Royale With Cheese

For class on 4-4-2007

I’ve actually haven’t seen “The Thin Blue Line” yet, but from the clips I’ve seen in class it is obvious that Errol Morris used music to enhance the the film. Morris, as it is seen and heard, also uses this musical technique in “Fast, Cheap & Out of Control.” I found the latter film (I can only really speak for that one out of the two) seemed significantly different from Morris’s earlier movies. People just sit or stand in front of the camera and speak; any noise that is heard comes from the immediate surroundings. Now, music is incorporated into the later films and seems to have an incredible impact.

For one thing, I was stunned as soon as I heard it, because it was so different. But the music does play with viewers’ emotions. Sad music plays and people will probably begin to feel sad, and vice versa when it comes to happy or exciting instrumentals. But a sort of sad music is played over Rodney Brooks saying that there is nothing special about human life, while at the same time he is walking into his own birthday party. If the music is trying to enhance something that is being said, I can’t say that every viewer will get the point. I began watching the slow motion, black and white shot of Brooks’ students jumping around for him, and I became so caught up in seeing what was happening in the film that I forgot what was being said. Then watching that scene a couple more times I began to realize what Dr. Campbell was talking about. He was his students throwing a birthday party for him, all wearing shirts with their teacher/mentor’s face on it, and pictures of the solar system all around us, while saying there is nothing special about human life.

I actually enjoyed that fact that the film had some music in it, maybe because most films do and that is just what I’m used to, but it would throw me off at times. The instrumentals literally messed with my perception of the film itself. Maybe that is why Morris put music in the movie, to make it more complicated to get; cause people to want to dig deeper into his mind. I do feel that one of the key reasons music is used in the movie is simply to connect everything together. Dr. C stated it creates a continuity over a section of discontinuity. But I also feel that the circus was a recurring factor that somehow played into every person’s story, and at the circus music is always heard. It would be boring to go to the circus not have any music playing in the background, that’s just my opinion though. But the music and the circus scenes are everywhere, and I feel that is also another element lying beneath the surface of the film. I don’t know how to explain it yet or what it might mean, because I need to think it over in my head a little more, but I’ll just leave it at that for now.

“Fast, Cheap, & Out Of Control.” It was quite a film. I’m truly interested in further discussion of what the significance of “Darkest Africa” has in the film. I understand Clyde Beatty, with being a lion tamer in real life and playing one in this movie or television show (I’m not sure which), and he’s actually playing himself as well. But is that the only thing within showing that or is there something else? I know one thing. That little André The Giant/Chunk (from the Goonies) kid was freakin’ awesome. Running around in his diaper concoction fighting the forces of evil, how could you go wrong?

One thing that I feel that Errol Morris is trying to get across through this film, in addition to knowing reality and the meaning of life and how things “just happen.” I feel he is commenting on dreams; the fact that everyone has them and everyone needs them. These four men all have or had a dream that they strived for, they all reached theirs too. The film stars out with talking about dreams, and that is all I kept thinking about as I watched this film. I feel that the idea of having dreams in life was one of the major points of the movie, if not THE point. The beauty of dreaming of something is that it keeps you pushing forward in life. Even when the world around you is falling apart, a dream, just one dream, can help you survive.

The definition of reality was said to be ‘A complete and total representation of reality.’

I find this to be interesting, and I am not disagreeing with it, but what about fantasy and sci-fi films? Are those considered to be forms of cinema? They do not seem to represent reality at all, because these sorts of movies create exotically fictionalized worlds that do not exist, except within the mind. The FTC group on Wednesday stated that fantasy is not reality, in turn also making it not cinema. But then what is it? What are these kinds of mythical films considered? And more importantly, because this is a question that must always be asked when referring to definitions, who came up with meaning of the term cinema and were they qualified to make such distinctions between different types of films?

I do not have answers to follow up these questions, but I do have something that I want to throw out on the table in terms of cinema and reality. Fantasy films such as the “Lord Of The Rings” trilogy are certainly not recreations of the world we live in today. There are no dwarves running around with axes chopping down orcs; I haven’t seen them at least. But within these films there is some reality whether it seems like it or not. There is war, and people/creatures fighting for a greater cause. Kind of like what the U.S. has always and still is trying to do when stopping enemies. There are bonds between individuals, friendships are created; and sometimes between the most unlikely individuals. War creates bonds between people her in America. I have seen two war veterans who meet for the first time, not knowing a thing about each other, but they can talk for hours about anything because there is a connection there. There is love of all sorts sweeps across the screen as well. I think that one is pretty self-explanatory.

All I’m saying is that there are characteristics of reality within fantasy films; sci-fi films too. Most of the original Star Trek episodes always had some sort of moral they tried to convey to viewers about life. The morals of the reality that people follow today were relevant in sci-fi movies and television then. Is this enough to be considered cinema, or is there more to be done? Or are these ideas I have presented irrelevant? Who knows, other than ‘The Definer of Cinema.’

That statement that was made last class that “Just because a statement is ineffectual or doesn’t make a difference, doesn’t mean that it is meaningless.” It was either a quote or an idea from the novel “1984;” I could have written it wrong but I don’t know.

