The Shawshank Redemption

SCREENING REPORT

The Shawshank Redemption

Lorvingsky Dorielan

1.            Relate what was discussed in class or the text to the screening.

The Shawshank Redemption is a movie adapted from the novel “Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption” by Stephen King. In class it was discussed that the ending of the movie was changed to the satisfaction of everyone involved in the end. While searching the internet the differences in the ending I could find was with the warden, and Red and Andy reuniting. In the book the warden simply resigns after Andy’s escape (What's the Difference between Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption the Book and The Shawshank Redemption the Movie). I feel this was changed to show us a concept. The idea that how the people who use their power unjustly with fear, are usually using that to mask their cowardice. As it was shown in the ending of the film with the warden's death. Also, in the short story Red just hopes to see Andy again (Higgins, para. 6). Instead redemption from a hopeless place is reached within the movie as they meet at a place of freedom.

Citation - What's the Difference between Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption the Book and The Shawshank Redemption the Movie?. Retrieved from http://thatwasnotinthebook.com/diff/rita_hayworth_and_shawshank_redemption_book_1982_vs_the_shawshank_redeption_movie_1994

Citation - Higgins, B. The Shawshank Redemption: A Novel and Film Comparison. Retrieved from http://theclassicshawshankredemption.weebly.com/filmnovel-comparison.html

2.            Find a related article (on the film, director, studio, actor/actress, artistic content, etc.) and summarize the content. You may use the library or the internet

The related article I decided to use for this screening report correlates with the artistic content in the film. It was mentioned in class that the scene with seemingly hundreds of grasshoppers was real. Not the scene itself, but the grasshoppers in that particular scene were. For some reason that I have no idea why, that situation remained stuck in my head. Because of that, I chose to use an article about grasshoppers’ symbolisms and relate it to the film. The content in the article I selected to use is about the spiritual meanings grasshoppers have in the presence of a person’s life. In the article there are topics of grasshoppers in an individual’s dreams, and relation with ancient Egypt. Nonetheless the matter of the grasshoppers being present in someone’s life is what is most interesting to me, as it relates to the screening.

Cite the article or copy the URL to your journal entry. Summarize in your own words the related article but do not plagiarize any content.

Lune, C. d. (2016). What is the Spiritual Meaning of the Grasshopper?. Retrieved from http://www.lightforcenetwork.com/forum/6/what-spiritual-meaning-grasshopper

Shawshank Redemption Ending – (Exact moment Red took leap of faith after reading Andy’s letter at 1:39). Link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7MMTmVZcVs

3.            Apply the article to the film screened in class. How did the article support or change the way you thought about the film, director, content, etc.?

There are moments in a person’s life that the same things that seemingly had no importance, resonates greatly with them at a different time. One of these moments that I experienced was during the screening of The Shawshank Redemption. Those instances happened a few times while watching the movie, but particularly during the ending scene. I got the feeling and idea of taking a leap of faith in the direction that was always wanted while watching it. Beforehand, Red was in downward spiral heading to what he always feared. His lack of hope in coping in the outside world that he was given, became a reality more than a previously horrifying idea. However seeing this, his worst fear became his greatest inspiration towards his new found hope. With that he found Andy’s letter and headed where he always wanted to be, but didn’t believe was possible. Red finally decided to get busy living. All of the above is from my own ideas, with having “leap of faith” thoughts of my own as a driving force behind it. Then with the mention of grasshoppers, it being stuck in my mind, I researched and saw the parallels within the movie. 

Searching throughout the internet, I couldn’t find a definitive answer on the reason why grasshoppers where in that scene. Nevertheless, there are too many parallels between them that I couldn’t ignore. These correlations supported the way I thought about the film. According to “What is the Spiritual Meaning of the Grasshopper?”, “When the grasshopper appears to us we are being asked to take a leap of faith and jump forward into a specific area of life without fear. Usually that specific area is one that we have avoided and is often connected to change on a larger scale (Lune, 2016, para. 1).” Also in the article it is stated, “Grasshoppers can only jump forward....not backward, or sideways. So, when a grasshopper shows up he could be reaffirming to you that you are taking the right steps to move forward in your current situation. Or it could be that he is telling you to go ahead and move forward, getting past what is hindering you (Lune, 2016, para. 2).” These two quotes relate to that specific scene so much so that I cannot look past it even more. Furthermore, immediately after Red read Andy’s letter he took his leap of faith finally without his crippling fear. The next shot shows him walking in the same direction of the grasshoppers. This indicates in my perspective, that connection between the latter quote and the film. As this is seen to me as the presence of the grasshoppers are reaffirming the right steps are being taken. These aspects may have been unintentionally put into the film, or it can just be my own outlook. All in all, it gave me a certain feeling and connection I don’t mind having even if wrong.

4.            Write a critical analysis of the film, including your personal opinion, formed as a result of the screening, class discussions, text material and the article. I am less interested in whether you liked or disliked a film, (although that can be part of this) than I am in your understanding of its place in film history or the contributions of the director.

