Well being opened up to a the whole new world of the 70s the last few weeks i have really enjoyed watching some of these great movies - espesially Bonnie & Clyde which I had never thought to of watched before.
I started watching Easy Rider which an already dissapointing head on that it was not going to be a good film with already two people telling me it wasn't great. But I tried my hardest to keep a honest view of the film. But as soon as Born To Be Wild came on - I knew it wasn't going to be a film that I would rave about in this blog.
Easy Rider is about men wanting freedom. Once they sell drugs to get the money, they take off on the biggest adverture of their lifes. It wasn't a gripping story line for me but one thing Easy Rider did show me is what the 60s were like and I have learnt a lot from just watching this one film. It shows a good potrayal of the use of drugs in the 60s. It shows it in great depth and it goes in to great detail of the hippie movement and how much of a big deal it was in that decade.
Easy Rider was very slow at times - and felt myself getting distracted easily while watching this film - and this is not a good sign to any film!
Overall - I guess it was an okay film, and I do see why it was a hit but I would much prefer to see any of the other films we had watched in class than this one as it never grabbed my attention at all.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Friday, May 07, 2010
Stagecoach
I haven't seen many westerns in my life, as normally if they are on the TV i would just switch over and find something different to watch that interested me. But actually sitting down and making the effort to watch Stagecoach I never thought it was as bad as i was thinking it would be as I just have the idea of westerns in my head being bad. I always think of westerns being very repetitive and does get dull after a while, with it just being about cowboys and indians - good vs evil etc etc etc
It was set very well and the scenes in the film were very beutiful with really nice scenery.
I really enjoyed the music in Stagecoach and it really fitted in with the genre and gave tension through out the film with it keeping in with emotions the actors were going through. It was used really well at the end scene of the film - where the tension of the scene was made by the music and the stillness of the surrounding area.
After watching all the silent films - especially Charlie Chaplin, i have definitely had more of an open mind to different genres i wouldn't normally watch, which is why when i was watching this i tried not to think of it as a western. I did really enjoy it and can see the quality and good acting in the film which made it such a success it was and still is today.
Overall, i enjoyed the film - and was kept fully excited all the way through with all the tension that was built up and i am glad to say, stagecoach is a good film.
It was set very well and the scenes in the film were very beutiful with really nice scenery.
I really enjoyed the music in Stagecoach and it really fitted in with the genre and gave tension through out the film with it keeping in with emotions the actors were going through. It was used really well at the end scene of the film - where the tension of the scene was made by the music and the stillness of the surrounding area.
After watching all the silent films - especially Charlie Chaplin, i have definitely had more of an open mind to different genres i wouldn't normally watch, which is why when i was watching this i tried not to think of it as a western. I did really enjoy it and can see the quality and good acting in the film which made it such a success it was and still is today.
Overall, i enjoyed the film - and was kept fully excited all the way through with all the tension that was built up and i am glad to say, stagecoach is a good film.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Peter Pan
Well a few of us girls went and saw Peter Pan at the Kings Theater last week.
One word to describe it - amazing.
I didn't really know what to expect as the only version of Peter Pan i have seen (apart from hook) was the disney version - and after seeing the poster for it I knew straight away it was not going to be like this.
The set was very basic with the set being the forth road bridge - but unfinished which was really nice and set the time of the story very well, then when we were in Neverland it turned round into trees etc.
The technical side of Peter Pan was shown to the audience which I thought was going to ruin the magic of "Peter Pan" but it made it really different and really enjoyed it because of this. The wires that made them fly were really thick and obvious but this did not take anything away from their performance cause you never concentrated on this. They also made tinkerbell into a fire ball - which i still have no idea how they did as it magically floated around the stage and into the actors hands. I thought this was very imaginative as they could of easily just had an actor play the part or even a little light.
Another part that was a "talking point" after the show was when Peter Pan lept in to the water when thrown off the ship. This was done with blue lighting and smoke. He lept from the boat (on his wire) and jumped into 4 peoples arms and they acted as waves while Peter tried to get out of the water with sound effects etc. This was extremely imaginative and i really enjoyed this part of the show.
I just loved the show so much and would of defo of paid to see this - (we did get free tickets!!)
One word to describe it - amazing.
I didn't really know what to expect as the only version of Peter Pan i have seen (apart from hook) was the disney version - and after seeing the poster for it I knew straight away it was not going to be like this.
The set was very basic with the set being the forth road bridge - but unfinished which was really nice and set the time of the story very well, then when we were in Neverland it turned round into trees etc.
The technical side of Peter Pan was shown to the audience which I thought was going to ruin the magic of "Peter Pan" but it made it really different and really enjoyed it because of this. The wires that made them fly were really thick and obvious but this did not take anything away from their performance cause you never concentrated on this. They also made tinkerbell into a fire ball - which i still have no idea how they did as it magically floated around the stage and into the actors hands. I thought this was very imaginative as they could of easily just had an actor play the part or even a little light.
Another part that was a "talking point" after the show was when Peter Pan lept in to the water when thrown off the ship. This was done with blue lighting and smoke. He lept from the boat (on his wire) and jumped into 4 peoples arms and they acted as waves while Peter tried to get out of the water with sound effects etc. This was extremely imaginative and i really enjoyed this part of the show.
I just loved the show so much and would of defo of paid to see this - (we did get free tickets!!)
Has TV effected the Election?
Well in short, Yes.
I feel that definitely with this years live debates, it has definitely put a different view on the candidates up for election. I never really watched the debate - only caught 10 minuets of it in the middle. But even without watching it I knew it had a massive affect on the election as their was results after the debates with an in depth look at what they all meant and who stood out from the rest which then they decided - who "won" that debate.
This would of made people think about who they were voting for, as if your candidate never "supposedly" won the debate, you would think to yourself are you actually voting for the right person.
Also the polls that were shown on television on the news has a great effect on people too as this tells you who is winning so far and really i think we shouldn't know who is "winning" - as we all have our own opinions and if someone never knew about the election and saw for example, the lib dems were winning at the moment, they would just go and vote for them just because they think they are a good party because everyone says so. So this does have a huge affect on the votes too.
I also feel that the different channels have favorite parties, so are very biased when it comes to showing news about the election etc
Overall, the election is very much powered by television these days and i feel without television the election votes would be much different.
I feel that definitely with this years live debates, it has definitely put a different view on the candidates up for election. I never really watched the debate - only caught 10 minuets of it in the middle. But even without watching it I knew it had a massive affect on the election as their was results after the debates with an in depth look at what they all meant and who stood out from the rest which then they decided - who "won" that debate.
This would of made people think about who they were voting for, as if your candidate never "supposedly" won the debate, you would think to yourself are you actually voting for the right person.
Also the polls that were shown on television on the news has a great effect on people too as this tells you who is winning so far and really i think we shouldn't know who is "winning" - as we all have our own opinions and if someone never knew about the election and saw for example, the lib dems were winning at the moment, they would just go and vote for them just because they think they are a good party because everyone says so. So this does have a huge affect on the votes too.
I also feel that the different channels have favorite parties, so are very biased when it comes to showing news about the election etc
Overall, the election is very much powered by television these days and i feel without television the election votes would be much different.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
