Film Lit Log #2 - Poster - Psycho

For the second lit log, I decided to revise a movie poster for Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. The way this poster was laid out was mainly inspired by Marion’s death scene and continued with some tools and elements that are included in the movie. I renamed the movie on the poster as “The Room.” The room refers to the hotel room, basement room, office room, and the room where “Mrs. Bates” lives in. By renaming The Room I’m also referring to the spaces that we see in those places and the way the camera frames the size of different scenes. Some of them are more open spaces and some are more limited spaces. Using Marion’s death as an example, she’s inside a bathroom of a hotel room. Both spaces are open and limited depending on where the part of the room you are. When she walks in to take a shower, then there’s limited space for her, and when she gets stabbed the camera had zoom in a close for the shot and the frame was limited space that we can only see a certain part as well as limited space where she’s standing. As I had mentioned in the stabbing scene, that’s where the knife on the right corner comes from and the blood splashes around the title. I want it to make it as the blood comes from the knife stabbing and it splashes everywhere. The knife had not just used in Marion’s death scene, but also it comes up again in the later scene when Bates tries to kill Lila. Given the clue, I’m also assuming that the knife that “Mrs. Bates,” which is Bates uses, is the tool that represents him. The bottom half of the poster is more picturing the scene of the motel location and the surroundings, as well as the car representing Marion’s death. The car shows a relationship between the money Marion took in the beginning and her death in the motel and where she got put in the back trunk after. If she doesn’t steal the money and run away, maybe she wouldn’t be dead. The trees and the reflections are representing it’s around the lake because Bates had put her in the trunk and drowned the car down the lake. This is also the reason why the car is sided so it looks like it’s going down. The splash of blood on the bottom was to make it represent Marion is dead and is in the back of the trunk. The overall color of the poster is black because the film was in black and white. The tittles and blood are red are referring to the movie’s genre of horror and thriller that makes people think it’s scary. In conclusion, this was the inspiration for me to revise the poster, and I hope the poster catches your attention!

PSYCHO
PSYCHO

Love Letters to the Western: Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is essentially a love letter to the western genre. It employs several cinematic and narrative choices that symbolically allude to its timely downfall, as well as respecting the genre with a sense of esteemed devotion.

The western film is notorious and unmistakable. They are set in the wild American west sometime between the mid 1800s and early 1900s. They follow a hat-wearing, gun-slinging cowboy who tackles themes of civility, nature, and change. As old as film itself, the western movie captivated America, being heralded as the genre that perfectly encapsulates the American zeitgeist. Freedom, exploration, oftentimes racism, and a cool, quick-witted, tough-as-nails main character. Western’s are America’s myths, the fables and lore that the young country developed to promote its founding values as a nation, something essential to empires. It reached its prime in the 1950s following the cold war and other events that invoked a sense of patriotism and superiority in citizens. It wasn’t until the 1960s that the genre began its decline, a time when Americans lost hope in their government and began to self-reflect on its roots. From then, westerns became relegated to prime time television until eventually fading away, never to make a recovery.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid premiered in 1967. The movie begins with the sound of a film reel against old-timey footage. It explains who Butch and Sundance are, as well as their “Hole in the Wall” gang. It is in full sepia tones, reminiscent of the first waves of westerns from the silent era. This first impression sets the stage for the audience, where we are being transported back in time to the beginning of the frontier flick days. These credits serve to infuse nostalgia into the audience, reminding them of the days past. It effectively begins two stories: the film’s story of its titular characters and the overarching symbolic story of the western genre that the characters parallel. As the film continues, it keeps its sepia tones and we see the main protagonists in modern (to the time) film. This slow transition takes the audience back gently, allowing them to immerse further into the story and period.

The plot revolves around Butch and Sundance, notorious outlaws, as they commit robbery a few too many times and end up being hunted by a hired group of police and master trackers. Fundamentally, it is about two men trying to outrun their fate. The film makes it abundantly clear that their days are numbered when Sheriff Bledsoe warns them that their, “Time is over and [their] gonna die bloody, and all [they] get to choose is where.” The group pursuing them is never shown on screen, all the audience sees of them are distant silhouettes and their hats, giving them an elusive, intangible quality, perfectly representing destiny.

