Written by Mark Trinkle

       We eventually learn that Amelia is torn between her desire to hide her grief and keep it to herself and her desire to care for her son. She loves him despite the trouble he gets into, but cannot help but harbor a secret grudge against the boy whose birth led to her husband’s death. 
                At the start of the film Amelia doesn’t realize all of these emotions she has bubbling under the surface but Jennifer Kent (writer as well as director) gradually gives us keys to Amelia’s psychology right before the titular monster kicks down the doors to wreak havoc on her mind and her home. 
                After Samuel first stumbles upon the Mister Babadook pop-up book and she sees how creepy it is, she destroys it hoping to make Samuel forget about its main character; a creature that will supposedly ‘haunt them if they let it in and make them wish that they were dead.’ Although it is a perfectly natural reaction to hide scary things from your child, it is important to note that Amelia uses this same approach when it comes to her late husband- going so far as to lock his things in the basement away from Samuel. Amelia’s attempts to protect her son also hurt him because as he says when she forbids him to go down to the basement ‘He’s my dad too, you don’t own him’. ​

Written by Anthony Watkins

In 2007, Wan officially moved on from the Saw franchise with Dead Silence, another horror film, and Death Sentence, a crime/drama film starring Kevin Bacon. Wan’s next feature-length effort after Death Sentence was another horror film, Insidious. On another low-budget of $1.5 million, the film was initially rejected by the Toronto International Film Festival, but went on to become another box office smash for Wan (TVGuide). In its opening weekend in the US, the film garnered over $13 million, and ended up grossing over $54 million (IMDB).

Wan continued on a roll with The Conjuring (2013), a film based on the true case files of renowned paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren. Critically praised for its use of “old school scares” and sharp cinematography, (which will be investigated next week in my article on the film) The Conjuring became yet another box office hit for Wan, grossing over $41 million in its opening weekend in the US and a staggering $137 million for the year in the US alone (IMDB). ​

Written by Anthony Watkins

What’s scarier for you as a viewer? Seeing something created on screen, or not seeing something on screen, and instead being forced to “fill in the gaps” with your own imagination? For me personally, it is the latter. I have watched many films spanning several decades---films that are intended to thrill, surprise, and shock the viewer. One of my favorite films is Steven Spielberg’s pioneering blockbuster Jaws (1975). As I wrote in a previous article, Jaws was largely successful due to its failure—that is the failure of the mechanical shark “Bruce”. Because the shark did not work properly for several scenes in the film, Spielberg was forced to form the shark’s point-of-view using underwater shots. Also, just as importantly, Spielberg decided not to reveal the creature until about halfway through the film. A similar aesthetic was used in another favorite Spielberg film of mine in Jurassic Park (1993). If you have seen the film, you will remember that we only catch a glimpses of the terrifying velociraptors and we do not see the Tyrannosaurus Rex at all until the famous “T-Rex Paddock Attack” scene. The characters in the film were even disappointed not seeing any dinosaurs on their first tour (cue Jeff Goldblum: “Now eventually you might have dinosaurs on your dinosaur tour, right?”). What I am getting at is that suspense for viewers is created by not seeing the object right away. Instead, force audiences to get on the edge of their seat and make them anxious and antsy about wanting to see what they currently can’t see on screen. ​

This is an aesthetic that was used in old-school horror films, particularly with The Exorcist (Friedkin, 1973) and The Amityville Horror (Rosenberg, 1979). But in recent years, filmmakers have opted for a new approach to scare and create terror for audiences: showing gore and excessive graphic violence (“splatter” films) or a combination of gore and sexual imagery (“torture porn”). These films can be effective in their own right, but in my opinion they do not live up to the old-school aesthetic. 

Director James Wan, who ironically helmed the original Saw (2004) and is responsible for popularizing torture porn, harkened back to old school horror films with Insidious (2010) and most recently with The Conjuring (2013). What specific old school scares did Wan recall to electrify audiences?

