never again. never forget. 8/39

It's funny how the evolution of special effects, computers, and CGI offers more and more possibilities for films—particularly horror films, and yet, the truly scariest and most impactful monster of all time is from 1939. These monsters are so vicious and evil, so terrible and horrid, that they haunt our dreams today, 72 years later, and certainly will another 72 years from now. Nightmares not only in the minds of small, innocent children, but even the minds of mature, rational adults are haunted with the memory of what they saw the first time they watched The Wizard of Oz. Hordes of those purple faces and thick, black fur carried by the ominous gray wings of those horrific flying monkeys is hard enough to recall, let alone write about. Still, I venture into my memories and stare that thought square in the eye.

This brave service—this sacrifice—is something I will do so that never again will we have to hide our scars. We will face the memory of the flying monkey scenes from The Wizard of Oz and remember those brave souls who sat in that theatre on August 8, 1939.

“And take care of those ruby slippers! I want them most of all! Now fly! Fly!” Christ have mercy. They’re coming for Dorothy. And there’s nothing we can do. The way they chase and jump at her. Remembering that image for you now is like describing to a jury how I was violated by rapacious, disguised intruders of my home. The moment they’re ripping apart the scarecrow is just one symbolic yet literal pivot in my life—these damned monkeys were ripping apart my childhood.

         This was in 1939. It’s difficult enough to recall these scarring images, but to imagine how they would be had this movie been made in the modern film industry is impossible. To compare any beast or ghoul or psychopath of today to the truly vicious existence that is a flying monkey would be inherently inadequate.

"We're both rotten." "Only you're a little more rotten."

The term "protagonist" can be misleading. The connotations that come with it are that the main character is a hero, or the force of good, while the "antagonist" provides obstacles, and works against the hero, being a force of evil, or injustice. However, in film noir, a movement characterized by the "fatal experiences of men" and the "femmes fatales whom they pursue", a protagonist is morally confused and psychologically damaged. Often this noir protagonist follows his own moral code. And so, those "femmes fatales"(French for "deadly women") are seductive women who lure men into dangerous circumstances for self-interest. The classic example of a film noir is Double Indemnity. 

The noir protagonist is Walter Neff, an insurance agent, who at first sight has a romantic interest in our femme fatale, Phyllis Dietrichson, the wife of a very wealthy man. What makes these two characters classic noir elements? Well, we have no evidence that before meeting Phyllis, Walter led a moral life, and after he does meet and converse with her, he agrees to killing her husband in order to be with her. But he’s not that simple. He’s doing it because she says he treats her poorly. And that’s not all the good intent we see in him. He calms Lola down and befriends her after she’s concerned about Phyllis’ agenda. Of course, this could also be seen as him trying to keep things quiet. So, as many other noir protagonists’ intentions, it’s unclear. However, there is one thing he does for the entire film that shows his remorse for his actions. He’s confessing his crimes to his associate, Barton Keyes. His narrating of the events is him coming clean. So though we see him as a flawed character morally, he could also be interpreted as just a cynical sort of hero who simply follows his own moral code, as immoral as it sometimes may be. We see at the end of the movie Keyes telling him that he was closer to him than just someone at the opposite desk, and Walter responds, “I love you too”.

             The character of Phyllis Dietrichson, on the other hand, is simpler. It’s obvious that she’s had a crooked agenda the entire time. She killed a woman to marry her wealthy husband, used Walter to kill her husband for the insurance money, and then told another man that her daughter no longer loved him, and that he should kill both her and Walter so there would be no more chance of anyone talking to the police. She’s a classic femme fatale who seduced and dragged our Walter Neff into a plot he’d never leave.

frames of "the quitter".

The eleventh page is very unique for frames. Usually, each page has big frames, small frames, square frames, etc. Frame size usually expresses priority. A frame on a page that’s a monumental moment in the story, with a lot of words to explain the image, may take up to a quarter of the page. This way, you have more to explore. You have more imagery to support the event or action taking place in the frame. You could even argue that some larger frames are unimportant plot-wise, but have a purpose based solely off of imagery. Larger frames could be more “showing and not telling” because what is being described simply has more space on the page. On page eleven, however, where Harvey is trying to make a conclusion on his mother’s motivations, the frames are set up differently. There are six, equal frames. They are equal in size, shape, and text (roughly). No frame takes priority over another. He has six different thoughts in this inner-conversation, and the six frames evenly divide those six thoughts. The frames, in other words, separate each beat in his inner-monologue. However, the imagery is what differs. On the left side, we see Harvey in a “bad light” each time. This is to say, not only is there a shadow covering half is face and hands, but we are seeing a side to him that is very accusatory and upset. In the panels to the right, his face is lit up, while his mood is rational and relaxed. Still, however, the amount of time and space for each of these two sides of Harvey are distributed evenly.

I don’t feel as though pace was a consideration during the framing process. I figure that the frames were mainly organized the way they were due to how much illustration was needed for each text, and how important each moment was. If there were pacing involved, there would absolutely be chapters. There would even be a difference in his voice as he told the story. The narration stays at a solid tone through the entire story. If I had to place a chapter myself into what I have already read, I would have ended the first chapter where he moves out of Cleveland. That way, I could set a whole different mood for the new setting. That would factor into a real change of pace.

framing.

What's unique about this example of framing is that there are two subjects joined into one center of focus for the viewer's eye. Everything is foregrounded and nothing is backgrounded. Spielberg wants you to explore the entire subjects as if he didn't want distractions. However, there are parts of the subject(s) that Spielberg chose to highlight. Notice the lighting. Light is coming from two horizontal angles illuminating their faces. It effectively allows you to see each of their personal expressions that almost summarize their characters. Anderton, for example, has a determined look, while Agatha has one of worry and surprise. This shot is an archetypical medium close up. The subject is framed from the chest up. This shot focuses on the subject, rather than the environment the subject is within. And, instead of focusing on someone's entire body language, a medium close up hones in on the smaller details of their face. That, complimented with the light, gives us an idea of these characters in the moment from a simple profile. How does this contribute to this specific movie as a whole? Not until the last moments of the rising action and the ultimate climax of the film do we see these to characters so close together, especially after being engrossed into the plot. Not until Anderton is carrying Agatha away do we see them side-by-side, and until this specific shot that captures their reactions to the circumstances around them.

Genesis

This is my first post. Mainly for testing purposes. Entirely for required class objectives. Seperate from recreational desires.