Additionally, Butch and sundance are running from time itself, as the world they are living in advances right in front of them. In an iconic scene, Butch takes Etta, Sundance’s girlfriend, on a bicycle ride, amazed at the new technology. Before leaving for Bolivia, where they attempt to escape, Butch throws out the bicycle, yelling that the “Future’s all yours, you lousy bicycles!” The camera cuts to an exceptionally modern-looking close-up shot of the wheel on the ground. In doing this, it shows the characters’ rejection of modernity, and in turn, their affinity for the past.

This mirrors the arc of the western genre as a whole. By the time the film premiered, the western’s fate was clear. Just as the days of the wild west were over, the film type would fall behind as well. It could not keep up with contemporary audiences, a similar fight against modernity as the leading protagonists. This is among the way’s the film honors its history in a self-aware way, poignantly characterizing this in some of the west’s most famous bandits. The nostalgic beginning also serves to give tribute, eliciting a romantic sentiment of the genre.

In its final act of love, the film’s closing scene evokes the words uttered by Etta earlier in the film, where she states that she will join them in Bolivia on one condition. “I won’t watch you die. I’ll miss that scene if you don’t mind.” Her words ring true, as the audience does not witness their deaths. Butch and Sundance are in a seemingly hopeless situation, with, unbeknownst to them, the entire Bolivian government in a position to kill and capture them. In one last stand out, they are badly wounded and attempt a daring escape. They run out of their shelter in a blaze of glory, and as several gunshots are heard, the camera freezes on them midrun, fading back into sepia tones.

This ending literally does not let them die. It immortalizes them, symbolically turning them into legends, which, of course, never die. Furthermore, the sepia tones and photo-like composition solidifies the idea that this is the past. The fugitive’s days are no more, and what we have left of them is the great epics they’ve left behind. This reflects the concept of westerns as a whole. It serves as a swan song to the genre, its story mirroring the story of the western with a sense of attentive adoration. They may be dwindling, but they are an important part of American society, and they will never die. Their fates as an expired variety are sealed, but as is its fate as folklore, sowing mythology into the fabric of the culture, never to truly be forgotten.

Reel Reading Lit Log #2

Do the Right Thing Director’s Interview

Jada: Good Afternoon Mr.Lee Spike Lee: Good afternoon! Jada: I want to congratulate you on such an outstanding film and how much effort you put into it with all the elements and character development. You shot this film in 40 days and still happened to make it such a well known movie to so many people. The film is very interesting in the color ways and the recognizable soundtrack. Spike Lee: Why thank you a lot! You know I’ve always loved making films about the lives of African Americans without making it such a tragedy. I want to open the eyes to other cultures to show them what is different from what’s on the news and what people make us out to be because in reality, we are like everyone else with normal lives and usual day to day problems. Jada: I genuinely applaud that especially in the times we are living in where the news isn’t always the most reliable way in knowing about one’s culture or what else other than tragedies are happening. I wanted to start off this interview by asking what was your inspiration behind this film and how did you come to put it all together? Spike Lee: Well I feel for the film as a whole, it gives a very good representation of what it is like on a hot summer day in a predominantly African American neighborhood. There was a lot of different things going on at once and I wanted to portray that within the film by making it very fast paced but also something that was easy to follow along with. Jada: I definitely agree with the fact that it was easy to follow along with and I do applaud you for filming it all on one block in the middle of Brooklyn! My next question would have to be why? Why did you decide to film it on one block instead of multiple? Spike Lee: I felt like if it was filmed on one block it would give it a much more homier feeling in regards to the neighborhood. Yeah, a few blocks could be considered a neighborhood but when you have everything focused on one street, you’re able to see different people in the background. While the camera would be focused on one person, you still have an insight into the other characters behind them without it seeming so forced or like they are in the spotlight. I feel as if it was just a small detail that was put in that many people may not even notice but makes a very big difference in the overall outcome. Jada: So if you could go back and change anything in the film, what would it be? Spike Lee: If I could change any part in the film, it would have to be the way some audiences looked at it as controversial. They said that “the film could incite Black audiences to riot” I did say my turn back to the White people who were saying this. I think just because it shows some type of riots or fights within the film, it does not suggest that it would be the best option or even an option at all. In fact, when the character Buggin Out was trying to start a riot with everyone, they all turned it down because of the fact that they grew up on Sal’s pizza and couldn’t see anything wrong with it. Yes, they may have some differences, but in the long run, no one would put up with everything happening in the neighborhood other than them and they always did right by them no matter how many arguments they had. Jada: I can definitely see exactly where you’re coming from because of everything going on and how if just because something happens, it does not mean that you are inciting anything like it. As we come to an end, I want to ask one final question. That being; within the character development throughout the film, there is one character that stood out to me a lot which was Radio Raheem. He was someone in the beginning of the film who seemed to be the person everyone was scared of and no one wanted to be around. He always had a radio in hand and didn’t say much. As the film progresses, he seems a lot more soft and like he is just having a good time or just enjoying himself. At the very end of the film, we come to notice that he was choked to death on the street by the police. Why did you choose to make this character do the things he did? Spike Lee: I feel as a whole character, he shows a lot of different sides to him that I wanted to bring out. He showed his mean mug side, his friendly side, and a very vulnerable side even though it wasn’t very voluntary. He is also holding the radio for almost the entire film which is always playing the song “Fight The Power” which is the opening song and the song you continue to hear throughout the rest of the film that I think sends the biggest message in it all.

