A Light Discussion (WARNING: RANT)

Though this isn't a review of any movie in particular, I want to bring up a very touchy subject, something you may want to watch your words with. I am positive someone with much more research and experience has covered this topic, but I just want to put in my two cents. You may or may not agree with anything I say, but it is nothing personal if you don't like what I say. It may offend some, it may not.
Now, we've have romantic stories ever since the dawn of time; you've had your Much Ado About Nothing, your All's Well That Ends Well, your Pillow Talk, your Breakfast at Tiffany's, your Annie Hall, your Four Weddings and a Funeral, your America's Sweethearts... and then you have junk like Fool's Gold, The Ugly Truth, and Bride Wars.
I can't help but wonder what happened to us. I mean, really. Rom-coms are a form of escapist entertainment for most women (and the occasional men, even though I hardly know any guy who enjoys them), and yes, there are some great movies like that (see the last paragraph, even though I haven't seen them all). However, when one looks at the overall quality, it's no wonder the men roll their eyes whenever they're dragged into a "chick flick"!
The world obviously has better taste than stuff like The Ugly Truth; I may be killing my credibility, but even though I haven't seen the film, I read up on it and watched some reviews, and frankly, it's sexist, misogynist, misandrist trash. The female lead is portrayed as an upright workaholic who has to be liberated by the "big, strong man", and the male lead is a total sleaze and jerk in every way possible. If anyone asks, no, I won't watch something like that. EVER. Don't even ask me. I'll just turn you down flat.
Then there's Fool's Gold, which I HAVE seen. Now, it's quite tame compared to The Ugly Truth; there's no misandry, and it's more of an adventure story than a rom-com since it's about a treasure hunt for a Spanish ship's cargo. However, I couldn't really stand the leading lady, even though my mom takes her side. For those of you who haven't seen it, the main characters are an archaeologist and a historical researcher who are getting a divorce because the researcher thinks the archaeologist is too immature and stretches the truth too much. I could SLIGHTLY understand her frustrations, but she should at least WAIT for him to come to the divorce hearing before making the ultimate decision. For that, I think she's a bit of a witch.
There will be more evidence to come, and I'm incredibly sorry I'm rambling this late of an hour. I should be going to sleep instead of delving into stupidity such as this. I don't like today's rom-coms (500 Days of Summer is an exception; I highly recommend it), but I like the older stuff better. Until then, let's see what happens. Tell me your thoughts on the subject, and I'll tell you if I agree.

America's Genghis Khan - Citizen Kane (Part 4)

My remarks here will be brief, I'm afraid. I have little to say about this movie.
Personally, I think it's a better film than All Quiet on the Western Front. Even though I am not entirely familiar with Orson Welles, I think I might check out his version of Jane Eyre, where he plays Mr. Rochester. He has never been a handsome-looking man, but you can't help looking at the guy. He is articulate, he is intelligent, and more importantly, he is original. You can't find that in a lot of men these days.
So going back to the film, I still stand by what I said: Susan Alexander IS more vulnerable than Mr. Kane. By the time the Enquirer lauds her for months, she can't take it anymore. I had a feeling if Kane didn't listen to her, she'll kill herself from the exhaustion. Not that much else of her is still alive anyway. Like Kane and Leeland, she has lost a part of her Soul, and at one point, she turns to drinking.
I've read some of the blogs, and a lot of people are saying he acts the way he acts because of his drunken dad. Since Leeland and Kane were good friends before Kane got carried away, he should've known at least a little bit about his childhood. And what of Emily and Susan? Surely he must've told them something... It's true that he is estranged from them, but they should've known at least a smidgeon of his history.

As the film points out, he is a mysterious man, and life cannot be defined with one word. If that were true, it would've been easy to catergorize everyone. However, every little detail is complex. There's no way of knowing what is true or not. It's all very well, but unfortunately, the film is incredibly one-sided. Were there any people who still liked him? Every person the reporter came across has some kind of agenda against him, or at least some kind of grudge. It's a pity, really. We could've seen him at his best. Maybe he could've been a better person... Maybe he shouldn't have been left with a reliable banker... the world may never know.
Until then, let's hold our breaths for Runaway Train

America's Genghis Khan - Citizen Kane (Part 3)

