King Kong (2005)

Well, director Peter Jackson has done it again. He has made another 3 hour epic film that will inevitably rake in the Oscars at the Academy Awards. This time, however, the film does not have a three foot man, but a 25 foot ape. I am talking about, of course, Jackson's newest film, King Kong (2005). A remake of the classic 1933 edition, Jackson has stated many times that it was this film that was his main inspiration for becoming a director, so it is fitting that the special effects 'King' should remake the 'King' of all special effects.

Carl Denham (Jack Black) is a movie director, who is failing along with the majority of New York City. After messing up on his last chance, Carl rounds up a cast for his film, and sets out for an island to film on (without permission of his endorsers). The destination: a mythic island thought to be a legend. The scenic (and ominously named) Skull Island has beautiful beaches of jagged rocks, a wonderful wildlife of gigantic carnivorous insects, and even a population of 'extinct' dinosaurs. Its greatest attraction, of course, is the title character; a 25 foot ape who develops love for Carl's leading actress, Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts).

Also included in Carl's crew is the famous playwright Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody), who is idolized by Ms. Darrow, and is the main reason she joined the cast. This idolization soon changes to love, causing a love triangle to form between Ann, the famous playwright, and a 25 foot tall dirty ape (who would you choose?). When Ann is kidnapped by Kong (Andy Serkis), Jack goes to rescue Ann, and even ventures into this strange 'lost world' alone.

I found the new remake to be quite entertaining, even with the hefty 3 hour time limit. Unlike some other 3 hour movies that Jackson has made, King Kong dazzles the audience with the amazing graphics it presents, causing the length of the film to be almost ignored. The remake, unlike the original, does not have a surprising plot or amazing idea, for the main reason everyone knows what's going to happen. In one of the most spoofed and quoted moments in movie history, a giant ape climbs the 'tallest building in the world' while kidnapping Ann. Kong fights the fight of the century with a T-Rex. All the classic moments of the original are improved upon with modern technology, and extended with Peter Jackson's vision. This became a major disappointment to me, because I always knew what was about to happen. (Not to mention it has the 'classic fairytale' feel to it, where the good guy always wins the girl.)

Jackson even stayed faithful to the original film with the minute details that, on average, no one notices. For instance, the nose of King Kong is heart shaped, just as it is in the original (I'm not sure if this is natural for Gorillas). According to IMDb's trivia section, the T-Rex has three fingers, instead of the normal two. Jackson stayed faithful to the original, explaining the inconsistency as 'evolution'. Recreating even deleted scenes of the original (The rescue crew lands in a pit filled with giant carnivorous insects), Jackson's new film is a wonderful remake, remaining faithful to the original and adding new things to it as well (How else would the film be 3 hours?).

King Kong contains many interesting creatures that pop out at you, as well as ideas that pop out. The majority of characters in the film believe that Kong is a monster, for his obvious appearance. However, it is shown by Ann that appearances can be deceiving, and that you can learn to love a gigantic monkey (in a similar fashion to the story of "Beauty and the Beast"). The 'Beast' is shown to be able to love, (c'mon, he fights a T-Rex for her . . .) and even has visible scars to prove it (not to mention a heart shaped nose). Despite the irony that Jackson's new film contains wonderful visuals, the film shows that you should not always see with your eyes.

Of course, Jackson adds the obvious 'love theme' to the movie, and causes the audience to question what does it mean to love. As Ann struggles over her two loves, a giant ape and a playwright, Jack realizes that it isn't enough to love someone, but that you have to say it. Ironically enough, Jack realizes this epiphany during his own play, written for Ann.

The original King Kong will always live forever in movie history. Its familiar themes and plot lines have created a niche in everyday life (You can never think of the Empire State Building the same way again). While the new film does have a few negatives, such as a long running time and a predictable plot, these few minute details can be easily overlooked to enhance the outlook of the new remake. With clever lines, and experienced actors, the new film is not just a modern day King Kong, but an enhanced version with enhanced themes to fill it, such as appearances. Both versions, new and old, were the 'King' of special effects, causing the film to be loved by generations and generations. However, if it has taught me one thing, the visuals are not always important, and one should watch a film, and people (and apes), without eyes.

Mise-en-Scene: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)

Mise-en-Scene, literally the "putting together of a scene", determines the mood of both the scene, and of the characters in it. (For more Mise-en-Scene, see the analysis of M (1931)) Used in many films, both old and new, this technique helps the audience with characters intentions and thoughts, without using any spoken word. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005), definitely more modern then M, contains many scenes put together with Mise-en-Scene. From Mike Newell's (director) skill at putting the film together, one can get a sense of what is happening in a scene, even before it is released in theaters!

Both scenes in this analysis are in the Quidditch World Cup scene. Although not back to back, they describe the mood before and during the eruption of chaos. As Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), the obvious protagonist of the series, views the Quidditch World Cup (for all you Muggles out there, Quidditch is a wizard sport), thoughts of his archenemy Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes), nicknamed 'Voldy' by his loyal fans, are nowhere to be found. Having a good time with his best friends, this peace of mind is suddenly interrupted by Death Eaters, faithful followers of You-Know-Who.

In this first scene, before the Death Eaters wreck havoc, the trio of friends are setting up in their new 'tent'. As both author J.K. Rowling and director Mike Newell show, the Wizarding world can be . . . fun. From viewing the tents, the audience gets a sense that something is out of place; mainly the smokestacks and whether vanes. From the crazy and out of the ordinary items in this scene, a mood of happiness and joy is expressed to the audience. The main 'good guys' are predominate in the frame, and so are the Wizarding items that represent happiness, such as the tents. In addition to these examples, the happy attitude is also gained from the light (day) on the location. From these elements, Mike Newell tries to emphasize the peace before the attack of the Death Eaters.

Unfortunately, evil arises when happiness is at its peak. With the Death Eaters comes destruction, pain, and a new Mise-en-Scene analysis (not all necessarily bad). The most obvious element of evil in this scene is the outfits of the Death Eaters. Shockingly similar to the robes of both the Grim Reaper and the KKK, this uniform installs fear in the audience, through previous knowledge of other 'non-fictional' characters of the real world. In addition to the real fear the robes create, the hoods are draped over their heads, creating shadows and darkness. The masks also create an element of darkness in this scene. Unlike in the book, the Death Eaters are wearing masks representing a decaying corpse, a future no one looks forward to. The darkness is greatly emphasized in this scene, by the lack of happiness. In the previous scene, many crazy objects, such as weather vanes, are visible, giving the viewer a sense of happiness. In this scene, there are no objects to install laughter; the tents and good wizards are either missing, or are really small in the frame. Good is no longer the focus of the scene, causing it to be weak and insignificant. It is no longer day, and the darkness produced from the lack of light (and color) creates both shadows and a feeling of the unknown. Also, smoke clouds the horizon, showing any viewer that there is either chaos nearby, or that the Death Eaters weren't invited to a Barbeque. (Incidentally, that is probably not a witch being tortured by the Death Eaters, but a Muggle, a non-magical being)

From the wonderful Mise-en-Scene that Mike Newell puts in his film, we can determine both the feeling and situation of the scene before viewing it. Just the simple technique of day and night gives an audience the feeling of the characters, and their intentions. Mise-en-Scene, included in even "children's movies", is in almost every film. Whether in a classic such as M, or a modern movie like Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Mise-en-Scene always guides the audience to the correct conclusion of what is to come in the film, or even the feeling of the characters and their thoughts.