Blade Runner Poster

If I were in charge of coming up with a new title for Blade Runner, I would call it “Tears in the Rain.” This comes from Roy Batty’s final monologue on the roof. He says, “I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe… Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion… I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain… Time to die.” At its core, Blade Runner is a movie about what makes us human and, in context, what differentiates us from the movie’s replicants. On the surface, we appear the same, but we are different things with different purposes. Teardrops and raindrops are the same. They are indistinguishable just based on appearances. The title, “Tears in the Rain,” describes the replicants among humanity. In the movie, the replicants are the ones who show the most emotion, tears being a symbol for them makes sense. Also, tears come from the eyes, which is a motif Blade Runner uses often. Going along with this theme, the poster has a large, glowing, red eye in the background. This is because one of the ways to tell if someone is a replicant is by looking at their eyes. The poster also has Deckard, Rachael, and Roy Batty on it. These are who I consider to be the main characters of the film. Roy Batty acts as the antagonist for most of the film, so I have his face looming in the background. While he is the main antagonist, Roy doesn’t really fit the definition of a “bad guy.” Most of the characters in the movie have a nuanced portrayal so I don’t think it’s completely accurate to group them into good and bad categories. To represent this, I chose pictures of Deckard and Rachael where they both have guns drawn and put a dove next to Roy’s face to show the peace he chooses in his final moments. Roy is looking at the eye, while the other two are looking away from it. This represents how Rachael and Deckard were both unaware of being replicants, unlike Roy. Above the title there are silhouettes of running unicorns. This is because of their significance to Deckard’s character. I chose a dark background for the poster because the film has a dark atmosphere. I think that it would be kind of hard to tell exactly what the movie is about just from looking at the poster, but I think that fits because of the film’s ambiguity.

Blade Runner Lit log

The film Blade Runner utilized a variety of different cinematic elements in its production. Not only did these techniques increase the audience’s understanding of the movie, both consciously and unconsciously, they gave us unique insights into some characters that we may not have had otherwise. Director Ridley Scott had more control of the final cut that we watched, so all of the details were intentionally laid out by him. One of the key aspects of this film was the camerawork that went into establishing the setting of the cramped, polluted city. In practically every scene where Deckard is in the street (though especially during the chase scene with Zhora), Deckard is not the closest thing to the camera. The camera is either looking through windows, crowds of people, or other pieces of the set. It all makes the audience feel more cramped and trapped as we try to figure out what is going on — exactly what Deckard must feel as he is pushing his way through the street. In other similar scenes, such as the investigation of the snake scale or the noodle scene at the beginning, the shots are also similar, with very few direct shots of Deckard, almost as if he is getting lost in the confusion of the city. Scott chose these types of shots to immerse the audience into the setting and almost put ourselves into the life of this dystopian city. The lighting is another important way Scott helps the audience understand the setting. There is very little natural lighting, with most scenes being lit by colorful neon lights or different lamps indoors. It is depressing that whenever these characters walk outside they are met with this smoggy artificial light and absolutely no natural light at all. Pretty much the only time we ever see any natural light is in Dr. Tyrell’s apartement, which is fancy and luxurious. The sun shines through the massive floor to ceiling window and the whole room is lit up. This really highlights the setting, but also gives us a better understanding of the classes and rules of how the world works in a more effective way than simply telling us would. Sunlight seems like a luxury that most people cannot afford to ever see, they just live their lives in artificial light. Tyrell is one of the most wealthy people and he is the only one that can really enjoy the sunlight. This made me less sympathetic with him in a way because he seemed to be very intelligent, but extremely detached from the reality of the world and the consequences of his actions. The apartment of JF Sebastian, specifically his “toys,” the genetically engineered people are definitely a deliberate choice. The toys are all strange, having strange shapes, weird voices, and often not being able to walk correctly. These toys very much contrast with the Replicants that Deckard is hunting, who seem to share a lot more with real humans than they do with these odd little creatures. This highlights one of the main struggles of the movie: if replicants are essentially the same as humans, why are they treated differently. It is easy to think of these toys as just that, toys, which is intentional. But the seemingly human nature of the Replicants, who appear human, as well as seemingly having feelings and emotions is very different. The replicants are vastly more human than the toys which indicates it is the way you think, not whether you are made in a lab or not which makes you a person or not. Blade Runner utilizes a variety of different film and theatrical techniques to immerse the audience and make them feel like they are really in the world of the movie while also giving them a deeper understanding of the issues that are prevalent throughout this world. These make the film come to life and make the audience more emotionally invested in the film.

