El Newburger and Nadiya-Bhaktika Weld

El: This movie got all around great reviews. People, such as Roger Ebert and writers from the Hollywood reporter say that this is Christopher Nolan’s best work. The movie concept is quite confusing and has a lot of twists and turns but Christopher Nolan and Wally Pfister, the cinematographer, did an amazing job with blending dream and reality seamlessly. The scene being analyzed is pivotal to the rest of the movie, we learn more about the dream world and about the personalities and curiosities within Cobb and Ariadne.

Nadiya: The main theme in the film is dreaming and not just dreaming but what it means to dream and what can happen within them. There’s a lot to unpack in the scenes because there’s so much going on at once it’s mind boggling in a sense. Throughout the movie the question of “What’s a dream, and what’s reality?” lingers in the mind of the viewer and it’s never answered even at the end of the film the question is left unanswered. Which leaves it up to the viewer to determine if the ending was a dream or not. In this scene laws of physics are tested as Ariadne takes control in Cobb’s dream as you watch the scene unfold. It takes a minute to adjust to what’s happening. The theatrics of the setting are so profound it’s almost like the buildings and the streets are their own characters, shifting in every direction. In the dream sequence when Ariadne learns how to build dreams she says “I guess I thought that the dream space would be all about the visuals but it’s more about the feel of it.” This quote truly explains the nature of the film. Even though the visuals are a key part of the dreams, the look of them would be nothing without the feeling that comes with the creation of them.

El: The camera movements are a big part of this scene. The handheld recording style makes the audience feel as though they are there with Cobb and Ariadne, an outsider learning about being an architect for dreams right alongside the characters. There aren’t many POV shots in this scene and it’s mostly laid out in a two shot sequence. This can be seen as a way to show the audience that neither character has the upper-hand in this scene, they are both in new territory even though Cobb has been in dreams many times before, each one is a new challenge. Not only does the handheld shot make the audience feel like a part of the scene but it gives the scene an uncertain undertone to it. The shaky movements let us know that something is unstable about this environment; even though the characters themselves seem quite comfortable in this dream space. The shaky camera movements could also be seen as a hint of foreshadowing, that something is going to go awry soon, we then see that it does toward the end of this scene. Ariadne toyed with the dream space and started creating areas from her own memory triggering a domino effect and the dream world became dangerous very quickly. There is a constant unsettling nature in this scene and when Ariadne takes it too far the cuts become quicker and of course the shaky camera movement is still there. At this point in the scene the audience is probably very confused as to what’s happening, again we are right alongside Cobb and Ariadne. This movie is all about dream vs. reality and due to the amazing cinematography it can get confusing what is dream and what is reality. To quote from Roger Ebert’s review, “The movie is all about process, about fighting our way through enveloping sheets of reality and dream, reality within dreams, dreams without reality. It’s a breathtaking juggling act…”

Josie DiCapua and Iris Peron-Ames

Amal Giknis

Reel Reading

24 May 2022

Transcript: The Final Duel in Barry Lyndon

Josie: Barry Lyndon, Kubrick’s underrated masterpiece, follows the life of the titular character, Barry Lyndon, an Irish rogue. The film is, according to Jason Bellamy, “subdued, straightforward, introverted” and often overlooked due to its “deliberate, drawn-out pace” (Bellamy and Howard). Kubrick documents Barry’s rise and fall along the social ladder. Using calculated composition and blocking, the auteur develops the intricate narrative. Barry Lyndon acts as a sort of tragic hero as he navigates his fate.

In this scene, Barry is involved in a duel with his stepson, Lord Bullingdon, who seeks atonement for the abuse and mistreatment he endured. It is a very slow paced and drawn-out scene, playing with its emotions and expectations. Nobody really knows what is going to happen at any point in the duel.

Iris: We begin with the men preparing for the duel. They are arranged in an L-shape, creating depth. Bullingdon and Barry are placed opposite one another, visualizing their confrontation. Bullingdon is set slightly apart from the others, whereas Barry is framed by them. This illustrates Bullingdon’s lack of familiarity with the situation, his isolation, and seeming lack of power in the scene. Barry has already proved himself a skilled and practiced duelist, while this is presumably Bullingdon’s first duel.

