2012 Movie #41 - Casablanca (1942) This is my third time seeing CASABLANCA, but my first time seeing on the big screen with an audience. I was lucky enough to see this projected on 35mm at the BFI Southbank over the weekend. Like most classic films, CASABLANCA gets better with each viewing. Seeing it on the big-screen you really get a sense of how masterfully Michael Curtiz moves the camera. Seeing with an audience, I was also struck by how funny the dialog is, but never at the cost of the serious nature of the story. The humor comes from character and dramatic irony, not from forcing jokes into an inappropriate context. What I’ll Take Away: Storytelling pace is a different thing than cutting pace. The opening sequence of CASABLANCA where the usual suspects are being arrested moves incredibly quickly, but this has more to do with density of storytelling than speed of cutting. It’s possible to have a brisk pace with a single shot, and a slow paced scene with fast cutting. It’s about the speed of information being revealed, not the speed of cuts. High-res

2012 Movie #41 - Casablanca (1942)

This is my third time seeing CASABLANCA, but my first time seeing on the big screen with an audience. I was lucky enough to see this projected on 35mm at the BFI Southbank over the weekend. Like most classic films, CASABLANCA gets better with each viewing. Seeing it on the big-screen you really get a sense of how masterfully Michael Curtiz moves the camera.

Seeing with an audience, I was also struck by how funny the dialog is, but never at the cost of the serious nature of the story. The humor comes from character and dramatic irony, not from forcing jokes into an inappropriate context.

What I’ll Take Away: Storytelling pace is a different thing than cutting pace. The opening sequence of CASABLANCA where the usual suspects are being arrested moves incredibly quickly, but this has more to do with density of storytelling than speed of cutting. It’s possible to have a brisk pace with a single shot, and a slow paced scene with fast cutting. It’s about the speed of information being revealed, not the speed of cuts.

2012 Movie #40 - The Woman In Black (2012) Things said by the teenager behind me at today’s screening of THE WOMAN IN BLACK: Don’t go upstairs, you idiot. Don’t go downstairs, you idiot. Don’t open the door, you idiot. Is he back at the house again? What an idiot. Don’t go outside, you idiot. What I’ll Take Away: You can get a lot of mileage out of someone walking around a house at night holding a candle. High-res

2012 Movie #40 - The Woman In Black (2012)

Things said by the teenager behind me at today’s screening of THE WOMAN IN BLACK:

  1. Don’t go upstairs, you idiot.
  2. Don’t go downstairs, you idiot.
  3. Don’t open the door, you idiot.
  4. Is he back at the house again? What an idiot.
  5. Don’t go outside, you idiot.

What I’ll Take Away: You can get a lot of mileage out of someone walking around a house at night holding a candle.

