In class today, the topic of Martin Scorsese and his movies just happened to pop up. Not that I'm oddly and emotionally attached to directors I like or anything like that, but I love Marty a totally non-weird amount and felt the need to write why I like him and his movies so much. I want to make it clear, though, that I completely respect your opinions about him, Mr. Bennett, and in no way mean to change your mind or anything like that. I just happened to wake up from a nap today and see that picture of a sweet, happy Scorsese winning his Oscar (the last time I actually enjoyed the ceremony) that I put up on my wall years ago and suddenly felt a need to briefly explain some of the reasons why I like him such a TOTALLY non-weird, every day amount...
First off, I'll get his personality out of the way in only a few sentences, so I can then concentrate on his movies, which are much more important. In every interview I've ever seen of him everything he's written that I've ever read, and everything that others have said about him, the man is not only incredibly lovely but a huge lover of cinema. He's sort of like some stereotypical comical nerd with asthma and glasses, but he's said that ever since he was little he's loved movies as a means to both escape and explore. He's clearly obsessed with movies, and I'm unsure exactly what it is but I find something about that immensely endearing. This love of movies has found his way into his work, as his movies constantly have both hidden and obvious allusions to other films. The most recent example of this is in the Departed, where Scorsese put an X somewhere on camera whenever a character dies. This is a direct reference to the Howard Hawks version of Scarface (the good version- there, I said it). It's the little things like this that truly make most of his movies a treasure hunt for cinephiles. (That word is creepy.)
About his camerawork- yes, it is very obvious. It's impossible to watch one of his movies and not take note of a little trick he does here or there. I guess it simply comes down to a matter of personal taste, because this has never bothered me, and in fact I usually like the fact that the camera takes on the role of almost narrator. I can certainly understand why someone would be bothered by maybe a lack of subtlety in the camerawork, but one of the major things I love about most of these movies is the fact that they can appeal to/entertain several different types of audiences. What I mean is, someone with a lower understanding of movies who comes in to watch, say,Goodfellas, can be entertained purely by action, while someone with slightly higher understanding sees the significance of tracking shots or what have you. Others even more perceptive will find more subtle things to take note of - things like brilliant acting, a good screenplay, and those cool little Easter eggs. You can go in as a regular moviegoer or as a film professor or as Akira Kurosawa, you'll find something to analyze.
Finally, I just want to say a few things about the characters. I think you said, Mr. Bennett, that you didn't feel that most of the characters in his movies had any resonance. I guess, again, it depends on personal tastes, but I've found a lot of these characters fascinating. Taxi Driver is a prominent example, because I always think of the movie as primarily a character study of Travis Bickle. Any action that takes place in the movie is completely dependent on the character. The same is true for Raging Bull and even Goodfellas. I've found the way he's handled crime/mafia movies brilliant, as he doesn't seek to glorify or condemn, only explore the psyches of the people involved. At least that's my perception of it, I could be wrong. And his movies that aren't very action oriented, like the King of Comedy, the Avatior, and even Kundun- I've felt that the characters were brilliant. DeNiro's character in the King of Comedy, Rupert Pupkin, is actually one of my favorite all time characters and really affected me a great deal.
To each his (or her) own I guess...
Monday, April 6, 2009
Signs & The Seventh Seal
Before I start off this post (my first in quite some time, sorry)I should probably mention that I missed a day of the Seventh Seal due to absence and I (forgive me) fell asleep during part of Signs (due to sleepiness, not lack of entertainment), so anything I say is obviously due to scrutiny based on that alone.
But anyway, this is my second time seeing both movies, and I'm almost disappointed that my opinion hasn't changed for either. I still think The Seventh Seal is brilliant and I still think Signs is simply entertaining but nothing truly spectacular, or even slightly spectacular for that matter. What I saw of Signs, excluding my 20 minute nap, kept me entertained but not fully engaged, and I felt the entire movie was too overdone for my taste. Meanwhile, the Seventh Seal remains one of my favorite movies, and resonated very deeply with me. I don't consider myself a hard-core existentialist, and I do believe there is, if not a God, some sort of "higher power", so it's interesting that I responded more to the existentialist movie. Maybe it was the cinematography...
