Nights of Cabiria

            Cabiria, a film made in 1956, displays the struggles of a woman hoping to find happiness and love from a man. She makes a living by prostituting, and every man she comes in contact with takes advantage of her vulnerability. Giorgio, Alberto, and Oscar all hurt Cabiria in multiple ways, even though she gives them everything and tries to gain their acceptance. The pattern of her heartache and anger is a continuous reoccurrence in the film, and makes viewers believe that she will have a hard time finding happiness. In the last scene of the film, Cabiria has a tear running down her face and walks off alone, but is soon met by a band of musicians. At that moment she builds a smile upon her face, even after all of the anguish she faces throughout the film. I believe that at that moment, Cabiria realizes that she does not need a man to make her feel like she is not alone. Cabiria changes herself and does not rely on others to change her. Her smile is lifted from behind her tears because she feels the joy surrounding her, and I think she realizes that there is no use in crying over someone who did not deserve her happiness in the first place.

            All of the male characters in the film pursue something in Cabiria that she is not searching for herself. They all either want money or lust, while she wants love and happiness. Cabiria carries herself through the streets of Rome with high hopes, but always manages to get caught in an act of deceit and heartache. The first man who appears in the film is Giorgio, who pushes her into a pond for 40,000 lira. Her rage and anger is casted towards everyone, even those who save her life.  Soon thereafter she is dancing with her prostitute friends and having a good time. We never get to understand the real Cabiria because all of her emotions seem as though they are exaggerated. She cannot understand why someone who she loves would try to drown her, but likewise she allows people to do pretty much whatever they want with her. It is hard to understand as a viewer where her happiness comes from, and I also think Cabiria does not truly know. She knows she wants to find love and she wants something to change, but she is not sure how to put her hopes into action.

            Another man that causes Cabiria’s self-realization at the end of the film is the famous actor Alberto Lazzati. I believe she goes with this man because she hopes something good will come out of their night, but he ends up locking Cabiria up in a bathroom to hide her from his fiancé. She relies on him to make her happy, but he is too caught up in his own lifestyle and luxury to care about a woman like her. It seems like a repetitive scene where Cabiria puts trust into a man with many faults that Cabiria chooses to overlook. Her one hope in life is to be happy and to have someone love her, but she will never be able to reach these goals unless she can be happy and love herself.

            The last contender in Cabiria’s spiral downwards is a man named Oscar. They fall in love and are soon to be married. This could be because Cabiria prayed to the Madonna for something to change, but we soon find out that Oscar was only going to marry her for her money, and also intends to push her off of a cliff. She has been stepped on countless times by the people she surrounds herself with. It is as though none of the things in her life matter if she can’t be happy, but Cabiria has yet to realize that it is the way she is dependent on others for her happiness. Cabiria walks away in tears as the movie is coming to an end. As viewers we want the best for Cabiria, but it seems impossible at this point.

            Cabiria walks alone but suddenly comes across a lively orchestra of people who smile at her and show her friendliness. They dance and sing alongside her, I believe helping her forget all of her past distress. Something very unexpected happens within Cabiria; she looks towards the audience and a grin lightens up across her face. This confused me at first—how could Cabiria be happy after all of the hurt she experienced throughout the film? Nonetheless, her perseverance to find true happiness through scumbags and deceitful liars opened her eyes to what she could have been doing wrong the entire time. These men are not going to change her life around for the better. Even though Cabiria is now alone, she is now surrounded by warmth, delight, and a true love for herself. If Cabiria had never experienced the hurt she did throughout the film, she would not have been able to hope for something better and be optimistic about her life. By people hurting her, she comes to the conclusion that the only person she can rely on is herself.

-Allison Emery 

At the time of The Searchers release racism was a hot issue. The Brown v. Board of education decision was only two years old and to a generation who criticized Rock ‘n Roll music by calling it “too black”, treating Native Americans as equals was virtually unheard of. It was in this setting that John Ford released The Searchers, starring John Wayne as the wildly and unapologetically racist Ethan Edwards. Although a large number of western plots revolved around the conflict between western settlers and Native Americans, at that time few dealt with the issue the way Ford did in The Searchers.