Want to know why generations of teenage girls love DIRTY DANCING?Want to know why it’s one of the highest selling DVDs of all time?Want to know why it can still sell out screenings around the world? Because it’s really fucking good. 2012 Movie #39 - Dirty Dancing (1987) For Valentine’s Day, Jess and I decided to see DIRTY DANCING at a theater here in London. this is probably the 4th or 5th time I’ve seen the film, but the first screening for over a decade. It’s also the first time I’ve ever seen the film projected in a theater. I’ve always been a fan of DIRTY DANCING. Unfortunately, as a cultural phenomenon, “Dirty Dancing” has moved beyond the quality of the film, and now exists as a polarizing pop-culture item that people “love” or “hate.” This is a shame, as the film itself is of remarkably high quality. So what the hell, I’m going to make the case for why I believe  DIRTY DANCING is one of the great films of the 1980s. THEME DIRTY DANCING is incredibly dense with interesting thematic content. It contains interesting explorations of class relations, shifting family and cultural dynamics in the mid-20th century, the maturation of father/daughter relationships as a daughter becomes an adult, but mostly it’s a film about believing you can change your world and the importance of helping other people. These last themes are touched on by all of the interweaving storylines and major characters, and is the beating heart of the relationship between Baby and Johnny. THE BABY/JOHNNY RELATIONSHIP Baby and Johnny have a love story built on the belief they have in each other, and their ability to expand each other’s horizons. Johnny teaches Baby how to dance and how to express herself. He helps her take the path from timid teenager to strong expressive adult. Baby in turn gives Johnny the strength to push against the class driven glass-ceiling he feels restrained by. In the most basic and compelling sense, they complete each other. They are simply better people in each other’s company. We fall in love with Baby and Johnny for the same reason why they fall in love with each other, and this is the ultimate success for a dramatic romance. BABY’S RELATIONSHIPS WITH HER FATHER The second biggest driving relationship in the film is between Baby and her father. People generally attribute the Baby/Johnny dynamic as the cause for the film’s rabid female fanbase, but I think the father/daughter relationship has an equally strong appeal and elevates the film beyond just another teen romance. The film uses the events of the narrative and Baby’s character arc to reflect the universal relationship dynamic of a father realizing his daughter is not just a child to love but a person to respect. Baby leaves DIRTY DANCING as a truly realized adult in all her important relationships. THE WRITING The screenplay for DIRTY DANCING is exceptional. If you’ve been following my blog, you can tell that I have pretty strong beliefs when it comes to the power of a well executed dramatic narrative. DIRTY DANCING never lets its narrative tension slack, and every scene is a real dramatic scene, which has become a rarity these days. When I describe a scene as a “real dramatic scene,” I mean something very specific. In his book “On Film-Making,” Alexander Mackendrick defines a dramatic scene as… …one in which something happens: an incident or an event takes place, the situation between the characters is different at the end of the scene from what it was at the beginning. The equilibrium has been altered and there is some narrative momentum that drives the characters (and us the audience) to a new situation in the next scene. It has been a sad trend these days that many scenes are just “stuff happening.” Events will occur, but they have no impact on the film’s narrative propulsion because they don’t actually change the character dynamics or situations from the start to the end of the scene. They don’t indicate to the characters or the audience a new situation that builds on the prior situation, and so we enter the next scene as a blank slate waiting for the next “stuff happening” moment. Boredom is born in “stuff happening.” This idea of indicating narrative progression is hugely important when it comes to structure. It’s well explained in Matt Stone and Trey Parker’s NYU lecture on story structure that went viral in 2011. We found out this really simple rule… We can take these beats… of your outline and if the words ‘and then’ belong between those beats, you’re fucked. You’ve got something pretty boring. What should happen between every beat you’ve written down is the word ‘therefore’ or ‘but.’ If you have “and then” between your scenes, it means that you aren’t writing using true dramatic scenes. You aren’t using your scene to build a changing situation in the world, and indication of how that changing situation effects the overall narrative progression of your story. DIRTY DANCING is almost entirely structured using strong dramatic scenes. Every scene propels the plot and the characters, and this is what allows for such dense thematic, narrative, and character content in a brisk 100 minute running time. This alone would make DIRTY DANCING an impressive screenplay. What makes the writing exceptional is that you never notice this expert craftmanship! Hell, I’m always looking for this stuff, and it took me a few viewings to realize how well crafted the script is. You never feel the invisible hand of the author forcing the story along. The scenes exist as natural moments between characters, where you believe they are making decisions and experiencing the world exactly in that moment. As a result, the audience also lives within the moment of every scene. THE DETAILS It’s certainly not enough to have a brilliantly structured and told story. Having a strong dramatic structure definitely helps make a film compelling to watch and avoids the cardinal sin of boredom, but it’s not like most people look back on a film they loved and say “it was amazing how every scene had narrative propulsion.” The things you consciously remember and love about a film are the details. The iconic shots, the memorable marriage of dialog and performance, the shocking peripeteia (reversal of circumstances; turning points), the powerful scene or sequence, or the twist ending. The moments and the details. The red pill or the blue pill? Indiana Jones shooting the swordsman. Bruce Willis was dead the whole time. Darth Vader reveals he’s Luke Skywalker’s father. Gene Kelly singing and dancing on a rainy street. “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.” Slim Pickens riding the bomb. “I Fart In Your General Direction.” Johnny lifting Baby above the water of a Catskills lake. “Nobody puts Baby in the corner.” DIRTY DANCING draws us in with its expertly conceived narrative, and hooks us eternally with its exquisite details. What I’ll Take Away: Everything. High-res

Want to know why generations of teenage girls love DIRTY DANCING?
Want to know why it’s one of the highest selling DVDs of all time?
Want to know why it can still sell out screenings around the world?

