(NOTE: All the films on this page are not used in
class every semester, and some films screened in class may not appear on this
page. You may find this page useful for assignments on films that you are
assigned to watch outside of class, and may even wish to save it for any future
self-directed film study you can do by viewing the films on your own.)
Battleship
Potemkin
(USSR, 1925).
Directed
by Sergei Eisenstein. Scenario by Eisenstein from an outline by Nina
Agadzhanova-Shutko and Eisenstein. Assistant director: Gregori Alexandrov.
Photographed by Edward Tisse. Subtitles by Nikolai Aseyev and Sergei Tretyakov.
Produced by Goskino, Moscow. First shown at the “1905” celebration at the
Bolshoi Theatre, Moscow, on December 21, 1925. Re-released with new music and
introductory narration for its 25th anniversary in 1950.
CAST:
Alexander Antonov (Vakulinchuk), Grigori Alexandrov (Senior Officer
Gilyarovsky), Vladimir Barsky (Commander Golikov), Alexander Lyovshin (Petty
Officer), Levchenko (Boatswain), Mikhail Gomorov (Matyushenko), Marusov
(Officer), I. Bobrov, Andrei Fait, (Recruits) Konstantin Feldman (Student),
Repnikova (woman on the steps), Sergei Eisenstein (Priest), Beatrice Vitoldi
(mother with baby carriage), sailors of the Black Sea fleet of the Red Navy,
citizens of Odessa, members of the Proletkult Theatre, Moscow.
75
minutes
Who
is the hero of Potemkin ? What is the effect of having such a hero?
How
does Eisenstein manipulate time? How much “real” time goes by from beginning to
end of the film? How can you tell? How does Eisenstein slow time down? Speed it
up? Why does he handle time in this way?
How
would you describe the acting in Potemkin ? What methods of characterization does Eisenstein employ? Is this
effective? Why or why not?
Potemkin is divided into five
parts, indicated by “Act” titles in some prints of the film. What is each part
about? Where does the climax of each part occur? What is the relationship of
each part to the others? Is there a progression of any kind?
What
symbols can you find in Potemkin? How effective are they?
How
does Eisenstein use the physical world? What is the relationship between people
and machines in Potemkin? Are machines and objects shown to be good or
bad?
Potemkin was made eight years after
the successful Russian Revolution, and depicts events that occurred during the
unsuccessful attempted revolution of 1905. Why would Eisenstein (and by
implication, the Soviet government) want to remind the Russian people of a
revolution that failed? Why would he want to create a revolutionary fervor
among the beneficiaries of a successful revolution? What is the primary point
Eisenstein seems to be making?
Is
Potemkin a work of art, a piece of propaganda, both, neither?? How can
you tell?
Does
Potemkin seem “realistic” to you in the way it presents events? Is it
like a documentary (and if so, how)? What kinds of things are shown that could
not possibly be shown in a documentary?
Does
Potemkin seem any more or less effective in any way, now that the
Communist government of the Soviet Union has fallen? How and why?
The
Birth of a Nation (USA-Epoch Releasing, 1915)
Produced
and Directed by D. W. Griffith. Screenplay by D. W. Griffith and Frank E.
Woods, Jr., based on the novel and play The Clansman and the novel The
Leopard’s Spots by Thomas W. Dixon. Cinematography by G. W. “Billy” Bitzer.
Edited by James Smith. Costumes by Robert Goldstein. Music Composed and
Compiled by Joseph Carl Breil.
CAST:
Lillian Gish (Elsie Stoneman), Mae Marsh (Flora Cameron), Henry B. Walthall
(Ben Cameron), Miriam Cooper (Margaret Cameron), Mary Alden (Lydia Brown),
Ralph Lewis (Austin Stoneman), George Seigmann (Silas Lynch), Walter Long
(Gus), Robert Harron (Ted Stoneman), Wallace Reid (Jeff the Blacksmith), Joseph
Henabery (Abraham Lincoln), Elmer Clifton (Phil Stoneman), Josephine Crowell
(Mrs. Cameron), Spottiswoode Aitken (Dr. Cameron), Donald Crisp (General
Ulysses S. Grant), Howard Gaye (General Robert E. Lee), Raoul Walsh (John
Wilkes Booth)
What
aspects of The Birth of a Nation do you think made it so popular upon
its initial release and for many years afterward? What aspects of the film made
it (and still make it) so controversial? Are some of them the same?
The
American Civil War had been over for 50 years when The Birth of a Nation
came out, and many of its veterans were still alive. What is the film’s
attitude towards war in general, and the Civil War in particular?
Griffith
consciously copied the look of well-known paintings, photographs, and actual
locations for this film. How closely do Griffith’s reconstructions of
historical settings, characters, and incidents fit your own knowledge of the
period portrayed?
How
does the tone of the film shift after the intermission? What are the main
themes of the first half and what are the main themes of the second half?
How
does Griffith use cinematography and editing at different points in the film?
When does he use long shots and when does he use medium shots or close-ups?
What scenes are predominately in long takes, what scenes use rapid cutting, and
what scenes vary the pacing within them to reflect the mood?
How
consistent are the acting styles between one performer and another? Do some
actors seem to change styles or intensity within the film? Which actors use
more subtle gestures and which actors use broader gestures? Which are more
effective in the particular context?
If
you have read the novel, how closely does Griffith follow the plot in his film?
In his visual interpretation of the story, how does Griffith tone down, change,
or eliminate the inflammatory racism of Dixon’s verbal description? Why does
what remains on the screen still offend many people?
The
Blue Angel
(Germany-Ufa/Paramount, 1930)
Directed by Josef von
Sternberg. Written by Joseph von Sternberg and Robert Liebmann, from the novel
by Heinrich Mann, (courtesy writing credits: Carl Zuckmayer and Karl
Vollmoeller). Produced by Erich Pommer. Photographed by Gunther Rittau and Hans
Schneeberger. Décor by Otto Hunte and Emil Hasler. Music by Friedrich
Hollander. Lyrics by Robert Liebmann.
CAST: Emil Jannings (Professor Immanuel Rath),
Marlene Dietrich (Lola Lola), Kurt Gerron (Kiepert), Rosa Valetti (Guste), Hans
Albers (Mazeppa), Reinhold Bernt (The Clown), Eduard von Winterstein (The
Headmaster), Rolf Muller (Angst), Roland Verno (Lohmann), Karl Bollhaus
(Ertzum), Robert Klein-Lork (Goldstaub).
103
minutes
An
early sound film, The Blue Angel depends very much on visual details to
make its points, much like a silent film. How does von Sternberg delineate the
decline of Professor Rath visually? What are some of the striking visual
details in the film as a whole?