            Ethan’s harsh attitude towards Native Americans was evident from the very start of the film. His dismay at Martin Pawley’s being 1/8 Cherokee was clear and even went to the extent of him refusing to let Martin call him “Uncle”. His ruthlessness is clear in one scene when we witness several clearly traumatized ex-Comanche prisoners. One man remarks “It’s hard to believe they’re white.” to which Ethan responds, “They’re not white anymore, they’re Comanche.” This racism even goes so far as to motivate him to attempt to kill Debbie after it is clear she has “gone Indian”. Furthermore he takes evident pleasure in the killing of Comanche, even shooting the coins off of a dead Indians eyes so that he forced to wander the spirit land.

            To this point, Ethan is clearly well-versed in Comanche culture, even knowing their language. This becomes extremely telling in his encounter with Scar. After years of tracking they come face to face and show evident displeasure at each of them knowing the others language. More surprising is the revelation that in addition to language, Scar and Ethan also share a similar motivation for killing. Scar reveals that his impetus for killing white men comes from the fact that they took three of his son’s lives.

            Seldom in the film industry of the time were Native Americans even humanized enough to speak a commonly understood language. It was surprising that Ford drew such attention to the plight of the Indians when so many films treated them as heartless savages. He even took the care to include their children in the film when most other films choose to glaze over this detail.

            Through Ethan’s growth from hardened racist to someone who accepts Debbie after she allegedly was converted to Comanche after living with some long and finally to walking off into the sunset we question whether he is the real protagonist or if the Comanche are really the bad guys.

            Although The Searchers is a long way off from Dances With Wolves, it did send a strong message concerning racism in a time where this message was much needed. In this way it was revolutionary in addition to being entertaining and using pioneering panoramic camerawork that exposed the rugged beauty of America’s Midwest. 

Marshall Fegenbush

Sunset Boulevard -The way the story was told-

-The way the story was told-

In the 1950 film Sunset Boulevard, the black and white film presents a variety of methods that make it unique in its story telling. A few of the methods used are, the use of flashback, use of narration, and an actual character in the movie telling the story. These factors made for a lot of suspense, an easy way to follow the story through story telling, and it also provided a sense of discovery. I will explain why all of these things enhance the value of the story and adds something new to the way a movie is presented.

The use of narration in this story is key; you can tell that there is importance to the guy who is narrating but you are unaware until his role and true identity is revealed toward the end. Narration is a style in which a story can be presented I am for this style and in this case it sets the tone of each scene. Joe Gillis’s narration did certain things like revealing how he felt about a certain thing that happened; at times it even revealed what he was thinking in a specific scene. This adds information to a scene that we would not regularly get without narration, or in other words we would have to assume.

The other and maybe most interesting thing about the narration and story telling method is that the narrator was an actual character in the main storyline that becomes identifiable. Usually in a movie or story a narrator is a character that is not connected to the main plot maybe someone who is telling a story from a distant perspective or as a minor role in the main story. This case, Gillis was the main character and without us actually knowing it he was telling his side of the story the whole movie. This is not something that we are usually accustomed to with movies that have narrators.

One of the most interesting things that happen in this story is provided mainly because the narration being given by the main character. We discover that the initial image in the beginning of the movie is actually the narrator himself. At the beginning the narrator addresses this image but we don’t actually know, or have the idea that it may be him until more than half way through the film. I feel because discovery is one of the things we look forward to most as an audience it enhances the discovery when you discover something about someone you are more connected to, for example Mr. Gillis. He connects with you through telling you the story and then we find out that he is the dead image at the beginning.

Another tool used as a method of story telling is the flashback that we have at the start of the movie. This makes you more attentive of the story, because as the audience you want to discover why and how this came about.  So with the added anticipation you are on the edge until you can get back to the flashback point.