*To my great dismay, I have found out that both of these scenes are not included in the film.*

Zathura (2005)

Since the only thing I have been thinking about was this film for the past few days, I thought it would be best that I write a review of this amazing and new film. While many people (non-viewers) criticize the film for being a rip-off of Jumanji (1995), this film does not copy the ideas in Jumanji. The main reason for this is that Zathura (2005) is the sequel to the 1995 blockbuster. (Check IMDb, I'm right) Both films are based on books by author Chris Van Allsburg, and they do have similar themes, but Zathura is NOT ripping off its predecessor in any way. However, even before it was released, I knew the film would do good, because of many reasons. First off, Chris Van Allsburg is an amazing author, and gave the film an excellent story to work upon. Director Jon Favreau (famous for Elf (2003)) is increasing in popularity, the amazing Screen Playwright David Koepp, and the incredible cast also contribute to this film's success.

Six and three-quarters years old Danny (Jonah Bobo) and ten years old Walter (Josh Hutcherson) are your typical brothers. They constantly argue with each other, fight for their father's affection, and have an evil, ignoring sister. After one of their quarrels, Danny is forced into the creepy, dark basement, of which he is completely terrified of. When down there, he discovers a mysterious board game called 'Zathura', and the adventure starts. After convincing his brother to play it, the entire house is flung into outer space, orbiting around the scenic Saturn. The magical game materializes terrifying events to happen to the players (and anyone else who is nearby), such as meteor showers, defective robots, and the Zorgons, space aliens who are always hungry for a snack . . .

While playing the game, Danny rescues a stranded Astronaut (Dax Shepard), who was a player of the game 15 years ago and has been stuck in limbo ever since. Although kind of rude at some times, the Astronaut becomes an important character in the film, who helps out the family in times of need. Lisa (Kristen Stewart), the sister, finally realizes what's going on, and starts to fall in love with the Astronaut. As the film progresses, many problems arise, such as loosing the board game, fights between characters, and an invasion of Zorgons.

The character of Danny is very interesting, especially when compared to his brother Walter. Danny, in the words of his father, has an amazing imagination. When stranded in space, Danny decides to cook Macaroni and Cheese (as a true six year old would). Despite his brother's belief that it is impossible (the house is in space), Danny's imagination allows him to try out a gas powered stove, and a sink in the middle of space. Of course, the result is that they work, showing that imagination can do anything, even help cook. This explains many of the 'loopholes' in the film, such as why there is oxygen and gravity in the house.

There are many themes discussed in the film, some of which are shown in Jumanji. The most obvious one deals with growing up. As the father says, "there are some days where you need to grow up all at once." This is shown many times in the film, through comparison of before and after they play the game. When Danny confronts his fear (the basement) the first time, he is completely terrified. However, later on in the film, he must go down there again, but this time with deadly, meat eating aliens down there ("and that's bad, because we're meat!"). Another example of the characters growing up, is through the characters of Walter and the Astronaut. However, a major twist in the plot involves this example, so I will not tell it to you. The relationship between Walter and Danny is also shown both before and after the adventure takes place. Before the game, Walter and Danny argue when playing catch (mainly because Danny was horrible at it). However, when they learn their lesson, both brothers play together, teaching each other skills and, more importantly, not arguing.

Another theme discussed in the film deals with brotherhood. As Walter constantly reminds Danny during the game, "Nothing's going to happen to you, because I'm your brother". Saving his brother from the dangers of space, Walter stays true to his word. Brotherhood is also shown in the dependency that both Walter and Danny have with each other. When one is missing, the other cannot continue the game, showing that the brothers must learn to cooperate to get home. In addition to this, Danny cannot read, so he is constantly depending on Walter to read the cards.

Interestingly enough, when arriving to the goal of the game, Zathura itself, the characters realize that Zathura is nothing more then a black hole. The reason, I believe that Zathura was made to be a black hole lies in the tagline for the film, "Adventure is Waiting". Believing that reaching the goal, Zathura, will return them to their world, the two brothers play till they reach Zathura. When finally reaching the black hole, all of the space objects, the adventure, are sucked into the black hole. I believe the black hole represents reality, and shows how dull normal life is. When traveling on their adventure, the brothers learn their lesson, and return to their boring life with the knowledge of all that has happened.

For all the Jumanji fans who worry that this film will ruin the reputation of the 'original' film, do not worry! Zathura, as many critics say, is better then the original. Of course there are many similar connections between the two films, what sequel doesn't? For example, both films contains themes of siblings, family, and of cheating (not to mention a magical board game). The thing that makes this film better though, is the fact that it is not overloaded with special effects. When Jumanji was released, it was praised for the amazing visuals it presented. Zathura, however, does not focus on the visuals, but on the characters and themes.

Both Danny and Walter go on an amazing adventure filled with action, comedy, and important themes. Though critics may call this a 'children's film', it is more of a family film, because it can be enjoyed by everyone. When watching Zathura, there was no point in which I thought "Wow, this movie is for kids." On the contrary, most of the time I was so entranced by the film, I had no time to think. Even though it is similar to Jumanji, I highly suggest this film for any family, person, or pet who enjoys movies. You will enjoy the film from the beginning, and want more when it's "Game Over (thank you for playing)."

*As a fair warning to any parent who might want to bring their child to see this film: Both of the brothers may be young, but they do use inappropriate language towards the beginning of the film (Many audiences gasp at this). *

The Last of the Mohicans (1992)

It is the year 1757, and the famous French and Indian War rages on between the two nations in this 'new world'. As history states, both the French and British acquire help from the natives of the land, the Indians. History, unfortunately, does not go into great detail after this, but James Fenimore Cooper's novel The Last of the Mohicans does. Telling the story of the remaining survivors of the Mohican tribe, this classic story has been recreated over 12 times. The 1992 film version, directed by Michael Mann, contains all the aspects of a fairytale, and is molded into a film that has amazed audiences for more then a decade.

