets to Earth and fights with Hal Jordan. Hammond is played by Peter Skarsgaard and he, like the others, suffers from average writing. His character is pretty basic comic book superhero villain. He is basically a genius scientist who has daddy issues, jealous of Hal Jordan/Green Lantern, and has an obsessive crush on Carol Ferris. He gains his super brain power when he is exposed to Parallax's DNA. His motives are based on anger and jealousy, pretty basic villain motives.

Blake Lively plays the love interest to Hal Jordan, whose name is Carol Ferris. Some fellow reviewers would argue that she is a miscast because a girl that looks as attractive as her would not be a fighter pilot. I do not necessarily agree with that, good writing could have fixed a problem like that. In this case they only had her fly a plane once and the rest of the time she played the traditional love interest, complete with a damsel in distress situation. Her acting was average, which was disappointing because she did a great job in the Ben Affleck Directed film "The Town." It was not so much her acting ability but it was that the writing was so average and traditional and without depth that these actors were really at a disadvantage.

If you know me the one thing I always am a stickler for is the run time of a film. I always check it before I watch a film and almost always keep it in mind while critiquing a film. When it comes to this film, the run time is just too short for my personal tastes. The film clocks in at around 105 minutes (I have seen a runtime of 114 minutes, but that time includes the credits). What Batman Begins, Superman: The Movie, and Spider-Man have in common is they all feature origins of a Super hero and are all longer than two hours. Also they are successful starts to popular franchises. My philosophy when it comes to this genre of film is longer is better, especially when you are dealing with origins.

The problem with Green Lantern is that the origin of his character and the film itself feels rushed. When he gets to Oa, the planet of the Green Lanterns, and becomes a Green Lantern, the sequences there are rushed. Basically his training involves him getting his butt kicked by Kilowog, voiced by Michael Clarke Duncan, and then by Sinestro. This entire sequence although visually nice to watch were brief. Jordan then doubts himself after being beaten by two Lanterns who were obviously more experienced then him and returns to Earth. That is it, that is all his training. It is not like when he gets to Earth he goes out and helps people so you can see him explore his powers. Nope, basically in 105 minutes, Hal Jordan goes from cocky test pilot, to Green Lantern, to fighting Hector Hammond, fighting Parallax in a climactic battle, and save Carol Ferris a couple of times from danger.

The tone of the plot was all over the place. The film felt it did not know if it wanted to be a film you take seriously or a fun action film. It tried to find some middle ground but it just kept weaving from light to dark. Just when you think the film is falling into one tone a scene will happen that catapults into another tone. One scene in particular is the scene that you see in the trailer where Hal Jordan is showing his friend that he is the Green Lantern. You would think that it is a scene that happens earlier in the film, but no it is at about the 3/4 of the way through the film. By that point in the film a tone should have been established. Perhaps the problem has to do with the fact that there are four different writers who wrote the screenplay. They could each have had different viewpoints and then combined them into some Frankenstein of a script.

The film just felt so disjointed. It felt like the writers were trying fit some mold instead of writing a good movie. It was as if they had a checklist of things they needed to put in the film and once they did that they were done. The plot felt just pasted together to fit together and there were wholes that needed to be filled but those scenes were left out. The film never took that next step, it just stayed safe with a conventional plot. There was no point in the film where I was wowed by any of the dialogue.

Overall I was let down by this film because it had potential to be a good entry into the comic book super hero genre of film. Where it ultimately failed was an average script, basic plot, and an uneven mostly light tone. Where the film excelled was in its visuals and its overall fun viewing experience. Is it watchable? Yes. Will you have a fun time watching it? For the most part yes. But, do not expect anything more than an average film. Would I recommend it? Yes, it is a fun film to watch, it is nothing special. I will have to give it 3.1/5 stars.