The
Blue Angel
was filmed entirely on a sound stage (i.e., there are no “real” outdoor
scenes). What is the effect of this? What are the settings like? What is
unusual about the streets when we do see them? How would you describe the décor
of the Blue Angel café?
It
is often said that Emil Jannings (Rath) and Marlene Dietrich (Lola) are actors
from two different worlds. How do their acting styles differ? How does this
affect the way we view their characters? Do their acting styles ever seem to
clash?
A
clown appears frequently in the film, although he almost never speaks. What is
his function? What can we guess about him?
What
motives are we given for Lola Lola’s behavior? What is her attitude towards
Rath at the beginning of the film? Before the wedding? After the wedding? At
the end of the film?
Is
Lola Lola a femme fatale? What is a femme fatale?
What
is the method of narration in The Blue Angel? Does this remind you of a
play? How is time handled in the film? What kind of devices does von Sternberg
use to link scenes together?
Does
von Sternberg employ symbols in this film? What are they and how do they
contribute to the themes of the film? What are the themes of the film?
Blue
Velvet
(USA-De Laurentiis Entertainment Group, 1986)
Written and Directed by
David Lynch. Executive Producer, Richard Roth. Cinematography by Frederick
Elmes. Editing by Duwayne Dunham. Sound design by Alan Splet. Production Design
by Patricia Norris. Music by Angelo Badalamenti.
CAST:
Kyle MacLachlan (Jeffrey), Laura Dern (Sandy), Isabella Rossellini (Dorothy),
Dennis Hopper (Frank), Hope Lange, George Dickerson, Dean Stockwell
120
minutes
Do
you think that Blue Velvet is intended to be taken seriously as a crime
drama/melodrama or as some critics have suggested is actually a perverse
comedy? Might it be described as both of these or as something else entirely
different? What about the film leads you to think one or the other?
Do
you think the story depicted on the screen is supposed to be really happening
to the characters, or is it all a dream? What makes you think so?
David
Lynch was a painter before he became a filmmaker. What are some notable ways he
uses pictorial composition and colors to emphasize aspects of the story?
How
is the film’s use of its soundtrack different from other films you have seen.
How does the sound contribute to the film’s impact? Which scenes use sound in a
particularly memorable way?
What
kind of characters are Jeffrey and Sandy? Do you think Frank and Dorothy might
be considered their alter egos, or simply characters whose lifestyles are
drastically different?
The
Bride of Frankenstein (USA-Universal, 1935)
Directed
by James Whale. Produced by Carl Laemmle, Jr.
Written by William Hurlbut and John Balderston, from the novel Frankenstein
by Mary Shelly. Photographed by John Mescall. Special Effects by John P.
Fulton. Art Direction by Charles D. Hall. Music by Franz Waxman. Makeup by Jack
Pierce. Edited by Ted Hunt.
CAST: Boris Karloff (The Monster), Colin Clive (Henry Frankenstein), Elsa Lanchester (Mary Shelly and The Bride), Ernest Thesiger (Dr. Pretorius), O. P. Heggie (The Hermit), Una O’Connor (Minnie), Valerie Hobson (Elizabeth), Gavin Gordon (Lord Byron), Douglas Walton (Percy Shelly), E. E. Clive (The Burgomaster).
75
minutes
One
important aspect of mise en scene is costume and makeup. What do these
elements contribute in this film? What, in particular, strikes you as notable
in the costuming and makeup of the monster (Boris Karloff)?
Another
element of mise en scene is setting. What are some notable aspects of
the setting in The Bride of Frankenstein? One way of thinking about this
is to ask, where does the film take place? What does the world of the film
“look” like? How realistic or unrealistic is that world?
Another
way of thinking about setting would be to consider the fact that the film seems
to have been shot entirely in a studio, on indoor soundstages and backlot sets,
rather than in a “real” village. Why do you think a filmmaker would choose to
film in a studio? What are some of the effects of this choice?
The
acting styles (figure expression and movement, another element of mise en
scene) vary considerably from character to character, but, in general, one
might say that the primary acting mode is non-realistic. Does this work for or
against the mood and tone of the film? Which performances seem the most
effective? Which least? Why?
James
Whale, the director of The Bride of Frankenstein, uses a number of odd,
tilted camera angles rather than filming every scene on a normal, horizontal
plane. What might be the purpose of this? In which scene is this most evident?
Does
the film create sympathy for the “monster?” With what historical or mythic
figure is he associated (and how is this done)? Are these associations
meaningful? Why or why not?
The
Bride of Frankenstein
contains a good deal of humor, which was unusual for a horror film in the
1930s. Does this add to or detract from your enjoyment of the film?
It
has been said that the only “normal” character in this film is the monster. Is
this a reasonable statement? What would such a conclusion say about the film’s
meaning?
Some
critics have seen this film as making a statement about the nature of racial
prejudice, especially in the context of the frequent lynchings of
African-Americans taking place in the southern United States in the 1930s.
Others find it to be a statement about homosexuality and public fear of
homosexuals. What elements in the film might support such interpretations?
Casablanca (USA-Warner Brothers,1942)
Directed
by Michael Curtiz. Written by Julius J. and Philip G. Epstein. Produced by Hal
B. Wallis. Photographed by Arthur Edeson. Edited by Owen Marks. Production
design by Carl Jules Weyl. Music by Max Steiner. Sound by Francis. J. Scheid.
Released November, 1942.
CAST: Humphrey Bogart (Rick), Ingrid Bergman (Ilsa Lund), Paul Henreid (Victor Laszlo), Claude Rains (Captain Louis Renault), Conrad Veidt (Major Strasser), Sydney Greenstreet (Señor Ferrari), Peter Lorre (Ugarte), S. Z. Sakall (Carl), Madeleine LeBeau (Yvonne), Dooley Wilson (Sam), Joy Page (Annina Brandel), John Qualen (Berger), Leonid Kinski (Sasha), Helmut Dantine (Jan), Curt Bois (Pickpocket), Marcel Dalio (Croupier).
102
minutes.
The
way Casablanca’s narrative develops, as is true of most Hollywood films,
is through a tight sequence, or chain, of cause and effect. What are some of
the important links in that chain?
If
the major motivating force in classical Hollywood cinema is desire, what
are the desires of the major characters in this film? To what extent are these
desires satisfied?
Rick
and Lazlo can be said to represent two different types of heroism. How would
you categorize each one as a hero? What qualities, if any, do they share? How
do they most differ from each other?
Casablanca has become something of a
“cult” film, in part because of the personality of Humphrey Bogart. What is it
about Bogart as a performer that makes him interesting?