The Mohican tribe is small and dwindling fast. It's only survivors are Uncas (Eric Schweig) and his father, Chingachgook (Russell Means). Traveling with them is Chingachgook's adopted white son, Hawkeye (Daniel Day-Lewis). One day when traveling, the three encounter a party attacked by an opposing tribe, the Hurons, led by the antagonist of the film, Magua (Wes Studi). Of course, since the Mohicans are the heroes of the film, they are obligated to save the damsels in distress, Alice (Jodhi May) and Cora (Madeleine Stowe) Munro. Once again, in order to fulfill their requirements for heroes, the tribe of three escort the two lost ladies (and Duncan Heyward (Steven Waddington), a British soldier) to their final destination.

Alice and Cora are the daughters of the famous Edmund Munro (Maurice Roëves), the head of Fort William Henry. Both stern and fair, 'Grey Hair' (as Magua calls him) is constantly giving and taking back promises. However, Munro's message to his daughters (do not come to Fort William Henry!) 'mysteriously' did not arrive (in addition to the mysterious dead messengers). As the film unfolds, the war rages on, romance is in the air, and the travelers find themselves thrown into a plot of revenge, planed by none other then Magua.

One of the amazing things about this film, is the ability it has to present each scene with a beautiful layout, showing an artistic view of Lake George in the 1700s. Of course, there is much Mise-en-Scene in the artistic view too. For example, Magua, a very dark character, is constantly shown in shadows, hinting that he has both a dark past and dark intentions. This, in contrast to a good character, is quite different from Cora. Director Michael Mann uses techniques to emphasize the difference between these two characters; Cora is wearing a white dress, while Magua is . . . not. The Mise-en-Scene is also used to show how 'pure' and innocent Cora is, as she is placed against a white cloth. The background creates an illusion of a 'heavenly quality', while Duncan, who is placed against the dark background of the forest, does not have the same innocence. (Of course, Magua does not have this quality either.)

The main reoccurring theme from this film is the idea of promises and of survival. Constantly repeated, Hawkeye says to Cora "You stay alive, no matter what occurs! I will find you". While this also implies that the travelers run into trouble quite often, it also shows Hawkeye's dedication for Cora, and his determination to find and save her. Lucky for us, Hawkeye is a hero, and saves Cora from this danger. Magua . . . does not. The other theme that is constantly repeated in The Last of the Mohicans is the concept of promises. In the beginning of the film, the local villagers are promised that they may return from battle (remember, they are in a war) to defend their homes and families from the "savages". Munro does not keep this promise, and threatens any abandonment with beheading. A promise is broken later in the film, but this time it is Magua that breaks the promise. During a parley, the French and British negotiate terms of surrender, which the French General later wants to back out on. (Realizing the British may not honor the terms of parley, and he may fight the same soldiers again.) However, he cannot brake the terms of parley. (Let me say that again with more emphasis) HE cannot brake the terms of parley, but Magua . . . can. Once again showing his 'dark side', Magua breaks the promise of peace, eat (literally) eats the heart of Munro.

The Mise-en-Scene and Magua may be entertaining, but easily the most remembered part of the film is the end. With a beautiful landscape behind him, Chingachgook remarks at how sad it is that he is the LAST OF THE MOHICANS. It is a very sad scene, which ends in the complete opposite way of how the film begins. However, in the director's cut, Chingachgook continues on to say that the Mohicans will not be the only ones to die out. The frontier will push all of the Indians out, with nowhere to go, and, eventually, all of the frontier will die, leaving only ". . . my white son and his woman and their children". While both speeches are important, the original ending leaves more of an impact (mainly because the last words are the title), which is probably why the second speech cut in the first place (or, it could have been because the film was over 3 hours long).

The Last of the Mohicans is a film that will be viewed for generations, adored by its themes, artistic views, and of Magua. Although some of Daniel Day-Lewis' quotes are funny and out of place, the film has a serious mood, of which the war greatly emphasizes. With a perfect fairytale story, this film is not for children (Eat his heart out Magua!), but contains a classic hero, a beautiful damsel, and an awesome Magua. The ideas and characters of the film will live on forever, (As will the places, because they are real places. I've been to Fort William Henry before.) and the amazing artistic views will be praised for years to come.

Double Indemnity (1944)

Double Indemnity (1944), hailed by many for the excellent film noir it uses, is the film that almost was. Nominated for many Oscars, including Best Picture, and loosing in every category, Double Indemnity is the 'best failed' film to have ever reached the silver screen. Director Billy Wilder started off his career in Berlin (which explains the constant use of film noir; see M), but then left Germany when Hitler rose to power (similar to that of his roommate, Peter Lorre; once again, see M). While the constant use of banter is quite annoying, the film eventually leads beyond that, and becomes an enjoyable classic.

The entire film is the confession of Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray), of how and why he killed. Of course, the mystery of 'whodunit' is eliminated, and is replaced by "howandwhyhedunit" (a term coined by my film teacher). After Walter Neff visits Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck), the femme fatale of the film, the two of them fall 'in love' and plan to kill Phyllis' husband. As Walter is an insurance salesman, he arranges it so that the death of Mr. Dietrichson can be categorized under double indemnity, in which Phyllis receives double the amount of money. However, with any evil plot, everything messes up, and disaster lurks into Neff's life.

One of the interesting things about this film lies in the character of the hero . . . of which there is none. In a similar fashion to Hayao Miyazaki, the film is filled with people who have good and evil intentions; however none of them can be classified under 'hero' or 'villain'. (Miyazaki's films never have villains in them.) The only one who is close to the title of hero, is Neff's boss: Barton Keyes (Edward G. Robinson). Probably the only one in the film with good intentions, Keyes just misses the title of hero. When Keyes starts to suspect Neff, but instantly turns him down as a suspect for his close relation. If Keyes was a true hero, he would have investigated it, and, upon finding the truth, helped Neff redeem himself. Unfortunately, by the time Keyes finds out, it is too late.

Double Indemnity is an enjoyable film that has many themes discussed in it. The main one, as stated above, is that of heroes and villains. Since most 'classic' films are black and white (not only in color, but in the values) and contain no in-between emotions, it is curious to see a film such as this to succeed. As many audiences like to see a hero win and a villain fall, Double Indemnity does not fulfill this request. This film meshes many emotions into one, making the audience feel sorry for the main character, the villain. This is one of the reasons Double Indemnity has become a classic.

Quite an enjoyable film, Billy Wilder's Double Indemnity has become a classic. While the banter is bad enough to scare anyone away, the plot and acting is what shines in this 1944 film. This American film has, possibly, the best film noir of it's time. From windows casting low key lighting, to mind-bogglingly high windows, the use of light creates a very murderous feel to the film, and a very appropriate mood to match it.

