La Dolce Vita

!Paparazzo!

Even 49 years after the original release, this timeless classic still captivates you with its style and elegance. After all, we are talking about a 3 hour long film! La Dolce Vita tells the story of the charming journalist Marcello, who has been seduced by the enthralling life the elite circles of Rome offer. At night he is the well known glamourous reporter, who every woman wants to be with. But in the morning, Marcello has to come back to his nagging girlfriend Emma, associated mainly with domestic work and other such the mundane activities.

He is struggling to come in terms with his life, on one hand enjoying the benefits of his job and hoping it will help him further to become a serious writer, and the on the other hand searching for the best formula for happiness. Even though Marcello is often swept away by celebrities and various parties, he is often entusiastic, but yet reserved. As if he is quietly observing the life of the rich and beautiful, contrasting it with his own.


The film opens with Marcello's everynight occupation. He is trying to spot the hottest gossip on the street and take the best pictures. I love the outdoor restaurant scenes, taking you into a life that has just begun. The type of characters that Fellini uses usually wake up at night. Back to the scene, Marcello is in a bar when he spots the gorgeous Maddalena, a heiress who is always in the spotlight. After spending a night with her in a random prostitute's house, Marcello comes home in the morning to find out that his girlfriend has tried to posion herself. It is the first time we see details of his flat, or more like the lack of any. Everything is very plain- white walls, telephone lying on the floor, not much furniture. In fact, the only piece of furniture we see is a double bed. We already know that the character is quite reluctant to spend time at home. It has become just a tedious place to sleep next to a domestic assistant (This is how he refers to Emma later on)



Fellini has carefully constructed Marcello first as bored and reserved, then adventurous and observing, until he finally transforms into a snob that has been engulfed by the guilty pleasures of the 'sweet life'.

It is worth noting the moment he meets Sylvia (Anita Ekberg). She is playing a Hollywood actress visiting Rome with her alcoholic husband. Marcello is fascinated by her charm and energy. The famous sequence in the 'Trevi Fountain' has taken 1 week to film in JANUARY!!! Apparantly, Marcello Mastroiani has been afraid to get into the freezing water, so he had a bottle of vodka. But even that hasn't helped him, because he'd jumped in the water only to fall on his face. They must have had great fun filming that. However, taking in mind that Anita Ekberg is basically promoting the film with all the posters, one would expect to see her for more than 1 hour. It is true they didn't know it would be a massive hit, but still she has been the main figure on the old posters as well.

I pesonally prefer to see more of the other actress playing Maddalena. She had more style and elegance, surrounded by mystery and secrets. I think it would have contributed to the story if Marcello had more encounters with her, before he claimed he wanted to marry her.


Bringing it to an end, I would like to note how great Marcello Mastroiani is in that role, as well as in 81/2! He has somehow defined the classical look of the film director with black sunglasses, that Hollywood has borrowed plenty of times. Almodovar is a big Fellini fan, he often refers to him in his own films. Even though Federico Felini doesn't rely on a script, he has managed to create stunning films.


I'm excited about Nine that is coming out in December, because of it's resemblance with Mastoiani. These days it's very difficult to find stars to play older stars, so no one really fits for Marcello Mastroiani.

'They come for you in the morning in a limousine; they take you to the studio; they stick a pretty girl in your arms... They call that a profession?Come on!'

Roma, città aperta

Italian neo-realism

Roberto Rossalini's film is set is 1944, during the Nazi occupation of Rome. It tells the story of the Resistance leader Giorgio Manfredi, who is tracked down by the police and has to run. He has numerous identities and is considered a serious enemy of Gestapo. Manfredi finds refuge in his good friend's flat, Francesco, just a day before Francesco's wedding. His fiancée Pina is a "real person", as Manfredi describes her. She hurries up to seek help from the priest Don Pietro Pallegrini for new documents for Manfredi, so he will be able to leave Rome. Essentially, all these characters are trying to survive in the extraordinary circumstances they're put in. They brake the low in one way or another, like Pina breaking in the bakery with many other people, but it is understandable that in this war, no institution can work properly. In the same scene,the priest is seduces and takes some bread too, the only reason why the police officer restrains is because he's on duty.

In the mean time, Gestapo is not wasting time. They contact Manfredi's ex girlfiend Marina who is still in touch with him and try to seduce her with drugs. She is already addicted, but feels reluctant to betray him. In this character, the director portrays some of the low methods the Germans have used in order to get to someone valuable.

Pina is played by Anna Magnani and encompasses the strong spirit of the resistance. In all her gestures and lines it is evident how real and down to earth this character is. She is also religious and relies on her faith to keep her through the war. Rossalini has used a comedian actress for this part, due to lack of any others available. Doubtlessly it couldn't be a happier accident. Therefore when Pina is shot a bit after the middle of the film, the audience is shocked by the decision to kill the actress they've already fallen in love with. Certainly that was the case for me.

Furthermore, the director also plays with a very interesting subplot around the children. Pina's son is in a secret children resistance group. They throw small bombs at night and feel very proud of their actions, despite the fear of punishment by their parents. Throughout the film a lot of the elder characters complain how sick and tired they are of the war, and how much they hate the fascists. Their views are indirectly infiltrated by the children, who on their side create even more realistic situations. The children also want to make a difference. As a result, the viewer is in sympathy with the resistance and that is strengthened and deepened by the small characters. I find Rome Open City as an amazing film, that succeeds to present the situations and reactions authentically, with great realism that can only add to the overall story. It is this films that starts the Italian neo-realism.