There may be a sequel, depending on how well the sales are for the DVD/Blu-Ray because the film made nowhere near its budget. Apparently production costed $200 million and $100 million was spent on marketing and the film only made $214.5 million worldwide at the Box Office. Also the Blu-Ray will have an extended cut which will hopefully add enough footage to fix some of the problems and improve the film.

Ip Man Movie Review

I must admit that I am a novice when it comes to Martial Arts films. Basically I watched a couple of Bruce Lee films when I was a child and thought they were cool. I have seen some Jet Li and Jackie Chan films, even Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, but that is about it when it comes to my experience with this genre. This is a genre I really have to explore more because since I was a child I have liked Martial Arts. It Started extremely early on in my life with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. My initial reaction to this film is that I loved it. I liked the acting, especially by Donnie Yen. I loved the martial arts action scenes, even though they were sometimes too brief.

This film essentially has two phases or parts, before Japanese occupation and then during Japanese occupation. The first part takes place in 1936 in Foshan, China. The place is known for its Martial Arts Masters and people travel their to learn from them. Ip Man , who is a Wing Chun Master, is regarded as the best. Here he lives a comfortable wealthy life with his wife and young son. The second part is a complete contrast of that. He has been kicked out of his home and essentially lives an impoverished life with his wife and son.

The plot although not that deep is deep enough to not make this some mindless martial arts film. This mostly has to do with a really strong performance from Donnie Yen. Directly from the start I believed that he was Ip Man. The rest of cast although I do not know them by name did well in their roles, but Yen is very much the star. The film is somewhat a biopic so the entire plot mostly revolves around him.

As I was saying the plot is deep enough to satisfy me personally. One example is the final fight. The climactic fight in the film is between Ip man and a Japanese General. What one can figure out easily enough is that it is more like China vs. Japan than simply two men fighting each other. I like the plot for its simplicity. You do not need to rack your brain in figuring out deeper meanings, the depth is there, readily available to diagnose.

What I hink sticks with most people who watch this film is how badass Ip man is in it. His level of badass is off the charts. I loved the martial art action sequences in this film. There was one part in particular that left me speechless, all I will say is that Ip man takes on ten Japanese martial artists. The one negative thing I will say is that the fight scenes were somewhat brief because Ip Man is so good that no one even comes close to his level of talent.

Despite my high praise for the film there are some negative aspects. The final battle, while awesome in my eyes, really is totally one sided and yet again over with quickly so some may view it as anticlimactic. Also the set design is somewhat lackluster. While it still looks like a 1930s China, the budget limitations show through in the set design. There really is not much character development. From the beginning Ip man feels like an already developed character, granted he does have some flaws. Also the other characters other than Ip Man really do not do much, like I said earlier the film concentrates solely on Ip Man. There is also some cliche throughout the film. Specifically when Ip Man teaches factory workers Wing Chun in order to defend themselves against robbers. It plays on that whole weaker people band together to fight agains a more powerful enemy. This next thing may be a little nitpicking but the film is not quite historically accurate or probably even accurate when it comes toe the real Ip Man life. With film based on true events or a biopic, inaccuracies and changes are expected.

Do I recommend this film? Yes. Strong acting by the lead, Donnie Yen, a plot that was easy to follow but not the point of stupidly easy. The Martial Arts action sequences were awesome despite briefness. I enjoyed this film beginning to end. The one thing I must warn about, you will need to read subtitles. There may be an English Dub version out there but I would highly suggest watching films in their original language with subtitles. My rating for this film is going to be a 4.15/5 Stars. Also if you enjoyed this film there is a sequel titled Ip Man 2.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 Movie Review.

We have come to it at last, the final Harry Potter film. Not only is it the end of the film film franchise but it feels like the end of Harry Potter, at least for me. Harry potter has been a part of my life from the late 1990s all the way up to now. I have read all the books and seen all the films. When I read the final book in 2007 I did not feel as I do now because at the time I still had a few movie adaptions to look forward to, but now there is nothing. All I have is a head full of memories. With that said the The last film will probably go down as a favorite amongst fans. While watching this film it is so difficult to not compare book to film and be objective but I will try to do my best in this review. Book lovers need to look at these films with a non-book point of view or else they will be really disappointed because the books are vastly superior to any of the films.

