The Perks of Being Out Of High School

This week’s screening was the film The Perks of Being a wallflower, an adaptation of the book written and directed by Stephen Chbosky. The Perks of Being a Wallflower is a coming of age story about beginnings, starting with the first day of high school for the story’s protagonist, Charlie. Charlie goes into high school with a set of expectations, unfortunately the reality falls short. But that doesn’t mean Charlie turns cynical and throws in the towel on his hopes for high school. Although his experience in freshmen year isn’t exactly what he planned initially, Charlie’s open mind leads him through a fruitful year of gaining and growing. Charlie gains a new group of friends that offer him judgment-free support, teaching him the value of being around people that value him. Charlie also begins to grow into himself and his interests, we see a monumental change in character as Charlie becomes entangled in the lives of the social outcasts of the school. Having a group of friends that are both eager to learn about and encourage Charlie’s interests helps him gain a sense of confidence and presence in himself. One of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Charlie’s sister gives him the mixtape ponytail Derrick made for her, something that is humorous in its over-the-top gesture for her, but ends up being endearing when Charlie discovers his favorite, song “Asleep” by The Smiths, and it becomes a recurring symbol in the movie. But, like adolescence, the hard times hit just as hard as the good. Charlie is kind, observant, empathetic, and good-hearted, but his social skills are a bit underdeveloped. Loneliness and confidence play a large part in Charlie’s ability to connect with those around him and achieve the experience he desires from high school. As Charlie becomes a part of a larger social circle he becomes keyed into the complex lives and relationships of those around him, often facing troubles of his own in new relationships, recreational drugs, and saying goodbye to those he loves. But the most complex person he begins to know is himself.

(The next paragraph speaks about subjects that could be triggering, please be mindful)

The Perks of Being a Wallflower is filled with the humor and beauty of life through a teen’s eyes, but it also brings in a sense of realness. This film shows an accurate depiction of trauma and repressed memory. Trauma isn’t something that can be controlled, for Charlie and many other victims of childhood sexual abuse, his brain repressed the memory of that trauma in order to protect him. The hard thing about repressed trauma is that it never calls before it makes a visit, it is often triggered by an event, taste, smell, object, or similar experience to that of the original trauma. And it never gives a straight answer to how long it will stay. Charlie’s memories of the trauma he endured come in fragments leading up to his realization of what exactly happened, his breakdown is a result of having to experience that trauma again through memory. One thing I appreciated was the tasteful handling of how Charlie’s trauma was shown to the viewer. Charlie’s character displays the residual effects of childhood sexual abuse on victims who are still unaware that they experienced trauma. I believe that the film alludes to this in Charlie’s shyness and slow opening up to his friends. Trauma takes form in numerous ways and it affects people differently, but films like this show how important representation is for mental health.

It’s been a while since I’ve watched The Perks of Being a Wallflower, I remember seeing it during its hype when it was first released. Although I read the book a few times, I hardly remembered it even though I remember the cultural significance it had on teens during the time. I do have to say, I enjoyed watching it now because of the cringeyness and it’s fun to revisit movies every few years to see if my perspective has changed. I had forgot how much I had loved listening to the soundtrack for it, I still remember the songs although I cannot listen to David Bowie’s “Heroes” anymore (maybe in 5 more years).

As I had hoped, I gained a lot from this class. It’s pretty hard to complain about a class that requires me to watch movies for homework. I wanted to develop my ability to read a film, I appreciated having in-depth lectures about every aspect of a movie every week because of this. But that is not the end of my curiosity with the film industry, now I just have the right basis to inquire further. I’ve never been fond of blogs, in fact, seeing it on a syllabus places dread in me. However, I lost that sense of dread when I started writing about film. Something about it clicks (I like it?), I even get excited when I think of something I can to add to a piece or if I really enjoyed the topic that week. But I would be lying if I didn’t say my excitement was partially fueled by the quality of understanding that the class material provided us with. Even though we were online, Dr. S’s passion for the medium was still delightfully evident through the zoom window. Thanks Dr. S for making us feel that same excitement about film.