First and foremost, Wan used what I call the “Jaws” aesthetic described in the opening paragraph. He doesn’t fully reveal the supernatural entity that is possessing the Perron family’s house until the last quarter of the film. The other three quarters of the film, Wan tantalizes viewers with partial prints of the being (ex: hands) instead of giving away the full body. In other words, he forces audiences to fill in the rest for themselves with the most terrifying special effect one can ever create---imagination. In an interview with Rolling Stone, Wan noted, “I always felt that what is scary is actually hearing someone tell you what they think they see. That sense of invisibility makes things a lot scarier, since your imagination tends to fill in the gaps. So a character can be staring into the darkness behind a door and you just see the fright on their face. I think that's scarier than showing you what's behind the door” (Rolling Stone). ​

The film itself is virtually devoid of any blood, gore, or special effects. Since there is only a couple profanities in the entire film and no sexual content, it can be affirmed that The Conjuring earns its R rating on scares alone. Besides using the “Jaws” aesthetic mentioned above, Wan creates these scares in various other ways. From the outset, he creates a very brooding and sinister atmosphere in the old farm house. We hear doors and floorboards creaking, wind blowing—causing objects to bump against each other, and strange noises. He is also able to emanate an ominous quietness, especially during the night scenes. This atmosphere is aided by an extensive use of slow dolly shots down empty hallways—making viewers believe someone or something is present behind the camera. ​

Written by Anthony Watkins

Last week in my article on sound I mentioned how directors are constantly looking for ways to immerse an audience in their story. Besides through writing, this is normally done through technical means during production of a film. However, the exhibition of a film itself has also become a factor in recent years with the advent of 3D-viewing technology. Most of you have probably seen at least one film in 3D, where you put on glasses and watch as sequences in the film seem to physically jut out from the two-dimensional screen.
​
A new invention developed by the South Korean company CJ 4DPlex, however, has taken the viewer experience to a whole new level. Many of you have probably heard of 4D in film, but probably have not experienced it firsthand. The purpose behind 4D is to fully utilize all five of the human senses so the viewer can feel as much as possible like they are not watching the film, but experiencing it with the characters. Some aspects of 4D include your chair rocking, swiveling, and vibrating, as well as water and air being sprayed on you and smells being released from your seat. All of these actions are programmed by software to be in-sync with the action that is being displayed on-screen, so that you as a viewer feel you are taking part in the action (CBSNews and Cinemablend). 

4D is still greatly in a novelty stage, as the first 4DX theater in the United States just recently opened in Los Angeles with Marvel’s Captain America: The Winter Soldier (Anthony and Joe Russo, 2014) being screened for audiences. Some examples of uses of 4D in the film included air blowing past your face when Black Widow fired bullets at a character, chair jolts as Captain America battled different adversaries and a splash of water as Nick Fury drove through a puddle (Cinemablend).

But will 4D actually catch on and ever replace 3D? The response has been positive in Los Angeles, with films like Transformers: Age of Extinction (Michael Bay, 2014) doubling box office receipts over other local regular theaters. The major drawback to 4D, however, is the expensive construction of theaters and the hefty $26.75 ticket price, which is more than even the standard IMAX ticket. This, coupled with the increasingly-declining number of audiences in theaters, suggests that the technology will not become a standard for US theaters, at least not in the near future.

Other issues for 4D include the comfortableness of audiences and the distracting nature of the format. Some audiences thoroughly enjoyed the screenings, while some complained about getting sick and damp during the experience. This issue does not surprise me, as films like Transformers: Age of Extinction went as far as emitting the smells of burnt rubber for some of the action sequences, causing some viewers to feel nauseous (Dailymail). In my opinion, I think the format could be very distracting for audiences, as they are wiping water off themselves or consumed by smells while trying to focus on the story and characters in the film.

Nevertheless, CJ 4DPlex defends the technology by stating, “Movies are now no longer bound by their visual and aural limits. 4DX is the next step in the movie-going evolution taking audiences on a journey into the full feature film. Free yourself from the confines of the flat screen and live the experience with 4DX” (Dailymail).

What do you think of 4D in cinema? Do you think of it just as a passing fad and less an evolution in the movie-going experience or as something that will possibly replace the 3D format and become a new standard? Post your thoughts below!
 
 
WORKS CITED
Cable, Simon. “Hold on to your seat…it’s the 4D cinema…” Daily Mail. 8 Oct. 2015.
8 Jan. 2015. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2902582/4D-Cineworld-multiplex-set-open-movies-featuring-weather-scents-shaking-seats.html>.
 
“Is 4D technology coming to a theater near you?” CBSNews. 8 Oct. 2015. 27 Sept. 2014.
<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/4d-movies-coming-soon-to-a-theater-near-you/>.
             
Eisenberg, Eric. “The First 4DX Movie Theater Has Opened In The United States.”
Cinemablend. 8 Oct. 2015. 8 Oct. 2014. <http://www.cinemablend.com/new/First-4DX-Movie-Theater-Has-Opened-United-States-43678.html >.