Really though, I think I realized what made the Seventh Seal work for me and Signs not. I felt that the ending of Signs was far too contrived, convenient and, well, happy. It seems to assure the audience "don't worry, things may seem rough, but everything happens for a reason. God is looking out for you." And this is the message that sends Graham back to religion? I'm not sure I buy that completely. Feel free to disagree of course, I honestly don't want to insult anyone and maybe I've listened to too much George Carlin in my life, but the only thing I could think of in the last minutes of the film was "If God supposedly has this grand, master plan, and all the bad stuff that happen, like wives and mothers being pinned by a truck, is simply part of this plan and has to happen to reach some end result, well then what's the use of praying to begin with? " I feel as though that message of everything happens for a reason and is part of a plan seems almost anti organized religion, and the fact that its used in an opposite way just feels fake to me.
Meanwhile,the Seventh Seal never tries to hide or sugarcoat the fact that bad things happen every day for seemingly no reason. It never sings us a lullaby the way Signs does, and yet conversely, never says conclusively that there is no God. I find this fitting, since we can't know whether there is or isn't a God, so why should a filmmaker pretend to? My favorite scene in the movie both times I've seen it has been the Wild Strawberries scene. While death is clearly imminent in the background of the entire scene (a symbol of death, not the figure), I just get pulled into the, for lack of more eloquent word, loveliness of the entire exchange. The scene feels like a welcome rest from an otherwise extremely heavy movie, but it affected me on a much deeper level. Directly after this scene,Block plays his last match with Death, and if memory serves me correctly I believe he's even smiling. The climax, as we've discussed, happens here, when Mary and Joseph and their non-Jesus baby escape. While Block loses his chess match, as we all must do, he wins on a much deeper level, and this is why: by forming meaningful relationships with other human beings and ultimately affecting the lives of others, his life has not gone to waste. While we can never know the secrets of life and death, we are given the (in my opinion, not necessarily the movies)gift of life, so we must find our own ways to make it meaningful here on Earth. This is a message that I find much more true to life than that of Signs. While the Seventh Seal is clearly a movie about Death, literally and philosophically, we shouldn't forget that it is also, subsequently even, a movie about life.
But anyway, this is my second time seeing both movies, and I'm almost disappointed that my opinion hasn't changed for either. I still think The Seventh Seal is brilliant and I still think Signs is simply entertaining but nothing truly spectacular, or even slightly spectacular for that matter. What I saw of Signs, excluding my 20 minute nap, kept me entertained but not fully engaged, and I felt the entire movie was too overdone for my taste. Meanwhile, the Seventh Seal remains one of my favorite movies, and resonated very deeply with me. I don't consider myself a hard-core existentialist, and I do believe there is, if not a God, some sort of "higher power", so it's interesting that I responded more to the existentialist movie. Maybe it was the cinematography...
Really though, I think I realized what made the Seventh Seal work for me and Signs not. I felt that the ending of Signs was far too contrived, convenient and, well, happy. It seems to assure the audience "don't worry, things may seem rough, but everything happens for a reason. God is looking out for you." And this is the message that sends Graham back to religion? I'm not sure I buy that completely. Feel free to disagree of course, I honestly don't want to insult anyone and maybe I've listened to too much George Carlin in my life, but the only thing I could think of in the last minutes of the film was "If God supposedly has this grand, master plan, and all the bad stuff that happen, like wives and mothers being pinned by a truck, is simply part of this plan and has to happen to reach some end result, well then what's the use of praying to begin with? " I feel as though that message of everything happens for a reason and is part of a plan seems almost anti organized religion, and the fact that its used in an opposite way just feels fake to me.
Meanwhile,the Seventh Seal never tries to hide or sugarcoat the fact that bad things happen every day for seemingly no reason. It never sings us a lullaby the way Signs does, and yet conversely, never says conclusively that there is no God. I find this fitting, since we can't know whether there is or isn't a God, so why should a filmmaker pretend to? My favorite scene in the movie both times I've seen it has been the Wild Strawberries scene. While death is clearly imminent in the background of the entire scene (a symbol of death, not the figure), I just get pulled into the, for lack of more eloquent word, loveliness of the entire exchange. The scene feels like a welcome rest from an otherwise extremely heavy movie, but it affected me on a much deeper level. Directly after this scene,Block plays his last match with Death, and if memory serves me correctly I believe he's even smiling. The climax, as we've discussed, happens here, when Mary and Joseph and their non-Jesus baby escape. While Block loses his chess match, as we all must do, he wins on a much deeper level, and this is why: by forming meaningful relationships with other human beings and ultimately affecting the lives of others, his life has not gone to waste. While we can never know the secrets of life and death, we are given the (in my opinion, not necessarily the movies)gift of life, so we must find our own ways to make it meaningful here on Earth. This is a message that I find much more true to life than that of Signs. While the Seventh Seal is clearly a movie about Death, literally and philosophically, we shouldn't forget that it is also, subsequently even, a movie about life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)