film as an art

I feel as if this is some sort of philosophical question, because can anyone actually define art? We live in a time when a toilet seat was considered a form of art... so can everything be art? Are people art? What makes an artist? I never like to answer questions with questions though, so I'll try and define it as best as I can. Art for me is the expression. If something is trying to be expressed through the "self" or through admiration, I think it can be considered an art. For instance, my favorite painting (that I've yet to see anyway) is Sunflowers by Van Gogh. This is an art because Van Gogh expressed himself in the painting and and I express myself through loving the painting, because it has become part of who I am. Also, art evokes a sense of attachment, enjoyment and creativity. In all of these senses, film is quite obviously an art form. Film is a creative, enjoyable (excluding movies like Glitter) and definitely gives the audience a sense of attachment. Have you ever met someone who doesn't cry, laugh or even just give a little smile while watching a movie? I didn't think so.

While we watched the clips in class, the train film by the Lumiere's was very striking for the times. First, the train was moving forward, toward the audience. You see the edge of the station, a few people, but little else of the background. The train comes looming toward the screen, and even passes it by. As the train approaches the camera, the people approach as well, all looking at the camera perplexed. The way of dress and even the train as a mode of transportation sets the tone of the times, but it's the train who is the star of this short film. The people are not characters as they file in and out of the shot and it's easy to see that this documentary style filming is very much a realistic portrayal of that time period. Also, since it is one continuous shot, there is obviously no editing involved and the film truly captures the essence of the moment.

African Queen

The African Queen was a perfect example of the Adventure/Romance genre. Charlie drives his boat "African Queen" up and down the river when he's not working at the mine while Rosie and her brother are doing mission work in an African village along the river. It's obvious that Charlie and Rosie are extremely different, but their behavior is further juxtaposed when her brother dies, the German troops tear down the village and Rosie's only choice of living is joining Charlie on the boat. (end of ACT I) Rather than wallow in sorrow for her losses, she convinces Charlie of taking a dangerous stretch of the river to read the Nazi patrol boats and "torpedo" them. Charlie good naturally goes along with the idea but progressively they fight more and more often because Rosie is stubborn and Charlie gives in too easily. After a near death experience with the Nazi's along the river, Charlie and Rosie kiss and suddenly show their true feelings for each other. (end of ACT II A and climax) After a long, grueling and complicated journey down the river, they finally get to the German boat. They create their "torpedo" but before they can reach the Nazi's, their small boat sinks in a storm. (end of ACT II B) Charlie and Rosie are pulled aboard and are sentenced to hanging immediately. Just after they are quickly married by the captain of the ship, the Nazi ship hits the semi-sunken "African Queen" and the torpedo begins to sink the larger ship. Before anything too serious can happen, Charlie and Rosie are swimming towards a safer country that's just across the lake. (end of ACT III) It's obvious that the two characters "won" at the end of their action/romance adventure because they complete their goal of bombing the boat and they found love in each other.

This movie isn't much of a romance in the sense that there's forbidden love, or a distance issue (maybe because almost the entire movie takes place on a 30 ft boat!) but there is obviously a love interest between Rosie and Charlie who do love each other in very strange sort of ways. After the crisis of the heart occurs and they could have been shot by the Nazi's, they suddenly realize in a passionate frenzy (literally overnight) that they love each other. This aspect of the film is the internal struggle. Rosie is a ignorant and uptight kind of woman while Charlie is a fly by the seat of his pants kind of drunk. The external struggle is evident as soon as Rosie insists that they steer the boat down the most dangerous river and ram their tiny boat right into the huge boat for the sake of the worlds peace. In reality, what is one little boat in Africa going to make a difference? But I supposed the fact that Kenya was on the other side was an additional factor. The action-adventure is more so evident than the romance because of the fact that they are on a boat that doesn't always work and seems to be falling apart. They're surrounded by lions, elephants, hippos, alligators and disgusting leeches (why is it that whenever they were in the water, I was expecting Anaconda to come slithering up?) The idea of two very fragile humans against all the elements working against them adds a thrill of you never really know what will be happening next. The adventure loosens Rosie up and she even lets her hair down, and in a sense it straightened Charlie out, and he's seen less frequently with alcohol or cigarette in hand. Finally, I would have to say that they really did make this movie with many comedic elements. The entire class was laughing throughout the movie, which is remarkable that things from 1951 could still relate to 2011. "Darling, what is your first name?" after they have sex is something that is taboo to talk about even today!