Close to the end, I just want to mention how surprised I was to find Federico Fellini in the script and idea credits! They were in the beginning of the film, so I was prepared for something completely different. Taking in mind the lack of structure and story in Felini's films, throughout Rome Open City which is incredibly shaped, I was wondering how he managed to preserve it in the neat form we see it today. Then I found the answer that it's Rosellini's story, and Fellini as a good friend was there to help. In those days the great directors must have all known each other.

Finally, my favorite part in the film except the one with the rebellious children is when Pina and Francesco are sat at the staircase in front of the flat. They recollect the moment they first met as neighbours and it sounds something like:

Francesco: "You stormed my flat as if you wanted to kill me"

Pina: "You were hammering a nail in the wall and knocked down my mirror. You didn't breake it though"

Religulous

Directed by Larry Charles , and written by Bill Maher, this American documentary aims to prove that there is no reasonable point in keeping faith in God and following any religion. Considering how controversial the topic of religion has always been, Bill Maher choses the oddest subjects to prove his view.

To start with, the documentary focuses on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. I accidentally came across a group of friends watching it, so I missed the Judaism part. I was immediately drawn to it, just like the rest of the party. Bill Maher has a certain style to provoke the subjects, but doesn't necessarily give them a chance to explain their views and beliefs. Moreover, he consciously asks indelicate questions, so the inte

rviewee is either left completely confused or feels trapped.

I noticed how there was a slightly more aggressive approach towards the Muslims. That footage was from the Middle East. A woman was stopped in the street and asked about the current situation, and she starts off very relaxed, but the film maker keeps pushing and bringing references from the past. At some point the woman looks offended that he is not listening to her, instead only reinforces his own statements. Another random selection was a muslim gay couple in Amsterdam, who clearly had no clue what they were taking part into. The couple was pleasant and probably high. Bill seemed to only use them as an example how a gay community cannot develop freely in the muslim world.

The most entertaining part was maybe the last third, when the film maker was meeting some dedicated muslims with extreme views and using captions to mock their beliefs. I have to admit that I was laughing just like everyone else, but afterwards felt quite bad the way they were presented. It seemed that if the Christian community was slightly odd, the Muslims were shown as complete lunatics. In my opinion, there is certain boundary that a film maker should never cross, if he wants to stay objective and ethical. Well, this documentary was off limits. The selection of subjects was not fair and equal in the 3 religions which were explored.

Finally, the last ten minutes tried to sum up the "ridicule" of worshiping any God, but felt quite long. It consisted of images of nature disasters and terrorist attacks. Despite trying to make a grand statement of the uselessness of religion, the ending was not convincing, unfocused and generally sloppy. It's main advantage is the high production quality.

Genre

Genre theory and audience expectations

When we go to the cinema, we often have a clear picture of what we are going to see, just by looking at the poster. It is a notion created by certain elements, which combination define the genre. Starting with the iconography, the recognizable images and sounds are the first clues of the type of story, told in the film. Sharp suits and sleek hair, loaded guns and jazz music are often an inseparable part of the gangster movie.

Style is another important element of the film. While iconography deals with images and sounds, style is about the way they are combined and presented to us. In more and more films the subtle change of style now indicates an important shift in the character's views, or simply a change of time or location. For example, bright primary colors may suggest a comedy, but clashing them may result into a melodrama. European cinema nowadays is using primarily muted colors that put forward social realism. Getting right the style of the

film in the early stages of preproduction is vital, if the film maker wants his work to be remarkable and memorable.

Common settings also help the viewer to identify the genre easily. In westerns, for example, we are often presented with deserts, railways, canyons. From a narrative point of view, the main character is usually the lone hero, unlike the film noir, which focuses on the femme fatale. Characters are important to set up, and this is widely supported by the above genre elements.

The genre can also be defined by the way the narrative is disrupted- mistaken identity in the thriller, family conflict in the melodrama. Once we know what movie we're on, it is difficult not to expect car chases in the action film, or the long waited kiss in the romantic comedy. The audience is very aware of the generic devices and looks for them. Screenwriters refer to it as a game :"Now you are going to give me this, and I'm going to believe it, then this and that will follow... and I hope but also don't, that you'll surprise me ".

Reading the frame

How to create a visual notion that supports the narrative?

In our Monday class with Andy, we started talking about the frame and how we subconsciously read it. In some films, the first 3 minutes tell us a lot of what we need to know about the characters and what will probably happen later on. "The Searchers" is a good example of an early set up. We tried to speculate on the previous lives of the characters and guessed right for all of them, except on their future life. "The Searchers" is an interesting film, it is a shame I've started watching it 3 times and never got beyond the first 5 minutes. Maybe I'm prejudiced
because I don't watch westerns, but this one I definitely enjoyed.


On Tuesday we continued looking at research methods and the ethics of the whole initiative.
Information can be easily manipulated, and it is up to the film makers to decide whether or not to use an inconvenient fact that might sell the documentary, but is not relevant to the subject matter. I also learned that it is easy to be put on the sex offender list, so we should not judge too soon before familiarizing with all the facts.


Wednesday was a day off, and everyone was busy with pre-production of "The Golden Rule".

On Thursday morning we had a meeting with a Glasgow based gaffer who brought some insight into our vague knowledge of modern and expensive lighting. It was a beneficial session, because he showed us some quick tricks of doing a better 3-point-lighting for an interview, by simply using an additional dedolight! He also touched on the relationship between the DoP and the gaffer, common duties and responsibilities and his experience in the industry. One of the new and expensive lights that was mentioned was chamira, which I'm planning to find out more about. It has an umbrella effect and wraps itself around the object, creating a better effect than what 3 lights could achieve.