We are roughly two thirds into the movie, and I can't help but think perceptions about him are a little skewered; every time the reporter interviews someone new, it's nothing but the negative. Does Kane really have not a single friend in the world?... This is what an amateur writer thinks; it is better to move on to some astute observations.
Ever since my first post, I wondered what it is he did for her that Susan went from being an Opera star to a night-club singer. I confess, my impression was that she was a starlet before the two of them ever met, though it's now been proven she just happened to work at a music library on the side. Mr. Bennett once told us that the aria she sings for him is the Bride's song from The Barber of Seville; I thought this was the opera Susan performed, but the costumes proved me wrong. Instead, it looks like she is singing something out of Cleopatra or Aida. It's a strange decision on Orson Welles' part, but then again, the grandioseness of the situation supports the materialism theme.
Mr. Bennett also mentioned something about stereotypes; while he touched upon Mr. Bernstein (who has a slightly bigger role than I previously thought) and the black band-leader, he has forgotten about the music teacher. It's probably just me, but his over-the-top reactions, his greasy hair, and his constant screeching make him into a stereotypical Italian. Maybe I am reading too much into it, but this is how I see it. It's also clear Susan isn't enjoying this one point; in fact, she is far more vulnerable than Kane ever will be. It's not that she sounds like a dog when she sings... It's just that he is far too controlling and the poor girl knows it. The viewer already knows the rest.
From the tone of her voice, I though it was Kane that left her out for garbage, but it was actually the other way around. Even Charles Foster Kane is not that big of a jerk. Then again, he DID cheat on Emily, and we already know what happens to her and her son. They probably don't show it yet, but they will soon.
If my guess about Rosebud is right, everyone else is not only in for a big shock; anyone expecting anything big will also be in for a big disappointment.

America's Genghis Khan - Citizen Kane (Part 2)

Apparently, I was drastically off by fourteen minutes the last time I posted; we stopped at twenty-minutes yesterday, and probably stopped at roughly forty today. All in all, I have much more material to cover.
So we finally have the answer why Charles Kane went to another guardian. If Mr. Thatcher's account is to be believed, the elder Mr. Kane was a drunk and Mrs. Kane wanted to plan an escape for some time now. Then again, I don't blame little Kane for reacting like he did. I'd try attacking them too if I were him; he obviously didn't know a single thing about being sent away. It's traumatizing for a ten year old boy.
This raises the question I had from yesterday: Of all people, why would Mr. Thatcher become Kane's new guardian? And also, why did Mrs. Kane consider sending him away when she could've divorced or left her reprobate of a husband easily? I guess we'll never know...
His old sled could represent his lost innocence, and the new one he gets for Christmas could be materialism (we see a lot of this in the next section). We're also introduced to organic transition; I'd love to see how they did that because it probably took plenty of time to film. They obviously used fake snow, but how long did the camera crew have to wait to achieve this? Let's see if Mr. Bennett and the rest know.
Then there are some quotes I want to discuss, like Charles Kane's remark to one of his workers at the Enquirer, where he tells him "You provide the prose poems, I provide the war." Though it foreshadows his later support of the Spanish-American conflict, it shows that all ties between Thatcher and Kane are broken. The rest will be destroyed as well, but this is another story for tomorrow. He's only twenty-five, and he is already one of the biggest giants New York has ever seen. Yet, as we know, success comes with a price. He confides that his "mother should've chosen a less reliable banker" and that if he "hadn't been rich," he might've been a "really great man." In a way, he is great; he acquires wealth faster than today's billionaires and controls not only newspapers, but later radio stations as well. However, if Thatcher's account's to be believed, he may've let the power make a jerk out of him. He says he speaks for the people, yet there are times when he speaks only for his own interests.
There is also another hint of foreshadowing from Mr. Bernstein, a former confidante of Thatcher and Kane, who tells the reporter "A fellow would remember a lot of things you wouldn't think he remember." I'm thoroughly convinced that he is there for comic relief; he is the one who has to carry Leeland and Kane's things and also gets a little troubled at times. I see very little reason for his existence, other than to provide another vantage point on Charles Foster Kane. It would've been interesting to see it from Jed Leeland's point of view, but he has already killed himself at this point. This leads into another quote, which takes place at a party celebrating the consolidation of the Chronicle paper. Kane may've been jesting with "you don't expect me to keep any of my promises, do you?", but it greatly foreshadows his corruption from acquiring so much wealth, more than any man his age could ever dream of. The showgirls also represent the gaudiness of materialism and power. When he is carried away by these women, he is also carried away by his fortune.
These are my remarks for now, but there will be more much later. Maybe I'm wrong about Bernstein, and maybe I overanalyze things a bit too much, but let us see what happens next. Let's see what "Rosebud" truly means and how far Kane's power will take him, as well as what he did to Susan to make her go from an opera singer to a performer at a sleazy night club.

America's Genghis Khan - Citizen Kane (Part 1)