Because it’s really fucking good.

2012 Movie #39 - Dirty Dancing (1987)

For Valentine’s Day, Jess and I decided to see DIRTY DANCING at a theater here in London. this is probably the 4th or 5th time I’ve seen the film, but the first screening for over a decade. It’s also the first time I’ve ever seen the film projected in a theater.

I’ve always been a fan of DIRTY DANCING. Unfortunately, as a cultural phenomenon, “Dirty Dancing” has moved beyond the quality of the film, and now exists as a polarizing pop-culture item that people “love” or “hate.” This is a shame, as the film itself is of remarkably high quality.

So what the hell, I’m going to make the case for why I believe  DIRTY DANCING is one of the great films of the 1980s.

THEME

DIRTY DANCING is incredibly dense with interesting thematic content. It contains interesting explorations of class relations, shifting family and cultural dynamics in the mid-20th century, the maturation of father/daughter relationships as a daughter becomes an adult, but mostly it’s a film about believing you can change your world and the importance of helping other people. These last themes are touched on by all of the interweaving storylines and major characters, and is the beating heart of the relationship between Baby and Johnny.

THE BABY/JOHNNY RELATIONSHIP

Baby and Johnny have a love story built on the belief they have in each other, and their ability to expand each other’s horizons. Johnny teaches Baby how to dance and how to express herself. He helps her take the path from timid teenager to strong expressive adult. Baby in turn gives Johnny the strength to push against the class driven glass-ceiling he feels restrained by. In the most basic and compelling sense, they complete each other. They are simply better people in each other’s company. We fall in love with Baby and Johnny for the same reason why they fall in love with each other, and this is the ultimate success for a dramatic romance.

BABY’S RELATIONSHIPS WITH HER FATHER

The second biggest driving relationship in the film is between Baby and her father. People generally attribute the Baby/Johnny dynamic as the cause for the film’s rabid female fanbase, but I think the father/daughter relationship has an equally strong appeal and elevates the film beyond just another teen romance. The film uses the events of the narrative and Baby’s character arc to reflect the universal relationship dynamic of a father realizing his daughter is not just a child to love but a person to respect. Baby leaves DIRTY DANCING as a truly realized adult in all her important relationships.

THE WRITING

The screenplay for DIRTY DANCING is exceptional. If you’ve been following my blog, you can tell that I have pretty strong beliefs when it comes to the power of a well executed dramatic narrative. DIRTY DANCING never lets its narrative tension slack, and every scene is a real dramatic scene, which has become a rarity these days.

When I describe a scene as a “real dramatic scene,” I mean something very specific. In his book “On Film-Making,” Alexander Mackendrick defines a dramatic scene as…

…one in which something happens: an incident or an event takes place, the situation between the characters is different at the end of the scene from what it was at the beginning. The equilibrium has been altered and there is some narrative momentum that drives the characters (and us the audience) to a new situation in the next scene.

It has been a sad trend these days that many scenes are just “stuff happening.” Events will occur, but they have no impact on the film’s narrative propulsion because they don’t actually change the character dynamics or situations from the start to the end of the scene. They don’t indicate to the characters or the audience a new situation that builds on the prior situation, and so we enter the next scene as a blank slate waiting for the next “stuff happening” moment. Boredom is born in “stuff happening.”

This idea of indicating narrative progression is hugely important when it comes to structure. It’s well explained in Matt Stone and Trey Parker’s NYU lecture on story structure that went viral in 2011.