Thursday afternoon was Zam and directing! It is starting to become my favorite class! We continued with our short, group stories and tried to sum up the main beats. Someone from each group had to pitch the story to the rest of the class, and not surprisingly they were all entertaining. Our grand title was "Duck" and it is thriller (Petra's idea!) , as well as a Jerry Bruckheimer production (Zam's conspiracy). The whole point of these ideas was to later on storyboard them. We went over the storyboards of some films, such as "The Gladiator", "Taxi Driver", "Raging Bull" to become familiar with the style of drawing that could convey a simple idea. Directors like Ridley Scott are great illustrators, able to double the budget of their films with a storyboard. However, on location he must have changed his mind on some shots because they either didn't work, or there was no time to film them. Others like Martin Scorsese draw in a much simpler style, but his storyboards still work to depict the action.


On Friday we continued storyboarding. It was the best class ever- we had to watch the famous sequence of "North by Northwest" where Roger is chased by an airplane in a crop field. Then we storyboarded around 20 shots. Zam told us that Hitchcock was usually very organized and knew exactly what he wanted to achieve on set, but in fact for that sequence he did not have any storyboards and it was all a happy accident.
Afterwards we did some group drawing for a new story. It's a shame Charlotte missed these classes, she would have enjoyed them.

Later on that day we started shooting "The Golden Rule". We continued on Saturday, and if only the footage was not corrupted, it would have been a very successful shoot.

¡Átame!

Tie Me up! Tie me Down!

by

Pedro Almodóvar

The story follows Ricky, a psychopath who has just been released from a metal institution. He remembers a girl he used to date and decides to find her, tie her to bed so she'll get to know him. But the girl, Marina, happens to be a porn start. Ricky tracks her down in the studio she's being filmed. Despite failing to catch her attention, our hero goes to her apartment and brakes into. He carries out his simple plan- ties Marina to the bed, tells her they are going to get married, but doesn't force her to sleep with him. Of course the heroine is slightly addicted and has an unbearable toothache. This is the type of situation where Ricky can stand out as a reliable boyfriend and proves he can find her drugs. Not surprisingly, these 2 charming characters fall in love little by little. Filled with hysterical, comic and bizarre settings, Tie me up! Tie me down is an extreme pleasure to watch. The screenplay, original to the roots, is the type of charismatic Spanish fiction that can be easily bought into for reality.

This is also Antonio Banderas' ticket to Hollywood, but to be fair, I prefer him in his Spanish films. The charm and danger he usually portrays is somehow lost in every American film I've ever seen him in. It also has to be pointed out that the intimate scene of Ricky and Marina is absolutely hilarious. The director has managed to prolong it by also putting some entertaining dialogue. I recently finished a book on Almodovar, and I must say his plots are crazy, as well as enormously entertaining. All his characters are bright and vivid, full of passion and flaws. As a contemporary storyteller he makes a wonderful use of gestures, characters' appearance and hair, their quarrels and make-up.

Sound design and back to editing!

Copola's "The Conversation" intended to give us some insight into sound design and how it drives the narratives forward. It is an immense editing tool and creates phycology in the picture. For Monday's class we had to come up with specific sounds we connect with the scene of a young woman spending the night in Dracula's castle. All our suggestions stem from already established conventions from earlier films using such soundscape. We also watched a scene from "The English patient", where the use of sound or silence creates unbearable tension. At least with me, it played with my nerves to the maximum. Walter Merge, who we need to read about, gets under the phycological profile of the Nazi officer, trying to reflect his way of thinking through sound.

In the afternoon we discussed some options and alterations from the 3- act- structure with Richard, and came to the conclusion that it undoubtedly makes the screenplay more interesting, but also requires a lot of experience to create such piece. Most of my favorite directors brake the 3-act-structure, but they've all made at least 20 feature film, from which the first ones are not very successful. But eventually you learn the lessons and start playing with the narrative much smarter. I personally prefer bringing an unusual element to the narrative, but it doesn't always work, or it take ages to fit it properly.

On Tuesday we continued with the research approaches, heard some entertaining stories of what could go wrong :) I don't know if it is just Roman Polanski and Woody Allen, but I start to think the old directors are twisted.

And now let's talk about the best part of the week- editing! Back in the DTU, we started with AVID. I like it much more than Final Cut, because it seems more reliable not to crash whenever it wants. Avid will definitely not let us down, besides it's easier to use. I strongly hope this year we have more editing classes filled with rich content, unlike last year when we barely touched Final Cut.

I'll end up with the last beat of the week- Friday, when we watched Life on Mars and talked about themes of a few successful Scottish shows. I have to admit I quite enjoyed Life on Mars! Why not even watch it again, when I find some free time. Dissecting such shows is quite helpful for us to establish the subthemes that positively bring hue to the series' profile.

In the mean time, this week, just like the previous one was busy with preparation on "The Golden Rule". Fingers crossed the weather is good next Saturday, so our race can take place.

"Why is the editing good? Because there is not much cutting"

On Monday we looked at theories of editing with Andy. Basically, it covers the aspects in which editing can covey a meaning, manipulate it or even exaggerate. Eisenstein and Murch are 2 of the great editors, but both have a different approach. We went a bit further into "Strike" to analyze how Esenstein generates feelings through images, particularly in the slaughter scene. Even though we don't see the workers being shot, by the image of the slaughtered cow we know what happens. Now there are some new books on editing in the library, and it was strongly recommended we read Sydey Lumet's tips on the subject.

Richard was in the afternoon with tutorials. Mine was fine, might want to continue with one of the ideas, but is desirable to think of new ones as well.