Blade Runner Poster

Retire All Replicants

After watching some film analyses, I was intrigued by the idea that Deckard is a replicant. I wanted my poster to hint at the fact that he is one. When the idea was first floated, I was pretty doubtful but after watching the videos, I began to believe it. I still don’t completely believe that he was written to be a replicant but it’s fun to think about the hints that the people who made the film put in. I wanted people who believe in the theory to see the poster and think that since Deckard is on a poster with so many other replicants, he is one too. The new title could also be ironic; “retire all replicants” could mean that Deckard eventually would have to be retired, too.

I found pictures of Deckard and the replicants he is tasked to retire. I like the shot of Deckard a lot because it shows that this is not a movie about retiring, it’s about murder. There’s stress and suspense, and it’s almost always dark and raining. All this can be inferred from that one shot. It seemed like an obvious choice to make Racheal’s picture bigger since her involvement in the story is bigger. I also like that by looking at her outfit and the way she holds herself, someone could guess that she’s the femme fatale even from just one shot.

The unicorns at the bottom represent the added symbolism of unicorns in the director’s cut. While watching the video about the differences between the cuts, I learned that the original cut focuses more on the whimsical aspect of unicorns whereas the director’s cut focuses more subtly on them. Either way, unicorns represent something special and magical, similar to the replicants. Adding them to the poster makes it fun to look at after watching the movie because viewers aren’t going to know how they connect to the story until after watching.

I added the question to intrigue viewers and give a very basic summary of the plot. I like the question format because it can be answered with “find out this June” which is when the film did come out. People don’t want to read a lot of text, but they want enough to know what the film is about.

In my opinion, this movie is much more about the replicants than the blade runners. By focusing the poster on replicants, one could tell what the film is really about and theorize that Deckard is also a replicant. Both are things I wish I knew before watching.

Blade runners Real world relations.

Alana Finney Reel reading Mrs.Giknis 4/26/2022 Blade runners Real world relations.

In Blade Runner, the concept of being human or humain has been pushed to say, only humans can be and define what is human and what is humain. Understanding the separation of humans and all other species, including the man made ones, is easy in a biblical sense. Humans have made the belief that we are the highest power on earth and, for some, god gave us that power. Even if blade runner has no godly entity besides devine wealth, we know humans have some sort of biblical ideal in the humanitarian society. God made humans separate and better from animals, and they see all other life forms as some form of animal, including the replicants, which gives humans the right to treat them as such. Society deemed some things safe to do to species not human, such as killing, breeding, enslavement and entertainment. In Blade Runner they enslave their own creation for their own benefits. Even if they look, act, and feel like humans, they, to society, are stil man made objects. This also raises concern about morals and what makes a human, human. From the Encyclopedia Britannica “a more highly developed brain and a resultant capacity for articulate speech and abstract reasoning.” is the most eligible definition of a human. Most would argue that the replicants have all of that since they are made to be exactly like a human, except stronger,.They have a psychological pattern exactly like ours. They have real emotions and were intended to be real human servants. They are also born of man, man made them, the thing that is keeping them from being defined as human is the societal construct that if it is artificial, it holds no real value. Similar to our world they have artificial and genetically modified foods and meat. Their world is around 85% artificial with humans being the only real things left. With our world today we have GMOs in order to maximize food production for the lively benefit of human consumption. GMOs are widely overtaking natural food for how easy it is to grow and maintain, and less expensive to produce and purchase. Though organic agriculture won’t disappear, it’s on a drastic decline. We also share similarities within our animals. We have, and are continuing to make genetically modified animals for human entertainment and benefit. We have created hypoallergenic animals so people allergic to their pets could have them. Now we are using CRISPR, a gene modifier, that will help breed better animals suitable for production. It will help increase meat production. It has not yet been proven to affect an animal’s way of life nor have any health risks. In similar ways we are affecting the animal kingdom which I find morally wrong especially since you have to breed this gene into existence. Society said that this is ok because these are just animals and it is benefiting us. In relation to the unicorn that has multiple meanings two of them being freedom and eternal life. In Their society and ours, humans have one thing in common: the search for freedom and longer life. The replicants want to live longer, as their makers gave them very short life spans, but seeing as they have the wants as a normal human, they both wanted to have time to experience life. They want to live as long as possible and they found it unfair, they got abandoned without any consideration. They were seen as disposable so they weren’t seen as something that needed to live long. Everyone in this world lives in a hierarchy like we have. Everyone wants to be freed from the confinements of living in a hierarchy.

Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho - Elemental Deep Dive

Spoilers ahead

Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho is an interesting film, filled to the brim with suspense. In addition to that key theme, there are many other elements that help this film “work”. These elements can be organized into theatrical and cinematic elements.

First up is theatrical elements. This film needed its sets without them, the story wouldn’t stay true. I specifically mean the Bates motel. It’s in the perfect spot, in the middle of nowhere surrounded by a good amount of vegetation. In addition to having a bog behind it. This motel and its placement alone raise some suspicion and curiosity. It’s extremely secluded and allows for the perfect murder cover-up. It has the perfect proximity to Norman’s house which has its own treasures. Norman and “Mother’s” home included 2 important bedrooms and a cellar. One bedroom being Norman’s, gave insight to him that wasn’t revealed to the audience. While Mother’s bedroom included jumpscares, a used bed, and all her personal belongings. Lastly a creepy cellar, without the creepy cellar where else would we have had such a wonderful reveal. A debatable setting would include the city where beloved Marion was introduced. It provided a sense of relatability and establishment. Without this installment in the being, we wouldn’t be able to compare the settings and develop the conclusion that something was sketchy.

Next, we have the costumes. The play on colors helped deliver to the audience where the character stood mentally. Which could be level-headed or rebellious. The Mother’s dress and wig were also important factors. Without Mother’s clothes Norman could not bring her to life. Then you have Norman’s outfits which consisted of plain button-up shirts and straight pants. Norman and Mother’s costumes help the audience establish them as two separate characters before they are revealed to be one.

Then we have props. I specifically wanted to highlight the knife and chocolate. Not many things were consistent in this film but Mother always killed someone with a knife. The chocolate added a realistic look and amazing contrast of blood on different backgrounds.

Following, we have acting choices. I think it was a specific choice that Marian’s sister was so calm and intrigued upon finding out Norman’s “condition”. It was a choice to widen Norman’s eyes and give a full smile at the sight of his next victim, in Mother’s clothes. Last it was a choice to deliver Norman’s creepy aura subtly. This aura was conveyed subtly with posture, tone, word choice, and interests.

Now I want to dive into the cinematic choices. The black and white color of the film’s finish gave the film a vintage look. It also delivers contrasting colors or surfaces really well. The lowkey, bottom, and side lighting especially with Norman was another key factor in delivering Norman’s creepy Aura. This film uses crispy and clear cuts, it gives the film a serious and professional polish. A great addition to this film’s cinema was the long under the chin shot where Norman was being followed when he was glancing at the check-in book. Higher angle shots delivered Marian’s fear and realization of the situation well. Low angled shots on Norman, specifically the ones including his taxidermy birds in his conversation with Marion. These visual elements help deliver Alfred’s theory of suspense. One last notable feature in Psycho’s cinematic element toolbox was the non-diegetic sound and overall soundtrack. The soundtrack proved to be iconic, notably because much of the sound was then used in many films after the birth of this one. The non-diegetic music provoked auditory feelings in the audience, it intensified the emotions that we as viewers were already feeling witnessing these storylines and characters. Without the sound and just the images, Hitchcock’s emotional and suspenseful rollercoaster would still be in tack because all these elements did was heighten his initial visual.

The strength of the tools in this film’s “toolbox” is what makes it so significant. It has been argued that this film is more of a genre film than a storyline film. I agree. The suspenseful rollercoaster of Hitchocks’s choice paired with the different elements of the film created a masterpiece. A masterpiece that I enjoy for what it possesses.