The method of story telling can enhance a story in so many ways, some of which I described. Sunset Boulevard used a method that enhanced the value of the story.

-Kendrel Dickerson

Rashomon

                                  The Double-edged Dagger:  The Two Faces of Humanity

                Can you trust another human being? Even if they passionately plead their case before you and fervently claim innocence, can they be believed? These are the questions posed by the 1950 film, Rashomon, directed by Akira Kurosawa. In this monumental piece of Japanese art, the people, props, and plot paint the picture of one of life’s most intriguing, yet perplexing mysteries. Viewers throughout the world have observed this brilliant story and by its end, drawn the conclusion that humans, by nature are victims of just that, their own nature. The story of Rashomon illustrates the vacancy in the human heart of the needs and interest of others. It becomes clear that when viewers reflect on the self, each person, no matter how moral or humanly, is most concerned with his or her own wants and needs. Perhaps most convicting is the truth as demonstrated here in the film that even the best people tend to be willing to, by any means necessary, protect the self, even if it means stabbing another in the back.

            Kurosawa knew exactly the kind of message he wanted to relay to his viewers when he designed this film’s direction. From the opening scene with the confounded woodcutter who has been contemplating all he has witnessed, to the end scene when the priest’s faith in humanity is wrecked, then apprehensively restored, each scene is purposeful, meaning to echo the theme that mankind is primarily interested in looking out for his own desires no matter how pure his intentions appear. Analysis of the film has convinced me that the presence of the dagger is deliberate and quite representative of the double-sided nature of humanity. Initially, the dagger is a means of weaponry, or defending the woman. Later it is revealed just how self-seeking the woman is, so it is appropriate that the dagger remains present in the story even after her exit. The dagger is a fierce aggressor, used for protection, but ultimately, used in the mix of carrying out a monstrous couple of crimes. Later, the dagger is the means by which the audience, along with the priest, learns the truth that the woodcutter fooled the priest and everyone involved by pleading his own innocence. In this scene, it is disclosed that he stole the dagger.

            The director, I believe, hinted at the idea of the perpetual guilt and evil inside humanity from fairly early on, with the prevalent maniacal laughter in many of the characters. This, along with the inconsistencies of each character’s story, amplifies the viewer’s already reluctance to know each character, while further solidifying the belief that each one is nearly crazy and not to be trusted. The dagger in this film represents humanity. Humans are, at the most foundational level, concerned only with the protection and preservation of self. Each man and woman is only interested in his or her own good; worrying about anyone or anything outside of self is of secondary importance, and quite unnatural. The first side of the dagger, or nature of a human, is evil and must be controlled, or it will dominate the man it inhabits. It is only with suppression of one’s selfishness that he or she will be able to vanquish the evil side of the dagger, beginning to see the needs of others and attempt to minister to them. If one thing is for sure, though, it is that it takes great work and effort to suppress one’s selfishness. The priest is right to question the intentions and morality of humanity. The truth is that every man, like the dagger, is two-sided. One side is not to be trusted, and the other, in need of great help.

-Taylor Gilliam

Caroline Downer - The Gold Rush

                                                                     

After watching and discussing The Gold Rush, our group has agreed that Charlie Chaplin mastered the art of silent film making.  Charlie Chaplin was not only the main character in this silent, black and white film produced in 1925, but it was written and produced by him as well.

While a silent film can include music and captions to help guide the plot, most of the audience’s interpretation comes from the actors and props.  Our group believes that Chaplin does a perfect job of keeping the viewers focused without the use of words spoken.  Instead of words, Chaplin uses dramatic facial expressions, body language, and hand gestures.  These physical aspects allow us to understand feelings, emotions, and relationships without hearing dialogue.  The Lone Prospector’s face tells us exactly how he is feeling about Georgia at the moment, just by the exaggerated way he looks at her.  Another example of Chaplin’s silent brilliance is the dinner scene when he entertains the women and the audience with his dance “Oceana Roll” dinner performance.  Our whole class was laughing and he didn’t speak a word. 