Digital Threat?

This week we watched two documentaries about technological advancements that shaped today’s movie industry. Industrial Light & Magic showed us the beginnings of the special effects organization Industrial Light & Magic founded by George Lucas. What was really interesting to watch in this documentary was the evolution of visual effects into what they are today. The documentary showed us a variety of ways that special effects are used in movies from altering small details to recreating entire landscapes. CGI is an amazing feat and is often needed to meet a story’s needs, but I am not very fond of it for a couple reasons. I hate seeing behind the scenes footage of a movie and seeing a green room, it kills the magic for me. I also hate what it has done to costuming, yes it gave us Davy Jones’ floating tentacles in Pirates of the Caribbean but I am more impressed by really great special effects makeup and wardrobe. I was happy to see that the documentary covered the effect it has on an actor’s performance too, it seemed as though the answer was subjective. CGI has become so advanced that it is hard to tell what is real and what is not in a movie, I know that is the point but I find it unsettling. It taints movies that cannot afford the most spectacular CGI because we are so used to see top tier CGI in blockbuster projects. But I can appreciate the feat of technology that CGI is and what it’s done for the fantasy/sci-fi genre.

The second documentary we watched was Side By Side, a dive into the heated atmosphere of the film industry as digital cameras become the norm. Again, the documentary starts at the emergence of digital video and tracked the advancements of the medium. I was surprised by how many people in the industry disliked the idea of using digital cameras to film a movie, maybe it’s because I have only ever used digital software to create videos. After watching the pros and cons listed from each side, I can understand why people would prefer film but (in my opinion) the pros outweigh the cons. One factor that I can see as an argument for those who prefer using film is that it completely transforms the approach to creating a production, especially if you are a cinematographer. I cannot answer the question of whether this hinders the authenticity of a “good cinematographer”, but I can say that the ability to color key a shot is worth using the digital form. The bit about color correction tools was actually my favorite part of the documentary, I like how easily a shot can be transformed so quickly and simply through an alteration of color. Digital cameras also changed the cameras movement in relation to the body creating new ways of shooting. One of the main points in the documentary made about editing was the shortening of editing time as well as shots seen within the movie. But as we talked about in class, the real answer to which medium is better depends on the project it is serving.

During our discussion about ownership we briefly took a look at the plethora of streaming services now available to the public, many of which even release their own movies. Covid-19 has faced the entertainment industry with challenges as theaters still remain closed and release dates are pushed back. Some streaming services have started to release movies meant for theaters to watch at home, Disney’s Mulan is one I can think of off the top of my head. When the theaters shut down at the beginning of the pandemic I began to question whether or not theaters will still have a life as we the industry tries out new ways to make up for the loss. Now, 8-months since the closing in New York, independent/small-business owned theaters are struggling to find the funds to stay open. I have no worries about bigger theaters being able to hold themselves afloat, but I wonder if there will be a slow decline in theaters around the country?

The Beginner’s Field Guide to The Wes Anderson Film

Film is art and like art, the viewer seeks to know the name behind the work. Film is a collective endeavor, leaving the pointed finger with multiple targets, but in the hierarchy of production it often lands on the director. Authorship is the basis behind the idea of auteur theory; the recognizable mark of an individual on a film. This takes form in style, content, theme, technique, the list goes on and the number of auteurs is vast. When we think simply of how recognizable an artist’s touch is the works of Wes Anderson fit the bill. So much so that one could argue that an Anderson film could be pinpointed within the first ten minutes of its runtime. A bold statement, but one that stands on a collection of highly stylized recreations of the world crafted by the hands of Wes Anderson. In this sense, the lens does not act as the eye so much as a teleportation device.