How
is Ilsa characterized in this film? Would it be fair to say that the main
female character in Casablanca is merely an object of exchange between
men? Does Ilsa ever do anything in the film?
Although
the narrative is constructed on a change of heart on Rick’s part, are we ever
in any real doubt as to what Rick’s final choice will be? What are some of the
clues, from the very beginning of the film, that tell us what Rick’s future
behavior will be?
The
story in Casablanca takes place in two worlds, Paris and Casablanca. How
are these worlds compared and contrasted in the film?
One
critic has suggested that Casablanca is structured around the concept of
theft and thievery. How many different “thefts” are there in the film and how
are they related to each other?
Citizen
Kane (USA-RKO,
1941)
Directed
by Orson Welles. Written by Herman J. Mankiewicz and Orson Welles. Photographed
by Gregg Toland. Edited by Robert Wise and Mrk Robson. Art Direction by Van
Nest Polglase and Perry Ferguson. Costumes by Edward Stevenson. Decors by
Darrell Silvera. Music by Bernard Herrmann. Mrcury Productions. RKO Pictures.
Premiered May 1, 1941, at the Palace Theatre, New York.
CAST: Orson Welles (Charles Foster Kane), Joseph Cotton (Jedediah Leland) Dorothy Comingore (Susan Alexander Kane), Agnes Moorhead (Kane’s mother), Ruth Warrick (Emily Norton Kane), Ray Collins (James W. Gettys), Erskine Sanford (Mr. Carter, Everett Sloane (Mr. Bernstein), William Alland (Thompson, the reporter), Paul Stewart (Raymond, the butler, George Colouris (Walter Parks Thatcher), Fortunio Bonanova (Signor Matisti), Gus Schilling (Headwaiter), Philip Van Zandt (Rawlston), Harry Shannon (Kane, Sr.).
119 minutes
The
narrative structure of Citizen Kane, the way the story is told, is one
of the film’s most distinctive aspects, and certain episodes in the film serve
more than one narrative or thematic function. How many functions does the “News
on the March” newsreel serve? What are they?
The
story of Citizen Kane is told primarily in flashback, and some episodes
are related more than once by different people. What is the effect of this? Do
the different versions of events contradict each other? Is there any
significance to who tells what?
Since
the events of Citizen Kane cover a long period of time, and since they
are not always related chronologically, there is a strong possibility that
viewers may be confused as to what happens when. How does Welles prevent this
from happening?
Many
people (including Welles himself) have referred to the whole “Rosebud” devise
as “dollar book Freud,” a cheap and superficial plot device. What do you think
Rosebud contributes to the film? Is it meant to “explain” Kane’s character?
Does it? Assuming you haven’t guessed already, do you feel cheated when Rosebud
is explained at the end?
When
Orson Welles first saw RKO studios, he is reported to have said, “This is the
biggest electric train set a boy ever had to play with.” Is this feeling
reflected in Citizen Kane? In what ways?
Citizen
Kane
employs much “depth of focus” photography which allows people and objects to be
in sharp focus both in the foreground and the background simultaneously. In which
sequences is this particularly evident? What does this technique contribute to
the film?
Almost
all of the actors in Citizen Kane (including Welles himself) came from a
background in radio and had never been in a film before. Is this radio
background in any way evident in the film? Does sound, in general, play an
important part in the film? Are there any unusual uses of sound that stand out?
Is
Citizen Kane a visually realistic film? What are the sets like? How does
the appearance of the sets, combined with the lighting, contribute to the
meaning of the film?
Contempt
(Le Mépris)
(France-Concordia/Embassy, 1963)
Written
and Directed by Jean-Luc Godard. Produced by Georges de Beauregard, Carlo
Ponti, Joseph E. Levine. Based upon the novel Il Disprezzo (A Ghost at Noon)
by Alberto Moravia. Photographed by Raoul Coutard. Edited by Agnes Guillemot,
Lila Lakshmanan. Music by Georges Delerue.
CAST:
Brigitte Bardot (Camille Javal), Michel Piccoli (Paul Javal), Jack Palance
(Jeremy Prokosh), Fritz Lang (himself), Georgia Moll (Francesca Vanini,
Jean-Luc Godard (Lang’s assistant director) Linda Veras (Siren).
103
minutes
Jean-Luc
Godard was an influential filmmaker of the French nouvelle vague or “new
wave” in the 1960s, which challenged traditional styles of filmmaking,
especially overly literary scripts and studio production techniques. These
filmmakers preferred more location shooting, looser acting and photographic styles,
and looked at cinema as a means of personal self-expression, considering the
director as author (or “auteur”). Contempt is probably the most “mainstream”
and commercial of Godard’s films, yet it still was considered too “artsy” by
American audiences of the time. What about Contempt seems to depart from
a traditional Hollywood approach, and what about it seems similar?
If
you had to provide the “referential” meaning of this film (as defined by
Bordwell and Thompson in Film Art: An Introduction), a bare bones plot
summary, how would you word it? What about going deeper into its “explicit” and
“implicit” meanings? Can you think of any possible “symptomatic” interpretations?
Do
you think there is any significance to the fact that Brigitte Bardot’s actual
birth name is Camille Javal, the name of her character in this film, or that
famous film director Fritz Lang is playing himself? What sorts of symbolism can
you detect in the film (in story, character, and/or imagery)?
How
does cinematographer Raoul Coutard compose the elements of the mise en scene in
the widescreen frame? What are some ways he uses space in the frame? How are
colors used in this film?
Godard
originally suggested Kim Novak and Frank Sinatra in the lead roles but was
turned down by the producers. Who different or similar do you suppose the film
would have been with them instead of Brigitte Bardot and Michel Piccoli?
Part
of the story deals with the difficulties of adapting a novel or work from
another medium (Homer’s The Odyssey is an epic poem) into a movie. What
films have you seen that were adapted from novels? If you read the book
beforehand, how did that influence the way you watched the film, and did it
live up to the experience of reading the novel? How was it changed, and why do
you think it was changed? What storytelling techniques do you think seem better
suited to the written word and what storytelling techniques seem better suited
to cinema?
Deliverance (USA-Warner Brothers,
1972)
Produced
and Directed by John Boorman. Written by James Dickey, from his novel.
Photographed by Vilmos Zsigmond. Art Direction by Fred Harpman. Music by Eric
Weissberg. Song: “Dueling Banjos” by Weissberg and Steve Mandel. Edited by Tom
Priestly.
CAST:
John Voigt (Ed), Burt Reynolds (Lewis), Ned Beatty (Bobby), Ronny Cox (Drew),
Bill McKinney (Maountain Man), Herbert “Cowboy” Coward (Toothless Man), James
Dickey (Sheriff Bullard), Ed Ramsey (Old Man), Billy Redden (Lonny).