Overall the tools that Alfred Hitchcock used, theatrical and cinematic helped to deliver his directorial view to the audience, in a way that would resonate with many. While being an inspiration to others.

Bigger Connections Blade Runner

In Ridley Scott’s 1982 Blade runner the story takes place in a claustrophobic 2019 Los Angeles. At the time of filming these large assumptions made throughout the film about the future may have seemed plausible, but how do they hold up today? To start off one of the easiest elements to pick up is the bright neon lighting scattered throughout the duration of the movie. In fact there seems to be too much lighting overwhelming the contents of the scenes themselves. If this trait wasn’t already true in Los Angeles in 1982 it definitely would hold true today. With all this light currently being emitted by today’s world, light pollution is seen throughout the country. With Blade Runner depicting no visible stars in the sky along with the consistent smoggy look, it is definitely comparable to the conditions of some cities today. The lighting in both the movie and real-world convey how people have taken one of the simpler technologies and have stretched it so far that it clashes with nature and overtakes it.

The next element, definitely the most notable having to do with the actual plot of the film is technological advancements. In Blade Runner, it is apparent that technology holds a large role in everyday life, the first being transportation. Transportation in the movie greatly overestimated what we currently use today, where they have flying cars we instead have self-driving ones. While vehicles have definitely improved since the movie was created it puts into perspective the values of people back then and now. In the current day flying cars, while they would be an amazing feat, would most likely cause more harm than good. In movies such as this they are displayed as convenient and trustworthy but with there still being issues with our modern cars how would flying cars go? As of now, there aren’t any large leaps to commercialize this effort but there would definitely be some form of vehicle in the future to further test upcoming technology.

Building off of tech the use of androids, or replicants, in the film was crucial for expansion in the movie. With their bodies being designed for handling more labor-intensive duties they would take the jobs of people, assistants of the human race. Today we rely so heavily on technological assistants to help us with everyday problems ranging from something as basic as our phones to specialized robots for specific functions. In Blade Runner, these replicants were created for a specific purpose for human usage just as any other device today or back then. The question that arises as the technology continues to evolve and take on forms to better interact with humans is, is there a line that has to be drawn? Today people are already working on robots to imitate human behavior including facial expressions and to some degree the ability to think. While the movie has heavily built itself on the idea of sentient androids would it be wrong to overwork, exploit, and use them? They’re only machines, right?

Blade Runner Soundtrack - Koba Jaiser

SOUNDTRACK // Redo (or make in the first place) the soundtrack for the film. Choose at least five songs that you would include. Write an explanation for each song: why would you include it, and how does the song connect to events in the film? (750 words)

Blade Runner

Something In The Way (Nirvana) - I would include this song in the soundtrack because it has a very noir feeling to it and fits the theme of Deckard fighting the replicants because they are in the way of him enjoying his life. Which also resonates with the time when his boss wanted him back but he was tired about that type of stuff and wanted to be left alone. However he didn’t really have a choice in the end. I really think this song fits a lot of the themes in Blade Runner. Personally I think it’s because a lot of the parts in this movie really are in the way of his goals and way of life.

Armed and Dangerous (Juice WORLD) - This song really belongs in the movies when the action starts turning up because all sorts of weapons are used in Blade Runner and you could really connect it to the theme of him fighting the replicants towards the end or even maybe the beginning depending on where it was placed. I think it belongs in the soundtrack because it resembles the actions of the replicants in a really unique way; they are all armed and dangerous.

In the End (Linkin Park) Ok for starters this might be one of the most inspiring songs of all time and I think for an ending song especially for Blade Runner this one fits perfectly because everything he did in the end people will just pass it by only he will really remember how important that was. Overall his story will be forgotten. This is a perfect song for the soundtrack because of how you can use it for the ending and some other sections dealing with an end of sorts’ it also kinda fits that sci-fi element a tiny bit.

Psycho (Post Malone - feat. Ty Dolla $ign) This song especially fits for Roy because the guy is a psycho living his last few weeks on Earth even though this song is kinda more upbeat there’s a certain message that personally I think fits in this movie’s soundtrack if it’s only a tiny bit however the message could be really powerful. There’s a certain feeling I get from this song. It’s one of depression and happiness, kind of a mix of the two and it works. If this was used for a tiny section with Roy at the perfect moment I feel like this would be something truly special.