Written by Emmanuel Gundran

​People all across the globe will recognize Nintendo's trademark Italian plumber anywhere, but not quite like this. On May 28, 1993, the live-action adaptation of the popular Super Mario Bros. game series was released and garnered mostly negative responses from audiences and critics alike. Many changes to the original source material turned off Mario fans from the film. However, in recent times, it has gained a small cult following that appreciates not only the unique, alternative interpretation of the Super Mario Bros. world but also the intricately developed world that it created. Nevertheless, this film was the first of many video game-based films that demonstrated the challenging yet doable feat of taking an interactive property and adapting it to a non-interactive medium.

If there’s one major roadblock to bringing a video game’s story to film it’s that, typically, a video game’s story is primarily focused on fun gameplay for the player. Unless a game’s primary draw is the story, like The Last of Us (2013) or Heavy Rain (2010), for example, most people wouldn’t play a video game for in-depth story or character development. People would usually play Super Mario Bros. for jumping on platforms and enemies, not trying to glean life lessons or character development from the story. Trying to replicate this same sort of enjoyment would not translate to a film. So, to make a movie like a Super Mario Bros. movie work, the writing team would have to create a three act story out of a thin game story that ultimately comes down to two heroes saving a princess from an evil villain.

The challenge pitted to the team making Super Mario Bros. was to follow this simple story while figuring out what kind of story content to write to fill up the approximate hour-and-a-half needed to fill up the slot in the theatre. Shigeru Miyamoto, creator of the Super Mario Bros., in a translated interview with Next Generation says that, “the movie may have tried to get a little too close to what the Mario Bros. videogames were. And in that sense, it became a movie that was about a videogame, rather than being an entertaining movie in and of itself."

​If the film had focused more on taking Mario and Luigi on their journey and developing their characters rather than making blatant nods to the source material, the film would have had a better flow. Throughout the film, there are scenes devoted to reimagining elements from the game such as Mario’s dinosaur sidekick Yoshi, who was reimagined as a baby T-Rex, and the Princess Peach’s mushroom-headed assistant named Toad, who was oddly reimagined as a government-hating, guitar-playing rebel played by former psychobilly artist Mojo Nixon. Although these scenes serve to build the depth of the world, they don’t move the plot forward by much and make fans of the Super Mario Bros. games even more aware that this was not the Super Mario Bros. movie they were expecting.

This was not the only problem that bogged the film down, unfortunately; weak comedic gags were also sprinkled throughout that tried to lighten the overall gritty tone but ultimately felt awkward, out of place and showed how uncooperative the filmmaking team was behind the scenes. Directors Rocky Morton and Annabel Jenkel had their own vision for the film to be a serious and sophisticated political satire, while the studio, the now defunct Lightmotive-Allied Filmmakers, expected a light-hearted kids film akin to the games. “I wanted parents to really get into it” says Morton, reflecting on the film. “At that time, there was a very hardcore movement against video games, and a lot of anti-video games sentiment. I wanted to make a film that would open it up and get parents interested in video games.” The uneasy tensions between the directors’ and studio’s individual visions especially show through the inclusion of nightclub scenes alongside comedic slapstick.

For better or for worse, the Super Mario Bros. movie is the first demonstration of what to and what not to do for a video game movie. A good videogame movie is one that is a good movie first. Translating every detail of the source material into a visual medium should not be the main focus of making a video game film, especially if said source material does not have enough narrative to fit a three act, hour-and-a-half film. Though it reimagines the colorful characters of the games through its own dystopian lenses, Super Mario Bros. tries to fit many details of the games into a three-act film yet forgets to further develop its titular protagonists and make their journey to save the captured princess meaningful and character-changing. Furthermore, as with any movie, the production team should be confident in developing a central idea for a film. The disparity between the crew and studio’s vision for Super Mario Bros. resulted in an awkward conflict between a light-hearted versus dark-hearted tone. With the highly talented and experienced writers and directors today, there is room for hope that a good video game movie will hurdle the major obstacles, into which Super Mario Bros. and other video game movies have run.

​​​Sources:

Kuchera, Ben. "Miyamoto remembers the troubled Mario Bros. movie." Arstechnica. 29 Nov. 2007.  Web. 7 Oct. 2015.

Reeves, Ben. "Mario’s Film Folly: The True Story Behind Hollywood’s Biggest Gaming Blunder." Game Informer. 28 May 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2015.

