Today we officially discussed our film noir films. Below are my impressions of each film, including a self-evaluation, that are focused on the screenplays and writing since I was the writer of my group's film. This also includes Jeff's film, which was actually viewed in the class after this one, but I included it in this entry just for coherence.
Natalia
My overall impression of the film is that it could have been much better. It started out well with a good monologue. It was very scant and blunt and was delivered well by Elliot. It set the mood very well.
But it was the best part of the film. The rest was in a plateau lower than the opening 30 seconds. The setting for one seemed like someone's house, and the lighting did not have much contrast, it was just dim.
The dialogue between the protagonist and the femme fatale wasn't really witty although the attempt and idea was there. The dialogue was dedicated to giving a background of the plot, but how could you solidify and establish the plot only through dialogue? It's a very difficult thing to do. I don't blame them for trying though. A film noir usually has a complex story line, and it's hard to squeeze it in a 5 minute production. But it felt cramped in and unsuccessfully established and developed, especially when trying to introduce his father's murder. We never find out who the femme fatale is, and will never know. The sense of moral ambiguity is unclear since the dialogue was too focused on the plot, and the banter fell flat.
Stratagem
It was hard to believe this was a film noir. There was an attempt to have quick, witty conversation but as soon as the lines
"I was under the impression you wanted me at 7:30. It's 7:20"
was heard, it just gave me a very bad impression on the dialogue. It seems like something comedic than something serious. The dialogue didn't get any better, neither did it get any worse.
The plot was so simple, too simple. I guess it could have worked, but the delivery was unsuccessful (staking out in a car, a plastic bag as the murder weapon, etc.). And the development of each character was non-existent. Each character was the same, even with the same intentions.
There was also no effort in making high contrasting lights, and the music only added to the unintentional comedic effect the film exuded.
Pulse
Screenplay wise it was good. It was a romantic-centered piece with the protagonist having to choose between his girlfriend and a girl he was having an affair with.
I think what this film did was that it relied on tricks and gimmicks. For example, when the femme fatale took off her underwear there was two separate shots that showed that. Sure it was edgy, especially for the classroom, but I felt it blatantly abused it, kind of like "we're the cool kids on the block" sort of thing. Though it did express the 'sinful' and 'temptation' aspects of the affair. But it could've been done perhaps more gracefully; with more style, and perhaps limit it to only one cut.
The first time I watched Pulse I didn't understand what happened in the end when the protagonist says to his girlfriend "don't wait up on me". I didn't understand it the second time, but it was just me. Apparently the protagonist was going to go with his secret lover. I thought it was just fine as an ending; it wasn't anything special, and it didn't really change my view on the film. Basically, I was affected the same amount when I didn't know the ending compared to after I found out what happened in the end.
The dialogue was quite good though nothing special or memorable.
The tape recorder bit was, again, just fine. It was used in Michael Clayton, though I'm not sure if that was the inspiration. I didn't really like it in Michael Clayton, but I thought it was better used there.
I think what made the script not as good as it should be was the presentation of it. I thought that the shot with Ella, or the protagonist's girlfriend, was so bright, colorful, and cheerful, that it disrupted the film's mood. I thought that either that shot should be cut out, or done in a darker tone, though the idea was there (contrast with his secret life). But why introduce a character for a 10 second shot?
Also the lighting was too grainy and dark. There were some shadows but that was all. It was just dark most of the time.
Plunge
The screenplay, I felt, was more of a novel than a screenplay. Only people would pay attention and listen attentively to the dialogue can appreciate it and understand it fully. The thing is, there's a lot of long paragraphs and speeches from each character. The content was good but slowed the pace down dramatically. Also, there wasn't much action or anything a novel can't describe as well.
The main criticism was that the film could have been a lot tighter; that it felt as if it was part of something larger. Apparently it was; it as an adaptation of a feature length film screenplay Jeff was working as a side project. The idea was great, then just wasn't adapted elegantly. But overall it was a good screenplay.
The Broken Beautiful (self-evaluation)
I didn't receive much criticism for the screenplay. I was glad that some people gathered that it was inspired by Sin City and Moulin Rouge, which were the actual inspirations I used while writing the script; falling in love with a prostitute, and how futile it was.
It was good because the story of this dark romance was intriguing. The pace was fast (or at least in check), and the dialogue was tight and interesting. Of course it could have been better, perhaps better dialogue, better lines, etc. Overall though I was pleased with it.
I have to give a lot of credit to my group members, Bernice, Medora and Andy for putting a lot of effort in to understanding my screenplay and figuring out the best way to display it on screen, which they did very successfully.
I was an IB learner:
Communicator: Communicated my opinions and shared it with the rest of the class
Open-minded: Open to the comments toward my film as well as other interpretations of the other films.
No comments:
Post a Comment