We found out this really simple rule… We can take these beats… of your outline and if the words ‘and then’ belong between those beats, you’re fucked. You’ve got something pretty boring. What should happen between every beat you’ve written down is the word ‘therefore’ or ‘but.’

If you have “and then” between your scenes, it means that you aren’t writing using true dramatic scenes. You aren’t using your scene to build a changing situation in the world, and indication of how that changing situation effects the overall narrative progression of your story.

DIRTY DANCING is almost entirely structured using strong dramatic scenes. Every scene propels the plot and the characters, and this is what allows for such dense thematic, narrative, and character content in a brisk 100 minute running time.

This alone would make DIRTY DANCING an impressive screenplay. What makes the writing exceptional is that you never notice this expert craftmanship! Hell, I’m always looking for this stuff, and it took me a few viewings to realize how well crafted the script is. You never feel the invisible hand of the author forcing the story along. The scenes exist as natural moments between characters, where you believe they are making decisions and experiencing the world exactly in that moment. As a result, the audience also lives within the moment of every scene.

THE DETAILS

It’s certainly not enough to have a brilliantly structured and told story. Having a strong dramatic structure definitely helps make a film compelling to watch and avoids the cardinal sin of boredom, but it’s not like most people look back on a film they loved and say “it was amazing how every scene had narrative propulsion.”

The things you consciously remember and love about a film are the details. The iconic shots, the memorable marriage of dialog and performance, the shocking peripeteia (reversal of circumstances; turning points), the powerful scene or sequence, or the twist ending. The moments and the details.

The red pill or the blue pill? Indiana Jones shooting the swordsman. Bruce Willis was dead the whole time. Darth Vader reveals he’s Luke Skywalker’s father. Gene Kelly singing and dancing on a rainy street. “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.” Slim Pickens riding the bomb. “I Fart In Your General Direction.” Johnny lifting Baby above the water of a Catskills lake. “Nobody puts Baby in the corner.”

DIRTY DANCING draws us in with its expertly conceived narrative, and hooks us eternally with its exquisite details.

What I’ll Take Away: Everything.

2012 Movie #38 - The Grey (2012) I’ve liked most of Joe Carnahan’s prior work, but THE GREY is by far my favorite of his films. The marketing is a bit misleading. This isn’t really a movie about Liam Neeson punching wolves in the face. It’s a brutal atheist existential survival story in which Liam Neeson punches wolves in the face. The filmmaking is excellent throughout, and my one minor quibble is that the film does have a tendency to structurally separate its narrative moments from its character moments. Rather than naturally interweaving character and theme into scenes that continue to propel the narrative, I think the film occasionally allows too much slack in the narrative tension to allow for character building moments. My favorite films tend to find a way to do all of these things at the same time. That said, it’s really a minor quibble, and I would highly recommend seeing THE GREY. What I’ll Take Away: Dermot Mulroney is becoming more and more interesting as he gets older. I could see a major comeback for him in the near future. But with regards to the filmmaking, I’m really impressed by Carnahan’s ability to juggle naturalistic and iconic camera choices within the same scene. High-res

2012 Movie #38 - The Grey (2012)

I’ve liked most of Joe Carnahan’s prior work, but THE GREY is by far my favorite of his films. The marketing is a bit misleading. This isn’t really a movie about Liam Neeson punching wolves in the face. It’s a brutal atheist existential survival story in which Liam Neeson punches wolves in the face.

The filmmaking is excellent throughout, and my one minor quibble is that the film does have a tendency to structurally separate its narrative moments from its character moments. Rather than naturally interweaving character and theme into scenes that continue to propel the narrative, I think the film occasionally allows too much slack in the narrative tension to allow for character building moments. My favorite films tend to find a way to do all of these things at the same time. That said, it’s really a minor quibble, and I would highly recommend seeing THE GREY.

What I’ll Take Away: Dermot Mulroney is becoming more and more interesting as he gets older. I could see a major comeback for him in the near future. But with regards to the filmmaking, I’m really impressed by Carnahan’s ability to juggle naturalistic and iconic camera choices within the same scene.

