MYST POST #1: "Lone Survivor"

I am a huge fan of Mark Wahlberg. I have seen almost every movie he has been in, and think he is just a phenomenal actor. So, when Lone Survivor came out and I knew Marky Mark was starring in it, I automatically wanted to see it. I have started to appreciate war films more because of how complicated it is to accurately portray what happens overseas. Within the first 20 minutes of this film, it was obvious that the casting was spot on. 

Also, I knew of Taylor Kitsch, who plays Michael Murphy, because of my familiarity with the television show Friday Night Lights, and was completely blown away by his performance. Even the relative unknowns in the film did a spectacular job of capturing that emotion of being away from home and the heartbreak that comes along with war. As a viewer, I don't think that true emotion can really be faked, but these actors brought the characters to life in a way that I've never seen before. Not going to lie, I was brought to tears repeatedly, even before the first death occurred. 

The editing of this movie was very fast-paced, as any war movie tends to be. From the beginning there were numerous circle, panoramic shots were the audience member thought that they were in the room with them. This added to the emotional connection the director was clearly trying to create right from the start. When their mission begins, there are more close shots of their faces than I originally expected. This as well added to our sympathy for them and the situation they are in. When the action begins, we follow them as they fall or as they run, keeping us with them throughout the whole fight and struggle to survive. Because of this, the use of long shots was rare unless they were in a new position. I was surprised by this, but it worked out well in the long run.

The one scene that made a huge impression on me was when Marcus Luttrell (Wahlberg) awakes the morning after the attack and is alone and severely injured. The scene starts with us waking up with him, as we go from a black screen to slowly seeing light, just as Luttrell is. We get close ups of his injuries and the sound is amplified so we hear his breathing even more than normal. Also, the sounds of the nature around him are present and the light shines on the trees in a way that is showing both us and Luttrell that there is still hope. We then see him struggle to get up and make his way to a river where he immediately falls in. From there, we are only seeing a shot of Luttrell as he breathes slowly, in slow motion it seemed. Then, his face automatically changes to fear and we don't know the reason until about ten seconds later when the shots change. This scene, I believe, was the longest one that didn't have a break to it. That was purposeful to convey the feelings going through his head at this obviously heartbreaking time and to highlight the importance of that. 

Overall, I was blown away by everything Lone Survivor had to offer. It made me think not only about the situation, but about the different shots and lighting that can be used to convey the mood. I would definitely give this a 5/5 and would recommend to anybody, regardless of their movie taste. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoLFk4JK_RM

Review of the Reviews

Positive Review: http://www.delawareonline.com/viewart/20140109/ENTERTAINMENT10/301090084/Review-magical-lonely-love-Spike-Jonze-s-Her-
Negative Review: http://www.sfgate.com/movies/article/Her-review-No-future-in-virtual-relationship-5091276.php

The movie Her came out recently and has been nominated for both Golden Globes and Academy Awards, eventually winning the Golden Globe for best screenplay. Most reviews for this movie focus on the abstract idea of the film, which is a human falling in love with his operating system, an OS. The first review I read originally goes through the events chronologically, while adding her own opinions throughout. The main argument she uses in support of this film is the connection between the emotional and physical aspects when it comes to love, and whether or not you need both in order to obtain that relationship. She focuses mainly on the world that Spike Jonze has created, one that she describes as a "dreamland" and praises his cleverness in comparison to his other works.

However, the lack of the OS having a physical being is what some critics saw as a major flaw in this movie. This critic points out that the main idea of the movie is more interesting to discuss in detail rather than watch on the big screen. He is judgmental towards Joaquin Phoenix, the main character, and the weirdness that this future society embodies. He also comments on the choice to cast Scarlett Johansson as the voice of Samantha, the OS, and states that because of her already present sex appeal, it may have affected the audience and the mystery of the idea as a whole.

I do have to agree with the point that Mick LaSelle's makes about Scarlett Johansson. He says, "We know what she looks like. Hence, we buy into Theodore's fantasy and start thinking, 'If only.'" (Negative). So, if the voice had been someone we did not know, would the allusion have been different? This is such an integral part of the movie that I can't help but criticize the choice in casting someone that is not only famous, but known for her good looks.

However, Jessica Herndon also makes an interesting point by stating that "in a dark theater, surrounded by the wondrous world Jonze creates in "Her," it's difficult to avoid getting emotional" (Positve). I completely related to this because I'll admit I teared up a couple times, even at scenes that weren't necessarily sad. As an audience member, you can't help but feel bad for Theodore and the situation in it's entirety. Life with an OS is clearly not ideal, and seeing Theodore's struggles firsthand, the audience can be surprised by how much they may relate to him.

If I had read these reviews without seeing the film, I would most likely believe LaSelle's negative review more than Herndon's because he touched on more points than she did and gave me concrete reasons as to why he thought the film was bad. Herndon seemed like she enjoyed the film, but I didn't really get to see exactly why. You can tell she gained a lot from it, but you aren't exactly sure what. LaSelle on the other hand had a structure that led me through his thought process as he was watching the film and turned me off to it immediately, even if I had wanted to see it. The critic needs to have a solid concrete argument either for or against the film instead of simply saying they enjoyed the versatility of the director or the uniqueness of the script. The reader needs to understand the feelings of the critic firsthand instead of trying to guess them.

If I were to review this film, I would most definitely focus on the originality of this screenplay as well as the actors' performances. They all did a superb job, in my opinion, and I think that would be necessary to discuss in order to win the reader over. I would also talk about how this future seems 100% realistic, as if it could actually happen, and isn't completely fictional. The harsh reality of it brought out questions in me about technology and society now that had me thinking for days. However, I would leave out the repetitiveness of the script at times. Some scenes felt like they were repeating themselves and although that was the point of the movie, I wouldn't want my readers to see that and be turned off by the film in fear of it being boring.

Film Intro Survey

1. What is the first movie that really made a strong impression on you? 
Adventures of Babysitting because we used to watch it as a family regularly when I was younger and I have seen it countless times. 

2. What are 3-4 of your favorite genres?
Mystery/Thriller, Indie/Arthouse, Comedy, Drama 

3. What are 3-4 of your LEAST favorite genres?
Animation, Horror, Western

4. What are your five favorite films?
Donnie Darko, Fight Club, Pulp Fiction, Happythankyoumoreplease, Some Kind of Wonderful

5. List three characteristics of what you consider to be a good movie.
Interesting plot line, compelling characters, and realistic dialogue

6. What are some of your least favorite movies?
Blindness, Side Effects, Taken 2 

7. List three characteristics of what you consider to be a bad movie.
Boring, no plot line, cliche 

8. If you have any favorite directors, list them
David Fincher, Quentin Tarantino, John Hughes 

9. If you have any favorite actors/actresses, list them.
Jake Gyllenhaal, Forest Whitaker, Amy Adams 

10. List 3 films that you consider important films for people to see
Shutter Island, Hotel Rwanda, Toy Story  

11. What's your oldest favorite film?
It's a Wonderful Life 

12. What's the best movie you've seen that's been released in the past 2 years?
The Place Beyond the Pines 

13. What are the next five films on your "queue"?
The Hurt Locker, Law Abiding Citizen, Big, Crash, Argo