1. The Social Network
The Social Network is my personal favorite out of all the other films listed. Part of this has to do with the interesting way the story is told. In many scenes the camera switches between two settings, accentuating the differences between two completely different worlds. In fact, many things in the Social Network have to do with doubles. There are two different trials in which Mark is the defendant, and as one Winklevoss twin cleverly noted, “I’m 6’5”, 220, and there’s two of me.” But perhaps the pair with the greatest importance is the two people that Mark must choose between for the success of Facebook. Will it be Eduardo, the loyal friend, or Sean Parker, the young and ambitious entrepreneur? All of these effects lead to a phenomenal film and story.
The theatrical performances in The Social Network are equally great. Eisenberg is exceptional at playing Zuckerberg. Even though I have never met the glorious Mark Zuckerberg I have had my fair share of computer geniuses and Eisenberg’s short, clipped speech and drooping posture are identical to the real thing. Even Timberlake is good. His acting in The Social Network is a far cry from his performances on The Mickey Mouse Club. He has multiple layers to play, too. On the outside Sean Parker must remain collected and suave, but Timberlake expertly reveals the insecure core buried beneath the layers of Prada blazers and carefully gelled hair.
The cinematic elements in this film were as modern and contemporary as the plot itself. One of my favorite aspects of the film was how the cinematographers often switched between two completely different settings while filming a scene. These switches helped to visually show the differences of Zuckerberg’s world and the world of his peers. The rowing scenes were also fantastic. The camera captured each rippling muscle almost in slow motion, catching the bright droplets of water that came from the foreheads of the racers and the water itself. This filming technique captured the intensity of the moment and helped to show the importance and elite of the Winklevoss brothers.
The Social Network exceeds in every way possible. The characters are realistic and you are left feeling like you have known them for a lifetime instead of 120 minutes. When Eduardo is cheated I felt his rage and betrayal and when Zuckerberg friends Erica I could feel his regret and hope like it belonged to me. Out of all the movies listed, this was the one that I could relate to the most. I check Facebook multiple times each day and would most likely faint into a year-long coma if it were to be destroyed. That was sarcastic. But still. It was interesting to learn the story behind my most browsed website, even if many of the facts were untrue.
2. True Grit
True Grit is a work of art. The story is partly told through a subtle, clever dialogue which takes a moment to sink in before it makes you laugh. The scenery also adds to the storytelling. As in all great westerns, the landscape is a character. The infinite plains and ominous forests add touches of excitement and a sprinkling of fear that play an immense piece in the storytelling.
The acting in True Grit is superb. Without saying anything Damon makes me laugh just by his mustache alone. But when he does say something as simple as, “I’m a Texas ranger,” the superiority of his tone makes me cover my mouth in an attempt to hide the giggles. Bridges nails the role of a tough and drunk U.S. Marshal. At first, his character is hard to like. He’s drunk and stubborn and he won’t bother to listen to Mattie. But later, when Cogburn is carrying an extremely ill Mattie through the barren Western landscape towards safety, the audience’s views have changed. What was once a hard, annoying character is now a likeable hero. And although young, Mattie is clearly the main possessor of “true grit” in this story. She is relentless, brave and driven by her strong morals, making her the obvious hero.
True Grit would not be as magnificent if the cinematic elements were not as flawless as they are. The passing of time is perfectly captured through fading pictures and the wide, open landscape helps to convey how completely alone these adventurers are. The lighting is also something special. The audience is put on edge watching the scene unfolding in the warm, dim house where a finger later is severed. The lighting also makes it easier to capture each character’s expression as there is often a soft warm light that highlights each face in a dark setting.
In my opinion, what makes this film better than most is its strong characters and clever dialogue. Although the plot of the film is grim, the clever statements and subtly funny language make it easier to watch and enjoy. This movie is not just about revenge and murder. It is also about the development of Rooster and Mattie as they come to realize how much they mean to each other. This is what makes this film so great.
3. Toy Story 3
Toy Story has some of the greatest storytelling of all time. Part of what makes this story telling so good is that it is easy to understand. Scenes flow gracefully together, connecting elements and making once mysterious actions less mysterious. On top of all this, the story is one we can all relate to. At one time or another every kid has to part with his or her once beloved toys. Doing this brings back memories and often a glimmer of innocence that we all possessed at this young age.
Because Toy Story 3 is animated it is easier to see each character’s expression and posture. This feature provides for excellent performances all around. Watching each toy’s face droop and smile helps the audience connect with the characters. This connection is also spurred on by our common experiences and emotions. Each member of the audience has experienced moments where they have had similar emotions, and this helps the audience bond with the characters. The fact that they are cute, lovable toys helps too. The swells and obvious passion in each voice also adds to the theatrical performance and film as a whole.
The cinematic elements of this film were also outstanding. Instead of the unrealistic shrubs and one-dimensional floors many animated films turn to, Toy Story 3 paid particular attention to the details. I loved watching each emerald leaf of a tree flutter in the breeze and the mother’s eyebrows raise when she opened her son's chest of old toys.
Toy Story 3 was great. It featured good morals and ethics, the characters were lovable and each scene was a masterpiece of brilliant details pixilated to fit on screen. The only thing that is missing from this film is a real depth of character. What makes a character interesting is their dimension. They are not completely good and not completely bad. They have flaws, but those are balanced out by good traits. The characters in Toy Story 3, while not completely one-dimensional, were lacking in this feature. Buzz Lightyear, for example, was one pretty perfect dude. Nonetheless, the characters were lovable and the animation was wonderful. These elements are what earned this film third place.