As they prepare the pistols, Barry fixes directly on Bullingdon, but Bullingdon keeps his gaze on the ground. This once again defines the power imbalance. Barry maintains the power in this moment. This is also reflected in their body language. While each man holds his hands together, Bullingdon does so nervously, clutching his hands tightly. In contrast, Barry holds himself in a refined, confident way. He looks every part the gentleman he aspires to be. Josie: In this shot, Barry is framed by the other men at eye-level, allowing the viewer to feel like a part of the crowd.

The order of the duel is decided by a coin toss, reiterating the theme of fate throughout the film. Fate is notably a trademark of the tragic hero narrative. The coin toss decides Bullingdon as the first to shoot, signalling a shift in the power dynamic. To illustrate this, Bullingdon is centered in the shot for the first time. The attention is purely on him. Meanwhile, Barry is ever-so-slightly off-center. He has lost the control he previously possessed.

Each man is framed by a set of cross-shaped windows, which in turn allude to the religious symbolism in the narrative. This could be a reference to Lord Bullingdon’s previous assertion that “Quarreling people do not go to heaven.” However, Bullingdon is now quarreling with Barry.

Iris: Bullingdon misfires on his first shot, signaling another shift in power. Due to the stress, he gets sick. For the first time in the scene, we see camera movement. It enhances the panic and uncertainty of the moment.

When Barry goes to shoot, Bullingdon is placed front and center, triangulated by the other men on one side, and Barry on the other. This emphasizes a sense of humiliation and distress. He is on display, much too close, feeling trapped and scrutinized by the others. Barry, surprisingly, decides to shoot the ground. This serves as an act of atonement, as he is equalizing the situation, and offering Bullingdon a kind, merciful, and almost fatherly service. Geoffrey O’Brien, of Criterion, calls this act the “one incontestably right thing he does” (O’Brien). However, it could also be interpreted as degrading towards Bullingdon. It is an act of pity, demonstrating Bullingdon cannot win the duel on his own. This, in turn, strips him of the full power and masculinity promised through the duel, circling back to the thematic desperation for masculinity. This interpretation is further compounded by the blocking. Bullingdon remains front and center, with the men on either side of him, as if to suggest humiliation and further distress.

Josie: Bullingdon is angled slightly higher than the camera as he decides not to end the duel, proving he has some semblance of power over the situation once more. The power is a quivering one, though, seen by the subtlety of the low angle.

At the end of the scene, doves fly, suggesting that peace has been restored.

Works Cited

Bellamy, Jason, and Ed Howard. “The Conversations: Barry Lyndon.” Slant Magazine, 21 October 2011, https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/the-conversations-barry-lyndon/. Accessed 24 May 2022.

O’Brien, Geoffrey. “Barry Lyndon: Time Regained | Current.” The Criterion Collection, 17 October 2017, https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/5047-barry-lyndon-time-regained. Accessed 24 May 2022.