On Tuesday Zam continued with the scene selection exercise. We all had to read our treatments and become the directors. With A streetcar named Desire it was a bit difficult for

me to decide how to lay out all the information. The confusion started from reading and listening to many interviews and comments on the film. At some point it was made clear that the director didn't want the lead actress at all, and it was a happy accident it all worked out well in the end. So I had to pretend everything was fine with my casting.

The second part of the class was breaking down the restaurant scene in The Godfather. Zam had the script prepared for us and we studied the difference between what was intended to be done and what was actually shot and put together. I find it quite useful to study scenes like that in terms of their strong character and influence. Later on, we continued with Patt Garrett and Billy the kid. We discussed 2 versions of the opening scene and which edit works best. It was hard to choose, because the original one has a more powerful saloon scene, while the second cut is more clear in terms of getting what is going on. I have watched that film before for editing purpose, and I found it hard to follow. There are a few vivid scenes in my head but generally it didn't catch my interest (as most westerns fail to achieve)

Wednesday was a day off for us and Thursday kicked off with sound! I must say Cammi tries to explain the principal of good recording and manages to catch our interest. In our films so far, sound has always been an issue and showing them to someone else usually receives comments on the same flaw.

Стачka

Strike is considered Eisenstein's best achievement, so I was anticipating some type of surprise. The title is quite straightforward- it examines the rising of the masses, their unity and attempt to bring change to the life of Russian working class. At the end, their effort is mercilessly smashed by the police, factory managers and the person who manipulates everything- the tsar. The film examines the relationships between the people within power and contrasts them with the working class majority. The first are presented as blood-sucking creatures, obese, soulless and never happy, while the latter tend to win our sympathy with their heroic solidarity and selfless battle for a better life. Their unity generates a powerful force, so the ruling class is left with no other option but to try and divide them, spreading spies and corrupting the leaders of the movement. Throughout the film, the viewer is gradually convinced that the workers are in a state of neglect, with no protection from the government and its services whatsoever. They are not only helpless, but also totally replaceable according to the ruling circles, so their mass destruction at the end seems like an excusable remedy for the government.

Strike is made of 6 parts, each one examining the cause and effect of the event itself, and presenting us with numerous characters, sometimes difficult to follow or understand. In my view, the director consciously avoids to point at just one person as a leader, to create a broader picture of the strong unity and equality between the comrades. With the power of montage, he manages to reinforce their desperate situation and manipulated lives. As a whole, the film is difficult to follow especially by audience, that is not familiar with the events in Russia from that period.
Eseinstein uses immense symbolism in a number of scenes, to suggest general attitude to a matter or the outlet of the strike.
An interesting film to watch once in a lifetime, but "Battleship Botemkin" is better in my view.

Week 2

It's just the second week, but it already feels like the middle of term. We are moving with a much faster pace than last year, and it is especially tangible referring homework. Everyone gives us homework.

On Monday we had a class with Andy, discussing Art Direction, design and how much it can contribute to telling a visual story. I believe we all rediscovered the significance of the art department. Highlighting that design is synergetic with story, it probably works that way mainly when the director has a clear vision and gives detailed treatments to all the departments. This is something we are learning to do in Zam's classes. Coming back to the main point, the films we looked at in terms of Best Art Direction for 2004 are some of my favorite ones. I realized I have watched all of the Oscar nominated ones, maybe because they do stand out enormously from most of the rest made that year.
In the afternoon we had Richard with a revision of screenplay structure, characters, goals, THEME (one of the difficult ones). We spend some extra time on theme to discover how little we are actually aware of it. Richard tried a new excersice, deviding us in 3 groups,all having to put together a puzzle of scipt's cuttings. We should do more of it to practise structure. The new homework is comming up with a premise that goes against the structure in some way, but we need to decide which element exactly will still work if turned upside down.

On Tuesday we had Adam and TV content creation class. It was pramarily concentrated on our new projects and how to make a successful show, which resembles the assets of Shameless, Teachers or Death Proof.
The second class on that day was with Zam. We continued the analysis of our favorite scenes. For next time we need re-embody the directors of these scenes (mine is Elia Kazan) and write treatments to 3/4 departments, considered most important for the achiving the effect of the scene.

Wednesday was a class based on new research approaches. I'm glad we are doing this, but after we have a new online database in the Academy, it's much easier to make a research on films or directors.

A camera test awaited for us the next day. It was not that difficult, mainly technical questions we've all covered. Afterwards there was an introduction to the new, more serious tripods we are going to use.

And finally, Eisenstein's Strike ended our week.

Hable con ella (Talk to her)

Full of sensuality that creeps under the skin, Almodovar's film centers round two tragic women and the men who love them. Benigno and Marco first meet at a theater where they still don't know each other. Afterwards, series of events put them together in a private clinic and they form a friendship, around the 2 women in coma they are taking care of. Despite having a nonlinear structure, the screenplay still follows certain rules. This film is an interesting example to study, because it's one of the few foreign films to win an Oscar for a best screenplay. After braking it down, it becomes easier to understand how the director has organized the bits and pieces to create a powerful story.

Both Benigno and Marco have the same flaw and disillusion, that they understand women and their problems so well. Benigno has taken care of his mother for 20 years, and after seeing from his window Alicia dancing ballet down the street, he is infatuated. Alicia has a car accident and is left in a coma. It is the perfect opportunity for Benigno,who is a nurse, to take care of her. This is what he believes he is very good at.

After seeing an interview with the attractive bullfighter Lydia, the journalist Marco is driven by the same passion to help her. He believes she is desperate, and he is the only one who can help. Marco and Lydia start a relationship but 4 months later she is deadly injured in a corrida. Tragically, she is left in a coma too in the same hospital where Alicia is. So far, the characters' flaws are gradually built. Their goal is to save these women, take care of them. But both characters have different circumstances which gives chance to the storyteller to change the goal. Lydia's ex boyfriend arrives at the hospital and takes his place. Marco realizes he can not help her and has to leave. Essentially, it is suggested that these women simply do not want to be saved by these 2 particular men.

