Post Five - Rango Review

Production Year: 2011

Country: USA

Cert (UK): U

Runtime: 107 minutes

Directors: Gore Verbinski

“This way to Dirt…”

When originally sitting down to watch the much anticipated CGI animated, animal western; Rango, who would have known the thought to be kid’s animation had a possible better suiting to an adult audience.

Johnny Depp plays the green, crooked necked chameleon; Rango. Although the film is family friendly Depp adds a certain edginess to it with reference to the well known novel turned film by Hunter S. Thompson; “Fear and Loathing”. These characteristics plus a certain arty weirdness make the film a thrill to watch as an adult as well as perfectly suitable for children. 

The film hasn’t followed the cinematic trend by going 3D but doesn’t really need too as the remarkable CGI animation makes every tiny detail on screen look extremely realistic.

Rango is a pet chameleon who ends up stranded in the Nevada desert after a car accident. He is lost, out of his comfort zone and is extremely thirsty in the scorching sunlight with no shadow to hide under. After getting into a spot of bother with an eagle he finds himself in a small western town called Dirt. The town is populated by a variety if desert critters whom all play a part in this spaghetti western like film.

Rango arrives in Dirt and fancies himself as a bit of hero although heroes in Dirt don’t go down too well. He is appointed sheriff and is trying his best to fit in with his new surroundings.

The town’s water supply is close to running out and Rango wants to help and save the day. But is the water supply simply running out? Or is there more to this than meets the eye? 

The plotting of the film is narrated by a group of Spanish singing birds, this adds to the oddness of the characters making the film a strange, thrilling and interesting watch, but what else would be expected from Verbinski, the director of “Pirates of the Caribbean”. 

Verbinski also adapted an unusual way of directing this film by using the people voicing the characters to act scenes on a set up stage using this for help with animation. 

Even though there is a slight confusion over Rango’s target audience, Verbinski has certainly shown his true colours with this clever but weird film. This along with the outstanding animation and gripping storyline makes Rango a must see watch.

Rating: 

http://www.rangomovie.com/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/8360336/Rango-review.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/mar/06/rango-review

http://cinema.theiapolis.com/movie-2SB1/rango/storyline.html

Post Four - Implicit and Explicit Ideologies in Films

“Ideology is a relatively systematic body of ideas, attitudes, values, and perceptions, as well as, actual modes of thinking (usually unconscious) typical of a given class or group of people in a specific time and place.” (Hess, 1978)

All films made whether Hollywood blockbusters or low budget independent films all represent ideologies from the culture and attitudes at the time. The above quote written by John Hess is a good definition of ideologies in films.

Cultures vary depending on when and where a film has been made. In a report written for scribd.com the author discusses two films that represent WW2, Catch 22 (1970) and Saving Private Ryan (1998). Both films represent the same time period but due to the 38 year gap between each being made, they both contrast and contradict each other.

The article also discusses cinema as a communicative medium which has culturally bound implications and mediums. From this films can be divided into implicit and explicit ideologies. 

Disney films are perfect examples of implicit ideologies. They are mainstream films but always have embedded messages within them. Take Wall-E for example, the title gives nothing away about the themes and is a film set in the future about humans leaving the earth due to pollution. Wall-E (a robot) has been left to clean up the years of pollution. All humans have left the earth and are now living on a spaceship which offers the highest technology so that they need to do nothing for themselves, not even walk. The ideological message here is about the worlds over reliance on technology as well as a warning to pollution. The film has a happy ending with the humans returning to earth to help clean up, another ideology here is that teamwork solves and helps everything.

An example of a film with an explicit meaning is The Wizard of Oz. The film is a well known classic about a young girl (Dorothy) who is dreaming of running away from her dull life on the farm she lives on. She ends up in Oz, a colourful odd place with munchkin’s, witches, flying monkeys and a wizard. She becomes friends with a scarecrow, a tinman and a lion and asks them to help her find her way home. She has to make her way to the Wizard of Oz in hope that he will grant her the wish of returning home. The explicit message here is the meaning of the film, once she had left home she realised how much she loved and missed her family. This was shown at the end of the film when for Dorothy to return home the line “There’s no place like home” had to be repeated.

These are just a few examples of ideologies in films but all films have underlying meanings in which its up to viewer to decipher and understand.

  

http://www.scribd.com/doc/97612/Ideology-and-Cultural-Meaning

http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC17folder/FilmAndIdeololgy.html

http://www.wsu.edu/~hughesc/film_and_ideology.htm

http://www.esfmedia.com/page/Wall-E+-+Ideology

http://hubpages.com/hub/Wizard-of-Oz-Analysis

Post Three - Mainstream Cinema

Today Hollywood films are classed as "mainstream", they follow specific standards and use specific techniques. This much so that you can spot a Hollywood film just by the actors used, the storyline made and camera techniques. 