Jaws (1975) PART II

Peter Benchley's best selling novel swept the nation as it's readers learned of the adventures of Chief Brody (Roy Scheider) and a murderous shark. The fame of the novel increased even more, when director Steven Spielberg created a summer blockbuster based on Jaws. Both the book and the film are similar in many ways; however, Spielberg has tweaked the film in order to support the different themes he presents in Jaws. In this review, many of the differences between the novel and the film will be revealed, explained, and insulted.

Possibly the most insignificant, but important, change that was made has to do with the island itself. In Peter Benchley's version, Amity, the setting of the story, is a small island town on Long Island. However, in the film, Amity is it's own island. This insignificant detail, ignored by many, actually caught my attention, (for the main reason I live on Long Island) because it greatly magnifies many of the themes that are presented in both versions of the story. If, as Benchley intended, Amity was a small town on Long Island, Brody would have the option of ignoring the shark. Ignoring it would cause it to swim away, and start attacking another town on the island (I live on the north part of the island, don't worry). This eliminates the feeling of leadership that Brody has, for the adventure becomes optional. Another theme that is enhanced is Spielberg's motif of 'fear of water'. Brody, all his life, has been afraid of water. Moving to an island is considered a bad move for anyone of Brody's nature, but increases the fear Spielberg creates for his audiences. As the film progresses, Brody's character learns more of saving people (another theme introduced in the film), and eventually copes with his fear of water.

While many of the differences are minute, the death of Alex Kintner (Jeffrey Voorhees) is a big, noticeable difference. In the novel, the shark attack is [barely] noticed by one person, and the victim is unaware that he is now dead. However, Spielberg tweaks this to intimidate fear. A crowd materializes around Kintner for the film, causing panic and fear to spread when the death occurs. This becomes significant, for Brody is now considered to be correct all along. In the novel, he still has a hard time convincing the town that there is a shark problem.

Another noticeable difference between Benchley's and Speilberg's version, is the quest to destroy the shark. In the novel, Quint (Robert Shaw) specifically states why searching for the shark at night would be a bad idea. However, in the film, Quint specifically states why returning home would be a bad idea. This becomes an excuse for Spielberg to increase the fear in the film, for now the crew is in danger 24 hours of the day.

Many of the other differences become insignificant, such as the affair between Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss) and Ellen (Lorraine Gary), and have no relation to the film. The death of Hooper could be placed in this category, something that Benchley became enraged over. In Spielberg's opinion, the audience at this point is entranced by the film, and will believe anything that they are shown (thus, the absurd ending). This is the reason why Hooper does not die in the film. Upon hearing this, Benchley became so enraged, he had to be thrown off the set (which was twelve miles out to sea).

Novels and films generally don't mix and match very well. Faithful readers notice the multitude of differences between the two versions of the story. However, once in a while, a good pair surfaces and ensnares both readers and audiences in its jaws. For films like Jaws, the themes presented in both works create the perfect atmosphere for a shark thriller.

Jaws (1975) PART I

Awarded the position of second most thrilling movie of all-time, (in AFI's 100 Years. . . 100 Thrills) and causing fear and panic to cover beaches world wide, Jaws is considered to be the start of the 'summer blockbuster' trend. It's success over the $100 million mark, in addition to the 3 Oscar wins and a 'Best Picture' nomination, caused Universal to create 3 [really, really bad] sequels. Of course, there are many things that attribute this film to fame; the novel it is based on (see PART II), the acting, the special effects, but mostly the fear that was created by director Steven Spielberg. Although the line between movie and film is very thin, especially for Jaws, Spielberg just makes the mark of film for this thriller. (Interestingly enough, composer John Williams is the only person who worked on Jaws and refers to it as a film.) While movies generally are made for only entertainment (or money), films usually have deeper meanings behind them, and are filled with hidden messages. Jaws may not have many, but the ones it does have takes a 'bite out of you'.

The friendly island of Amity is home to gorgeous beaches, filled with sand, water, and something much worse then tourists. A deadly 25 foot Great White Shark has infested the waters around Amity, risking the oncoming summer tourist season. Since the town is so small, it depends on the money raked in during this time to ensure it's survival in the winter. However, with one death already caused by this Leviathan, the town becomes threatened, and Chief Brody (Roy Scheider), the protagonist, becomes pressured on what to do. Unable to close the beaches due to the necessary income, the beaches remain open . . . causing the second and third deaths.

Alex Kintner (Jeffrey Voorhees), the second victim of this Great White, is the start of the great panic that attracts people from all over. The Kintner mother offers a reward of $3000 to whoever can slay the monster; and this is when the real feeding frenzy begins. Guns, chum, and loud insults fly across boat to boat, resulting in the shark's third meal. Now serious, the town of Amity hires local shark hunter, Quint (just Quint) (Robert Shaw), to destroy the monster and save the beaches. Along for the boat ride is Chief Brody and Marine Biologist Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss). The difference in opinions cause great animosity between the characters (fueled by the real hatred of the actors), and the fear spread around by Spielberg reels the audience into a film they cannot escape.

While the special effects in Jaws are hailed for being incredible (for its time), the real fear is brought out from the magnificence of John Williams' music. Universal executives highly criticized the film when first viewing it without the soundtrack. After 'much improvement' (the addition of non-diegetic sound), Universal hailed this film as a great work of art. Even years later, the famous two note tune creates a sense of fear whenever heard. The theme from Jaws has become a metonymy for a giant shark, which itself has become a metonymy for fear. Indeed, this can be proven through many instances in the film. Whenever the shark is present, John Williams' famous soundtrack can be heard. (Which become very useful, for the shark often broke. Realizing that a mechanical shark cannot be always used, Spielberg replaced the sight of a shark with the sound of one.) During the fourth of July, a few boys play a practical joke by using a cardboard cutout in the shape of a dorsal fin to spread panic. It is obviously a fake for the lack of a critical thing; a theme song. The awkwardness caused by the lack of a fear inducing song gives audiences the foreboding feeling that this is not real. However, when the real shark appears, the familiar song returns, fear returns to the audience, revealing the fourth death of the Great White.

Another aspect that causes fear in Jaws is the non-sight of the shark. While completely accidental, Spielberg often uses metonymys to represent the shark. (Remember, the shark often broke) Everything from barrels to even the point of view of the shark itself creates the illusion that a 25 foot eating machine is somewhere beneath the water. The fear is greatly enhanced from this, especially when viewing the shark for the first time. Failing to show the monster for the entire first half of the film, the audience (literally) jumps when the shark jumps at them. If all went according to plan, Spielberg has been quoted saying that the film would be "cheesy".