From The Darjeeling Limited

Wes Anderson

His work has become so recognizable that fans have been able to recreate it and even develop a ‘Wes Anderson Eye’ seen in the Instagram account: https://www.instagram.com/accidentallywesanderson/

But being able to recognize that sparkle takes time and research. Anderson has directed nine feature length films, two of which have extended into the realm of animation, and a handful of short films. Luckily for you, this guide excuses you from the task of watching every film by highlighting the framework that gives each film its antiquated gleam. So, here is the Beginner’s Field Guide to The Wes Anderson Film.

1. Distinct Production Design and Aesthetic

The Grand Budapest Hotel

Wes Anderson has been accredited to creating his own worlds, the reason why it has become so easy to deem something as having a ‘Wes Anderson-like quality”. That isn’t to say that Anderson does not sway from a specific aesthetic, in fact each film has its own. His films span across time periods and locations, but they still seem to maintain a distinguishable quality. Michael Chabon compares them to maquettes in their blatantly artificial yet accurate depictions of reality. (Chabon, 22) They are maquettes in the sense that there is such a high level of artifice that we must accept the world as existing under Anderson’s terms. It is like listening to a child ramble or what Michal Chabon describes as the distance of looking at a maquette. This high level of artifice allows the viewer to engage in the complex stories while also enjoying the whimsy of the world they exist in.

Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou

2. Font and Intertitles

With an already established attention to detail, it is no surprise that font would become a recognizable element in Wes Anderson’s work. But his choice of font shows his understanding of design and the meaning that font can hold. His choice fonts prove to be Futura and Helvetica in bold, their lack of flourish makes them stand out against the other visual stimuli of his films. They also have a direct quality to them which is important considering they act as intertitles within all of his films. Intertitles play a crucial role: they draw attention to important facts, act as introductions to characters, create the allusion of a chapter, and remedy the discontinuity of montage shots. As a film scholar himself, title cards act as an example of personal preference for those seen in early Hollywood films.

The Title card shots for 6 of Anderson’s 9 films

3. Eye Pleasing Cinematography

Because aesthetic and design are used as elements to enhance the films subject matter they ask to be displayed, as Donna Kornhaber puts it. Anderson uses extreme frontality in his shots to frame what the viewers see; it is the reason for the symmetry of his films’ cinematography.

Here is an example of symmetrical frontal shots

“More than letting us into the world of Anderson’s films, his camera is displaying for us the contents of those filmic worlds much in the way one might show off a shelf of collectibles or open the door to a curio cabinet,” (Kornhaber, 29).

The most notable among Anderson-esque shots is the god’s eye shot, a view from the camera directly above the subject matter. While this is often used from a distance to create a disconnect between the viewer and what is happening on screen, Anderson takes a different approach by tightening the distance from the camera to the subject. He uses it to show intense emotion or the direct movement of objects within a frame. It all plays into his film’s high level of mis en scene; every object tells a story. Anderson’s characters are defined by their style, two hours does not allow the viewer to truly know someone but with distinct wardrobes and belongings we are able to learn more about their interests without it being said verbally, making us feel closer to the character.

An overhead shot from The Royal Tenenbaums

Overhead from The Grand Budapest Hotel

Overhead from The Royal Tenenbaums

4. Highly Curated Soundtrack

A Wes Anderson soundtrack is an artfully crafted soundtrack. It fits the overall theme of the movie while also allowing the songs to hold their own with their paired scenes. There also has to be an air of eccentricity within it, songs that make sense mixed with a few that are more obscure, The Darjeeling Limited is an example of this. Anderson is also a utilizer of the needle-drop, where the scene wouldn’t hold the same weight without the specific music used in it. The Royal Tenenbaums and Moonrise Kingdom use the needle-drop notably.

needle-drop From The Royal Tenenbaums

Use of song to set the mood in the title sequence of Moonrise Kingdom

5. Melancholic Riff on the Humor of Existence

Lastly, a Wes Anderson film is one that uses story, and sometimes adventure, to comment on the struggles of human existence. While his films are beautifully decorated and pleasing to gaze at, they also feature complex characters facing internal struggle.