Superhero (Simon Curtis) There’s alot to this song for one it is probably one of my favorite and most unheard of songs in the industry and period. It feels like something that would perfectly fit in any action scene involving good or bad. I believe it would fit perfectly with Deckard’s struggle to fight the replicants, maybe not for multiple scenes but just one or two would work perfectly if done right. Mainly because well this isn’t really an action movie but more of a psychological sci fi action drama film which however that is a mouthful it gets the point across. I really love how this song fits into the theme of action in basically every genre involving some sort of hero; it’s just something so unique.

It Wasn’t Me (Shaggy) This would be insanely funny if It wasn’t me played in the background of that strip club scene I personally feel like that fits perfectly and would be hilarious which I think to an extent Ridley Scott was going for a somewhat comedic scene because I could tell he was trying to make us laugh with the character in that scene until it switched to a action scene. I know it sounds weird me suggesting this song for a noir sci fi film but ever since I watched Blade Runner back in 2017 I could never get over the fact of how hilarious it would have been to have that song in the background not necessarily in the scene where that girl gets undressed but just the strip club when he enters it. To this day I still believe it would be insanely funny.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid review... review?

Roger Ebert’s 2.5/4 star review of “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” is a bit disappointing to me, and I am curious as to how the era in which this review was written had an impact on his view of the film. He starts out with an overall summary of his thoughts on the movie, stating: “the completed film is slow and disappointing.” He attributes this notion to two main factors. One being the casting of Newmann, a well established and expensive actor, as the lead role. The second being that the movie is “too cute, and never gets up the nerve, by god, to admit it’s a western.”

To the first point, Ebert claims that the money spent on Newmann compelled the studio to protect their investment by increasing the overall production value of the film, something he saw as a detriment to the pacing. What could he possibly be talking about? Surely not the extremely long chase scene between Harriman’s “super posse” (which I think is a very funny title, good job Ebert) and our two heroes!? I actually really like this scene by the way. Supposedly, the chase scene is so long because George Roy Hill wanted to make the money spent on all the shooting locations worth it by keeping much of the footage. I disagree with this point, and I find it interesting that at the time, the length of a scene would be just as indicative of a “high production value,” as things like special effects. This lengthy scene contributes wonderfully to the overall aesthetic of the movie, temporarily transitioning the movie away from its roots as a comedic “western.” (I’ll dive into the “” here later.)

From a narrative perspective, while George Roy Hill could have portrayed the terror of being chased by the “super posse” and therefore justified the rest of the film, using a much shorter scene (the first five minutes of the chase prove this), I think it is quite effective at doing something else entirely. The length of the chase, and the protagonists’ attempts to thwart the super posse is exhausting, in the best, most darkly comedic way possible. While I enjoyed every minute of that terror and exhaustion, Roger Ebert clearly did not. Ebert, in his claims about production value and whatnot, implies this exhaustion to be a byproduct of lazy filmmaking and greedy executives. He makes it very clear that he thinks the scene is a drag, bogging down the rest of the movie to a point beyond recovery. Personally, due to my enjoyment of what the scene does for the movie, I’ll subscribe to the idea of the scene being deliberate, and the product of a director with an unconventional vision.

Ebert doesn’t quite make his meaning on the second point as clear as the first, but I’d like to take a crack at what he means when he thinks the movie won’t “admit it’s a western.” In the later half of the review, he refers to the movie’s dialogue being too contemporary, affecting the believability of the movie. I think this is a misconception of the movie, and the genre as a whole. The movie, while based on real events, never seems to sell itself as a serious period piece, or as representative of the classic western genre. I think that looking at this movie as a subversion of the genre would be more accurate. This movie shifts the traditional western setting, placing western themes in a non-traditional western setting like Bolivia. Additionally, the dialogue, which Ebert attributes to the film trying to “act cutesy,” is a refreshing take on what could have truly made this movie a drag (imagine that long chase scene sans the witty dialogue). The traditional themes of good versus evil, or even anti-hero outlaws, are not present in this movie. Butch and Sundance are not strikingly good or evil, and typically, to be an anti-hero, one must be acting with intentions that are ultimately good. Butch and Sundance are in my eyes a good old pair of anti-villains, which is undoubtedly an unconventional take on the protagonist, even outside of the western genre. All of these slightly unconventional elements make the movie feel extremely aware of the western genre and its tropes, which makes Ebert’s claim that it is trying and failing to be a western misguided.