Spielberg has often been quoted in saying that his greatest fear was that a sight of land would be caught by the camera. This is a stroke of genius, for the audience feels safe, near home, when the shore is seen. This is what made Martha's Vineyard, the filming location, such a pristine place to create Jaws. 12 miles away from shore, the sandy bottom of the ocean lied only 30 feet away. This gave the filming crew an opportunity to film far from shore, while able to use the mechanical shark on the ocean floor.

While fear is the aspect that drove this film to fame, its themes are what drove it to the title of film. Chief Brody is obsessed with saving people. When the entire town is bent towards keeping the beaches (the buffet) open, Brody is fighting to close them. The town thinks only of money, of the income that the beaches will rake in. However, Brody is interested in the lives of the people, and eventually becomes the one to destroy the king of sharks. Spielberg, realizing this, added more to Brody's character in his film. Before the three fishermen discover the shark for the first time, Brody is practicing a knot called the bowline. While having many uses, the bowline creates a strong loop, that will never slip; a very useful characteristic for lifelines. Spielberg, with his Eagle Scout knowledge, causes Brody to tie this knot in order to practice his 'saving skills'.

Another theme addressed in this film is what humans innately do during a crisis. Many of the citizens of Amity worry of the insignificant things, like money. No one cares that lives are at risk, as long as 'public opinion' remains beneficial. Few people (in fact, only Brody) are shown to care about the people of Amity, and Brody is listened to four people too late.

Jaws, the box office hit based on the best selling novel (see PART II), is a film that will be remembered for all time. The amazing fear created is the main reason that this film was so successful. To back up the fear it created, Spielberg used techniques such as wonderful themes and an amazing composer to ensure this film will be a masterpiece forever.

Tim Burton's Corpse Bride (2005)

"But you've been dead for almost 15 years!"

"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."

Although this humorous quote was certainly not intended to, it describes this film brilliantly. Stop-Motion, or the politically incorrect term clay-animation, is a style of animation that I am very fond of. It involves the painstaking task of capturing images, and placing them together to cause the illusion that the puppets are moving on their own. (Remember: approximately 24 images per a second is required for the fluid movement shown in this film.) In total, there were 109,000,440 frames shot in this film. Tim Burton's newest film, Tim Burton's Corpse Bride revives the stop motion industry after it has lied dormant for almost 15 years. Despite the fact that this film was not done with the modern style of CG, audiences did not "give a damn" as the film ranked high in the box office. The most first full length stop-motion film was Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993), which had much hope for being the "new form of animation". However, it stopped dead on it's feet, and was only slightly revived with Chicken Run (2000), knocking the total of stop-motion films to a grand total of 2. (James and the Giant Peach (1996) does not count, as it is not a full length stop-motion film.) With a false prediction before, many critics believe that stop-motion will rise from the dead, as two full-length movies are being done in stop-motion this year.

Corpse Bride is based on a Russian, Jewish folktale in which a man mistakenly marries a corpse. (how he is that dim-witted, don't ask me) The folktale is centers around the anti-Semitism of the time, and how Jewish brides were murdered on the way to the wedding to prevent the continuation of the Jewish race (I am so glad they failed). In the folktale, the corpse bride is one of these unfortunate brides who were murdered, which gives this folktale an interesting and dark thrill. However, Tim Burton's Corpse Bride lacks the moral that is included in the original folktale. This is my biggest disappointment to the film, and my only. The fact that this film is based on a folktale should not discourage anyone from seeing it, for Tim Burton has replaced many of the old themes and replaced them with his own. New to the story now are dreaded in-laws, parents, and even a dead dog. Not to mention the amazing visuals Tim Burton's Corpse Bride offers is to 'die for'.

Victor (Johnny Depp) is a horrible klutz who has an uncanny ability to mess everything up. The protagonist is due to be wed to Victoria (Emily Watson), and everyone is excited, except Victor himself. The in-laws are in need of the money that will gained by wedding their daughter away, his parents are ecstatic over their ascension in society, and Victoria is happy to share her life with Victor. Victor, on the other hand, is nervous about everything, and to make matters worse finds himself in a 'grave' predicament. While practicing his vows (to a stick) he by accident marries a corpse (that really wasn't a stick). His new bride takes him to the land of the dead, where everything is explained to Victor in, of course, a song sung by Danny Elfman. The film continues with the struggles of both marriages, a field trip of the dead to the 'upstairs' (which is where the quote comes from), and even an evil character.

Tim Burton's characteristic dark feel to the film adds much to the themes discussed. For the main theme of life and death, an average director would display the living to be lively, and the dead to be . . . dead. However, Tim Burton completely takes you by surprise and reverses this. In the living world, everything is dull, boring, and (almost literally) black and white. However, in the land of the dead, there is bright, neon colors, and dancing skeletons! As stated in one of the TV spots, "this is the party of your afterlife". Even in the wedding scenes, one can see the difference between the worlds. The 'living' cake is minute (really, really minute), while the 'dead' cake is gigantic! Another comparison of the dead to the living, involves that of a broom. In the opening, a [living] man is seen with a broom, sweeping monotonously in sync with that of 5 clock pendulums. However, later in the film, a dead man is seen sweeping with much more enthusiasm and not restricted by the rules of the pendulum swing. Viewing these points in Tim Burton's Corpse Bride, the theme comes to be seen that the dead are more free (and lively) then that of the living.

Tim Burton continues this theme of freedom throughout the film also. In the beginning, Victor is seen releasing a butterfly, giving it freedom. Interestingly enough, the butterfly soars through the main credits, being swatted and swiped at by many of the living characters of the film. This shows the living's affinity for freedom, and that rules constrain all of them down. Even music, a freedom in itself, is restricted by Victoria's mother, who sees it as an uncivilized trait. Towards the end of the film, when the Corpse Bride realizes that she has been set free by Victor, she faces upwards towards the moon, and in an extreme low angle transforms into hundreds of butterflies. The butterflies represents freedom, and the low angle supports this by showing she will go to a higher, better place (let your religion determine the rest).

Tim Burton's Corpse Bride is a wonderful treat for all ages. The visual effects of the film will sweep you off your feet (if you're standing), it's songs will enchant you, and the humor in it will even make you chuckle. Of course, Tim Burton includes his twisted views of the world, of the dead, and of Napoleon. The themes shown in the film are not excellent topics, but the way they are shown is excellent. As a film lover, a stop-motion lover, and a Tim Burton fan, (note the absence of lover) I suggest seeing this film, as not seeing it would be grave mistake.