Written by Anthony Watkins

You may ask yourself, “What would possess a person to tightrope (without even a safety harness) 110 stories above concrete?” or “what would possess a person to tightrope at an unsafe height at all?” Why do these seemingly insane individuals put their lives on the line and tempt death?
 
Robert Zemeckis’ new film, The Walk, seeks to answer these baffling questions. The film is a biographical account of French high-wire artist Philippe Petit’s (played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) successful walk between the World Trade Center towers in August of 1974, which has since been famously named “the artistic crime of the century.” The film follows Petit’s personal journey, from a young aspiring tightroper to training as a wire walker to the massive planning to accomplish his dream of traversing the void between the two tallest buildings in the world (in 1974).
 
The main theme of Zemeckis’ film is discovering and appreciating the sheer artistic beauty ingrained in Petit’s act. Although Petit’s walk was a crime (and he was arrested shortly afterwards), the film extols his walk as the best type of crime a person could commit, as no innocent civilians were harmed, no property was damaged, and Petit gave himself up willfully and peacefully at the end of the act. Virtually any other crime involves a negative variation of one or more of those characteristics.
 
As mentioned earlier, the film also investigates the meaning behind Petit’s walk. For Petit, the walk was a transcendent experience, something that allowed him to see the world in a whole new light, as during the act he noted that all the city noise faded away and all he could see was his wire. Furthermore, in the film he states, “People ask me ‘Why do you risk death?’ For me, this is life.” Tightroping, besides being a symbol of liberation for Petit, was also the way he perceived fully living as a human, as something that gives you an in-moment experience that is indescribable unless you do it yourself. A possible comparison for this would be surfing inside of a wave, which surfers will tell you is something you have to experience for yourself, rather than them trying to describe it to you.
 
The Walk, besides serving as a homage to Petit’s incredible act, also serves to honor the World Trade Center towers’ existence from 1974-2001. As is briefly noted in the film, the towers were initially widely perceived as an eyesore by the public, some even mocking that they resembled “giant filing cabinets.” However, Petit’s walk, which occurred a couple months before the buildings’ official opening, ultimately served as a christening for the towers, giving them a soul, along with a new respect from the public and widely shifting opinions on their architectural beauty. 
 
Technically speaking, Zemeckis more than succeeds in resurrecting the twin towers, as the CGI is one of the main selling points of the film. But more importantly, Zemeckis also brought Petit’s walk to life by giving audiences a first-hand view of his experience walking between the towers. During the act, the camera predominantly stays alongside Petit, and often looks down the 1,362 feet to the concrete bottom. Other artistic works that have been produced on Petit’s walk, including the acclaimed documentary Man on Wire (Marsh, 2008) have failed to effectively put audiences in Petit’s point-of-view. But, alas, Zemeckis does not disappoint. Whether you are afraid of heights or not, more than likely your palms will be sweating during the film’s final act.

​The Walk is a film that provides drama from Petit’s relentless pursuit of a dream and suspense from the illegal rigging of his wire and the desperate attempts to evade security officials, as well as some romantic and comedic elements meshed in. Overall, I enjoyed this film and recommend seeing it on the big screen while it is in theaters. If you are a bit acrophobic, however, I strongly recommend that you bring a buddy so that you have a hand or two to clutch.  

Written by Emmanuel Gundran

I'm usually not one for films circling around romance simply because I can't believe how two people can fall in love and want to marry each other within the first twenty or thirty minutes. There is one, however, that I've seen recently that has taken me on a roller coaster of emotions, from joy, to sadness, to (much) anger, and back around to joy. Disgust and fear were late for the screening. Far From the Madding Crowd (2015) is a romantic drama based on the Thomas Hardy novel of the same name that focuses on the competition between three men for the love of a fiercely independent woman.

Far From the Madding Crowd follows Bathsheba Everdene (Carey Mulligan) who has inherited property from her deceased uncle and establishes her leadership over the farm and its workers. Meanwhile, she stirs the hearts of three prospective bachelors: Gabriel Oak (Matthias Schoenaerts), William Boldwood (Michael Sheen), and Sergeant Francis Troy (Tom Sturridge). Bathsheba must decide whether to pursue a romance with one of these three men or continue her management of the farm as a single woman.