109
minutes
If
you had to provide the “referential” meaning of this film (as defined by
Bordwell and Thompson in Film Art: An Introduction), a bare bones plot
summary, how would you word it?
Deliverance, like many narratives,
employs the structure of a journey. What, in your opinion, are advantages of
this type of plot?
Bordwell
and Thompson claim that every element in a movie (or any work of art) has one
or more functions—in other words, everything in a movie should have a
reason for being there. Assuming this is a correct point of view, how many
functions can you attach to the so-called “Dueling Banjos” sequence near the
beginning of the film?
What
repeated elements can you identify in Deliverance? Here you might
think in terms of incidents (things that happen), dialogue, places, character
traits, etc.
Any
significant, repeated element in a film can be termed a motif (just as
in music). Can you identify one or more motifs in Deliverance (for
example: visual elements, actions, props, sounds, etc.)?
Can
you suggest some ways the similar elements you identified in the previous two
questions are also examples of difference or variation?
One
might argue that the four main characters (the protagonists) in Deliverance
share certain traits with, and significantly differ, from each of the other
characters. Can you describe each of these characters in terms of their
similarities to and differences from each other?
An
important element of difference in Deliverance could be thought
of as the obvious contrast between the four “city people” and the “country
people” with whom they interact. What are some of the significant differences
among these groups?
If
we think of the formal development of any narrative as “a progression
moving from X through Y to Z,” how might we characterize the development
of the narrative in
Deliverance? In other words, how does
the ending compare to the beginning? What has changed and how did the change
come about?
Is
Deliverance finally a unified or a disunified film? One
way to think about this is to ask whether there are any “loose ends”—plot
elements left dangling, important characters ignored or forgotten, issues
unresolved, or questions unanswered.
Would
you be able to evaluate Deliverance in terms of at least one of the
criteria set forth by Bordwell and Thompson (coherence, complexity,
originality)?
Directed
by Billy Wilder. Screenplay by Billy Wilder and Raymond Chandler. Based on the
novel by James M. Cain. Photographed by
John F. Seitz. Art Decoration by Hans Dreir and Hal Pereira. Music by Miklos
Rozsa, with Symphony in D minor by Cesar Franck. Sound by Stanley Cooley.
Edited by Doane Harrison.
CAST:
Fred MacMurray (Walter Neff), Barbara Stanwyck (Phyllis Dietrichson), Edward G.
Robinson (Barton Keyes), Porter Hall (Mr. Jackson), Jean Heather (Lola
Dietrichson), Tom Powers (Mr. Dietrichson), Byron Barr (Nino Zachette), Richard
Gaines (Mr. Norton), Fortunio Bonanova (Sam Gorlopis)
107
minutes.
Double
Indemnity
combines many ingredients of the classic murder story: a “perfect” crime, a
large insurance policy, a tenacious investigator, and the inevitable
falling-out among the thieves. The one element this film purposely lacks is
surprise: we know from the first five minutes who did what to whom. How does
the film manage to sustain interest in spite of this?
What
details of mise-en-scene seem to contribute to the overall mood or tone
of this film? How would you describe the mood of Double Indemnity?
Does
this film seem to fit the pattern of the classical Hollywood film? Are the
problems set up at the outset of the film resolved by the end? Does Double
Indemnity follow the pattern of the usual “boy meets girl” plot?
Define,
as carefully as you can, the key elements of the main actors’ performances in
this film (Stanwyck, MacMurray, Robinson). Does each actor seem especially
suited to the role he or she plays? Can you imagine other actors in the same
roles?
How
might one best describe the motivation of Phyllis in the film? Is she primarily
interested in money? Is she in any way a sympathetic character?
In
terms of narrative, how would you describe the plot of Double
Indemnity in relation to its story (as differentiated by Bordwell
and Thompson in the textbook Film Art: An Introduction)? How much time
passes by during the plot of the film? During the story?
How
would you describe the relationship between Walter Neff and Barton Keyes?
Double
Indemnity
relies a good bit on voice-over narration. Do you think this is a good device
or a distraction? What is the effect of this kind of narration by one of the
film’s characters? How would it be different if the narrator were not a
character in the story?
It’s
a Wonderful Life (USA-Liberty Films, 1946)
Directed
by Frank Capra. Screenplay by Frances Goodrich, Albert Hackett, and Frank
Capra, based on Philip Van Doren Sterns’ story “The Greatest Gift.” Additional
scenes by Jo Swerling. Photographed by Joseph Walker and Joseph Biroc. Art
Direction by Jack Okey. Set Decorations by Emile Kuri. Costumes by Edward
Stevenson. Music by Dmitri Tiomkin. Sound by Richard Van Hessen and Clem
Portman. Edited by William Hornbeck.
CAST: James Stewart (George Bailey), Donna Reed
(Mary Hatch), Lionel Barrymore (Mr. Potter), Thoms Mitchell (Uncle Billy),
Henry Travers (Clarence Oddbody), Beulah Bondi (Mrs. Bailey), Ward Bodn (Bert),
Frank Faylen (Ernie), Gloria Grahame (Violet), H. B. Warner (Mr. Gower), Todd
Karns (Harry Bailey), Samuel S. Hinds (Mr. Bailey).
129
minutes.
What
kind of a hero is George Bailey? How is Mary, the heroine, presented? What is
Frank Capra’s view of small-town America in this film?
What
conflicts does It’s a Wonderful Life concern itself with? Are the
conflicts resolved by the end of the film?
Both
Mr. Potter and Bailey, Sr. are capitalists. What kind of capitalists are they?
What business values does each represent? Which of them best fits the American
idea of success, as you understand it? If you have seen Buster Keaton’s Steamboat
Bill, Jr. (made 18 years earlier), what parallels are there in the
socio-economic elements of the two plots? Are these themes still timely today?
It’s
a Wonderful Life
was Frank Capra’s first film after coming home from World War II. Does the film
in any way seem to reflect or comment upon the experiences of World War II?
Capra’s
film depends, to a large extent, on its fantasy framework. What is the effect
of the fantasy elements (the angel, Clarence, etc.)? Why do you think Capra
thought it necessary to fall back on this familiar (but, for him, unusual) plot
device?
There
are a number of suggestions, early in the film, that George will never leave
Bedford Falls. What are some of these hints?
An
important motif in It’s a Wonderful Life has to do with the idea
of home and of “housing” in general. How is this motif worked out in the film,
and what is its general significance?
Many
people find It’s a Wonderful Life unbearably corny and sentimental,
while others think that the film presents an unusually grim view of American
middle-class life. Is either view entirely correct? Is it possible that the
film exhibits both attitudes at the same time?