Claire Powell + Paula Vekker

Reel Reading

23 May 2022

Mrs. Giknis

                                    Anatomy of a Scene


           Gone Girl is a psychological thriller that was released in 2014. Directed by David Flincher who uses his “strong sense of story”(FilmLifestyle) to create a dark and dominant atmosphere to lure the audience in. Nick and Amy's cat appears in small scenes throughout the movie. Bleeker, the cat, was seen as an object that someone needed to take care of. In the beginning of the movie, Nick was supposed to be seen as likable, as he comes home instantly when he gets a call that his cat has escaped. This informs the audience that Nick is someone to trust, the sense that we then believe Nick has nothing to do with the disappearance of Amy. Den of Geek says, It's their abiding association with the supernatural. As an omen of things to come,  that makes their representation in horror films particularly interesting.” The cat is viewed as the omen of Amy's disappearance. 
      The film continues to carry the notion “things aren’t what they seem.” Director Flincher uses elements of suspense in plot and character building to engage viewers into the story. Escalation is implied as the speakers in the scene, officer Rhonda accuse Nick of withholding the pregnancy of his missing wife. The point of view is focused as an over the shoulder shot, as the back of Nick's head is only visible and the evidence of credit card debt and life insurance forms the officers are staging. Movement is used to escalate the emotions of the character in the scene… as officer Rhonda stomps on the ground and ironically the couple's pictures fall flat on their face, as a physical sign of their relationship turmoil. Nearing the end of the interaction between officer Rhonda and Nick it is revealed through a phone call the question of Amy’s pregnancy was in fact true. Nick thrashes his drinking glass on the floor, stating he will not speak to law enforcement moving forward without a lawyer. This abrupt action by Nick establishes a sense of dominance and acts as a symbolic representation of the peak of the film. The framing of the sense switches to a back of the head shot of Nick, putting spotlight on officer Rhonda and her fellow detective. This choice seemed to have been made to redirect the power and experience of Nick's shock and building aggression, as well as to establish the foggy distance between Nick and his interaction with the delivering of this news. Nick’s experience in this scene has been highlighted in the space his reaction takes up in the frame, which lacks the viewing of his facial expression. Nick’s statement adds to an overall sense of weary conclusion as the audience now assumes Amys husband committed the murder, but the pieces of the puzzle don’t fully fit yet. 
    When the Officer throws down the folder of images used for evidence, these pictures hold more color than the background. The tint of the room is filled with intense brown and yellow colors. This implies that Nick is stuck in the false reality that his wife Amy has created for them. Even so, everyone else has fallen victim to her tactics. There is a dark shadow that covers half of Nick and the officers face as they are facing each other and arguing. Almost all of the furniture and walls are a mixture of yellow and dark brown. Vishnevetsky from the AV Club says, “Fincher’s style—with its looming ceilings and motel-murder-scene lighting—can make something as simple as a man going out for a cup of coffee look like a procedural.” I believe Flincher made this obvious for the viewers to realize that Nick and law enforcement officers are in a false constructed reality, much different than Amy’s.

Cinematic - The choice of camera angles was definitely intentional. Blue and yellow lenses often come into play for almost all of the scenes with Nick. Theatrical - Nick and Amy’s cat is definitely a symbol. The cat is viewed as an omen for what lies ahead. Literary - Smooth Dialogue. Narration is overwhelmingly cool and sensual. Almost to trick the viewer into the real mood of Amy Dunne. “Amy not only crafts her own narration, but controls it.”

Breaking down the Anatomy =

Joshua Rothmen (The New Yorker) “I enjoyed Fincher’s film on its own terms, in all its abstract, intellectual, postmodern glory.” Rothmen says that the film is full of texture and detail, a psychological thriller. The twists that upturn the plot really change the narrative which makes it so interesting to watch. Ignatiy Vishnevetsky (AV Club) “The movie traffics in flashbacks and backward twists that purport to reveal more and more about its dissatisfied central couple, but which only uncover facades.” Visgnevestsky also says “Fincher’s style—with its looming ceilings and motel-murder-scene lighting—can make something as simple as a man going out for a cup of coffee look like a procedural.”

                                             Sources

Flincher, David, director. Gone Girl. YouTube, YouTube, 27 Jan. 2022, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmkfeIsZYP8. Accessed 23 May 2022. Harrison, Mark. “The Importance of Cats in Horror Cinema.” Den of Geek, 31 Oct. 2018, https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/the-importance-of-cats-in-horror-cinema/.

Matt. “David Fincher Directing Style: Learn from the Modern Master • Filmmaking Lifestyle.” Filmmaking Lifestyle, 12 Mar. 2022, https://filmlifestyle.com/david-fincher-directing-style/.

Miller, Jenni. “Is Cheeto the Cat the Real Star of Gone Girl?” Gone Girl Cat Star, https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2015/01/80778/gone-girl-cat.

Rothman, Joshua. “What ‘Gone Girl’ Is Really About.” The New Yorker, 8 Oct. 2014, https://www.newyorker.com/books/joshua-rothman/gone-girl-really.

Vishnevetsky, Ignatiy. “Gone Girl Is a Trick Only David Fincher Could Pull Off.” The A.V. Club, The A.V. Club, 20 July 2018, https://www.avclub.com/gone-girl-is-a-trick-only-david-fincher-could-pull-off-1798181471.