Unlike UP, I think that the African Queen focuses more on the adventure rather than the romance while UP focused more on the internal struggle of Carl and his need for "buddy love". This is easiest displayed for me when they begin Queen with a shot of an remote African village obviously very different than that audiences were accustomed to, much more adventurous than everyday life. UP begins with Carl's entire boring, seemingly unchanging home life, from childhood to elderly age. Similarly though, both stories need the adventure to find the romance or buddy love.

google

UP is better the second time around

I didn't like UP the first time I saw it. The first 10 minutes are great and tell the story of Carl and Ellie with a lot of heart and feeling, but Russell annoyed me and the story just felt too fake and silly. Talking dogs? The explorer looked Carl's age? The bird was what everyone wanted to capture? It just didn't make all that much sense to me.

While watching for the second time, I could see that this movie is a romance or "buddy love" between a young boy (annoyingly exuberant Russell) and his chosen father figure (crotchety old Carl). Carl's central problem is that he loved his wife and was never able to take her on the one adventure she truly wanted before she passed away. Now as an old man, he doesn't fit into the mainstream culture of cell phones, high rises and business suits and society wants to force him into a retirement home. Carl's external problem is that he doesn't feel ready to go into a retirement home and let go of his dream adventure. The solution? Why, tie balloons to your house and fly it to South America of course! His internal problem is letting go with the death of his wife. He associates all his memories of her into his house and doesn't like the world if she's not living in it. The triangle dynamic ultimately becomes Carl's choice of holding onto Ellie through holding onto the house, or holding onto Russell, who needs him. The crisis of the heart or the taste of death is when Carl decides to get rid of everything in the house (and later the house itself) when he realizes that he would risk everything to make sure that his new friends Russell, Doug and Kevin are safe from the crazed and elderly adventurer. The world isn't at stake and he doesn't willingly jump into the situation (like an adventuring Bond or Indy would) but Carl does his best to nobly sacrifice everything to save his friends. He learns that he should hold onto the memories of the wonderful adventure with his wife, but can also live to have other adventures as well.

Act I was a view of Carl's previous life with his wife Ellie and the discovery of what his life if like without her when she passes away. He literally separates himself from everyone in efforts to remain with her in spirit. His call to adventure comes when he has the choice of going to the retirement home or going to jail. Rather than succumb to society, he lets the balloons free and flies to South America. The crossing of the threshold happens when he decides to let Russell come along on his adventure. The midpoint crisis occurs when they land at Paradise Falls and they meet the Kevin, Doug and the dogs. Carl begins to realize that this might not be the adventure he'd anticipated. When they meet the old adventurer and he wants to hurt the other birds like Kevin, they realize that he's not a good person so they have to fight to get away. The road back begins when Carl realizes that his new mission is to save Russell, Kevin and Doug from the crazy adventurer. After a long, drawn out fight at the most high intensity action peak of the story, or the climax, Carl sacrifices his home and belongings to protect his friends.  The denouement occurs when Carl, Russell and Doug return back home. Carl takes a paternal role in Russell's life when he pins his scout badge and takes him for ice cream. Throughout a final slideshow of pictures and credits we can see that Carl moved into the retirement home but remained active in Russell's life and kept the dogs from South America. Carl's learned to accept that Ellie is gone, that he needs to be in a retirement home and that it's ok to care about other people.