From The Grand Budapest Hotel

Using comedy doused in wit and sometimes cynicism, Anderson approaches the uncertainty of aging by validating the viewpoints of characters of all ages. Often the characters are adults longing for childhood and children too mature for their age. It is the confusion of the in between moments in aging: approaching adulthood and approaching old age. Another theme that takes multiple forms in Anderson’s films is grief: grief for the loss of a loved one, childhood grief, grief within a family. His films rely heavily on relationships in all forms, perhaps this is why his films have been compared to the interconnectedness of dollhouses. Although, Anderson’s lack of variety in genre has caused critics to find a sense of predictability in his films.  

Here is a short video about recognizing Wes Anderson:

You know it’s Wes Anderson IF…

Anderson’s first feature length film and the oddball of the bunch.

Sources used:

Kornhaber, Donna. Wes Anderson . Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2018. Print.

Seitz, Matt Zoller, Wes Anderson, and Michael Chabon. The Wes Anderson Collection . New York, [New York: Abrams, 2013. Print.

“How do you get all your friends baptized just to make another monster movie?”

Alright, let’s tackle Ed wood the biopic that surrounds his relationship with Bela Lugosi. I’m not going to discuss the plot too deeply because I’d rather discuss other aspects of the film so I’m going to jump right into what the film has to say about exploitation films and Ed Wood’s work within the genre. As we discussed in class Ed Wood is a self-reflexive film in many ways (how much more meta can you get than a biopic about a movie director?). You can see this in the acting, the cinematography, and the lighting because it’s shot to resemble a B-movie from the 50’s. The whole movie is a great example of not only Ed Wood’s life, naturally, but also of the B-movie circuit. But what is a B-movie? During the production era of Hollywood, B-movies were made to be just that: producible. They were meant to be a quick profit for studios as we see in the nine-week shooting time Ed Wood is given for Glen or Glenda. You may be thinking, wouldn’t that hinder the quality of the movie? Why would studios take the chance of losing profit on a rushed movie? Well, B-movies weren’t meant to be amazing movies that follow the classic Hollywood standard; they had standards of their own. Also, production companies gave B-movies such low budgets that they didn’t expect them to be amazing. They were usually shown as the first movie in a double feature to warm up the crowd. Think of the moment when Ed Wood cons the church members into funding Plan 9 From Outer Space, he explains that a crowd-pleasing movie would make them enough money to make twelve more religious flicks (another genre of film that is rarely made by big production companies). In fact, exploitation films usually acted as an entry-level position for directors and actors just getting started in the industry. So, with those aspects of the B-movie in mind, they allowed a lot of room for creativity. Small budgets and shooting times meant crews had to be innovative during production, and if a film flopped it wouldn’t be a huge loss because the movie wasn’t a large investment in the first place.

            It’s important to know that B-movies explore a multitude of subgenres, not just monster flicks. Ed Wood leaned into monster flicks for a few reasons. For one thing, the camp qualities of the horror genre at the time seem perfect for Ed Wood’s ideas of grandeur within his filmmaking and personal tastes. Another contributor could be the crowd of actors Wood surrounded himself with, all apart of subcultures that weren’t included in mainstream movies. The biggest reason, however, is in his attempt to monetize Bela Lugosi’s past fame. Although he knew that Lugosi’s career had been halted by his typecasting as Dracula, Ed Wood still tried to use the once-famed actor as a way to bring in crowds. I’m thinking of Lugosi’s out-of-place scene in Glen or Glenda specifically. Not to devalue their friendship because, at times, it did seem that Wood was trying to restart Lugosi’s career, but it may have helped to have him play a different character if that was the true intention. But Plan 9 from Outer Space seems like a memorial for Lugosi after his death, giving him his last hurrah as Dracula.