The
Kid
(USA-First National, 1921)
Written,
Produced, and Directed by Charles Chaplin; Associate Director, Chuck Reisner;
Cinematography by Rollie Totheroh.
CAST:
Charles Chaplin (The Tramp), Jackie Coogan (The Kid), Edna Purviance (The
Woman), Carl Miller (The Man), Tom Wilson (The Policeman), Chuck Reisner (The
Bully), Albert Austin (a crook), Nelly Bly Blaker (slum woman), Henry Bergman
(proprietor of lodging house), Lita Grey (The Flirting Angel).
62
minutes.
Chaplin’s
The Kid is often referred to as a comedy, but a large percentage of the
film deals with serious social issues. How does this combination affect your
reaction while you watch it?
What
(or who) are the most common sources of humor in The Kid? How does
Chaplin incorporate comedy into his more serious (even melodramatic) plot?
What
sorts of characters appear in The Kid? What attitude does the film take
toward them? What makes them sympathetic (or not)? How does each function in
the plot? Why do you think their names are never revealed? What effect does
that have on your involvement in the story?
How
does Chaplin use the setting, costumes, and props as an integral part of the
narrative itself? …as sources of humor?
…as a means of social commentary?
How
does Chaplin suggest symbolic connotations by the way he stages the action in
front of the camera or inserts views of specific things into the action? What
are some symbolic images you can recall from the film? Do they seem appropriate
and effective in the context of the plot or forced and heavy-handed?
What
are some recurring motifs (themes, actions, props, image compositions, etc.)
you can identify?
Chaplin
composed his own music score for The Kid a half-century after completing
the film. If you saw it with his score, how does his music help or hinder
appreciation of the film? What parts seem most or least effective?
If
you’ve seen films by other silent era comedians, how is Chaplin’s approach to
comedy similar and how is it different? How does he construct his overall
narrative, compared with other movie comedies (or dramas)?
If
you’ve seen any of Chaplin’s short comedies, how does this (his first feature-length
film) continue his trademark style of humor and story material, and how does it
represent a growth or change in style?
If
you have seen the Adam Sandler film Big Daddy, what sorts of comparisons
and contrasts can you make between it and Chaplin’s The Kid?
North
By Northwest
(USA-MGM, 1959)
Produced
and Directed by Alfred Hitchcock; Written by Ernest Lehman; Cinematography by
Robert Burks; Edited by George Tomasini; Music by Bernard Herrmann; Production
Design by Robert Boyle; Art Design by William A. Horning, Merrill Pye; Set
Design by Robert Boyle, Henry Grace, Frank R. McKelvy; Special Efffectgs by A.
Arnold Gillespie and Lee LeBlanc; Makeup by William Tuttle.
CAST:
Cary Grant (Roger O. Thornhill), Eva Marie Saint (Eve Kendall), James Mason
(Phillip Vandamm), Jessie Royce Landis (Clara Thornhill), Leo G. Carroll
(Professor), Martin Landau (Leonard).
136
minutes.
In
a number of his films Hitchcock draws the audience into the story and then
suddenly seem to change plots just as the viewer is getting familiar with the
situation. What effect does this have in North By Northwest? If you have
already seen Psycho (his very next film, 1960), how might you compare
his story-telling technique in the two?
What
kind of person is the character played by Cary Grant presented as? How is the
audience made to sympathize with him?
What is your first impression of the character played by Eva Marie Saint? What gives you that impression? How does Hitchcock change your perception of her throughout the film?
How does Hitchcock build your expectations and then surprise you with some sort of reversal from time to time?
How would you describe the basic plot of the film? Can you identify any subtexts or social commentary going on as well? What sorts of symbolism or possible double meanings (of dialogue or imagery) did you notice?
North
By Northwest
runs for two and a quarter hours. Does it seem that long? How does the film
hold your interest? Are there any parts that seem to drag, and if so, why?
How
does the choice of camera angle affect the way you react to particular scenes?
Directed by James Whale.
Produced by Carl Laemmle, Jr. Associate Producer: E. M. Asher. Screnplay by
Benn W. Levy, based on the novel Benighted, by J. B. Priestley.
Cinematography by Arthur Edeson. Music by David Broekman.
CAST: Raymond Massey
(Philip Waverton), Gloria Stuart (Margaret Waverton), Melvyn Douglas
(Penderel), Charles Laughton (Sir William Porterhouse), Boris Karloff (Morgan),
Lillian Bond (Gladys), Ernest Thesiger (Horace Femm), Eva Moore (Rebecca Femm),
John [Elspeth] Dudgeon (Roderick Femm), Bember Wills (Saul Femm).
72 minutes
NOTE: See also the study questions (especially those regarding mise en scene) under The Bride of Frankenstein, made by the same director at the same studio, and featuring some of the same cast.)
The Old Dark House has elements of the horror film, the mystery and suspense film, intimate character drama, and comedy. Which seem to predominate?
“Old dark house” movies are a subgenre in themselves, an offshoot of a popular stage melodrama form. What other films have you seen that take place almost entirely within an old dark house, and how do they compare?
Are there portions of The Old Dark House that you think might have been changed if it was made two years later—after the enforcement of the Hollywood Production Code? (What is the first word of dialogue in the movie?)
Many of the cast appeared in numerous films, some in a wide variety of roles and others often typecast. How well suited is each actor to his or her role? Do you recognize any from other movies you’ve seen? If you saw Titanic (1997) can you recognize Gloria Stuart? Why do you think the director cast a woman to portray the aged father of the household?
If you have seen Frankenstein (1931) or Bride of Frankenstein (1935), both by the same director as The Old Dark House, what similarities can you recognize in filmic style, plot motifs, and story themes? If you have seen Gods and Monsters, a biographical film about James Whale, does it give you any insight into aspects of The Old Dark House or any of his other films you may have seen?
On
the Waterfront
(USA-Columbia, 1954)
Directed
by Elia Kazan. Produced by Sam Spiegel. Written by Budd Schulberg. Based on
articles by Malcom Johnson. Photographed by Boris Kaufman. Edited by Gene
Milford. Art Direction by Richard Dayl Music by Leonard Bernstein. Released
October, 1954.
CAST:
Marlon Brando (Terry Malloy), Eva Marie Saint (Edie Doyle), Karl Malden (Father
Barry), Lee J. Cobb (Johnny Friendly), Rod Steiger (Charley Malloy), Pat
Henning (‘Kayo’ Dugan), Leif Erickson (Glover), James Westerfield (Big Mac),
John Heldabrand (Mutt), Rudy Bond (Moose), John Hamilton (‘Pop’ Doyle), Martin
Balsam (Gillette), Tony Galento (Truck), Fred Gwynne (Slim), Nehemiah Persoff
(Driver), Pat Hingle (Waiter).