2012 Movie #37 - Underworld: Awakening (2012) The movie certainly had a lot of energy. What I’ll Take Away: High contrast visuals with lots of bright specular highlights do not look good in stereoscopic 3D. High-res

2012 Movie #37 - Underworld: Awakening (2012)

The movie certainly had a lot of energy.

What I’ll Take Away: High contrast visuals with lots of bright specular highlights do not look good in stereoscopic 3D.

HOWLING film poster REC 3 film poster THE GREAT MAGICIAN film poster ELECTRICK CHILDREN film poster NUIT BLANCHE film poster

2012 Movies #32-36 - Howling, REC 3, The Great Magician, Electrick Children, Sleepless Night

For the last few days I’ve been in Berlin attending the European Film Market. For people who haven’t attended a film market, it’s an industry convention for international film companies. There are booths and offices where foreign sales companies, national film commissions, and various other entities pitch their product or services to distribution companies and film producers. The three largest film markets are Le Marché du Film (during the Cannes FIlm Festival), the American Film Market, and the European Film Market.

The majority of activity at a film market involves “pre-sales” which refer to licensing distribution rights for a film that hasn’t been made yet and “post-sales” which refer to licensing distribution rights for completed films. For companies to see the finished films, film markets have a series of screenings that’s a bit like a film festival just for film executives. So a foreign distributor will go see a new finished film at a market screening, and then contact the foreign sales company to make an offer. The foreign sales companies also screen promo-reels or have other materials for the films that are in “pre-sales.”

For me, film markets are a great way to catch up with my international film industry colleagues, and to attend market screenings so I can see films early and to educate myself on upcoming foreign filmmakers.

I saw ACE ATTORNEY and WRONG at EFM, but I realized that I probably shouldn’t be blogging my thoughts on what I see at EFM, as these are all films that are currently in the marketplace looking for distribution. Unfortunately I didn’t think about this until after I had already written about ACE ATTORNEY and WRONG, but I decided to just give a simple list of other films I saw at EFM in 2012.

2012 Movie #31 - Ace Attorney (2012) Under all the wackadoodle aesthetic and tonal choices (I assume, mostly imported from the original video games and manga) is a solid narrative about an escalating series of interrelated court cases full of mostly interesting peripeteia. Unfortunately, the style and tone ruined any chance of me becoming involved in the story, or even understanding the story most of the time. What I’ll Take Away: Ryo Ishibashi can bring gravitas and immediacy to any role. High-res

2012 Movie #31 - Ace Attorney (2012)

Under all the wackadoodle aesthetic and tonal choices (I assume, mostly imported from the original video games and manga) is a solid narrative about an escalating series of interrelated court cases full of mostly interesting peripeteia. Unfortunately, the style and tone ruined any chance of me becoming involved in the story, or even understanding the story most of the time.

What I’ll Take Away: Ryo Ishibashi can bring gravitas and immediacy to any role.

2012 Movie #30 - Wrong (2012) I am definitely a traditionalist when it comes to narrative filmmaking, but even I was often charmed and won-over by the surreal storytelling present in WRONG. I found the film at its most successful when it managed to satisfy the emotional and dramatic beats of a traditional narrative in ways totally non-traditional. This is especially true of the first 15 minutes, but when it verged off beyond that style I started to lose interest. That said, I suspect for someone with more anti-traditionalist tastes than me, the film is vastly more enjoyable. What I’ll Take Away: It’s definitely worth watching a film like WRONG as an exercise in separating the power of form and content. High-res

2012 Movie #30 - Wrong (2012)

I am definitely a traditionalist when it comes to narrative filmmaking, but even I was often charmed and won-over by the surreal storytelling present in WRONG. I found the film at its most successful when it managed to satisfy the emotional and dramatic beats of a traditional narrative in ways totally non-traditional. This is especially true of the first 15 minutes, but when it verged off beyond that style I started to lose interest. That said, I suspect for someone with more anti-traditionalist tastes than me, the film is vastly more enjoyable.