Benigno, however, needs protection and guidance too, so the goal subconsciously shifts from one subject to another. Ostensibly Marco has lost the battle, has partly realized his flaw and is ready to leave. Benigno is established as the opposite of Marco- he is stubborn and even more blind to reality. Therefore, by making Benigno reach the darkest low, the storyteller can keep Marco's goal and desire active to save the desperate one. Benigno is the most developed character in terms of obvious flaws. It is logical he might not be able to overcome them, and his character is taken out.

Lydia doesn't survive the coma, but Alicia does. Benigno has caused a crime to her, which happens to be her saving element. After Benigno is gone, Marco has a chance encounter with Alicia. The viewer already knows it's natural to Marco to help Alicia, save her. Because after all, things are not simple. In my view, Almodovar is really good at creating colorful and eccentric characters and interweaving their lives in all directions. As in his other films, sexuality and desire has a central place in the story. I'm very pleased with Broken Embraces and La mala educacion so far. Volver doesn't do the magic for me. However, this director opened my senses for vivid transsexual characters, which makes him one of my favorite directors.

P.S- I've been writing this blog listening to the soundtrack of Habla con ella- absolutely obsessing spanish guitar!

La Grande Illusioin

La Grande Illusion is a film by Jean Renoir which depicts his memories of the First World War, based on his own experience as a pilot. Set in the German prison camps, it creates a rather mild reality in which the prisoners are allowed to receive parcels with food and clothes and are able to entertain themselves. But these are not ordinary prisoners- they are officers and therefore are treated with respect from the German guards. The French officers have a simple moto: "Prisons are to escape from them". They manage to preserve their spirits and form friendships. A few characters are distinguished in the film, and they are almost stereotyped. Renoir offers his social analysis of the French society. Marechal, played by the big star Jean Gabin, is a charming pilot who is representative of the working class. He gets along quite well with Rosenthal, a wealthy jew who is shares his parcels of food with everyone. Rosethal,however, doesn't have an aristocratic background like de Boieldieu, who differs in manners from everyone else. Having said that, these 3 characters are extremely entertaining, each one with his own style. For example, Renoir uses Jean Gabin to establish the working class hero, who is able to convey any type of emotion in a minimalistic way. De Boieldieu is a theatrical actor, standing out from the rest and portraying the symbolic distance between nobility and working class.

The prisoners of war bond together from the very beginning and dig a tunnel to escape. Unfortunately, they are moved to 16 other camps. The final one is a fortress commanded by a German aristocratic officer- Von Rauffenstein. He can not help but form a friendship with Boieldieu, both realizing that their class is inevitably doomed after the war. While in the fortress, de Boieldieu decides to make a sacrifice and help the other 2 French officers to escape. He consciously take this decision,caused by the lack of desire to wait and experience the miseries after the war. Von Rauffenstein never looses his admiration to his French friend.

In the third part of the film, Marechal and Rosenthal have escaped, but their affinities are tested by many obstacles. However, they stay together and meet on their way Elza (Dita Parlo), a German widow living alone with her daughter who offers them shelter. Marechal and Elza fall in love, even though they speak different languages. Renoir implies that the relationship between 2 people from different nationalities can be stronger than from the same nationality but different social class. It is also interesting how he plays with the title of the film, giving us an option to think what the illusion is. Maybe it is about the illusions of the prisoners that the war will soon be over, or that Marechal will come back to Germany and see Elza after the war.

By all means Renoir manages to create a social realism in his film and engage us even 70 years after its making. In the DVD special edition, there is a comment by the director that he intended to present the Germans as normal human beings full with nobility, in the time before Hitler.
In 1937 the film wins the best film award in Venice, and a few years after it's banned.



Renoir is one of the rare examples of coming from a family with and extremely tallented and famous father, thousands of opportunities to meet with leading arstists, consequently forming himself as one. His family is full of cinematographers, film makers, painters and actors.
In his early career, Renoir was influenced by the social realisim in French literature (Balzac, Zola) which he manages to develop and successfully portray in his films. His way of telling a story is quite easy to follow with witty and amazigly entertaining dialogues, an approach that has been taken forward by some later French filmmaker.

Back to blogging

Dear blog,

I haven't blogged for a while, because I was busy enjoying the summer. On a few occasions I was thinking about you, giving rise to a strange desire to share my thoughts on the films I've seen. However, something was always preventing me from doing it. But now I'm back in the Academy and we have to be friends again.

So what has happened so far?

On Tuesday we were introduced to the new first years, they seem nice. We were also informed there are many, many, many restrictions to kit use, absence and so on. It feels a bit like the army (or at least that's what my friends say).

In the afternoon we started taking a closer look at factual content, how to make a basic research and also discussed how much we actually know about factual film making. Frankly speaking, it is not an easy task to create a documentary which is engaging enough. One of the most memorable ones that I've seen is "The most hated family in America", by Louise Theron and the one about homosexual politicians in the US (was it called "Outrageous"?)"I am looking forward to these classes and hopefully we'll be able to make a short 5 min documentary about an original topic, based in Glasgow! I don't know why, but I keep thinking about the bluefin tuna scandal, since it's everywhere in the newspapers. Maybe a field trip to Monaco is a good idea to explore the subject in a greater detail.