108
minutes
In
the 1950s, Hollywood tended more and more to make films “on location,” in
“real” places rather than on studio sound stages or back lots. On the
Waterfront was filmed entirely on the waterfront docks of New Jersey and
New York. What is the effect of this location filming? Do you think the film
would have been equally convincing had it been filmed in Hollywood?
Although
On the Waterfront was filmed on location, the art director for the film
won an Academy Award for his work. What, exactly, do you think the art director
(who traditionally designs sets for movies) did to deserve recognition?
What
social issues does this film deal with? How would you define the film’s point
of view in relation to social issues?
Marlon
Brando was as important an actor for the 1950s as, say, Clark Gable was for the
1930s or Bruce Willis for the 1990s. How would you describe, on the basis of
this film, Brando’s appeal? What kind of qualities does he embody??
What
is the film’s view of the relationship between the individual and society?
What, finally, changes the social awareness of Terry Malloy?
What
is the function of the priest in On the Waterfront? How do you respond
to the priest as Karl Malden plays him? Can you imagine another way of playing
the same character?
Although
ostensibly a “realistic” film, On the Waterfront employs a good deal of
symbolism and what might be called “poetic” touches. What are some of the
film’s symbols? How effective is the film in using these symbols? Which work
best and which work least well? What do you make of the symbolism of the film’s
ending? Given the political mood of the time and the director’s own
experiences, how might the entire film be viewed as a metaphor—a symbol for
something else?
The
Player
(USA, 1992)
Directed
by Robert Altman. Written by Michael Tolkin, from his novel. Produced by Cary
Brokaw, David Brown, Scott Bushnell, William S. Gilmore, and Michael Tolkin.
Original music by Thomas Newman. Cinematography by Jean Lépine. Film Editing by
Maysie Hoy. Production Design by Stephen Altman. Costume Design by Alexander
Julian. Sound by Kenneth R. Burton.
CAST:
Tim Robbins (Griffin Mill), Greta Scacchi (June Gudmundsdottir), Fred Ward
(Walter Stuckel), Whoopi Goldberg (Detective Susan Avery), Peter Gallagher
(Larry Levy), Brion James (Joel Levison), Cynthia Stevenson (Bonnie Sherow),
Vincent D’Onofrio (David Kahane), Dean Stockwell (Andy Civella), Richard E.
Grant (Tom Oakley), Sydney Pollack (Dick Mellen), Lyle Lovett (Detective
DeLongpre), Dina Merril (Celia), Angela Hall (Jan), Leah Ayres (Sandy), Paul
Hewitt (Jimmy Chase), plus assorted celebrities playing themselves.
123
minutes
The
Player
begins (during the opening credits) with what is known as a “long take” (see
Bordwell & Thompson, chapter on cinematography), a shot which contains no
internal editing or “cuts.” What might be the purpose, and what is the effect,
of using this relatively unusual way of filming a sequence?
Throughout
The Player a number of actors appear playing themselves—Burt Reynolds,
John Cusack, etc. In your opinion, does this make this film about Hollywood
seem ore “true to life,” or does it have the opposite effect, breaking our
illusion of reality (since other major actors are playing fictional
characters)? Or is it merely distracting?
As
the essay “Hollywood” in this manual indicates, many books and movies about
Hollywood focus on the figure of the writer. How are writers presented in The
Player? Does the film present a positive or negative image of the writer?
Director
Robert Altman has commented that “casting is 80% of making a movie.” If this is
so, did Altman make a mistake in casting Brion James, a rather odd-looking
actor who usually plays murderers, sadists, or psychopaths, as the head of the
film studio?
There
are a number of references to old movies in The Player (Touch of
Evil, M, The Bicycle Thief). How do these references function in the film?
Altman
likes to film scenes in which several conversations are going on at once (as
Orson Welles did as early as Citizen Kane in 1941). What is the point of
doing that, in your opinion? Again, we might ask if this makes the film more
“realistic” or if it is merely annoying since at times we cannot hear every
line of dialogue.
A
film will often use items in the background of the shot to make a point about
some more central thematic or plot issue. How does Altman use décor, posters, interior
decoration, etc., in this film? Another way of asking this question might be,
what kind of world do the filmmakers create for this film?
Altman
likes to have his actors improvise their dialogue during rehearsal, and he then
uses some of this improvised material for the actual filming. Is this something
we can sense as we watch the film? (The result can be somewhat bizarre—Whoopi
Goldberg, for example, improvises much of her dialogue, especially for the
scenes in the Pasadena police station.) What are some problems with
improvisation of that kind?
Psycho (USA-Paramount, 1960)
Produced
and directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Screenplay by Joseph Stephano, from the novel
by Robert Bloch. Photographed by John L. Russell. Art direction by Joseph
Hurley and Robert Clatworthy. Special effects by Clarence Champagne. Sets by
George Milo. Music by Bernard Herrmann. Sound engineering by Waldon Watson and
William Russell. Title design by Saul Bass. Edited by George Tomasini.
CAST: Anthony Perkins (Norman Bates), Janet Leigh
(Marion Crane), Vera Miles (Lila Crane), John Gavin (Sam Loomis), Martin Balsam
(Milton Arbogast), John McIntire (Sheriff Chambers), Laureen Tuttle (Mrs.
Chambers), Pat Hitchcock (Carolyn), Frank Albertson (Cassady), Simon Oakland
(Dr. Richmond), Vaughn Taylor (George Lowrey), John Anderson (Car Salesman),
Mort Mills (Policeman).
109
minutes
The
opening moments of Psycho suggest a documentary, with exact time and
place indicated. What might be a viewer’s expectations after such an opening?
The
early parts of Psycho encourage the audience to identify with Marion
(Janet Leigh). With whom do we identify in the rest of the film? How does
Hitchcock encourage this identification?
Hitchcock
filmed Psycho on a fairly low budget and in black and white (even though
six of his previous seven films had been in color). Does the somewhat “tacky”
look of the film add to or detract from your enjoyment of Psycho? Why?
Although
Marion Crane is a thief, she seems sympathetic to us. Why? What is it about the
nature of her crime and/or her personality that makes her seem relatively
“innocent?”
Psycho works in part by fooling
the audience a good deal of the time, and some of the best moments in the film
are complete surprises. Does Hitchcock “cheat” too much in order to fool his
audience? Hitchcock often claims that suspense is more effective than surprise.
Does he violate that concept here?
Many
people think that Bernard Herrmann’s music contributes mightily to this film’s
effect. In what ways is the music particularly effective?