YOUTUBE LINK : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vs74jwz_qA&t=4s

If I was to change the title of this film I would change it to two-faced. I chose this title because during the movie you see this hotel guy with two different personalities, one crazy side and one that’s almost sane. Norman’s first side would consist of a momma’s boy that would care for anyone in the world unless he heard things that he didn’t like that would trigger his other side. Norman’s second side could be called Psycho instead of using the name for the film it could be used as one of his charcters. The name carries so much weight and I think that his personality would fit on that name perfectly. During the film I would start it off with a flashback of Norman and his mother at a young age showing how happy they are, then advance like 15 years ahead of time leaving the audience on a cliffhanger by just showing new characters to develop a new story until it’s time for a character to come across Norman and the hotel. Instead of it being a runaway girl I would make it a family making their yearly vacation trip but a snowstorm is incoming and they just need a place to stay for that night and they decide to stay at Norms. When the family gets there Norman would be showing his caring side welcoming the new guests to his hotel but he sees this boy whose super attached to his mama and in Normans head you can see it starts to get to him because his mom is no longer around but no one knows yet because everyone thinks shes still alive but only some knows she’s been passed away for awhile. As Norman constantly sees the boy during their stay it just drives him crazy for some reason and he starts to psycho and starts doing things that ends up scaring the family and once everyone is asleep the family wakes up the next day and the boy is gone. They go looking for him and contact Norman but there’s no trace Norman isnt even there anymore neither is the kid. The family then contacts the cops and they say that the place has been abandoned for years and that the owners passed away a long time ago. So now the family is going crazy but the dad notices a house far in the woods and decides to go looking for his son.

While watching Amélie, I had a feeling that this movie was similar to another movie I had watched before. I couldn’t quite put my finger on what movie it was until the scene about what Amélie likes. It’s when I made the connection to the movie Matilda, which was released in 1998. I hadn’t realized how I didn’t connect the two earlier, they were eerily similar. I looked up the two films to see if the director of Amélie could’ve possibly taken inspiration from Matilda but didn’t find much except a Spanish article that agreed with me. I wasn’t crazy as they had many similarities to the movie posters, wacky childhood, love of sweets, a sense of justice, and happy endings. The storytelling and camera work was also super similar in that they both must be in a super niche movie category. I mention all of this because it was those characteristics that made me enjoy Amélie so much. Matilda is a staple in many of our childhoods because of how lighthearted and fun it was. I found all of that in Amélie but with a more mature plot.

Starting with the narrator in Amélie who introduces the movie to us which I thought was a smart decision. Amélie is a very eccentric character and without much context from the narrator, we wouldn’t know why she acts the way she does. An example of this would be when the narrator explained what Amélie likes. She likes dipping her hand in grain sacks, cracking creme brulee, and skipping stone. These habits could be attributed to the weird upbringing that allows her to enjoy the simplicity of life. Another example is the phone booth scene in which the narrator explains why the box is so important to Dominique. In explaining the sentiment’s meaning, the narrator makes the audience more emotional. The narrator also allows Amélie to break the fourth wall frequently which adds a whimsical element to the film. It adds a nice touch to the film and fits nicely with her personality.

Another theatrical element that made the film work was the use of black & white for flashbacks and to show “likes”. Although the film is a full-color movie, whenever introducing a character’s habits, black & white were used. Though these habits were strange and random, they added texture to the movie. There were many examples of this throughout the film like the introduction of Suzanne, Georgette, and Gina. While they don’t add much to the plot, they don’t take anything away from it. If anything it just makes everyone all the more interesting and more dimensioned. It does fit into the movie when you think about all the fourth wall breakings. The flashbacks also include a variety of aesthetically pleasing sounds like bubble wrap popping, a cat bowl on tile, and soft whispering. When listening to it on the speakers, it is a nice experience for the ears.

The last cinematic element that I hadn’t realized until the ending was the color palette of the film. It was centered around yellow, green, and red. While Amélie was made in 2001, these colors made it seem much more nostalgic yet modern. It gave the movie a homey feel and fit right in with the aesthetic of the film. If the movie had used more bold, modern coloring it wouldn’t contrast well. Can you imagine the movie with the color scheme of a movie like Edward Scissorhands? An example of how well this color scheme works is in Amélie’s clothing, she frequently uses the color red in her clothes. When draped against the yellow background, it separates her from the rest of Paris. She is different from the other people that surround her and these red dresses are what signal that. In my opinion, Amélie’s color scheme is one of the most beautiful I have seen and it’s what made Paris all the more alluring.