Anyway, what if you substitute “film” in place of “statement?” The other Errol Morris films we’ve watched in class have not been well known. The people who do see Morris’s movies walk out or turn off the t.v. at the end thinking, “What in the world did I just watch?” And that’s only considering they did not walk out or click the power button before the end. One of Errol Morris’s idols thought one of his films was not a film at all, but instead a slide show. I can see where that spectator was coming from, but he did not look deeper into the movies. Morris’s idol did not look under the surface of the film itself. There are so many things taking place, so many important and interesting things being said, and hardly anyone picks up on it. Those viewers only say, “That’s just weird.”

I thought that too, until certain characteristics were pointed out, and then I began to see connections everywhere. I have gone into details about the different films in previous Errol Morris blogs (Refer to the Errol Morris Category for specifics) so I will not do so again. But there are certain things that make these films into pieces of art that should not be called Documentaries; they are something else. A documentary about pet cemeteries would be all about pet cemeteries. Morris made a film about pet cemeteries that also commented on life, death, love, hate, family, companionship, betrayal, loss, and even music.

Errol Morris has taken Documentaries to a new level, and uses a genre that works for him.

It was said that Errol Morris believes it is possible to know reality, but feels that it is a very hard task to accomplish. With each one of his films that we have seen so far, it seems as though he is trying to pull off this task. He’s looking for the door through each one of his movies, the door to reality. The people of Vernon, Florida spoke about reality, but were their ideas fact or fantasy. The people themselves could be the door. Morris’s films could be the very door he is looking for. Maybe he even knows that, but will not say. But all I can say is Errol Morris is trying to get into people’s heads with each film he creates. He is trying to reach every single person he can by presenting a variety of types of situations which many different people can relate to. He is trying to push reality into viewer’s heads through the people speaking on the screen. He is Errol Morris P.I., making the life a little more real for the world.

After viewing Errol Morris’s “Vernon, Florida,” all I can really say is that it was…interesting. This goes for all of his films as well. I’m not saying they are bad at all, but just incredibly different from anything I’ve ever seen. Maybe that’s why he does not call his films documentaries.

The most significant feature that stood out the most in the film is the people. Apparently Morris had gone to Vernon, Florida to make a movie about the real-life people who cut off their body parts in order to collected more insurance money; he called the film “Nub City.” He was badly beaten for propsing the making of this film, but realized that he loved the people there. Which brought the movie “Vernon, Florida” to the rest of the country.

I think I can see what Morris saw as he entered the town that second time, fixed on creating this film. I think he saw the perfect vehicle, or vehicles should I say, that could take the words coming out of their mouths and make them into a kind of philosophy. Morris could have easily seen that the people of Vernon, Florida had been seaching for the meaning of life; they had been around the block and seen a few things that sets the world in its place. If a wealthy man were to enter the town of Vernon in an expensive suit, ready to discuss what they believe is the true meaning of life, many viewers would probably laugh at the obsurdity of it all. Those people lived in that town and believed they knew more about life and its secrets than anyone else.

How could you go wrong with filming a man who speaks about the meaning of life, while sounding like Mickey Mouse as an old man-rodent. There’s the hunter who says that hearing “Gobble, Gobbel” is the best diariah medicine in the world. And you cannot forget his pal Snake. A man who speaks about using his brain and picking up brains. There was even a man who had a possum that he was saving for an auction. These are not ordinary people, and I believe that is why Morris found them so interesting. I even found them interesting. Every one of these people had a different view on finding the door to the meaning of life; but they are all trying to head in the same direction. I think I’ll have to refer to “Chappelle’s Show” in saying that with regard to all of Morris’s films that we’ve seen so far, he “keeps it real.”

From 3-19-2007 class meeting.

With regard to “Gates Of Heaven,” I am just baffled by this issue of having red objects seen beside the owners of Bubbling Well Cemetary. The father did not have anything like this during his interviews. Every time he was on camera, his background was incrediby plain. He was really the only thing in the shot. But observing his wife and two sons’ interviews, each of them were surrounded by objects that meant something to them. Although, this is done at the cost of creating a shot that has a great deal of clutter in it. Maybe this represents their emotional baggage, they all need things in life in order to feel better about themselves.

The mother needs her kids, because in a way they are her pets. But they have moved out and started their own families, so what does she do? She buys so much stuff that she can take care of those monetary items instead. Her oldest son Phil placed trophies all around his office in order to make him feel like he has done something with his life. He needs a meaning in life, and his old trophies are used as a substitution for going out and making something for yourself. During the scene, he is hiding behind the trophies, literally; they take up all the space. Danny loves music and would rather lie in his hammock and play his guitar than do anything else. He owns a large stereo system which is incredibly loud; and he brags about its musical power.

Danny is trying to impress everyone around him, Phil is trying to impress himself, and their mother is trying to impress anyone who would come see her. Cal is the most interesting of the four because of his lack of doing the same types of things. What does he know about life that makes him so incredibly comfortable? Did he find the Meaning of Life, not the film, but the real thing? Maybe so.