On Wednesday was the first class with a young director, who is interested in our choice of favorite movie scenes. I still haven't shown mine, but I'm dying to do it! I guess I'm just a bit afraid of what the other classmates will think of it. It's from "A streetcar named Desire". I find every scene in this film perfect, and I want to show it because of the incredible performance of Marlon Brando and Vivien Leigh. At first I was wandering between the opening scene of "Hiroshima mon amour", because it's extremely beautiful and the second scene in "Last tango in Paris". The second film is quite delicate and one scene probably won't give even slight insight of what is going on. And since Hiroshima is only available on video tape, Elia Kazan's film will do.

On Thursday we were off, and Friday was the first class from the new cinema module. It is concentrated on European cinema and how from being influenced from American one, became a factor of a new genre and style that Hollywood seems to be trying to imitate nowadays. Even though it's hard to encompass even a small part of the interesting European films in this class, I still think we need to watch some more French films.

EIFF

Edinburgh Film Festival was a great experience and gave me some insight of the type of films that have a chance to get into such a prestigious festival, also the great variety of people who usually attend the event. 

It was full of press, Scottish citizens who are regular at the festival, as well as many international people who travel the world to attend film festivals. For example, during "The girlfriend experience" I was sitting next to an Italian person wearing a Cannes Festival Cap, who told me he was about to see  "Antichrist" next, because it's really eccentric and it left him confused in Cannes. That's what caught my attention to go see this film.

Also it's worth mentioning the many fresh graduates from Glasgow Uni's Film& TV course, who came well prepared and fired interesting questions to the film makers. 

As far as the film program is concerned, we started off with Adventureland on Saturday afternoon. It's an entertaining, witty film set in the 80's, about a teenager who has just graduated from college but lacks funds to go into graduate school. He starts working in a theme park, where without realizing it,  he instantly becomes the center of attention. Moreover, he finds a girlfriend with many secrets.  The best part of the film was the use of 80's hits.

After Adventureland, we didn't have any other free films to attend. The drawback of the program is the arrangement of 4 films that start at 9, then 2 starting at 9.30, and 2 at 11.30 (All in different cinemas!). So practically it's hard to see more than 2 or 3 films per day, and not feel totally exhausted moving from one place to another. 

On Saturday we headed to Sheraton for a Scene Breakdown class, but came across Allan Cuming who was interviewed by BBC and had children as an audience. He shared that his greatest dream is to perform in the Citizens in Glasgow, which still hasn't happened. I stayed until the end of the interview, so I missed the class. 

The next day, I went to see  International Animations 2, which was the reason why I chose my dates. I am extremely disappointed that I missed the Saturday ones, due to lack of organization. Some of the animations I saw were quite impressive-  "Wires" (Spain), "Coffee and Chicory" (Slovenia), "The performance" (Germany). I don't remember the names of the rest, one Russian one was quite good, but I was surprised to see the level of entry in the festival. Among all the above stunning animations, there were a few with rough qualities, as if they were 1st year student projects. No wonder that a Glasgow School of Art student had an oscar nomination for animation, before even graduation!

Afterwards, we headed to Cineworld to see Running in Traffic, produced by Abigail Hawkins. 

It was not my idea to see it.... I felt absolutely exhausted after watching it...

I guess I generally don't like films based in Glasgow, because I don't find the topics interesting enough to follow. Maybe an Edinburgh film or somewhere in the Highlands will be much more intriguing to me.  

Luckily Sunday turned out to be a long film day! We managed to get some free tickets for a documentary called "Outrage" and a foreign production "Vinyan". The documentary turned out to be brilliant! It focuses on homosexual politicians who have voted against gay rights or marriage throughout their careers, despite their own sexual orientation. It's rather controversial, and apparently quite relevant right now in America. The great thing about it is that it shows many different angles of the story, and also the different people suffering from such life build on lies- for example, the politicians' wives. One of them shared that she had no idea when she married her husband and found out after years of happy marriage. On the other hand, the politicians who have had the guts to admit their secret,  have managed to free themselves of the double life and great burden that they've felt forced to carry. 

 But the point is not admitting sexual orientation, it's being true to yourself and not following "the strong of the day", especially when it totally opposes one's lifestyle. 

I'll end it here, and blog about the rest later on. 

By the way, for everyone who I haven't mentioned it: I saw GAEL GARCIA BERNAL y DIEGO LUNA!!!! How great is that :)

Week 6 and 7

The week starting from 25th of May was mainly focused on production. We had regular sessions with Abigail, Ray also talked to us about organization and what needs to be done.
On Tuesday the 26th I was filming Black Cats and Blue Angels- to be honest, I'd rather be in the audience and enjoy the show than stand on a table and record it. There were a few small problems with PD110, but everything was ok in the end.
I don't quite remember what we did every single day, but here is an outline on the tasks our production team was working on.
Location was not found easily, since all the people I contacted either wanted more money or were simply not happy with film crews around. Therefore, we settled for Benoit's flat. Now the priority is for him to make his landlord sign the location release form... which I am a bit concerned about.
Casting Bau was great fun, unfortunately Gianluca was not an actor- just a vibrant kid.
I am happy with the choice of Robert- he is my favorite.

On Monday me and Charlotte had a tutorial with Adam about our mobile content idea. We showed him visual reference of our Characters and Location, but still need to work on the inciting incident.
Kim's class on scene-by-scene breakdown was very enlightening on how to make a better structure and improve your writing skills.

Being still busy with production, I'll keep my blog very brief. Moreover, now I don't reside permanently at one place, so I'll keep moving to places with no internet connection.

20.05-22.05

Wednesday was a screening.