Citizen Kane has a promising start; we the viewers are first introduced to a shot of Xanadu Mansion, and for those who are dictionary-savvy, xanadu is a term used to describe a paradise. So keeping this in mind, it becomes a paradox to what our anti-hero has become; it has never been finished in his lifetime. Its creator merely goes out with the words "Rosebud" on his lips, triggering one of the most extensive newspaper findings since the Willbrook Institute scandal or the latest presidential election. The deceased man's former home represents dreams unrealized and crushed, which brings us into the themes of lost innocence, materialism, and alienation.
There is little to see about loss of innocence at the moment, except for his ex-wife Susan, an opera singer now reduced to singing in night clubs. She doesn't say it outright, but from her reaction and the way she drinks, she still has feelings for Charles Foster Kane. It's also fitting that the journey begins with a newsreel and a dark room, where one of the reporters scour the nation for the truth about Kane and what Rosebud actually meant.
The way the film is presented, it is a mystery, but deep down, it is a man's journey from rags to riches to near bankruptcy set to the backdrop of yellow journalism, a newreporting style where the events are seen from a subjective point of view and blown out of proportion to the point that it becomes libel. For some reason, anti-heroes interest me more than a typical hero does; one minute he was popular enough to run for President, the next one the public burns effigies and hoist all sorts of abuse on their protest signs. It's a shame that we had to stop the film before we truly meet Kane's parents; I wonder what would've happened if Mrs. Kane let Mr. Kane be more involved with their son's life. One thing's for certain. The talk with Mr. Thatcher doesn't look promising in the slightest. Yet I can't help but think it's a little extreme. I may be seeing this the wrong way, but it looks like the Bank's taking custody of him. Maybe it's the trick of the eyes, but it's just me. It's better to see the rest of the film. We're only roughly six, seven minutes in...

The Old Bait and Switch

Apparently, today was a misadvertisement; Citizen Kane will start tomorrow, but I won't even be there...

All Quiet on the Western Front (part 3)

So even though I'm busy right now and I have no acute observations at the moment, this is a good film to watch; it's not my favorite, but the entire work is character-driven, as the story should be. It's one of the first films to have a Pacifist message, and the scenes with the elders, the teacher, Kat's death, and the conclusion are the clinchers. I always liked Kat, and I thought he would be one of the survivors; that's not the case, unfortunately, and what ensues is a massive example of dehumanization. One minute, all he has is a busted knee, but by the next camera shot, Paul is carrying him over his shoulders like a pig and there's a gash in the back of his head so deep, nothing could be done. Then there is also the butterfly scene, the symbol of lost hope; it is unattainable. No one can go back.
The civilian adults' ignorance is also apalling; to the viewer, the soldiers are obviously suffering, but to them, they're only getting the best. They must be so indoctrinated that they don't realize they're speaking the greatest of idiocies, like telling them to "push on to Paris". It's nothing but a game to them. Don't they realize the entire war's a stalemate?! Probably not; the Kaiser's government probably made sure they didn't know the truth - and that's a terrible thing. The same applies to the younger students and the teacher, the one who should've known better. Patriotism is good, but nationalism is bad. There is a vast difference between the two. Patriotism is taking pride in a country's best aspects; nationalism is when a person is too prideful to even see the country's faults.
In their defense, however, I once read in this IMDB forum that the elder Germans had a different war experience than that of World War I; they had a quick victory in the Franco-Prussian War and expected to get the same result in this movie. As we all know, however, this was not to be. All the Germans had were a blockade that nearly wiped them out and the Treaty of Versailles, which set the scene for World War II and Nazi Germany. As stated before, the country banned this movie during Hitler's reign for its message and also because the government thought it made the country look like patsies. Either way, this is no excuse for ignorance.
On a positive note, I'm looking forward to Citizen Kane, one of Orson Welles' earlier films. Legend has it that William Randolph Hearst tried to sabotage the movie's success and keep it from playing in theaters. However, the cast and crew found a loophole and held outdoor screenings instead. Welles uses innovative shots and also has the entire story play out from Kane's perspective; it's based on Hearst's life and how he was one of the ruthless men in the newspaper business. Though some people say it's overrated, I only heard good things about it and I hope I won't be disappointed. I personally think Welles is an intelligent man and that he has an alluring voice (it's hard to find a bass/baritone voice these days), even though I haven't seen most of his films. Let's hope I rectify that soon.
EDIT:
P.S. Apparently, the only person who looks and actually has time to read my blog is Mr. Bennett...

All Quiet on the Western Front (part 2)

So anyway, even though this may not be stated eloquently or clearly enough, I just have a few remarks as I write this - This movie has one of the most realistic battle scenes ever put to screen; the camera moves with the machine gun, and the quick cuts and extreme close-ups represent how manic battle is. Also, Kat is one of my favorite characters right now, and I think Himmelstoss is a chicken; then again, I haven't seen him entirely in action yet. As started before, this is a short blog that's poorly written, but I just want to get a couple of opinions across.
P.S. Germany banned this film during the Nazi Regime because it was too harsh on Germans, while Poland banned it because it was too sympathetic with Germany. (Paradoxical, isn't it?)

All Quiet on the Western Front (part 1)

So far, All Quiet on the Western Front is very interesting; like most movies of the 1930's, it is shaped like a novel put to screen, complete with foreshadowing and symbolism. It may seem slow at first, but it requires patience on the viewer's part. The first two scenes use open doors; the main theme is war and pacifism set in the backdrop of Germany during World War I. It doesn't make sense right now, but it will soon enough.
Be warned about over-acting; movies have yet to transfer from the expressionist method. Nowadays, it's rare to see it, but if done right, it becomes a work of art.
More to come soon enough...