4. The King’s Speech
The storytelling in The King’s Speech was both good and bad. The good lies in the actual screenplay but the bad lies in the briefness of it. Each scene was meticulously crafted to bring out the flaws and strengths of each character and the importance of the particular era. The actual story itself though, is a bit of a bore. Someone cures the King’s stutter. So what? This really means nothing to me or a great portion of the audience. Dear people behind the making of this film: please add more things that we can relate to.
The acting in this film is magnificent. Firth nails the King’s stutter and I like to watch his regal expressions evolve into boyish ones when he is doing something he finds silly or ridiculous. He executes the King’s temper- how it flares up when someone is doing something that he finds disrespectful and how it cools down when he is in the presence of the people he loves, his wife and daughters. Geoffrey Rush is equally great. His falling expression made touched me when the directors of the play he was trying out for crushed his dreams with their harsh words. Even his eyes told a story. They express his worry and sadness so much that they are like an entirely different character.
I really enjoyed the cinematography in this film. I liked how Logue’s open, airy room where the King practiced his speech contrasted with the King’s narrow, stuffy corridors and chambers. The wide landscape shots are also a nice touch to the film. These sweeping views help to convey the huge area of which the King and his speech are effecting and also highlight the bleakness of the land. My favorite part was how the camera shook when Lionel and the King were fighting and then how it eventually smoothed out to an almost still shot as both men walked away.
The acting in this film is what makes it so good. Firth and Rush are not only believable but likeable. Especially at the end of the film I was surprised at how much I cared for Firth’s character. However, what makes this film linger near the end of the spectrum is that it feels like it has been done before. Sort of like how that previous sentence feels like it has been used by one too many critics to describe it. This film would have been amazing if it was done five years earlier. Any time after that though and it just blends in with the rest of the crowd.
5. Winter’s Bone
I should really like Winter’s Bone. I like empowering stories of women and hope. I find it interesting to witness what life is like outside of Edina
The acting in this movie was without a doubt outstanding. Jennifer Lawrence laid down a solid performance portraying Ree and even the kids did their job well. She brought me to tears when she was begging her mentally absent mother for help. However, I was not as fond of the actual characters themselves. I know Ree lives in a barren, hopeless world but would it kill her to break a smile? She could stand to learn a lesson from her younger siblings and summon up some happiness and childish pleasure that would help her learn to laugh.
Winter’s Bone had strong cinematography. The film’s low budget actually worked to its advantage. The handheld camera used in every scene helped the audience feel like they were experiencing the drama firsthand while providing extra suspense. On top of this, the lighting played a dramatic effect. In most scenes when the lighting was dark or it was nighttime the audience knew that something scary, bad, or a combination of the two was about to happen. I like this effect. It helped me prepare for when Ree had to cut off her dad’s hands.
The Winter’s Bone exceeded on almost every element that makes a film good. The acting was sensational, the cinematography spectacular, and the storytelling interesting. So what decides this film’s success is not its technical aspects but the viewer’s personal likes and dislikes. I didn’t care for Winter’s Bone because I prefer lighter, funnier films that don’t involve severed limbs. I like to see visible hope and smiles in the films that I watch. What makes Winter’s Bone one of the films that I don’t particularly care for is just this. There is not enough hope and visible happiness.
6. Inception
I bet the film’s storytelling merits would have been plentiful if I knew what they were. Unfortunately, I was completely lost the entire time. Maybe it was because I had a 102ยบ fever when I was watching it. Or maybe because I always thought dreaming only happened when you slept. But whatever the reason Inception was about as confusing as a Rubik cube. The only thing I know for sure about the story was that Leonardo DiCaprio and that girl from Juno were doing some weird stuff that involved driving off bridges and manipulating people’s dreams. Good plot, guys.
The acting in this movie wasn’t really acting. It was more screaming, shooting and scowling. And stabbing. Yeah, definitely stabbing. So that’s what we’ll call it. The four S’s. Don’t get me wrong though, the four S’s were done well. They were plentiful, and DiCaprio was especially skilled in the scowling section. The four S’s were good, but the depth of acting was not as apparent. The best was probably Cotillard who added a touch of French sophistication and elegance to the film.
The cinematic elements of Inception were probably the film’s strongest aspects. Especially with a fever. That added a nice touch. The thing I remember most vividly was the van falling ever so slowly into the water. That was very cool, even though the entire time I was thinking, fall quicker so this movie will be over finally. But still, it was very nice. I also like how the city folded on top of itself when Cobb and Ariadne (I didn’t even know that those were they’re names until I searched it on Google! Sign of some very prominent characters) were walking through it. All in all, the effects of the movie were great, but not good enough to save it.
I gave Inception last place. I know a lot of people will not agree with me and that there is probably a whole cult lined up with nunchucks and dream sticks or whatever ready to send me straight to Limbo because of it. But I just don’t get the whole obsession with Inception. The effects are really cool but none of the characters have the bravery of Mattie in True Grit or the depth of Ree in Winter’s Bone. The story just doesn’t seem real, and the characters are not ones that I can relate with. The best part of the movie was when Cobb got to see his kids again and that was for only five seconds. And it might have been a dream. What this story is missing that all the other films have is a little touch of reality, a little glimmer of real life and real problems.
Great job. Very thorough. Really enjoyed your witty asides (Inception is NOT a movie to watch while feverish).
ReplyDelete