I didn’t touch too much on Bela Lugosi but, if you are interested, the podcast You Must Remember This ran a series about the careers of Bela Legusi and Boris Karloff (the original Frankenstein). Here is the episode about Lugosi and Ed Wood: http://www.youmustrememberthispodcast.com/episodes/2017/11/13/bela-and-boris-episode-5-bela-lugosi-and-ed-wood

            Now, I wondered how we would tie Ed Wood into auteur theory because the term has this sound of prestige and astuteness to it. With virtually no plans for how to fund or shoot his movies, Ed Wood wouldn’t be the first to come to mind of an auteur. But after our talk on Thursday I would like to entertain the idea of Ed Wood as an auteur; who says an auteur can’t be the best at being bad? Thinking of auteur theory informed me as to why Tim Burton directed Ed Wood. Tim Burton is someone who is very successful at combining humor and charm with darker themes. There are similarities between his movies and old monster flicks, Burton’s are perhaps a more developed and funded version. And don’t even get me started on the similarities in production design.

            This is the second time I’ve watched Ed Wood and, to be honest, I didn’t quite understand it the first time so I’m happy to have returned to it now. I really enjoyed this one, I could go on about why but I think that would be overkill…. So I’ll just highlight what excited me the most. I loved Ed Wood’s band of misfits, especially because they were all real people who had their own niche lifestyles. There’s Tor Johnson, a Swedish wrestler, and John Breckinridge, a local drag queen. And more notably in terms of media and film The Amazing Criswell and Vampira, who both had their own shows on public broadcast television out of Los Angeles at the time. Criswell was an American psychic known for making inaccurate predictions on his show “Criswell Predicts”. The ghoulish Vampira was the host of “The Vampira Show” where she would broadcast horror films with the occasional interruption by her characterized comments and remarks. Not to be confused with the later developed Elvira Mistress of the Dark, but that’s a story big enough for its own blog post.

If you want to know more about Vampira there’s a documentary about her: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3225338/

^ Mila Nurmi’s Vampira ^

Billy’s Bloodbath

nice poster design

Fall is in the works and what better way to usher in October than with a horror film, well spoof – wait, comedy? It’s hard to be specific with this one. So why exactly is it so hard to place The Final Girls. Well to start, let’s briefly recap the movie. On the three-year anniversary of her mother’s death, Max is coerced into making an appearance at a screening of the cult B-movie her mother starred in from the 80’s. When a combustible combo of booze and blunts causes the theater to catch fire, Max and her friends attempt to escape through a gash in the projector screen and are, instead, transported into the realm of Camp Bloodbath. In order to escape Max and her friends must now operate with story to escape the movie and defeat the camp-killer, Billy. The Final Girls is obviously a play on the 80’s slasher flick, but it has a more meta take that has become a trend in the last few decades. The characters aware of the fact they are in the movie and must use their knowledge of the genre to overcome the conflicts of a movie they have seen multiple times before. That isn’t to say it’s just another movie though, while there are numerous parodies of the horror genre this is one of few where even the titles and flashbacks are within the character’s control (even if it is for comedic effect). Building off of that, The Final Girls encompasses all aspects of the slasher film. It nods to the midnight movie scene along with the cult appreciation of B-movies in Duncan’s enthusiasm for the screening and the rambunctious movie-going crowd. It also exaggerates the tropes of the summer camp slashers to assure the audience of its parody and to add a comedic spin.

The most prevalent theme of the movie lays in its title; the rise of the final girl. And if you aren’t familiar with the final girl trope, don’t worry the movie will fill you in. The final girl, as explained by Duncan, is the last girl standing at the end of the movie. She’s the girl who resisted the temptations of sex and booze, all the things that will land you in hell (can’t forget those moral undertones). For The Final Girls, we end up questioning who the final girl will be. Camp Bloodbath’s original final girl dies trying to escape and Max is on a quest to ensure her mother, Nancy, will survive this time. In another push to show the film’s awareness of itself, Nancy sacrifices herself to save Max because she realizes she is bound to the limits of her character and not meant to be the final girl.