The slapstick and irony of the film is also enhanced by the silence, evident in the caption that reads “Speech, speech!”  However, the audience knows they would not be able to hear any sort of speech.  This silence allows our attention to be focused on the props.  Chaplin carefully selects props to be in each scene.  These various props potentially foreshadow future events.  For example, the paper compass allows us to infer that Chaplin is ill prepared for his gold search and he is lost from the very beginning of the film.

Although Chaplin’s priority in Alaska is striking gold, we are also able to follow an entire unexpected love story, on the side, between The Lone Prospector and Georgia without voices to lead us.  Chaplin is able to show us how true Georgia’s love for The Lone Prospector is, at the end, with Chaplin’s modest outfit change.  Love is easy to get across with words.  However, taking on more of a challenge, in this silent film Chaplin must present their love through their gestures and facial expression alone.

Chaplin’s use of cross-cutting also displays his brilliance in this film.  He is able to avoid resulting to captions such as “meanwhile.”  Although cross-cutting is not just used in silent films, it is more important it seems in this movie since there are few other hints to show the audience that those two events are happening at the same time.  For example, when the wind is violently blowing the snow around in a storm, the camera goes back and forth from The Lone Prospector to Big Jim McKay and back again showing us that these two events are happening simultaneously.

The music chosen for this movie also acts as a cue for the audience to realize plot movement in a different direction.  Since there are no words, even in the music, we are able to use Chaplin’s choice of music as guidance.   When the music gets loud and speeds up we know that something dramatic is occurring.  For example, the music used in the scene in the cabin with the gun speeds up, presenting almost a circus atmosphere because everywhere Chaplin seems to turn the gun is accidentally pointed at him, even under the table.  The music almost acts the characters’ voice inflections.  Chaplin allows the music to take the place of his words.  In films that aren’t silent, music is important as well, but in The Gold Rush and other silent films, it does not just accompany the action and words, it has a much bigger role. 

In The Gold Rush Charlie Chaplin is able to masterfully incorporate history, a complex plot, and pure entertainment.  A difficult aspect of directing and acting in this movie, we think, is that silence leaves room for interpretation.  Being able to get a point across to audiences as a whole and have them understand the same plot while getting the same message is difficult in a movie that doesn’t allow for dialogue. Overall, we think that Charlie Chaplin shows us that actions do indeed speak louder than words. 

The Maltese Falcon

              The Maltese Falcon is a complex narrative of crime, mystery, and consequence. Samuel Spade, a  detective, becomes involved in a case where he has to get into other people’s business and use human intuition to figure out the many intricate characters in the movie. Throughout the movie, I had a hard time keeping up with who were bad people, who were good people, and all of the different sub plots involved. While almost every story should involve a main plot and a subplot, sometimes a viewer can become confused on where to direct their attention when so many things are happening at once. Crime dramas usually contain different sub plots to help guide the viewer to figure out who the criminal is, but they also keep the viewer guessing and questioning. While watching The Maltese Falcon, the main plot and sub plots seemed to intertwine and there is a hard time trying following every detail that is going on.

              

            The main plot in a film involves the main focus in a story. In The Maltese Falcon, the main plot is the quest to find a statuette of a falcoln that is said to be priceless with expensive jewels and diamonds. Three criminals and a conniving, dangerous woman all want to find this bird and bribe Sam Spade to do all he can to bring it to them. Sam Spade, the protagonist, complicates the main plot because many of his morals and actions do not depict what we believe to be a “good” detective. He is sly and acts as though he is working with the criminals to gain money and the multiple women introduced throughout the movie. I believe that Sam Spade’s motives throw off the main plot at times because he does not have a moral code and confuses viewers on whether or not he is actually working with these criminals to gain status and money, or if he actually wants these criminals prosecuted. Many would believe as a detective he should be working with the police and not befriending the criminals, but he has a different way of figuring out who the one to blame is.