*Although this is not included the film, I thought I should mention the audience ERUPTED in applause for the new Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) trailer, but there was only three clappers for the end of Tim Burton's Corpse Bride (myself included)*

M (1931)

German expressionism, rising from the ashes of the recently lost WWI, this style of filmmaking is filled with dark, mysterious images that generally include horror, death, and violence. From these key points, it is easy to see why many German expressionist films were monster movies, such as Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens (1922). Even when many directors fled Germany because of WWII, German expressionism surfaced in America with Universal's famous 'Monster Movies'. One of the most famous films of this time period, Fritz Lang's M, is a masterpiece that grips the viewer with fear and suspense, even over 70 years after its creation. Lang's ability to use the right amounts of light and sound cause an amazing moving picture to emerge. Playing with the minds of both the characters of the film and the people of the audience, M is a film that is viewed by many to be the most psychological thriller of all time.

Although M may not have the digital quality or CGI special effects of today, it certainly makes up for it with the excellent storyline, the amazing Mise-en-Scene, and the spectacular acting. M is the story of Hans Beckert (Peter Lorre), a psychotic child murderer, whose current score is 8. Fortunately for us, the police are working 'hard' to find this evil man. However, after discovering he is not hiding in the local restaurant, in the station, or any other place that the police enjoy hanging out, everyone becomes frustrated. The criminals (yes, criminals) are frustrated too; with police raids every day, this child murderer becomes bad for 'business'. Schränker (Gustaf Gründgens), the head of the criminal union, organizes a joint collaboration between them and the beggar union to find this child murder.

Compared to the stories of today, this film does not seem to exceed. In addition to that, the poor quality of sound and picture do not appeal to many. How is this film such a big hit then? It is Fritz Lang's amazing ability to display the right amount of imagery and sound. M is considered by many to be the first 'talking picture' success. Why is this? Most of it has to do with Lang's distrust with the sound. He refused to have sound in this film, but obviously and ultimately lost. (One might say in retaliation) Lang has almost no sound in M, which gives it the suspense it needs. It is said that whenever there is a lack of non-diegetic sound for more then a minute and a half, the audience begins to feel awkward and nervous. This becomes very helpful in M. Especially in the final chase scene, the lack of sound creates an atmosphere that feels as if there is no one there, as if help will never arrive. The lack of sound also causes the viewer to concentrate on the screen more then the sound. This also becomes effective in the film, as shown during important times such as the court scene.

M is also famous for the many psychological views that are brought up. For instance, when trying to capture Beckert, the police are worthless while the criminals are organized and skilful. Even the different justice system they show could be viewed with much shock. The 'correct' version of justice that the police advertise would have Beckert eventually released back into the public with little to no punishment. However, the criminals wish to give Beckert a taste of his own medicine, or an eye for an eye. As Schränker says to Beckert, "You talk of rights? You will get your rights." Although the reader of this review may believe that the official rules of justice to be correct, Lang shows the criminal side to be . . . better. The criminal side of the law is more sympathetic with that of the victims. Since Beckert could never feel the pain of a Mother's sorrow, the criminals would like to show Beckert how it felt to be on the opposite side of the knife. The other hand of the law, however, believes that "No one can kill a man that isn't responsible for his actions" as Beckert himself said that these impulses to kill are involuntary.

This leads to another theme Lang shows us in his film. Beckert, who fights "this evil thing inside of me, the fire, the voices, the torment!" eventually looses (8 times) as the murderer takes control. The murder is quite fond for the song "In the Hall of the Mountain King", and it becomes an audio metonymy for the impulse of killing children. In a wonderful scene, Beckert is trying his best to drown out the sounds of his own whistling, the sounds of "In the Hall of the Mountain King". Failing (again) to defeat the evil inside, Beckert continues to stalk a little child, who trusts him enough to give him a knife. Why trust a stranger when there is a murderer on the loose? Because of Lang's ability to show the face of a murderer to be . . . normal. In the time period that M is filmed, many believed that the face showed the characteristics of the mind. Beckert looks as normal as any other man on the street, continuing the fear that a murderer can be anyone.

Based on the real life murderer, Peter Kürten (the vampire of Düsseldorf), M is an amazing film that explores the vast topic of psychology. This review has just touched the many, many themes that Lang shows in his masterpiece film. Although it is in black and white, the sound and visual quality of the film is poor, and the language is German (necessity of subtitles), M is a film that should be seen by all. For its wonderful Mise-en-Scene, or the excellent story, M will be enjoyed by anyone who wishes to view it.

Mise-en-Scene: M (1931)

Mise-en-Scene!? What's that! Well, besides that atrocious food I ate for lunch, it's French for "placing into a scene". It is the term for what the director does before the camera; how the scene is presented to the audience. For example, if the scene is presented in a dark manner, and has a giant downward arrow in it, the director may be trying to convey the foreboding downward path a character may take soon.

Fritz Lang's masterpiece film M (1931) is an M-azing watch, with each scene thoughtfully planned and placed by the director. Two such examples are the scene captures to the left and right of this entry. A horrible child murderer is wandering through the streets of Germany, already killing 8 children. The cops, unable to cause any real threat to this murderer, feebly attempt to create a plan to capture this crook. However, in the second scene, the everyday criminals are planning to capture the murderer too (and do a much better job than the cops).

In the Cop scene, one can see the circles created by the compass. It creates the illusion that the town is a bullseye; a technique that should hopefully catch the murderer. However, this is an illusion of safety itself, for there is a very small chance that the cops will catch the murderer. As in the game of darts, all your money is on the fact that a bullseye will be hit. If not, then the dart will land on the outskirts. In the scene, the town is placed in the bullseye, however it is all based on luck that the cops will get this bullseye. More likely, they will hit the outskirts. This is shown many times in the film, mostly through the means the Cops are attempting to catch the murderer. The Cops are truly running in circles.

In the Criminal scene, a black hand covers a map of the town, similar to the map of the previous scene. (Interestingly enough, Hitler and the Nazis were big fans of Lang, and based their uniforms of the Gestapo on the clothes that the character Schränker, whose hand is shown here, wears in this film.) Unlike that of the previous scene, there is no false security based on dumb luck (mostly the dumb). Instead, a well developed plan is formed, as can be seen in this scene. With no words to accompany this picture, one can see that a hand is grasping the town, trying to strangle the murderer out of hiding. Unlike the "the murderer somewhere here" attitude of the cops, Schränker knows the murderer is in the town, and causes a giant undercover search to start. In addition to the grasping of Schränker, this scene feels much darker than the previous one, showing a darker intention of what should happen to this child murderer.

M is an amazing film. If you get a chance to see it, grasp it as fast as Schränker. Lang's expression through Mise-en-Scene is not the only thing to watch out for though, M's amazing ability to give fear and suspense (with little to no sound) is a characteristic that causes it to be loved by many a film critic even to this day.