But what I cannot get out of my head is what the freaking connection is between the red items that appear on screen with the people. that I cannot seem to wrap my brain around. I do not know if there is any true way of learning the true answer, unless I find the maker of all things…these things that is.

I saw “Gates Of Heaven” Thursday night, and I must admit it was a bit odd. It started out as a documentary about pet cemeteries, and then the film suddenly goes into this woman sitting in the doorway to her home, and she talks about her life. Once that is over, viewers are taken to another family who still, today, own their pet cemetery.

After we talked about that hinge scene, it made a bit more sense. I was absolutely confused on the whole matter. She just kept talking about things that did not, at the time, seem related to the overall film whatsoever. Thing strangest thing during that scene was not what she was talking about, but all of the sounds that came out of nowhere. She spoke of buying her son a car, and suddenly there was the sound of screeching brakes. Up until that point there was almost completely quiet during the woman’s monologue. After the screeching noise, more noises could be heard. For instance, more cars driving by, birds chirping, kids yelling. Where did all of that come from? There was a “No Trespassing” sign shown immediately before the woman started speaking. To me, it seems as if there would not have been anyone else around or cars driving by with a sign like that.

I was sitting there thinking that those noises had been implanted into the movie. That could have been what Errol Morris did, but I don’t know. I’m not really sure what those sudden sounds coming from around the woman were all about.

I do not know if I would go as far as saying that Beth is scolding Jo in the attic from the 1949 “Little Women.” It was an odd scene, Beth is very ghostly and seems to float toward Jo. I guess that goes along with the fact that she was dying, but she climbed up to the attic while she was in such a terrible condition. You also cannot see Jo’s face during the entire scene which was also odd. But coming back to the message Beth was trying to give Jo, she spoke to her silent sister about what was happening and told Jo not to tell their parents that Beth knew that she was going to die. I just did not see this remark as a command. I feel she was talking to her sister in a new way, an unrestrained way; people can do some crazy things right before they die.

To go to the idea of what I think is good and what I like, I’ll have to say that both the 1933 & 1994 (which, again, are the only ones I have seen) were good movies, but I did not like them very much. If I had liked the movies I would not had have such a hard time sitting through them. I just found them incredibly boring, I feel similarly about the novel, and I wanted to just turn them off at times. For some reason, I had a hard time getting through all of it. Someone in class noted the idea of a Coping Mechanism where viewers would latch onto a character they like so they can get through the film. With the 1994 version I latched onto Laurie, mainly because it was Christian Bale and he’s awesome (I recommend everyone go see “The Prestige”). He was the only thing helping me through the movie.

The movies were good though, they held fairly true to the novel and had decent acting with great portrayals of the characters. There are other factors that play a part in why they are good as well, we have discussed them in class. They are just not movies that I would want to watch again and again, or ever again for that matter. It’s kind of like when I watched Scorsese’s “Casino,” I saw the whole thing, uncut, once, and I do not really care to do it again any time soon. Great movie, but not one that I want to watch over and over again.

For the March 12 class.

I definitely try to look at the silent characters on the screen while anyone else is talking. I also try to observe the character’s surroundings for anything that might play a role in the movie as a whole. It is hard sometimes to do, because it is a habit to look at the person who is speaking. You can see inaudible people making certain faces or body movements in reaction to the speaker. I feel that when these silent people continue to act out what they think or feel from the situation, it makes the movie much more enjoyable. Everyone is separated into individual beings who can walk and talk on their own, without waiting their turn.

My favorite television show right now is LOST. Everything in the show connects with everything else, it’s awesome. There will be something in the background where the people are, and there will be a word or a picture that holds some relevance to the overall show. These sort of things are really cool and I like it when I am able to catch them. Well in last nights episode (3-15-07) one of the characters, Claire, was trying to set up a trap made of netting so she could catch some birds. She’s speaking to a Korean family who were also stranded on the island. (It would be way to hard to explain the show to anyone unless they have seen it. You can go to the iTunes Music Store and they have a FREE video called “The Lost Survival Guide” that will tell you everything that has happened up until now in the show. If anyone is interested.) The Korean husband, Jin, cannot fully understand everything Claire is saying, but she asks for his fishing netting. He does not move right away, because she continues talking. Then he understands what she is trying to do and turns to leave, but as he does so he lifts up his hand and shakily points it, as if he was making the statement “Oh, I got you.” Just little things like that make me feel really good for some reason. I don’t even know why or how to explain it. It’s like that happened and I said “That’s why this show is great.”

I can remember this happening in one scene from the 1994 “Little Women.” It is when Mr. Bhaer and Meg are walking toward the March house, and Laurie and Jo are walking behind them. Those followers never say a word to break the conversation, but I saw Laurie (Christian Bale is the man by the way) making facial expressions to show his curiosity in his teacher’s talk. It also happens with Beth’s eyes while Marmee was reading the first letter from father. She looks away in the distance, probably thinking and imagining her father at war.

I guess I just love sweating the small stuff.