                

              Along with the main plot, there are many different sub plots in the movie that keep us guessing and even throw off our attention and focus on what we believe to be true. The sub plots in a story are less significant events, but they help guide the viewer to the conclusion of the main story. There can be too many sub plots, which takes away the focus of the story and causes misunderstanding. While all of the characters in a story should not be static and never changing, it is sometimes hard to keep up with the many complexities behind who these characters are and what their point is in the sub plot story. The Maltese Falcon seems to provide many sub plots that confuse audiences on where the story is headed. An example of a complex sub plot in The Maltese Falcon is when we find out that Mrs. O’Shaughnessy lied to Sam about her identity, her sister, and Thursby. This confuses the entire plot because the motive behind Thursby’s death and behind Mrs. O’Shaughnessy’s (now Brigid) reason for wanting him dead is altered. Brigid confused me with her many sub plots because the density in her emotions and actions caused me to contradict whether or not she was behind the criminal actions as well. While many of the sub plots eventually lead to an overall conclusion, it is hard to keep up with different activities and reactions that challenge what we first believed.

              

              I believe that the writer of The Maltese Falcon added many intricate details in the story to keep the reader/viewer guessing. This causes mystery and engagement from the audience to see what happens next. While I think this is a good attribute to have in a detective narrative, having too many sub plots and complex characters cause confusion and sloppiness in the way the movie is depicted. Too many things happening at once is difficult to understand because an action could happen in the blink of an eye that was important to the overall main plot.

--Allison Emery

Citizen Kane

            One of the focuses of Citizen Kane is to question how fulfilling the American Dream (and the financial attainment that comes with it) actually is. Charles Foster Kane has achieved everything that can be hoped for in the American dream. He has enough money to build a palace and enough power to start a war. He hoards statues and paintings and builds Xanadu, “the costliest monument a man has ever built to himself.” In the end, however, he is alone inside Xanadu among his possessions and, on his deathbed, it is a childhood memory to which he turns.

            Orson Welles communicates the theme of the hollowness of the American dream through the camera shots he chooses, the design of the sets, and through intricacies of the plot. Many times the camera pans over the countless crates of the statues and paintings Kane has purchased. You see that many are still packed in crates and haven’t even been touched. Their sheer number and abandoned state show how much they really matter to Kane. This shows how Kane collects people. He doesn’t really have a mutual relationship with others, rather he wants to know that others love him.

Shots that show the distance between Kane and others show how he is withdrawing from the other characters. This happens several times throughout the movie. One scene shows shots of Kane and his new wife at the dinner table, switching from her face to his until finally, the camera pans back and you see that rather than sitting in close proximity they are now sitting at opposite ends of a large table. In a manner of seconds you the progression of their relationship from a seemingly healthy couple to distant almost strangers is shown. In the scenes near the end of the film the distance between Kane and his second wife is emphasized. In the huge space of Xanadu they have to almost shout at each other to be heard.

At this point Xanadu comes to symbolize how Kane has built a huge, empty shell around himself. The sets used are huge, with warehouse sized rooms and massive statues. All the walls are ornately decorated and carved giving the impression of grandeur. However, most of the space inside the rooms is empty, with the room itself dwarfing the people inside. Kane and Susan look miniscule compared to the rest of the house. When Susan leaves him Kane looks small and lonely wandering Xanadu. It becomes clear that the Kane which he built for the public eye, with grandiose speeches, opera houses, chains of newspapers and radio stations, and a magnificent palace, is a façade. The real Charles Foster Kane is lost somewhere inside the cold stone walls. This point was driven home by the shot of Kane walking through the parallel mirrors, revealing his likeness copied endlessly. Finally, on his deathbed it is not his wives or newspapers or vast amounts of wealth that he thinks of, but the memory of a childhood toy.

Luke Fegenbush