This film does well in representing different sides of masculinity. Gabriel Oak, who shepherds on Bathsheba's farm, dedicates himself to serving Bathsheba as her worker, displaying the servanthood side of masculinity. William Boldwood, who desires a committed relationship, asks Bathsheba frequently to marry him, representing the persistent side of masculinity. Finally, there's Francis Troy, who always wants his way in relationships, representing the desire for dominance of masculinity.

​From the very start, you'll really like Gabriel Oak. We see that he comes to Bathsheba's farm after suffering a devastating blow to his own property and needs work and a place to live. He falls in love with Bathsheba at nearly first sight but respects Bathsheba's rejection of him when he proposes to marry her. Though he has longing feelings for Bathsheba, he deeply respects her ambitions and serves her despite the obstacles that come.

Even if you didn't like Farmer Boldwood at the beginning of the film, you'll end up really caring about him by his arc's end. Farmer Boldwood isn't someone you start off feeling comfortable with, as he constantly pursues Bathsheba to the point of obsession. But then, he becomes more than just that creepy old man who desperately wants the attractive young woman.

The film makes it extremely obvious that Sergeant Troy is not someone to be trusted at all. Just from looking at the man's stern, mustached face, you'll know that he's a suspicious-looking character. When things don't go his way, Troy acts petulantly and takes his frustration out on others. Because of his charisma and position of power, he comes off as very self-entitled, he needs everything to work out how he wants to and people need to respect him for being so skilled. With Troy being the way he is, is there any way he could change by the end of the film?

The film has a great overall message for both women and men: you don't need to be married to succeed, but, if you want to marry, then your spouse should support your ambitions. Two of Bathsheba's suitors won't always have her best interests in mind, cause her stress and try to hold her back from running the farm with a firm grasp, but there's one special man who supports her the whole way through. It's important for everyone in choosing not just spouses but also close friends that the people one chooses are individuals who support their life pursuits.

Written by Anthony Watkins

​​​One of the chief goals of a director is to find various ways to help audiences draw in on characters, making us feel what they feel or sympathize for them in their situation. This makes for an overall better film as audiences can identify with a character and therefore invest in them throughout the film.

There are various technical methods that have been used in film history to accomplish this task. Most have dealt with camera angles or shots, such as close-up shots that give a sense of intimacy with a character or point-of-view shots, which show us a direct view of what the character is seeing and experiencing. While achieving the task by visual means usually works, there seems to be a major component that is often forgotten that can also greatly aid in the quest for character-identifying moments. 

This is a component that has existed for nearly a century in the medium of film: sound. When we think of sound in film, we inevitably first think of it being used for dialogue, since that was its main function when it emerged in the late 1920s. However, as film evolved over the decades, sound began playing a larger role. It is now also associated with a soundtrack and musical score that accompanies a film. The soundtrack and score is carefully chosen and composed to help convey appropriate emotions that the characters are feeling.

Sound can go further, however, and play an even larger role in a film to help us get in touch with a character's emotional state or situation. There are several examples of this in past films. James Cameron, in particular, has heavily utilized sound in his films. You probably recall the famous sequence from his 1997 blockbuster Titanic in which Rose is convinced by Jack and Cal to get on a lifeboat as the ship is sinking. She very hesitantly and reluctantly gets on the boat and is being lowered away as the late James Horner's score kicks in. However, as she is being lowered and staring up at Jack, she realizes that this is the last time she will ever see him. Cameron uses slow-motion point-of-view shots as Rose looks at the other passengers in her lifeboat, the crewman lowering them away, and at Jack. At the same time, the diegetic world around Rose, comprised of all the audible panic of the sinking fades away (leaving just Rose's breathing as the only diegetic component) as the musical score takes over the scene, signifying that we as an audience have now entered into Rose's mind and thoughts. Cameron notes that "time becomes dilated" as we experience the moment. The producers of the film also note, "People go to film school and they think all the time about using various ways to 'guide the eye,' so we move the camera and we use depth of field and frame the shot and do all these things to make the eye go where you want it to go. In sound, we don't do that as much as we should. Something I always learned from Jim [Cameron] was focusing the sound so that we hear the sounds we need to hear and nothing more...it's an example of taking sound and guiding the ear, pulling the sounds out we don't want to hear and playing it from her perspective or emotionally making it her moment" (Titanic Blu-ray). 

Another brief example of using sound in a similar manner is in Robert Zemeckis' sci-fi classic Back to the Future (1985) in which Marty McFly is fading away from the future timeline, represented visually by him holding up his hand and becoming transparent. However, Zemeckis also utilizes sound in that the diegetic dancing music starts to fade out, the crowd noise starts to echo, and the film's musical score escalates, especially when Lorraine is yelling "George!" It is a powerful moment where we are entering Marty's emotional state as he is fading away from existence.