What I’ll Take Away: It’s definitely worth watching a film like WRONG as an exercise in separating the power of form and content.

2012 Movie #29 - To Catch A Thief (1955) By far the best aspect of this film was the sense of fun and glamour achieved by actually shooting big segments of the film in the South of France. Looking back on the film with modern eyes, it’s clear that the real location photography is far more compelling than the faked studio segments. Although, this is a problem I have with a lot of films from this era. What’s I’ll take away: Shooting a fun sexy movie in the summer in the South of France is an incredible idea that I should steal. High-res

2012 Movie #29 - To Catch A Thief (1955)

By far the best aspect of this film was the sense of fun and glamour achieved by actually shooting big segments of the film in the South of France. Looking back on the film with modern eyes, it’s clear that the real location photography is far more compelling than the faked studio segments. Although, this is a problem I have with a lot of films from this era.

What’s I’ll take away: Shooting a fun sexy movie in the summer in the South of France is an incredible idea that I should steal.

2012 Movie #28 - Chronicle (2012) So, that’s a found-footage superhero movie. What I’ll take away: Perhaps it’s a generational thing, but I just don’t get the appeal of forcing a found-footage aesthetic onto a story that doesn’t fit it. It just results in distracting narrative gymnastics trying to justify the incorporation of cameras into every scene, often with the side effect of the shot not capturing the key story and emotional beats of a scene. That said, I thought the three lead actors were all fantastic. High-res

2012 Movie #28 - Chronicle (2012)

So, that’s a found-footage superhero movie.

What I’ll take away: Perhaps it’s a generational thing, but I just don’t get the appeal of forcing a found-footage aesthetic onto a story that doesn’t fit it. It just results in distracting narrative gymnastics trying to justify the incorporation of cameras into every scene, often with the side effect of the shot not capturing the key story and emotional beats of a scene. That said, I thought the three lead actors were all fantastic.

2012 Movie #27 - Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012) Journey 2 is vastly superior to the first film, but unfortunately that’s not saying much. Clearly the go-to method for breathing life into a tired franchise is casting The Rock, and I can’t argue with the results. He revitalized the Fast and Furious franchise with Fast Five, he’s done it here with Journey 2, and I suspect he’ll do the same with GI Joe: Retaliation. The film suffers from a bad case of stuff-happening syndrome, never really engaging the audience with the story or characters. The highlights are when the plot takes a break, and we’re left with The Rock and Luis Guzmán bringing their fun charisma to the screen. What I’ll take away: the lovable confidence of The Rock and lovable worry of Luis Guzmán make them ideal casting for a buddy comedy. I would love to see a buddy-cop movie with The Rock and Luis Guzmán. High-res

2012 Movie #27 - Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012)

Journey 2 is vastly superior to the first film, but unfortunately that’s not saying much. Clearly the go-to method for breathing life into a tired franchise is casting The Rock, and I can’t argue with the results. He revitalized the Fast and Furious franchise with Fast Five, he’s done it here with Journey 2, and I suspect he’ll do the same with GI Joe: Retaliation.

The film suffers from a bad case of stuff-happening syndrome, never really engaging the audience with the story or characters. The highlights are when the plot takes a break, and we’re left with The Rock and Luis Guzmán bringing their fun charisma to the screen.

What I’ll take away: the lovable confidence of The Rock and lovable worry of Luis Guzmán make them ideal casting for a buddy comedy. I would love to see a buddy-cop movie with The Rock and Luis Guzmán.