In my own time, I had to go back and rewatch some of the scenes in the movie because I didn’t quite understand. I realized that some things just didn’t have much meaning and were just there for fun. That is what makes Amélie so great, it is super lighthearted. The cinematic and technical elements were all carefully crafted and still stand out today in contrast to other films. The movie doesn’t seem outdated or out of place because of the way it was filmed and written. If anything it is like wine, it gets better as it ages.

Get Technical // Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, directed by George Roy Hill, is a love letter to traditional western films. That’s the first thing we were told about this film. The western genre, in general, surrounds an American western landscape, a battle between two groups, and characters that are based on real people. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is a beautiful nod to the genre, including all of these elements. It follows the two bandits, Butch Cassidy and Sundance, as they find their way robbing banks and running away from the law. The film uses both black and white scenes and scenes in color to captivate the audience. Some of the most effective and overall best aspects of the film are the numerous cinematic elements. The mix of extreme close-ups and zoom-ins and outs is a big part of why the film works.

In a typical western film, one of the iconic cinematic elements within a film is extreme close-ups. Usually, close-ups in western films are used to focus on characters’ faces, eyes, and hands. I’m no expert on western film, but even I know that a classic standoff has dramatic extreme close-ups of the character’s eyes. It shows the tension surrounding the altercation and the drama around who will draw their gun first. In Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, the opening scene uses dramatic close-ups of the character’s faces as they have an odd 3 person standoff. The shot is set up so that Butch and Sundance are facing the cameras and the third man has his back to them. The camera stays still for a moment as there is some movement, but a quick cut zooms into the pistol being drawn and then used to shoot the other pistol out of the third man’s hands and across the floor. While this standoff differs from traditional ones in western films - mainly by the lack of extreme close-ups - it uses other key components to still identify itself as a western movie. The quick draw after a long tension-filled standoff scene plays perfectly into the genre.

One of my favorite things accomplished in this film is the use of zoom in and outs. From the opening to the ending, the zoom-in and-out shots add so much chaos to an otherwise slow film. Following the story of Butch and Sundance as they banter and run from the law is exciting on its own. There are moments of comedy thrown in to make it all feel light-hearted, almost like it’s all a big game. To add comedy, and most often drama, the film uses a zoom in and outs. As mentioned earlier, there is a dramatic close-up in the opening scene that helps to show off Sundance’s shooting skills. While it is technically not a zoom-in, it still works as one as the scene cuts to it very quickly, giving audience members little time to process what has just happened. In later moments of the film, specifically, when Butch and Sundance go on a long journey to escape the police that are hot on their tail, viewers can observe the use of extreme long shots. The slowest parts of this film lay there in those shots. From a great distance, Butch and Sundance have to squint to see if they are still being chased. A few dust clouds confirm that they are and they are forced to keep moving forward. These scenes do the same with cuts to make it feel like the camera is being zoomed out to display a sunny desert landscape.

The final aspect of the film that works is the switch between black and white and color. Within the film, there are three key moments where the director chose to exclusively shoot in black and white instead of in color. Throughout the majority of the film, the director uses color, so these scenes always stand out. These scenes include the opening, the photomontage, and the final freeze-frame in the end. Each one of these scenes is perfectly executed and works so well for the overall genre and movie. The opening scene helps establish who everyone is without giving any formal introductions. There are some close-ups of the character’s face, as well as some medium shots of everyone standing around a table. As discussed before, this scene sets the tone for the film as a western and does so by being entirely shot in black and white. The black and white shots help viewers focus exclusively on the tension between the characters and the small dialogue exchanged. The next scene, or rather a sequence of photos, is a cheerful journey between Butch, Sundance, and Etta as they make their way to Bolivia. The scene includes upbeat music and lots of black and white photos of the trio on their travels. The scene then has a wonderful transition back into color as the trios’ trip ends and they arrive in Bolivia. I think the transition was exactly what the film needed to cross over the next half of the film. The final scene, the very last shot, is both a freeze-frame and the use of black and white. While the duo faces their final battle, they bravely go out, guns at the ready, facing their fate. In the last second, the scene freezes and captures a photolike shot of Butch and Sundance running out onto the battlefield. Audience members can hear gunshots being fired, but the frame doesn’t change. Instead, the director chose to capture their final moment in time, freezing it to preserve the story of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

For my second lit log I chose to write about Blade runner and the films connections to society, technology and the environment.