​As the years progress, we see the medium of film focusing more and more on visuals and less on sound. However, I believe that it is extremely important that we never forget the value and the powerful effect of sound as it relates to character experiences and emotional states. Using visual aesthetics is certainly a great step in the right direction, but we can go further and have an even deeper emotional impact on the audience if we utilize sound to its full potential.

WORKS CITED
Titanic. Screenplay by James Cameron. Dir. James Cameron. Blu-ray. Twentieth Century Fox and Paramount 
​           Pictures, 1997.

Written by Cayce Bower

Superhero movies have gone through many changes over the decades, and I would like to say they have gotten better overall, but they have changed. One common characteristic of a superhero movie is the strong, heroic, law-abiding, morally right, good-natured man or woman that stands on the side of justice, and saves the day by the end of the film (and hopefully by the time you finish your popcorn).  In these movies, movies like Superman (Richard Donner, 1978), where Superman flies in faster than a speeding bullet and has to make the right choices for the good of all. There was violence, but I believe it is fair to say that superhero movies back in the day had less    violence overall…or at least less graphic violence.

Anymore, the “good” superhero has become less popular in these films. Audiences today want to see superheroes that appear to be more human, flawed, having a darker side to them. People became introduced to Batman (Tim Burton, 1989), which was a huge success, appealing to the audience's desires for a “hero” who is willing to step way outside of the law, and maybe even abandon morals to accomplish their tasks. They also watched perhaps an even darker movie when they saw Blade (Stephen Norrington, 1998), the trench coat-wearing half-man, half-vampire. These movies created less of a calling for those superheroes like Superman, who decides that he will not kill. Audiences want to see someone like Wolverine, who very often does not think twice about slashing a foe with his adamantium-claws, or Rorschach, who is completely fine with using unconventional methods to get things done in the movie Watchmen (Zack Snyder, 2009). These "antiheroes" are becoming more and more popular as time goes on, and superhero movies are being made. 

Recently, a trailer for the movie Deadpool (Tim Miller, 2016) has been released, and it has been advertised as a movie with an R-rating, and rightly so. Any hardcore Marvel fan can tell you that Deadpool is not really someone to have as a role model. As one can see from watching the trailer, the film will contain copious amounts of blood, guts, killing, swearing, and other elements that 20th century audiences would have been shocked to see…and much of it will come from the main character himself.

Antiheroes are generally people who have had a rough past, and "have a sense of not belonging" (Explore Science Fiction Movies). They're also usually really resourceful as well as dangerous, and, as previously indicated, they're willing to do things that a hero would not do. Maybe that is why audiences are connecting with them, which increases the antihero's popularity.


Sources:

"Anti-heroes in Science Fiction Movies." Explore Science Fiction Movies. Web. 22 Sept. 2015.

"Blade." IMDb. IMDb.com. Web. 6 Oct. 2015.

"Deadpool." IMDb. IMDb.com. Web. 22 Sept. 2015.

"Superman." IMDb. IMDb.com. Web. 6 Oct. 2015.

Once Upon A Time In Mexico, 2003

Written by Mark Young

There is much debate in the industry these days over the use of digital verses celluloid film.  Although I think it’s safe to say that digital is here to stay, I personally doubt the veracity of it becoming the industry standard.  Hollywood is slow to change; they are still using the same script format that was developed in the 20’s.  This is to their advantage as their ability to keep the industry standardized does keep the massive workflow in check.  However, it may have cost them many great story tellers who could never quite nail down the industry standard.

HISTORY

Enter digital film, in 1975 the first digital camera was invented by Steve Sasson of Kodak.  It took 23 seconds to take a 0.01 megapixel picture which the 8 pound camera recorded to cassette tapes (Zhang). Digital cinematography, although quickly following in the 80s, did not take hold until the early 2000s with George Lucas' use of the Sony HDW-F900 camera.  Robert Rodriguez was the first to use the camera to shoot a “Hollywood” film Once Upon A Time in Mexico (2003) (McKernan).