Thursday- We found out which script is chosen to go into production.... and the winner is: Charlotte Carden: Little Clown. I am very happy with this choice, considering how different and interesting the story is. It is also challenging for me as a producer and 1st AD to provide all the props, a child-juggler and fit into the budget. I have a good feeling for this film, everyone is trying to collaborate on the project. So for the rest of the day we were allocating location and actors.

On Friday we had our last TV class with Andy, discussing the future of broadcasting and the increase of online TV users. In the afternoon, Abigail helped us with tips on the film, which we'll add to on Wednesday. Generally this week the production team will concentrate on tasks equally divided by us. 

Show Light

Saturday was our first day at BBC. My role was in the sound department, working together with Benoit and Graeme. Our supervisors (Corrina and Alan) were quite nice and I feel we learned something from them, just by helping and watching for 2 days. The audio set up takes an awful lot of time, for instance, we had to go on the roof and pass down cables to whoever was plugging them into the heavy speakers which were hanging on hooks. Also we probably used at least 30 XLRs, on various mikes. The first day was just to set up everything, and everyone was calm and friendly. Afterwards, there was a small dinner at the Cafe Bar, where I met some students from Croatia. One of them was a cinematographer and we discusses mainly the decrease in the use of film these day.
Sunday felt busier when Show light started. As well as passing the mike to the speakers in the audience at Q&A, I also helped Alan to adjust the mike levels to each presenter wearing a personal mike, also the hand held mike levels. The audio studio in BBC is amazing, they've got such an impressive equipment which at first seems so difficult to figure out how to use, but later on it gets simple. I was quite happy doing audio for 2 days, even though I didn't have many breaks, simply because they were used to chase down presenters and mike them up.
On Monday I was on camera from the morning till the afternoon. I changed just 2 cameras, with the main focus on steady CU, MS and WS. Very simple, given that we always had people to assist us with using the equipment. I presume the only difficult camera to use was the hand held one, which I didn't have time for, but it's quite heavy and sometimes challenging to get audience reactions when the audience was rather bored and asleep at some of the talks. What funny moments those were! So camera was great! I am looking forward to see the new equipment that the RSAMD will purchase for next year. We also met Roberto Shaefer, a cinematographer who assumed we are much more experienced in lighting than we actually are, but he also told us about the various jobs he had when he first started working in film. I quite enjoyed his presentation on Quantum of Solace and all the lights he used for some scenes. It sounded completely mad, but with such budget he could afford it.
Tuesday was our last day at BBC. I didn't want to leave, I quite like it there! Derrek, the director was very friendly with us. On that day, I was doing vision- basically, playing with a few racks to control the beam and opacity of the lights in studio A. My first 1 and a half hours were absolutely boring and I was struggling to stay awake at the techy talks. Thanks god, it got better later on, and we had a good laugh in the vision studio about the camera men's struggling to find interested faces in the audience.

As a whole, I loved the BBC experience that we had at Showlight. In terms of the content of the event, I don't think it's our specialism, because the practitioners invited were mainly working on concerts, advertising and theater productions, or mainly lighting buildings. I am sure the equipment could be applied in the field of film too, but I particularly was not familiar with all the equipment they mentioned. Despite this, I am glad we had the chance to talk to a few cinematographers. I hope that BBC assistants again!

Week starting from 11th of May

On Monday we had individual tutorials with Richard. I had some new premises, but the rather complicated plots didn't seem to give any space for character development. I wish I had more time to work that out, so for next tutorial, I'll try to be more prepared. Generally Richard likes a few of my premises and wants me to continue working on them, but sometimes the idea stops at some point and is quite hard to continue building the story arch.

In the afternoon class, Kim came was presented with our Coronation Street pitches. My group was working on a storyline around Dev which is actually quite entertaining. The next task was to write 15 episodes with beats, according to what type of story it is (A,B,C). In order to do that, the three groups from the class put their 15 tags on the wall and we all decided which was going to be the main story and the smaller ones.

Tuesday was a short class with Ray. He was hoping to discuss the scrips, but at that point we were still not informed which one is chosen.
Wednesday was a screening with Bonnie and Clyde. I imagined the story in a completely different way, influenced by Jay Z's and Beyonce's video ~:)
Thursday was a mobile media class with Adam. He was talking to us in groups to find out the development of our webisodes. Me and Charlotte pitched a new idea which he likes. The only thing that bothers me is we don't have much time to work on them, because of various other projects. The webisodes are quite important and hopefully we'll fit into the time limit.
On Friday the producer John York came to talk to the class about script writing, story arch, character development and so on.

Week 4.05- 8.05

Monday- holiday

Tuesday- Editing assignment of the other group's project. I found it challenging to put together shots that usually would not match, but a good editor should be able to do magic with these matters. A long but enjoyable experience!

On Wednesday we watched Paradise Now and we blogged about it. The film was definitely engaging.

In the afternoon a representative of Film G competition came to talk to us. It all seems quite inspiring and motivating, but somehow I am not attracted to the idea. I'll need to do a bit of research to find out more about the Gaelic culture and therefore come up with an idea for a short. Something tells me it's not going to happen though. If only if it was another language it would be much easier for me. 

On Thursday we discussed the misrepresentation of muslims on screen and how it affects us as film makers. To sum up, there are plenty of topics explored in films which are extremely controversial, so it's not easy to please everyone. Religion is one of the most dangerous subject matters because it directly affects a major or minority group, which is going to express an opinion afterwards. As a whole, I do believe muslims should be presented in a brighter light.

In the afternoon we watched some webisodes, my favorite one is Sofia's diary. Adams expects us to some up with an idea for similar platform.

Friday was a TV class, we watched 2 documentaries on how TV reflects or challenges the society, sometimes even changes it. Channel 4 has an interesting history, especially those years when they've aired a sort of pornographic films, for bigger ratings maybe? 