The stakes have never been higher, the epic scope has never been larger. This film has what the the fans of fantasy love, magic, dragons, epic battles etc. You finally get to see the Wizards and Witches do battle, there is destruction, carnage and death. Gone are the light happy times that we saw in the earlier films. The world is dark, gritty, and extremely dangerous. The wizarding world has been that way now for several movies, but now it has reached its peak in all out war. The ultimate battle of Good vs. Evil and the setting for this epic battle is none other than Hogwarts.


Yes, as already known by long time fans of the books, the majority of the last film takes place at Hogwarts in the midst of a final battle. As expected the action was amped up for this film and it was an awesome spectacle to watch. Normally I would object to such mindless action because I prefer plot and character development, but this is the 8th and final film. It also is essentially the second part of one long film. The first part is where the plot is laid out as well as the character development.


I am not a fan at all of the David Yates Directed films of the Harry Potter franchise, but the one compliment I can pay him is that he really captures the look and atmosphere well. The visual style that he chose to use for his Harry Potter films was good. The same can be said for this film as well.  The special effects for this film were on par with the previous Yates films and they did a very good job of depicting the magical world of Harry Potter.  The viewer is very much drawn into the film and that world created by JK Rowling. All of that is a credit too Yates' visual direction of his films.


Another thing I also must comment on is the acting. Throughout the entire series we have seen the young cast grow not only physically but professionally. This was a decade long film franchise that was able to maintain the core cast for the entire time. They have improved immensely in their acting ability throughout the franchise. Watching this film and then going back and watching an earlier film and one can see the difference in acting. Daniel Radcliffe especially did a good job in this film and throughout the series. Portraying the most popular literary character in the last 20 years on the screen is no small task. Rupert Grint also did well in this last installment. He has always fit the role well in my opinion. Emma Watson has been the weakest in my opinion throughout the franchise, as Hermione but she too improved for these last few films. Alan Rickman has been the most consistently great actor throughout this franchise and although he is only on the screen for a short time in this film he was still great.


The biggest gripe I have with Yates' Harry Potter films is the pacing is to fast. In my opinion it is because the films are just to short. This film is the shortest of all the films in the franchise with a runtime of 130 minutes. I know this is suppose to be the action part of the 7th film but you need to slow it down. There are also several deaths in this film that are briefly looked at and there is barely any pause to acknowledge the emotional weight of these deaths. I knew it was going to happen, the deaths of Lupin and Tonks was terribly done and if you had not read the books you would really not care at all about these characters. Those characters should have had more screen time in previous films to make the viewer actually care about their death. Also the death of one of the Weasley brothers needed more time as well, The deaths just seemed to rushed and lacked the emotional weight they deserved. The Yates films always seem to lack the extra emotion that the books were able to capture. I am not asking for an extra hour of footage but maybe 20 minutes or slightly more and you would have a film that flowed better.


There was one point in the film where it slowed down and I was so happy when it did. It was the scene when Harry views Snape's memories and the truth about Snape is revealed. Up to that point, I had the film at a 3.7 and that scene was what upped the rating for me. It was one of the non action scene that I liked. The final fight between Harry and Voldemort, while I understand why it needed to be longer than the book, started out well but grew into a bit of a mess. Especially when Harry and Voldemort were flying around Hogwarts.


Although I do have a lot of criticism for this film franchise, I still will re-watch it just because I am a fan. The franchise overall is disappointing because I feel that the later films could have been so much better had they been longer.

Also if you had not read the books you missed out on so much important details that were just ignored. But with all my problems with the series I will miss both the books and the films because I looked forward to their release. Overall I will give this film a 4.1/5 stars. Could have been better had it been longer.