ADVANTAGES

Digital cinematography has made many advances over the past decade.  With the invention of the HD camera, and digital editing software drastically dropping in price, the monetary advantages are clear.  The average person with a moderate budget is now able to film in a style that the common man would perceive as indistinguishable from Hollywood style.  And this is where the primary advantage as I see comes into play.  Young and inexperienced filmmakers can now tell their stories at an affordable price.  This allows for Hollywood to see the new talent expressed without having to conform to a style that may be difficult for some to grasp, as I said in my earlier comment about script format.  A talented filmmaker can now be discovered without having to make the common route of film school, intern, and personal assistant before ever getting to show their skills.  Digital cinematography has changed the industry forever.


Works Cited
McKernan, Brian, and Bob Zahn. "A Digital Desperado." Robert Rodriguez: Interviews. Comp. Zachary Ingle. Jackson: U of Mississippi, 2012. 75-82. Print.

Zhang, Michael. "The World’s First Digital Camera by Kodak and Steve Sasson." PetaPixil. 5 Aug. 2010. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.

Written by Matt Acuna

Let us think back for a moment to September 11th, 2001, when we first heard news of the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City. A seemingly normal day turned into one of the most chaotic days in the existence of the United States of America, and while we know almost everything about what transpired on that day now, the time spent during those attacks was full of confusion and despair as we waited for what tragedy would occur next. It seemed as if the world was thrown into complete chaos. The world and situation depicted in Cloverfield (Reeves, 2008) are exactly that, and seem to be a metaphor for 9/11.
​
When comparing the events in the film with the events that occurred in real life, it is easy to separate the two, as one had to do with terrorist hijacking a plane, and the other with an enormous alien being attacking the island of Manhattan in a brutish manner. However, many aspects of the film allude to 9/11, such as the location, confusion of the main characters, tone, destruction of well-known American landmarks, and even the marketing of the film. The marketing of the film makes it incredibly evident to the potential viewers that something happens to the Statue of Liberty early on in the film. The posters depict a headless Statue, while showcasing the destroyed New York City in the background with the tagline “Some Thing Has Found Us.”

When the monster from the film begins its initial attacks, one of the first things to happen is the decapitated head of the Statue of Liberty crashing down into the streets. This is done to show the destruction of the peace and solitude we know in our everyday lives. Our safety is destroyed, and the force of evil in this film is not afraid to destroy everything we hold dear.

Many films have destroyed famous landmarks to make this sort of impact on the viewers. Perhaps the most well-known is Independence Day (Emmerich, 1996) where the antagonistic aliens destroy the White House. This was incredibly shocking to see at the time of its release, as it was very uncommon to show the destruction of something so sacred in films. Following 9/11, including the destruction of almost any American landmarks became unacceptable to show in film, as it was too sensitive of a topic for many years after the incident. Even small occurrences, such as a trailer for Spider-Man (Raimi, 2002) being pulled off the air just for featuring the twin towers in it. After many years of this trope being absent from film, Cloverfield was one of the first movies to bring idea back, with the severed head of the Statue of Liberty being thrown down to the streets below, showcasing a link between the movie and the events of 9/11.

The feelings of fear and confusion that the film brings up are very relatable to the 9/11 attacks. Who is attacking us? What is happening, and why can I not contact my loved ones? Are they okay? These are all questions and feelings shared between the characters in the film and those that experienced the events on September 11th. Starting a seemingly normal night at a party, the characters are soon thrown into chaos as a mysterious being begins to destroy the city. As they make their way down to the streets to see what is going on, a large building collapses and engulfs the streets with dust, debris and smoke. The characters are forced to run as fast as they can to escape this massive dust cloud, and struggle to breathe as it coats their lungs with smoke. This is taken directly from the events of 9/11, when the first of the twin towers fell. People came down into the streets to investigate what was happening, and watched in horror as the building collapsed to the ground, not knowing that in a few short seconds they too would be running for their lives to escape a cloud of death. After these tragedies occur, in the film and in real life, people are left in the streets covered in ashes and frantically asking each other if they know what is happening. The streets look like a warzone contained within the eye of a storm, and give the ultimate feeling of desolation. Throughout the film, our main character Rob, played by Michael Stahl-David, is trying desperately to get in contact with his ex-girlfriend Beth, played by Odette Yustman. We see his desperation while trying to get in contact with her to see if she is alright, and his frustration and fear whenever he is unable to, and is left to contemplate whether she is okay or not. This is also very reminiscent of the countless amounts of people who were trying to get in contact with their family members who were in or around the sites of the crashes, or even just lived in New York City in general. The massive amount of calls caused the phone lines to go down. The feeling of uncertainty and confusion when it comes to a loved one being alive or not is one of the worst feelings in the world, and in the film and on September 11th, there was no way to cure that fear.