Though I didn’t enjoy the film much, due to its oddity It definitely has some very prominent connections to society and the real world. Many things in the media are evolving and gaining a more futuristic perspective. Blade runner is set in 2019 which is what people in 1982 thought the world would be like then but we know from living through 2019 that it was nothing like that. The concept of what’s real and what’s not is a big theme in the film and plays a big role in how the characters interact with each other along with their characterization. A key distinction which separates the humans from the replicants is a test along with glowing eyes. The concept of what’s real and what isn’t is seen a lot nowadays with the production of artificial intelligence. Technology will keep evolving and at some point these forms of artificial intelligence may even have more power than us which is scary to think about.

There are many examples of things that are easy to tell if they’re real or not such as a real apple and a toy apple. However when these forms of artificial intelligence start to resemble the real thing to the point that they are almost identical we may not be able to tell them apart so easily. Though people find the virtual reality experience to be interesting, it’s actually pretty scary that we could put on a pair of goggles and see a totally different reality which would seem and feel real. Even though Artificial intelligence can be scary it can also be used for good such as in the medical field and more similarly how the replicants could also be used for good as well.

Blade Runner is important as a cultural artifact because it shows society’s perspective on what is real and what isn’t and also shows how society has these big grand ideas for what the future will look like however it most likely won’t be anything like that for centuries to come. People in the 90’s and early 2000’ thought we’d have flying cars by now but we don’t. A question the film starts to raise is “ What defines humanity?” Which is a pretty prominent question in the world today and the answer varies depending on the person. Having the ability to love, express emotions, and have a consciousness are some of the building blocks of humanity which the replicants didn’t have. The one exception was Rachel who had feelings but they had to be developed and taught over time.

Thinking back to the setting, the way that the film portrays Los Angeles in 2019 is very odd to say the least. Los Angeles is a very sunny place and in the film it’s the total opposite. It’s gloomy and rainy. Not only that but it has a sci-fi star wars like aura to it and it makes me wonder why they chose this instead of still portraying it as a sunny place. Out of curiosity I read an article on the portrayal of Los Angeles in the film and the decision behind it. The reason that Los Angeles looked that way in the film was because the goal was to portray a city in the midst of environmental and social collapse, which it most definitely did. Thinking about the society we live in now and the issues with global warming the movie almost gives us an insight to what life would be like with no trees or really anything real, and it’s scary. Would living in an artificial world really be living at all? Overall there are many societal connections that can be drawn from the film that really make us think about the world we live in and what it would be like to live in an “ artificial” world where the sky is gray, robots walk around, and there aren’t any trees in sight.

The Grand Budapest Hotel and Wes Anderson as an auteur revolve around the beauty, wonder, and imaginative potential contained with art.

The plot and structure of The Grand Budapest Hotel are defined by fast pace, adventure, and mystery stories. From the fast plot changes, shifts in perspective, and dramatic escalation of the film, the plot forms a winding maze. Within the first five minutes, we transition from the women paying respects at a graveyard to the deceased author to his self, story and finally to the story told within that by Mr. Mustapha. These elements don’t have a specific meaning or commentary, instead of cementing the surface-level structure of the movie by disorienting the reader. As the movie progresses, this theme is only amplified. The highly choreographed movement of the waiters, symmetrical perfection present in each set, and frequent shifts in time maintain the illusion of a storybook illusion.