2012 Movie #26 - Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011) After the pleasant surprise of the first Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes film, I was looking forward to the next film in the franchise. The high points continue to be the chemistry between Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law and moments of visual brilliance. Unfortunately the movie quickly devolves into “stuff happening” for the majority of its run-time, as the many visual flourishes often distract from the key information and character beats needed to engage in the story. It’s dangerous to focus so heavily on style over story with a film like this, as it’s easy to lose the audience involvement when you rely so heavily on unseen mysterious machinations to drive the plot. What I’ll take away: slow-motion is a dangerous thing. If you use it well, it can be thrilling and beautiful. If you use it poorly, it can distance the audience, ruin the storytelling pace, and lose focus on the important elements of a scene. High-res

2012 Movie #26 - Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)

After the pleasant surprise of the first Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes film, I was looking forward to the next film in the franchise. The high points continue to be the chemistry between Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law and moments of visual brilliance. Unfortunately the movie quickly devolves into “stuff happening” for the majority of its run-time, as the many visual flourishes often distract from the key information and character beats needed to engage in the story. It’s dangerous to focus so heavily on style over story with a film like this, as it’s easy to lose the audience involvement when you rely so heavily on unseen mysterious machinations to drive the plot.

What I’ll take away: slow-motion is a dangerous thing. If you use it well, it can be thrilling and beautiful. If you use it poorly, it can distance the audience, ruin the storytelling pace, and lose focus on the important elements of a scene.

2012 Movie #25 - Roman Holiday (1953) I love this movie. I’ve seen it a few times before, but I’m always amazed by how a well made movie based on a simple concept and perfect cast can be so incredible. Audrey Hepburn is unbelievably good in the film. For me, this is the definition of a movie-star performance for an actress like Hepburn. Her acting is fantastic, but beyond that it’s the fresh open joy and discovery that you can read on her face. That goes beyond acting ability and into pure movie star territory. What I’ll take away: The scene at the Bocca della Verità is one of my favorite scenes of all time. It manages to create a focal point for every element of the film, and create a scene that perfectly embraces the power of cinema. The Bocca della Verità (the “Mouth of Truth,” image below) is a large round sculpture in Rome of a large face with an open hole for a mouth. Gregory Peck’s character (Joe) tells Audrey Hepburn’s character (Ann) the legend of the statue. That if someone is lying while they have their hand in the statue’s mouth, the hand will be bitten off. Joe then encourages Ann to put her hand in the mouth. Of course, Ann won’t do this because she’s lying to Joe about her identity (pretending not to be a princess), and of course Ann doesn’t know that Joe knows this already, which is probably why Joe brought her here and put her in this situation. It heightens the scene for the audience who is already aware of Ann pretending to not be a princess, and Joe’s knowledge of this. Ann edges towards putting her hand in the hole, but is too afraid, pulling back her hand just before the edge. She turns the tables, asking Joe to do it instead. Now we know that Joe is lying to Ann about his identity, but Ann doesn’t realize this. She thinks that she’s innocently asking Joe to put his hand in the hole. This makes the table-turning even funnier, as we see Ann unintentionally put Joe in an awkward situation. So the audience is gleefully juggling the inter-dynamics of the character relationships, what the characters know about each other, and what lies they’re telling to each other. And the film creates a natural situation that fulfills both the exotic travel possibilities of the premise and the central character dynamic that drives the engine of the film. Of course, Joe puts his hand in the mouth. And he pretends it’s bitten off. Causing a jump for Ann and for the audience, as for a moment we think that perhaps the myth of the statue is real! He removes his arm from the mouth, and his hand is gone! But he quickly reveals the hand up his sleeve. The scene has a short fright of horror, and then a quick laugh release and bonding between the two characters after the innocent joke is revealed. The true mastery of this scene is in how expertly it plays with the interplay of audience knowledge about the situation and the characters. Almost line to line we jump forwards and backwards in our knowledge of the situation between the characters. It’s done so well that during the scene the audience feels like an invisible third character in the film. And it does all this while providing us with a scene that advances the plot, the character arcs, and the marketing hook of visiting an exotic location with two beautiful movie stars. It even has a quick jump-scare! So, yeah, ROMAN HOLIDAY is a good movie. High-res

2012 Movie #25 - Roman Holiday (1953)

I love this movie. I’ve seen it a few times before, but I’m always amazed by how a well made movie based on a simple concept and perfect cast can be so incredible. Audrey Hepburn is unbelievably good in the film. For me, this is the definition of a movie-star performance for an actress like Hepburn. Her acting is fantastic, but beyond that it’s the fresh open joy and discovery that you can read on her face. That goes beyond acting ability and into pure movie star territory.