In the afternoon everyone had a tutorial with Abigail to discuss the schedule strip for Floating is easy. She seemed satisfied with my efforts. Generally I hope for the future we do that kind of work with a software, so it will save us plenty of time.  

Paradise Now

I guess we the reason we watched this film is to spot the misrepresentation of islamic culture and the stereotypical concept of fanatic terrorism. The 2 main characters, however, are represented in a positive way, people that we would like to meet in the beginning and therefore, understand their motivation afterwards. Said and Khaled are childhood friends who have grown up in Nablus, Palestine and feel that their whole life has been oppressed by Israel. Their heroes are martyrs whose main goal is justice and tolerance, so they decide to go on the same path. Said's father has died as a collaborator, something he doesn't see himself as. In this difficult atmosphere of political incorrectness, Suha tries to convince Said in more peaceful methods of fight and struggle. She is a daughter of a famous martyr and doesn't see the point of such death, since it hasn't changed the injustice Palestinians are living in.  At first she reaches his heart and he's unsure of wether is right to continue on this path, but later on he's the one who pulls the cord and blows off the Israeli bus. Khaled eventually changes his mind and steps back  from the whole operation, tries to save his friend too but fails. One of the scenes where Khaled is about to be recorded holding a gun and a powerful speech is very interesting regarding the perception of such occupation.  His comrades are eating, the camera is not working as if it's not a big deal to the people who organize the whole event. Probably that's a hint that the mission matters only to our main characters, who are actually manipulated by their weaknesses.

I am not sure what the message of the film is supposed to be: for example, what makes the martyrs choose this path? Is it the posters in the town center that makes them heroes,  the honor to be chosen for such mission, or the endless hope that their sacrifice is worth. Suha is depicted as a strong female character, she has her own believes and stands up to them. Probably Said's reasons to carry out the operation despite the first obstacle, is his lack of desire to go back into the same old reality. I was hoping both characters (Suha and Said) to end up together :( In terms of character development, Said and Khaled swapped their roles and believes, they both suffered changes which made me buy into it. 

Are aliens misrepresented on screen?

 To begin with the space ships, and going through the alien's extraordinary body, face and sometimes extreme hostility, Hollywood has a lot to explain if the DO show up to ask for reasons why they are presented in such a way. 

Moreover, do all aliens suck the blood out of people and kidnap them for experiments? Or is it just in War of the worlds with Tom Cruise saving the world. 

(For all alien lovers, do not take this blog too seriously)

Week 27/04- 3/05

On Monday Kim was off , so our Coronation Street pitch did not happen. Instead, we watched all the footage from March's shoots with Gavin, from which some shots are quite satisfactory (Melissa's Mail)

Tuesday was an editing assessment- logging sheets into Final Cut Pro, capturing a few clips and logging into the Edit Share. Not bad!

On Wednesday we watched "In the heat of the night", a film staring actors who revolutionized acting. I find it entertaining to watch those films with the class because their is always an occasion for a good laugh! Besides, it's one film less from my list of films  I MUST see.

Thursday was long day- 1 lecture on misrepresentations on the screen; starting from females and going through race, ethnicity etc. Megan Fox was mentioned, I googled her images and I've no idea where Andy found that one, totally missing her full beam of light and glitter.  Then we watched a TV pilot about a few working class people from Liverpool and their constant struggle to become rich and successful.  

On Friday Adam covered mobile media and its potential for film platforms. In short, the only disadvantage of webisodes is they are not making any money yet. LOL is an example of well-made webisodes with professional technical values.

In the afternoon we had Abigail assigning us to do a strip board, which each one of us will discuss with her next Friday. It's more like a schedule with strips, but extremely helpful for the next shoots.

The best years of our lives

This film is directed by William Wyler, and displays the difficulties of 3 servicemen to readjust to home after returning from World War 2. From all of them, Al is the luckiest one, being surrounded by 2 strong women in the face of his wife and daughter Peggy and a secured job waiting for him. Despite having these wanderful things at home, he still doens't feel comfortable and refuses to accept his children have grown up and are much more responsible since he last saw them. Al is childish in a comic way, especially in situations with a drink in his hand when he looks the happiest. His wife is next to him all the time, making sure he's ok and providing all the support he needs.
Homer, the youngest of all, has lost his arms during the war and has hooks as replacements. His readjustment seems the most difficult one, because he feels like a burden to his family and future wife Wilma. Homer remains blind to their complete love and support for a long time, but when he faces his own problems and insecurity he finally lets Wilma closer to him.
The three fellows often see each other. Their spot is a pub which Homer recommends, and in fact they, end up there on the very first night. Fred, who has reached a high rank during the war and has exceptional achievements, refuses to come back to the pharmacy where he has previously worked. He meets Peggy, Al's daughter, at the pub where they end up by chance. She is very different from his wife, much more tactful, caring and stepped down to earth. As his wife sees in him only the "smooth pilot" who she has fun with, when the money is gone she is off too. The best years of her life, are in fact, the years when he was gone and she was living in luxury. Peggy accepts him the way he is, with a low paid job and no fancy officer clothes. I really wanted them to end up together ever since they met! When the wife was introduced I got a bit worried.. but luckily it moved forward in the right direction as everyone hoped.
In "The best years of out lives" many details are omitted, others are summed up in one shot, but the audience is clever enough to figure out the whole plot and doesn't suffer during the two and a half hours at all! Brilliant ideas that we could all benefit from- like the long deep focus shots. They save up time and most of all bring style to the who film.

Just to mention that Peggy is played by Teresa Wright, who I've watched in "Shadow of a doubt", my first Hitchcock film :)