Overall, I think that Ebert didn’t give this movie a chance. It is fair enough that he didn’t enjoy the chase scene, I can get that. I personally believe it to be great, and a deliberate artistic choice, but… fair enough? You got bored which is completely subjective, and I can’t take that away from you. I don’t think I could agree to disagree with his points about the nature of the film as a failed western though, as I think that falls short of the movie’s vision as an anti-western. Of course, I could talk all day about how badly he missed the mark on this specific point, but it’s probably easier for contemporary viewers to spot the genre commentary, as traditionally themed western movies are more “a thing of the past” now than in 1969. Regardless, I review his 2.5/4 star review, with a 2/4 star review (his points were half fair, half not).

Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid Review

El Newburger

April 21, 2022

I personally did not enjoy this film. I thought it was somewhat stupid. There is an interesting plot and it is compelling in the way that you don’t know who is going to live and who is going to die; although that seems to be the only exciting part for me. The way this movie was filmed and directed irritated me, one of the biggest factors being the long chase scenes, although the cinematography is quite pretty. The length of the film composed of photos to show Butch, Sundance and Etta traveling to Bolivia was confusing. I think it’s a bit odd to have these long chase scenes which not much occurring and then tightly comprise a long period of time in photos. As the viewer I would’ve wanted to see more about their travels. We are introduced to the idea of Butch and Sundance going to Bolivia early in the film so, for lack of better words it seems idiotic to not include any information about that.

Yes this is a Western film, and it’s meant to be a tribute of western films so it must be that western films are not for me. As exciting as they come off to be, I got rather bored during this film. The first review I read was written by Roger Ebert. In his review about the film he says, “…This good movie is buried beneath millions of dollars that were spent on “production values” that wreck the show.” I one hundred percent agree with this, the producers spent $6 million on this film and getting Paul Newman which is shown, cinematically this film is beautiful but the money they spent on these factors could’ve been used much more effectively. Granted this movie made $102.3 million.

“Director George Roy Hill apparently spent a lot of money to take his company on location for these scenes, and I guess when he got back to Hollywood he couldn’t bear to edit them out of the final version. So the Super-posse chases our heroes unceasingly, until we’ve long since forgotten how well the movie started and are desperately wondering if they’ll ever get finished riding up and down those endless hills. And once bogged down, the movie never recovers.” This quote from Roger Ebert’s review perfectly sums up how I feel about this movie. Most of the budget was spent on Paul Newman and going on location and not enough time spent on editing and such.

One of the confusing parts of the film, that Ebert points out as well, is that this movie is set in 1910 and they have a much more modern dialect. Throughout the movie I kept thinking about when this movie is supposed to take place and I often forget that it was set in 1910. You’d think that since the producers and directors spent so much money on this film they would’ve moved some of it around for this movie to actually make sense. Why go through all the trouble of going on location and hiring a very expensive actor then not telling your actors so add a little tang to their accent? It can be so satisfying when actors learn the accent or dialect of a certain time or place to add to their character; for me personally it pulls me into their world even more. This movie didn’t have that, so it wasn’t as compelling.

On the other side of this I found the comedic parts of the movie quite enjoyable. When Butch and Sundance are learning Spanish and have difficulty conducting the bank tellers and townspeople during their robbery; that was amusing. The second article I read about Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid was much more in favor of this being a generally good movie. This review by Whitney Williams published by Variety in 1969 saw the film in a kiddie light. “A lighthearted treatment of a purportedly-true story of the two badmen who made Wyoming outlaw history.” Viewing this film in a more childish lens, with the share of violence is much more appealing to me. I could see myself possibly enjoying the movie as a younger individual, the comedic parts are a fun aspect to the movie and the constant need to run, loot and rob aid to make this a childish silly movie.

My final opinion of this movie is this, I wouldn’t watch it again unless I was really bored and couldn’t find anything else to watch. I don’t like it but it’s not terrible. There are pros and cons to this movie; as there are to any movie. Pros being the cinematography, the color grading, the little incorporations of comedy and the generally silly lighthearted aspect of this movie. The cons being, the extremely long chase scenes, the modern dialect used by characters who live in 1910, the use of this film’s budget and the fact that this is a western film. Overall I rate this movie two out of five stars.

Sources: Ebert, Roger. “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid Movie Review (1969): Roger Ebert.” Movie Review (1969) | Roger Ebert, John Foreman, 13 Oct. 1969, https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/butch-cassidy-and-the-sundance-kid-1969 Williams, Whitney. “Film Review: ‘Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid’ with Paul Newman, Robert Redford.” Variety, Variety, 10 Sept. 1969, https://variety.com/1969/film/reviews/butch-cassidy-and-the-sundance-kid-1200422010/