What I’ll take away: The scene at the Bocca della Verità is one of my favorite scenes of all time. It manages to create a focal point for every element of the film, and create a scene that perfectly embraces the power of cinema. The Bocca della Verità (the “Mouth of Truth,” image below) is a large round sculpture in Rome of a large face with an open hole for a mouth. Gregory Peck’s character (Joe) tells Audrey Hepburn’s character (Ann) the legend of the statue. That if someone is lying while they have their hand in the statue’s mouth, the hand will be bitten off. Joe then encourages Ann to put her hand in the mouth. Of course, Ann won’t do this because she’s lying to Joe about her identity (pretending not to be a princess), and of course Ann doesn’t know that Joe knows this already, which is probably why Joe brought her here and put her in this situation. It heightens the scene for the audience who is already aware of Ann pretending to not be a princess, and Joe’s knowledge of this. Ann edges towards putting her hand in the hole, but is too afraid, pulling back her hand just before the edge. She turns the tables, asking Joe to do it instead. Now we know that Joe is lying to Ann about his identity, but Ann doesn’t realize this. She thinks that she’s innocently asking Joe to put his hand in the hole. This makes the table-turning even funnier, as we see Ann unintentionally put Joe in an awkward situation.

So the audience is gleefully juggling the inter-dynamics of the character relationships, what the characters know about each other, and what lies they’re telling to each other. And the film creates a natural situation that fulfills both the exotic travel possibilities of the premise and the central character dynamic that drives the engine of the film.

Of course, Joe puts his hand in the mouth. And he pretends it’s bitten off. Causing a jump for Ann and for the audience, as for a moment we think that perhaps the myth of the statue is real! He removes his arm from the mouth, and his hand is gone! But he quickly reveals the hand up his sleeve. The scene has a short fright of horror, and then a quick laugh release and bonding between the two characters after the innocent joke is revealed.

The true mastery of this scene is in how expertly it plays with the interplay of audience knowledge about the situation and the characters. Almost line to line we jump forwards and backwards in our knowledge of the situation between the characters. It’s done so well that during the scene the audience feels like an invisible third character in the film. And it does all this while providing us with a scene that advances the plot, the character arcs, and the marketing hook of visiting an exotic location with two beautiful movie stars. It even has a quick jump-scare!

So, yeah, ROMAN HOLIDAY is a good movie.

The Mouth of Truth

2012 Movie #24 - Haywire (2011) Things that I liked about HAYWIRE. Bill Paxton. The deer smashing through the rear view window during a car chase. That one pretty exterior establishing shot of Bill Paxton’s character’s house. What I’ll take away: I need to remember to cast Bill Paxton in something, he makes sure every moment he’s on screen is interesting. High-res

2012 Movie #24 - Haywire (2011)

Things that I liked about HAYWIRE.

  1. Bill Paxton.
  2. The deer smashing through the rear view window during a car chase.
  3. That one pretty exterior establishing shot of Bill Paxton’s character’s house.

What I’ll take away: I need to remember to cast Bill Paxton in something, he makes sure every moment he’s on screen is interesting.

2012 Movie #23 - Margin Call (2011) I continue my trend of always liking Stanley Tucci. The costume designer (Caroline Duncan) did a great job of having all the characters in suits, yet still figuring out ways to differentiate their looks and to get across their relative success and position within the company. What I’ll take away: You can get a lot of mileage out of good actors and compelling current subject matter. High-res

2012 Movie #23 - Margin Call (2011)

I continue my trend of always liking Stanley Tucci. The costume designer (Caroline Duncan) did a great job of having all the characters in suits, yet still figuring out ways to differentiate their looks and to get across their relative success and position within the company.

What I’ll take away: You can get a lot of mileage out of good actors and compelling current subject matter.