As well as having a structure that supports a feeling of unreality, the characters are equally artificial. Mr. Gustave, for example, is full of extremes. He is a hyper-competent concierge who takes great pride in his work, charming and surrounded by admirers, extravagant yet profoundly lonely. Such a polarized character makes his flaws of overconfidence and surface interaction obvious and allows the story to flow more efficiently than if there were more neutral characters. Even more, Mr. Gustave is used as a commentary on Wes Anderson himself. By having an extravagant and obsessive character that mirrors Anderson’s attitude, he is poking fun at the frivolity of his movies but also embracing that fact and demonstrating its intentionality.

In The Grand Budapest Hotel, color and ornate sets give the movie a whimsical, storybook style highlighting the incredible but distinct from the reality of the visuals. In nearly every scene, there is a highly intricate set that makes use of ornate details and highlights symmetrical framing. There are frequent time skips throughout the movie. These are supported with different coloration and a changing of aspect ratio, with scenes further in the past becoming progressively narrow and scenes in the present winding. This creates a semi-conscious metal separation between the many threads of the story. Finally, we see the whimsicality peak through a stop motion chase scene, truly hammering in the imaginative nature of the film by completely switching styles without regard for inconsistencies. 

Another separation from reality occurs with the war happening in the background of the story. Instead of using the obvious connection to World War Two, Anderson creates a fake and much less terrible version of the war with an almost comical presentation. When Zero and Mr. Gustave train is stopped by soldiers instead of a bloody take over, there is a comical fight between Mr. Gustave and the soldiers before Henkel saves them. By limiting the severity and violence of the war within the world of The Grand Budapest Hotel, the attention is taken away from it and allowed to focus on the central narrative of Zero. Having the focus remain on the fanciful plot allows The Grand Budapest to stay story without the sharp edges ever-present in reality. 

Ironically the lack of a greater message is a commentary in itself. Anderson seeks to show that the need for deeper meaning is frequently over-exaggerated, causing us to lose the ability for short-term, surface-level enjoyment of a marvelous story. The Grand Budapest Hotel is an art not to promote a narrative but is for the sake of art. It is the beauty inherent within the intricacy of the ridges and folds of a maple leaf or the motion of a fire blazing. Simply wonderful because of enjoyment derived from seeing something wonderful and amazing. A primary reason for human success is this ability to continuously search for meaning, a group who seeks to understand will naturally obtain greater understanding than one that stagnates, but this evolutionary urge can lead to circular over analyzation detracting from the joy present in the world at large. On the largest scale, happiness is not made happy because it comments on sadness, but for the simple fact that happiness is inherent; happy.

This is the updated poster and name I chose for Blade Runner (1982). I retitled the movie More than Human. This title takes direct inspiration from a famous quote in the movie, the motto for the Tyrell Corporation: “More Human Than Human”. I chose this quote to base the title off of because I feel that the replicants need more representation in the marketing of the movie. The original title of the film, Blade Runner, focuses on Rick Deckard, the protagonist of the story, and his role as a blade runner. Given that this is the primary focus of the movie, the original title fits well. However, in my opinion, the position of blade runner and that overall story arc was not what I found most captivating about the movie. I was much more fascinated by the replicants themselves. How were they created? Why do they act in the way that they do? What really makes them stand out from a genuine human being? This movie was not one of my favorites that we have watched so far this year. I think that if through the marketing of the film, the viewers were guided into examining the complexities of the replicants, it would appeal more broadly to viewers such as myself who aren’t as into violent action movies like this one.

To build off of my theme for this poster, focusing on the replicants instead of the blade runners, I decided to only include images of the replicants. In the pictures, the replicants look very still and robotic. However, there is something a little bit different about Rachel. For starters, she stands out within the poster. The color theme is white and blue with both Paris and Roy having bright white hair, blue clothing, and standing in a harsh blue light. Rachel has brown hair, brown clothing, and standing in an orange light. In addition, if you zoom in on Rachel’s face, you can see a teardrop streaming down from her right eye. The teardrop symbolizes human emotion, something that is discussed in the movie. Coupled with the title, the reader of this poster should begin to question whether these “people” are really people and what makes them more than human.

By leaving out images with guns, the reader does not immediately assume the type of movie that it is. This should help draw in a broader audience. The addition of a unicorn also adds a fantastical element to the film. This slightly changes the perceived tone of the film while also paying homage to the director’s symbolism about Deckard being a possible replicant as well.