Kaze no Tani no Naushika (1984)

This Japanese film, a masterpiece from master filmmaker, Hayao Miyazaki, is probably one of the most amazing films to ever enchant audiences around the world. The title's English translation is Nausicaä of the Valley of the Winds, of which Disney recently made an English dub of. A surprising move for Disney, seeing as this film is banned in many countries in Europe for it's controversial views of the environment, and of human nature. Of the many things that Hayao Miyazaki attracts audiences with in his films, the most enticing one is his wonderful ability to create breathtaking art, seeing that all his films are Japanese animation (Animé). Although his art has astronomically improved, this film was considered to be a visual masterpiece back then, and (compared to some other animated films) still is today.

Kaze no Tani no Naushika takes place in the future, 1000 years after human civilization has collapsed. Humans, no longer the dominant species, cower in fear from the Sea of Decay, a toxic jungle that covers the entire planet. Anyone who stays in this deadly 'sea' for more then five minutes will be killed by it's toxic spores. If this was not enough, insects and bugs have evolved to be giant monsters, who live in the Sea of Decay, protecting it from human kind's deadly grasp of destruction. The most fearsome of these insects is the Ohmu, whose English translation means 'king of the insects'. Over ten times the size of an airplane, the Ohmu changes the color of their eyes depending on their emotion. When enraged, their eyes turn red, and blue represents calmness; a color pattern that Hayao Miyazaki continues to use throughout the entire film.

Although the origin of the Sea of Decay is never really explained, Miyazaki-sama gives hints to how it occurred. Nausicaä dedicates her free time to finding a cure for her father's illness, caused by the poisonous spores of the Sea of Decay. Instead of finding a cure though, she discovers that the plants are only toxic because the soil they grow from is toxic. Many, many, many years ago, a horrible war called the Seven Days of Fire terrorized the land. Humans, stubborn and blind of their consequences, created deadly weapons, called Giant Warriors, that engulfed the entire land in flame, burning all in their path. When the seven days had ended, the warriors turned to stone, so that their power could never be used against their master. However, the flames caused the entire planet to become polluted commencing the birth of the Sea of Decay.

1000 years after human civilization collapsed (present time), a young girl named Nausicaä lives with her father, King Jihl, in the peaceful Valley of the Winds. The villagers have little to fear, for the winds from the Acid Lake (made from real acid) blow through the valley and blow all oncoming poisonous spores outwards. Living like this for decades, the peaceful valley lives their merry lives, while the warring nations of Tolmekia and Pejite fight countless wars, causing more destruction and violence. One day, a Tolmekian airship flies through the valley, carrying spores and, to everyone's surprise, a dormant Giant Warrior. The army comes soon after, causing much death and destruction in the valley. Even worse, Pejite comes to claim the warrior for themselves, harnessing the rage of millions of Ohmus to destroy everything. It is an amazing story, filled with many layers, exciting battles, interesting characters, and very deep meanings.

One of the main themes throughout the entire film deals with that of rage and calmness. As stated earlier, whenever the Ohmu is enraged, the color is red, and is blue when calm. In the beginning, Ohmus were rumored to be the cause of the Sea of Decay; the Ohmu would trample continuously in rage, until it would die. Soon after, the first of poisonous spores took root in the carcasses of the deceased Ohmus, still reminiscent of rage. So, technically, the Sea of Decay is caused by rage. In addition to the rage, there is also calmness. Nausicaä is one of the few who see through all the rage, and is constantly calming down both Humans and Ohmus, blind with furry. It is this calmness that Nausicaä eventually uses to calm the giant herd of Ohmu. It kills her, but she is successful. The Ohmu, out of kindness of heart, cause Nausicaä to be reborn. When she comes back to life towards the end of the film, Nausicaä fulfills the prophecy, that one clad in blue (the color that represents calmness) will calm the gap between that of man and insect, causing peace to engulf the world, instead of the flame of rage. Although we do not see this peace, it is very obvious from the end of the film that this will come to pass sometime in the future.

One of the amazing things about this film, and all of Miyazaki's other films, is that there is no villain in the film. Instead, there are people with different opinions. The Tolmekians believe that the only way to save the planet is to burn all of the Sea of Decay. However, Nausicaä discovers that the Sea of Decay is purifying the water and soil, and the poisonous spores only protect itself from rage and destruction. However, the difference of opinion is so great, that it causes the Tolmekians to appear evil. If there truly are any evil characters in this film, it is that of man-kind. It is man-kind that destroys the earth in fire, through it's creation of the Giant Warrior. It is man-kind that causes the Sea of Decay, and it is man-kind that causes the necessity of Ohmus to protect the Sea of Decay.

Amazingly enough, this film almost wasn't. The executives at Studio Ghibli believed that animé should only be visual adaptations of manga (Japanese comics). In retaliation, Hayao Miyazaki created a Kaze no Tani no Naushika series that lasted for an amazing seven volumes, and eventually ended in 1993. Although only the events from the first two volumes are shown in the film, the executives were convinced enough to make it a film.

The success of Kaze no Tani no Naushika has caused for it to be dubbed not once, but twice into English. Beware! The first dub renamed it under the title Warriors of the Wind, and cut the majority of the film out. This causes the viewer to become annoyed, and left out of many of the themes that Hayao Miyazaki intended to show. The cause of this over-cut film is simple. Miyazaki was never asked permission if his film could be dubbed into English. Disney, thankfully, re-dubbed it recently into a drastically improved version of Miyazaki's masterpiece. Although the fact that Warriors of the Wind is amusing, (June Foray, the voice of Rocky the Squirrel, is cast as Nausicaä) I highly suggest to avoid it, and watch the Disney dub instead (or, even better, watch it in Japanese!).

Unfortunately, there are cultural barriers that prevent any foreigner to understand the film entirely. Luckily, this film has few barriers. One is the fact that Nausicaä is pronounced Naushika in Japanese (Thus, the title). The reason is that some of the sounds necessary to pronounce Nausicaä are missing from the Japanese language, and the name Naushika, the closest one can get, is used instead.

Kaze no Tani no Naushika is a film that inspires all. With it's amazing artwork, characters, and themes, it is surprising to find someone who could dislike a masterpiece such as this. Indeed, even Andy and Larry Wachowski, directors of The Matrix Trilogy, were inspired by this film. Both The Matrix (1999) and Kaze no Tani no Naushika use color themes of red and blue. In addition, the machines in The Matrix look amazingly similar to the Ohmus. Kaze no Tani no Naushika is a film that can be loved by young and old alike. It's wonderful story, excellent art, and the English dub of Patrick Stewart as Lord Yupa will enchant anyone who views it. It is a fantastic world that Hayao Miyazaki created, and, like all his films, should be enjoyed by all.