Some
viewers have disliked the last part of Psycho, where the psychiatrist
explains what “really” happened. What is your reaction to this scene? Why do
you think Hitchcock included it? Does it serve to explain the film’s meaning?
What does it leave out of consideration?
Psycho
might be
described as a film built around the number “2,” a film of doublings and
reflections. What doubles, repetitions, contrasts, and substitutions do you
find in the film?
If
you have seen the remake (which used the same basic script, music and even
opening credits design), which of the two do you prefer? Why? Although much is
virtually identical in the remake, what are some of the differences? Why do you
think the director of the later film made the changes he did (other than simple
updating of dated elements)?
Rear
Window
(USA-Paramount, 1954)
Produced
and Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Screnplay by John Michael Hayes, based on a
story by Cornell Woolrich. Photographed by Robert Burks. Art Direction by Hal
Pereira, Joseph McMillan Johnson, Sam Comer, and Ray Mayer. Edited by George
Tomasini. Music by Franz Waxman.
CAST: James Stewart (L. B. Jeffries), Grace Kelly
(Lisa Fremont), Wendell Corey (Thomas J. Doyle), Thelma Ritter (Stella),
Raymond Burr (Lars Thorwald), Judith Evelyn (Miss Lonely Hearts), Ross
Bagdasarian (the composer), Georgine Darcy (Miss Torso), Jesslyn Fax (Miss
Hearing Aid).
112
minutes.
How
would you define the major conflict between Jeff (James Stewart) and Lisa
(Grace Kelly)? Does it go beyond the question of money? What values does each
represent?
Is
there a pattern in the way the women in Jeff’s life treat him? Does this tie in
with any of the film’s themes?
Could
one say that Lisa is “punished” in some way in the course of the film? If so,
what for?
What
do the various “stories” Jeff sees acted out from his window have in common? Is
there a suggestion that Jeff sees what he wants to see?
Rear
Window is
one of Hitchcock’s “single-set” films, films that take place primarily or
exclusively in one, fairly constrictive space (others are Lifeboat, Rope,
and Dial M for Murder). Is keeping to one location particularly
worthwhile in this film? Why or why not? Do you ever feel you would like the
film to leave the apartment?
Overall,
what seems to be Hitchcock’s attitude towards voyeurism here? Are we as
audience implicated in any way with Jeff’s fixation on his neighbors? Is there
any connection between Jeff and his creator Hitchcock?
The
courtyard outside Jeff’s window is clearly a set, constructed on a sound stage,
rather than a “real” courtyard in New York City. Does this bother you? How do
you think Hitchcock would justify his methods here?
Hitchcock
wanted to do something unusual with the musical score in Rear Window.
Did you notice anything out of the ordinary about the music?
Romeo
+ Juliet
(USA-20th Century Fox, 1996)
Directed
by Baz Luhrman; Produced by Baz Luhrmann, Gabriella Martinelli, Jill Bilcock, Martin
Brown, Catherine Martin; Screenplay by Craig Pearce and Baz Luhrmann, from the
play by William Shakespeare; Cinematography by Donald McAlpine; Editing by Jill
Bilcock; Production Design by Catherine Martin; Art Direction by Doug Hardwick;
Set Decoration by Brigitte Broch; Costume Design by Kym Barrett; Sound Designer
Gareth Vanderhope; Original music by Craig Armstrong, Marius De Vries, Nellee
Hooper
CAST:
Leonardo de Caprio (Romeo), Claire Danes (Juliet), John Leguizamo (Tybalt),
Harold Perrineau Jr (Mercutio), Dash Mihok (Benvolio), Paul Sorvino (Fulgencio
Capulet), Diane Venora (Gloria Capulet), Miriam Margolyes (Nurse), Brian
Dennehy (Ted Montague), Christina Pickles (Caroline Montague), Vondie
Curtis-Hall (Captain Prince), Paul Rudd (Dave Paris), M. Emmet Walsh
(Apothecary), Pete Postlethwaite (Father Laurence)
120
minutes
How
does this film version of Romeo and Juliet compare with any other
versions or stage productions you have seen? What about it do you think made it
a boxoffice hit when other films of Shakespeare often show only in art theatres
or on public television?
How
appropriate does the change of setting from Renaissance Italy to modern
California seem for a) the plot line, and b) the characters? Does the use of
Shakespeare’s original dialogue seem to clash with the setting or does it
become just another convention used to tell the story?
Can
you think of other Shakespeare plays that have been “modernized” or whose basic
stories were used in completely different time & place settings? How
effective were those versions in conveying the themes and issues of the play?
What does the fact that so many variations have been made on Shakespeare’s
plays say about his writing?
What
stands out about the film’s editing? What scenes can you think of when the
style of editing seems to change from fast-paced to slow-paced? What are the
emotional effects of those scenes and why do the editing techniques shift?
What
are some of the more striking images you can recall from the film, and how do they
contribute to the meaning of those scenes? How does the film use color and
picture composition and camera effects to complement the story (which can be
told exclusively through its dialogue)?
Shakespeare
is noted for his rich dialogue. How easy do you think this film version would
be to follow if the sound (or at least the dialogue track) were turned off?
Why?
How
is music used in the film? Is it effective? What are some other ways (other
than simply sets and costumes) that modern-day elements are worked into the
story?
Run
Lola Run (Germany,
1999)
Written and directed by Tom
Tykwer. Produced by Stefan Arndt. Executive Producer: Maria Köpf. Photography
by Frank Griebe. Edited by Mathilde Bonnefoy. Original Sound by Frank Behnke.
Sound Editory: Matthias Lempert. Music by Tom Tykwer, Johnny Klimek, Reinhold
Heil. Set Design by Alexander Manasse. Costume Design by Monika Jacobs.
CAST: Franka Potente,
Moritz Bleibtreu, Herbert Knaup, Nina Petri, Joachim Krol, Armin Rohde, Heino
Ferch, Suzanne von Borsody, Sebastian Schipper.
81 mintues
How
does this film manipulate time? Using the differentiation described by Bordwell
and Thompson in Film Art: An Introduction, how long a period does
the plot cover, and how long a period does the story encompass?
Consider
Bordwell and Thompson’s discussion of “frequency “ and “variation.” How does
the director use these characteristics in telling the story?
How
important is the soundtrack to the impact of the events? How is its various
elements (dialogue, music, sound effects) used in conjunction with the visual
editing—to complement or contrast with what we are seeing?
What
sorts of transitions and other editing techniques does the director incorporate
at different times? How do they contribute to the particular scene they are
used in or emphasize recurring visual motifs?
What
kinds of colors predominate in the images? What effect do they add to the
scenes?