We learned in class this week about the life and death of genre, but I find it hard to categorize this movie. Yes, it has aspects of parody, comedy, and slasher flick, but that doesn’t mean it has become predictable or tiresome. Even though they explain to us the storyline of Camp Bloodbath, their plan to defeat Billy, and even the final girl trope we still aren’t sure how it will actually end. I contribute this to both Max’s internal conflict with the grief she feels for her mother and the teleport/time travel aspect of the narrative. Without these two factors it would be yet another horror parody as exhausted as the Scary Movie franchise (not to say I don’t enjoy them). I enjoyed The Final Girls for its humor and self-awareness. It was a much different take on the parody than the boom seen in the 2000’s but perhaps it is an indication of the direction the genre is moving in.

Scent of a Woman

Feels very fall

Last week’s topic focused on acting and our screening to match it was Scent of a Woman. The film was directed by Martin Brest in 1992 ad stars Chris O’donnell as Charlie Simms and Al Pacino as Lt. Col. Frank Slade. The story takes place over thanksgiving as Charlie, a student at Baird prep school, takes on the role as caregiver to a blind retired military colonel, Frank Slade. The movie takes a turn when Frank announces that they will be spending thanksgiving in New York City, counter to Charlie’s original understanding of the job. To complicate things even more, Frank announces to Charlie that, after a weekend of extravagance and luxury (paid for by Frank’s saved up disability checks), he will be ending his life. Already facing trouble at school, Charlie is now left to care for his own future as well as Frank’s. The narrative follows a budding friendship between the two characters as they grapple with their own individual struggles as well as each other’s.

This was my first time seeing Scent of a Woman and, as far as acting goes, I was thoroughly impressed. It was one of those movies where you forget that you’re watching a movie. This can be credited to multiple aspects of film we have gone over this semester but, for me, this was because of the quality of acting in Scent of a Woman. Chris O’donnell performed the character of a late teen on the brink of adulthood accurately, it was easy to sympathize with the character because of his genuine nature. As we discussed in class on Thursday, Al Pacino performed so well that it’s easy to forget that Frank is not the protagonist of the film. Going into this week’s screening with the topic of acting in mind, I was curious to see how Al Pacino’s performance would hold up to all the hype we had heard about it. I had only remembered seeing Al Pacino in one other performance before this, Scarface (no I have not seen The Godfather, yes I will get to it eventually), after a quick google search I realized that I actually have seen quite a few of his movies but for some reason they had slipped my memory. With every actor, some performances are more memorable than others. Al Pacino’s performance in Scent of a Woman stood out to me, it will be the movie that comes to mind when I hear his name. Considering the accuracy of his acting for Frank’s character, I think the Oscar was well-deserved.

If you are interested in learning a little more about the movie, here is a link to some fun facts: https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/84058/15-facts-about-scent-woman

Get em’ Frank

As for my thoughts on the movie: I enjoyed it more than I suspected. I only say that because of how many times my feelings about the film changed while watching it. There were multiple points where I thought I had the storyline figured out only for it to shift in a completely different direction. On top of that it made me incredibly sad; Frank’s character hit a heartstring. We spoke about the emotional and psychological aspect of Frank’s character briefly in class and I would definitely agree that it accurately depicted someone struggling with depression and suicide. This rang true in his acts of extravagance and over-the-top confidence at the beginning of the trip and his detached/lethargic episode after the manic high wore off once it was time to return to reality. It was hard to watch such a charismatic and energetic character struggle not only with his reality, but also with his past. My least favorite scene was Thanksgiving dinner, no thank you. With that being said, what I really enjoyed about the film was the tenderness of the bond between Charlie and Frank. Even though Frank’s character came of as a dirty old man at times, there were moments where there was beauty in his words. Overall, good film and very good ending.