A set of films which decided to reject the Hollywood system are Dogme 95 films. This new wave of films was started by Lars Von Triers and Thomas Vinterberg in 1995, they both met up and made a VOW OF CHASITY to making films which was then unveiled at the 100th anniversary of cinema. 

In total, 31 Dogme films were made before the Dogmesecretariat closed down in June 2002. The Dogme films were almost like a rebellion against Hollywood/ mainstream films, using handheld cameras and no added lighting or sound. Even though the films were a success, the Dogme films didn't want to be seen as a genre hence why they shut down in 2002. Filmmakers today are still encouraged to go on taking the VOW for historical purposes.

This was a revolution in film making subverting mainstream standards but there are many films that conform to these standards. With mainstream films you can usually predict the plot as a lot of them have the same storyline and characters, a film which subverts the mainstream and Hollywood film making standards is Bunny and the Bull.

 Bunny and the Bull is a British film directed by Paul King. The storyline features a man called Stephen Turnbull who hasn't left his house in months due to an unforeseen circumstance. The film goes back to a road trip with his friend Bunny. During his flashbacks the set is made out of things from his flat, for example milk bottles make a bar wall and a Ferris wheel being made out of the inside of a clock to signify that it is in the past. The storyline is also very unpredictable with a sudden turn towards the end. These characteristics help this film to identify as a subvert to the Hollywood and mainstream system.

 

Going from one extreme to the other, a film which conforms the mainstream standards is the well known romantic comedy Pretty Women. This film conforms to the standards of Hollywood through many characteristics. Number one is the films choice of actors, Julia Roberts and Richard Gere. Big actors sell films. As well as this the storyline of Pretty Women is very predictable, Roberts plays an unconventional part as a hooker where Gere plays the typical male role as a rich tycoon. They meet and end up falling in love, the film comes to an end with a typical fairytale ending leaving the audience content. Mainstream films, depending on genre tend to have the same plot. The big named actors and predictable storyline help to identify this film as a mainstream film.

These are just two films and a few examples that demonstrate how films can conform to Hollywood standards and how they can subvert these standards.

http://faculty.washington.edu/mlg/courses/definitions/counter-cinema.htm

http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC27folder/EpicThCounterCinema.html 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/nov/30/bunny-and-the-bull

http://www.thefilmjournal.com/issue9/dogme95.html

Post Two - Auteurship

"A filmmaker whose individual style and complete control over all elements of production give a film It’s personal and unique stamp."

Auteur is derived from the word author. The auteur policy was started by an article written by Francios Truffaut who critisised filming in the 1950's. Various film critics have had input to the auteur policy but Andrew Sarris was the man who turned it into a theory. Sarris claims there are 3 levels of Auteurship: 

• Technical competence.
• Distinguishable personality such as recognisable camera shots and script. 
• Director as a person, meaning the directors own personal views

"The auteur theory values the personality of a director precisely because of the barriers to its expression."

Sarris explains that whether directors are from Hollywood or Europe the films made will be shaped by the conditions and culture at the time. Meaning films made are affected by external factors.

Although Auteurship originates from Europe in the 1950's and great Auteurs include Jean-Luc Godard and Ingmar Bergman the auteur theory can be applied to famous Hollywood directors such as Quentin Tarantino.

Quentin Tarantino has been writing and directing films for the past 20 years. He shot into the limelight with his first film Reservoir Dogs in 1992 and since then has been involved in making some of the biggest films in Hollywood to date.  His films are very recognisble but to understand how Tarantino can be described as an Auteur a selection of his finest films need to be looked at. 

Tarantino's films tend to follow multiple storylines which all tie up at the end. Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds all pursue various storylines following different characters but all link in to each other at the end. This is a recognisable trait on Tarantino's part and makes his films interesting to watch.

Another identifiable trait of Tarantino is the extreme use of blood and gore in his films. Whether its gun shots in Pulp Fiction, Samurai Fighting in Kill Bill or WWI slaughter in Inglorious Basterds no expense is spared. They certainly aren't for the faint hearted.

Tarantino is also credited for his strange choice of word choice in his films such as the famous clip in Pulp Fiction when Travolta and Jackson discuss Big Macs even though they are cold blooded hitmen, it always adds a sense of humour even through the blood and gore.

One last most noticeable trait is Tarantino's choice to have the movie credits at the beginning of his films instead of at the end.This is a rather old fashioned but makes Tarantino's films distinguishable from the rest.

Tarantino’s films are extremely recognisable from the opening credits to the end scene when you figure out Tarantino's multiple storylines, and for these reasons Tarantino can definitely be called an Auteur.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/auteur

http://www.filmreference.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS_ROi0iiZw

http://www.bullz-eye.com/entertainers/quentin_tarantino.htm

http://passionforcinema.com
http://www.onlygoodmovies.com/blog/good-movies/quentin-tarantino-movies/