Portions
of Run Lola Run were shot on 35mm film and portions were shot on
videotape. Can you notice a difference? Why do you think the director chose to
do this?
Why
do you suppose the director decided to tell essentially the same story three
different times? What new information does each version of the events tell you
about the characters? Which do you think is the “actual” outcome of the story?
Why?
The
Seventh Seal
(Det Sjunde Inseglet) (Sweden, 1957)
Written
and Directed by Ingmar Bergman. Produced by Allan Ekelund. Cinematography by Gunnar
Fischer. Edited by Lennart Wallen. Music composed by Erik Nordgren. Music
director, Sixten Ehrling. Set designer, P. A. Lundgren; specia effects, Evald
Andersson; costumes, Manne Lindholm; makeup, Nils Nittel and Carl M. Lundh;
choreography, Else Fischer.
CAST:
Max von Sydow (Antonius Block), Gunnar Björnstrand (Jons), Nils Poppe (Jof),
Bibi Andersson (Mia), Bengt Ekerot (Death), Åke Fridell (Blacksmith Plot), Inga
Gill (Lisa), Maud Hansson (Tyan) Gunnel Lindblom (Birl), Inga Landgre (Block’s
wife), Bertil Anderberg (Raval), Anders Ek (Monk), Gunnar Olsson (Church
Painter), Erik Strandmark (Skat), Ulf Johansson (leader of soldiers) Benkt-Ake
Benktsson (merchant), Lars Lind (young monk), Gudrun Brost (woman at inn)
96
minutes
What
other characters in literature, history, or contemporary life are brought to
mind by the various characters in the film?
Why
is the knight Antonius Block so serious and depressed all the time? Why are Jof
and Mia usually happy? What is the function of Block’s down-to-earth squire,
Jons?
What
kinds of visual imagery does Bergman use to suggest allegorical references?
What characters might be purely symbolic rather than real people in the story?
What feelings does the film leave you with when it’s over?
What
is the significance of the game of chess? How and why does it recur throughout
the story?
Does
the story seem rooted entirely in the middle ages, or are there certain
elements you can connect with more recent events?
What
about The Seventh Seal do you think makes some critics rank it among the
greatest films ever made while other critics consider it an overrated or even
pretentious religious allegory?
Can
you think of other films that have personified Death as one of the characters?
How are they similar to or different from The Seventh Seal? What kind of
effect does using this kind of supernatural character have on your perception
of the story?
Sherlock,
Jr.
(USA-Metro, 1924)
Directed
by Buster Keaton. Presented by Joseph M. Schenck. Story by Clyde Bruckman, Jean
Havez, Joseph Mitchell. Photographed by Byron Houck, Elgin Lessley. Art
Direction by Fred Gabourie. Costumes by Clare West.
CAST:
Buster Keaton (Sherlock, Jr.), Kathryn McGuire (The Girl), Ward Crane (The
Rival), Joseph Keaton (The Father), Horace Morgan, Jane Connelly, Erwin
Connelly, Ford West, George Davis, John Patrick, Ruth Holly.
45
minutes
What,
in your estimation, is the most memorable scene or sequence in Sherlock, Jr.,
and why do you think so?
In
what ways does Keaton alternate from straight, realistic treatment of the
subject material to treatment that is comically exaggerated or even purposely
unrealistic for comic effect?
Made
decades before the concept of computer enhancement, the special visual effects
in Sherlock, Jr. were achieved directly in-camera, not even using
photolab printing techniques that might have been available at the time. How
could some of these effects have been accomplished?
How
does the absence of spoken dialogue add to or detract from this film? How easy
or difficult is it to follow the plot just by watching the screen?
How
does Keaton compare as an actor playing a character, as opposed to simply a
highly physical comic performer? Do you think he is better in scenes where he
is more of a straight actor or in comic scenes, or is there much difference in
his case?
What
methods does Keaton use to find humor in situations? What are some examples of
unhappy or even potentially dangerous incidents that he turns into comedy gags?
If
you have seen any other Buster Keaton films, how does Sherlock, Jr.
compare with them? How is it similar and how is it different? What aspects of
Keaton’s character remain constant from one film to the next, and what aspects
change with each film?
How
does Buster Keaton’s style of comedy compare and contrast with that of Charlie
Chaplin and other visually oriented comics?
Can
you think of any later films that might have been inspired by scenes in Sherlock,
Jr.? If so, what elements did they borrow and how did they incorporate them
into their story? Were they more or less effective than the original, and why?
How
do you think your friends or other current-day viewers might react to Sherlock,
Jr., and why? How does it compare
with any other silent films you might have seen?
Singin’
in the Rain
(USA-Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1952)
Directed
by Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen. Produced by Arthur Freed. Screenplay by Adolph
Green and Betty Comden, suggested by the song “Singin’ in the Rain.”
Photographed by Harold Rosson. Edited by Adrienne Fazan. Music composed by
Nacio Herb Brown, Lyrics by Arthur Freed. Music Director Lennie Hayton. Art
Direction Cedric Gibbons, Randall Duell.Set Design by Edwin B. Willis, Jacques
Mapes. Special Effects by Warren Newcombe and Irving G. Ries. Costumes by
Walter Plunkett.
CAST:
Gene Kelly (Don Lockwood), Donald O’Connor (Cosmo Brown), Debbie Reynolds
(Kathy Selden), Jean Hagen (Lina Lamont), Millard Mitchell (R. F. Simpson),
Rita Moreno (Zelda Zanders), Douglas Fowley (Roscoe Dexter), Cyd Charisse
(Dancer in ballet sequence), Madge Blake (Dora Bailey), King Donovan, (Rod),
Kathleen Freeman (Phoebe Dinsmore), Bobby Watson (Diction Coach), Jimmie
Thompson (Male lead in “Beautiful Girls” number), Dan Foster (Assistant Director),
Margaret Bert (Wardrobe Woman), Mae Clark (Hairdresser), Judy Landon (Olga
Mara), John Dodsworth (Baron de la May de la Toulon), Stuart Holmes (J. C.
Spendrill III), Dennis Ross (Don as a boy).
103
minutes
What
overall tone and sorts of attitudes does Singin’ in the Rain seem to
have… towards Hollywood and the movie industry? towards movie-making itself?
towards silent films? towards talking pictures? towards the media? towards
human relationships? towards its own characters? How does the mise en scene
reflect those attitudes? How would you compare this film with, say, Sunset
Boulevard, made just a couple of years earlier, or any other films you’ve
seen that deal with the movie industry?
Singin’ in the Rain was filmed in the expensive Technicolor process at a time when movies were just as often shot in black and white. Why do you suppose this decision was made? What sort of impact