In real life, when things had seemed to calm down a bit, the second building of the twin towers collapsed, reigniting the panic, and doubling the terror all within a few minutes. A similar event occurs in the film, where it seems as if they have the beast figured out, and the attacks are a bit less frequent. All of a sudden, these large dog-sized parasites begin to drop from the creatures body and add a whole new element of terror to the already horrific situation. The parasites begin attacking the people below, and cause one of the main characters Marlena, played by Lizzy Caplan, to die in a disgusting and horrific manner.

Another connection between the two, and possibly the most obvious is the location, New York City. It is common for a large-scale disaster movie or large monster movie to take place in a city like New York or London, as they are some of the largest and most recognizable cities in the world, and therefore people will be able to relate with the destruction of it more than any other city that they may have never heard of before. But I believe that the setting was chosen for more of a reason than just the normal relatable reason. I believe New York was chosen to really seal in the fact that this movie is an allusion to 9/11. The viral marketing for the movie adds to the effect that the director and producers wished to give off, in the sense that they wanted the movie to feel as real as possible. The trailers for the movie were advertised as footage that the U.S. Government recovered from the area formerly known as Central Park, and did not really have any bearings of a normal movie trailer. In addition, each of the main characters was given their own Myspace page with various posts, music pages and even had them all as friends with each other. The pictures and posts on their pages really made these characters feel like normal people in our own world, and added to the tragedy of the movie by having these people we “know” be taken away from us in this horrific situation about which we can do nothing about.

Finally, while not confirmed or officially canon yet, there is a theory going around that has a lot of credibility to it. It theorizes that there are actually two monsters, not just one, that are attacking New York City in the film, specifically a mother and a child. This is supported by the fact, that in the few glimpses we get of the monster, there are various differences between the views we get, with one of the monsters being much larger and older looking, and the other being slightly smaller, and younger looking. It is theorized that the child accidently made its way to earth, and is not acting out of malicious intent, but is just scared. When it is attacked, the mother comes to its rescue and attacks the city in order to protect it. The innocents end up paying for the actions of the true attackers. Cloverfield and 9/11 may not seem very connected at first glimpse, but upon further inspection, you see just how closely related the two actually are.

Maika Monroe as JayHeight in It Follows (2014)

Written by Mark Young

Horror is a genre that I personally dislike.  I avoid horror movies at all cost, even leaving parties simply because I find them to be that distasteful.  That being said, It Follows (David Robert Mitchell, 2014) is a film that has brought new life into a worn out genre. 

Although I am probably nitpicking here, I believe there is a difference between horror films and thrillers.  The fun in watching a thriller is the intensity, uncertainty, fear, and weird (usually in the guise of a supernatural happening).  The fun in watching a horror film is all about blood, gore, violence, and monsters.  And it is by these definitions that I find horror to be so undesirable of a genre.  It Follows is a much more intelligent film than slashers or horror movies of old.  Yet I must recognize that it is only because of the work in older horror movies that the modern thrillers can even exist.  After all, the thriller genre is simply a modification of the horror genre.  I do feel that Thrillers have found their own two feet and do deserve to be classified apart from horror.  And It Follows is one of those films that sets the thriller genre apart.

The story of It Follows is a simple one.  A young girl named Jay has sex with the boy she has been dating and unknowingly has become the heir to the supernatural being known only as “It.”  The boy explains to Jay that this being will follow her, can look like anyone, and will kill her if she allows it to touch her.  His advice is to just pass it on.  He explains, “Just sleep with someone else and tell him to do the same thing.”

This movie has been heavily criticized because of its seemingly pro-abstinence point of view.  However, I feel that is an over simplification of the deeply nuanced critique this film offers of sex among American teenagers.  Clearly this film is one that has a lot to say about sex.  It Follows offers critiques of rape and how people handle it, the difference in attitudes about sex between boys and girls, and even the part that sex plays in meaningful lasting relationships.

It Follows is a unique take on the thriller genre.  It is beautifully shot, with believable performances from all its members, and a frightening story made even creepier by the fact that most of it takes place in broad daylight.  I would recommend this film to all fans of the genre and people who love well-crafted films. 

I would add one simple caveat, there are some intense and graphic scenes that are not suitable for all viewers.  So please be aware of that when viewing this film.  Otherwise, see this movie and enjoy.