The Brothers Grimm (2005)

After a seven year hiatus, the legendary Terry Gilliam returns to direct the long awaited film, The Brothers Grimm. This film, unlike that of Gilliam's other previous ones, does not include a surplus of humor such as Brazil (1985) or Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) as I expected, but is filled with magic, adventure, sorrow, and love; all the necessities of a fairy tale, which it is. The Grimm brothers are the real-life authors of famous tales such as "Snow White", "Little Red Ridding Hood", and "Hansel and Grethel", and this film comically, and fictionally, describes the inspiration for which these stories are based on.

Once upon a time (to be more specific, 19th century) in a land far away, (French occupied Germany) there lived two brothers who wandered the land in quest of towns that housed terrible witches and demons, fed by superstitious fears. Their names are Wilhelm (Matt Damon) and Jacob (Heath Ledger) Grimm. Upon finding a town, the two brothers would exorcise the demon, kill the witch, or banish the plague, causing the villagers to rejoice, and the brothers to claim their hefty price tag for their services. However, the fairy tale does not end here, for one main reason: they were fake.

After each elaborate hoax, the brothers and their 'stage crew' would look in search of another village that had a similar supernatural folktale, gorging on their little to no gold. One day, however, they are arrested and brought to French authorities, who revel that they have discovered the Grimm's secret, but are willing to grant amnesty. A small town has become a great pain to the French; 10 girls have mysteriously disappeared into the forest, and haven't been seen since. The brothers are sent to investigate the cause of this disappearance, and eliminate the magic, while under the watch of French soldiers. However this town is discovered to be really haunted, truthfully enchanted, and mysteriously creepy. There's more to the story of course, such as a wicked queen, a magic mirror, and savage trees that eat men alive, but you need to see the film yourself to really enjoy it. The Brothers Grimm is a fairy tale of its own, with twists, turns, and lack of Disney songs. Any Gilliam fan will, of course, love the film and live happily ever after.

The Brothers Grimm is a witch's cauldron filled to the brim with allusions to various stories that the brothers wrote. Hansel and Grethel make an appearance, along with a witch obsessed with being fairest of the land, and a little girl with a red riding hood. This is one of the things that kept the film humorous, as there are so many of them. (Another allusion, surprisingly, is to the German film M (1931) , for in both, a little girl named Elsie is lured away by a mysterious man.) In addition to this, Gilliam creates a feel to the film which seems as if it was taken right out of a storybook. Of course, just as the brothers Grimm had it, all fairy tales are not always for children. Some scenes in the film were quite . . . disturbing. In a scene that conveys the wickedness of the French, a cat is grinded to bits, its guts are flung across the room, and it, eventually, is eaten. At this point in the film, the majority of my theatre left, claiming that the film was "cruelty to animals". However, Gilliam has shown cat abuse in many of his films before, so this minor scene should not have been a surprise.

Another disturbing scene in the film (which I found to be incredibly awesome) is when a girl is lured to the witch's tower because of a horse. Hearing the horse in pain, the young girl soothes the horse, petting it, only to be eaten (yes, eaten) alive. It is quite an interesting scene, which stood out in my mind when I left the theatre. The main reason, most likely, would have to do with the fact that the horse looked as if it actually did swallow a girl whole. Once again, as I said, this film may be a fairy tale, but is not meant for children of young ages.

This film had many high points too. The excellent soundtrack created a dark feeling to the film, one which is necessary to show the trials the brothers faced on their adventure. There were also many visually entertaining scenes, such as the eclipse scene, and much symbolism that created a wonderful atmosphere to enjoy and learn from. Things such as reality and fantasy are explored, along with the relationships between father and daughter, and brother and brother.

The Brothers Grimm is an enjoyable film that many a Gilliam fan will enjoy. Although his style is considered to be an 'acquired taste', I recommend this film for its magical feeling, its wonderful morals, its few funny lines ("You were nearly eaten by a tree!"), and its visually entertaining scenes which will hold you for the entire film, and longer.

*As a small little note, the man in the film is not a werewolf. In old folklore, it was believed that if one was to don the pelt of a creature, that person would be turned into that creature. If you look at Angelika's father, he is wearing a wolf pelt, as is Angelika later in the film.*

High Noon (1952)

A hero? Well, it can be defined in many ways, from someone running around in his or her underwear, to the person who makes you smile when you need it most. Recently, AFI continued their "100 years . . ." Series and published 50 All-Time Heroes (in addition to the villains, but they never really counted). Number five on the list is Will Kane, the protagonist from this week's film, High Noon.

This classic black and white western tells the story of our number five hero, and the trials he faces in his home town of Hadleyville. Marshal Kane (Gary Cooper) has just retired for the sake of his new Quaker wife, Amy (Grace Kelly). In agreement of marriage, Kane must give up violence, thus, his job. On the way out of town, Kane learns that his old time rival, Frank Miller (Ian MacDonald), has returned to give revenge for the town that sentenced him, and the Marshal that caught him.

AFI did well to award Will Kane as a hero. One quality of a hero is to have the ability to stand up and take action for your beliefs, especially when no one shares the same view. Will Kane definitely qualifies as a hero, as he is able to stand up to Frank Miller alone. Kane has the determination to save the town, as he has done before, when "no decent woman could walk down the street alone." That determination is what keeps him fighting, mostly when he stops and ponders if he should run away. Another quality Kane has that can define him as a hero is his ability to never run away, as the tagline for this film states. However, this can be debated if it is strength or weakness, for Amy leaves Kane for this same reason. It is in this moment, when Will must decide on the future of his town, or the future of his marriage, when his true hero emerges. Heroes must sometimes "give up the thing we want the most" in order to save innocent lives, as said by May Parker in Spider-Man. In-fact, many modern day heroes show similar qualities to this "old school" hero. Spider-Man, as stated above, gives up his most inner desires in order to save the city from destruction. Even heroes from children stories such as Hershel in "Hershel and the Hannukkah Goblins" (Corny idea, but a wonderful story) share similar ideals with Kane, as Hershel refuses to leave when he is left alone to defeat all 8 Hanukkah Goblins (One for each night).

The only other hero in the film worth mentioning is not a hero at all, but a heroine (no, not the drug). When Will gets injured, and it seems like he will loose the fight, Amy runs to the rescue to save him. The real reason she is a heroine, is because she sacrifices her belief to save her true love. Remember: Amy is a Quaker, and as such she must not participate in any violence at all. Seeing as both the hero and heroine of the film appear when there is danger, it could be assumed that heroes appear when they are needed. With the ever reliant Marshal Kane on the job, no additional heroes were ever needed. When Kane was in need of help, the heroine rises to the job to save him. This proves that there is a hero in all of us, lying dormant until it is lured out by the intrusion of danger into the safety of others.