“Every great film should seem new every time you see it. “- Roger Ebert. The quote is in the first page of the syllabus, and correlates more with me than any other screening so far. The Shawshank Redemption is a movie that I wanted to see for a long period of time. When I finally saw it I was highly impressed and enjoyed every moment of it. Fast forward to last Friday a couple years has passed until I watched it again. I was impressed and enjoyed it again, but with age and experience I was able to “feel” the movie in a way I couldn’t before. With the reoccurring thoughts I have now and new found perspective I see within the movie, a connection was made. To the point where I decided to get the movie and watch it again. Films that cause this are a vital reason to why there made to me. That alone places The Shawshank Redemption in film history, let alone the recognition and accolades it has garnered. The reality behind the concept of the story, and the acting of it cements this film forever in time.

Dazed and Confused

SCREENING REPORT

Dazed and Confused

Lorvingsky Dorielan

1.      Relate what was discussed in class or the text to the screening.

In class a topic we discussed that relates to the screening was about Matthew McConaughey. He was the actor in the film that played David Wooderson. “All right, all right, all right,” I remember was said during class when you asked who’s seen the movie. Immediately people where laughing afterward, and I just knew it was a memorable part in the movie. Personally I didn’t see the film, but my initial thought was confirmed after watching it and when you mentioned it was his breakout film. It wasn’t just a memorable moment, but more of an iconic role. A role of a calm, cool, collected guy in his early twenties. What shocked me was in the reading you gave us after the screening. In the article a Moment To Moment, it was written that McConaughey was nervous while filming his first scene (Heller, 2014). He actually used the phrase “All right, all right, all right,” with two thumbs up to force himself into character (Heller, 2014). At that moment, he was the complete opposite of what his character is, but simultaneously that shows how great his acting is in the film. I would’ve never guessed that to be the case.

Heller, N. (2014, June). Moment To Moment . Why Richard Linklater makes movies., 50-51.

2.      Find a related article (on the film, director, studio, actor/actress, artistic content, etc.) and summarize the content. You may use the library or the internet

Promptly after the screening of Dazed and Confused, you gave as an article about the film that we had a choice of reading. I chose to read it and include it in my screening report. The article Moment To Moment is about why the director of Dazed and Confused Richard Linklater makes movies. It isn’t cut and dry, as in cause this occurred then this came in as a result. It is constructed how Richard Linklater lives his life, in moments. From how his doctor gave him an excuse he was looking for to quit baseball. Which lead him to leave college to take a path towards his passion of film making. To shooting the last scene in Boyhood after pushing a crew member’s car, and everything in between.

Cite the article or copy the URL to your journal entry. Summarize in your own words the related article but do not plagiarize any content.

Heller, N. (2014, June). Moment To Moment . Why Richard Linklater makes movies., 46-55.

3.      Apply the article to the film screened in class. How did the article support or change the way you thought about the film, director, content, etc.?

The article supported the way I thought about the film, and gave me insight on the director and the movie “Dazed and Confused” itself. Throughout the reading it's revealed how Richard Linklater is different from other directors. Not intentionally, but unintentionally by Richard living his motto on and off the set. It is said in the article how many directors want their script acted in verbatim. However, Richard does seemingly the exact opposite of that. He schedules a lot of rehearsal time and goes through scenes in an open ended way (Heller, 2014). According to the article, “Most of the rehearsal time is spent rewriting the screenplay, line by line (Heller, 2014).” Literally on Dazed and Confused first day of rehearsal Linklater said “I told the cast, if we do this word for word, we’re fucked (Heller, 2014) .” And this is an approach he uses in almost all his movies (Heller, 2014). Because of situations as the above, I see how aspects of Richard Linklater and Dazed and Confused correlate greatly. While watching the movie I realized the movie wasn’t necessarily about the plot. It was really about just the moments of the last day of high school. Not only for the characters in the movie, or Richard himself, but for everyone who experienced that time. This is why he gave the actors and actresses a great deal amount of room for improvisation. It is especially shown on page fifty-one from paragraphs four to thirteen. The actors in it changed up the words and interactions drastically. However, the concept of the scene still was prominent, and seemed a lot more organic than scripted. All to do what he wanted, to capture a moment.

Heller, N. (2014, June). Moment To Moment . Why Richard Linklater makes movies., 51.

4.      Write a critical analysis of the film, including your personal opinion, formed as a result of the screening, class discussions, text material and the article. I am less interested in whether you liked or disliked a film, (although that can be part of this) than I am in your understanding of its place in film history or the contributions of the director.

There are films created that transcends generations and is revered because of the moments in them. Without exception, Richard Linklater’s “Dazed and Confused” is in that category. So much so, it has become a cult classic do to the moments that people can relate to and its hilarity. And I recognize the film in that light in a way. When I see other high school films it’s very dramatic in so many ways. This was purposely the inverse, which is something that I can associate with as it represents a time I was in. For these reasons I truly understand its place in film history, and have no qualms about it.

Do the Right Thing

SCREENING REPORT

Do the Right Thing

Lorvingsky Dorielan

1.                  Relate what was discussed in class or the text to the screening.

Some things never change. That saying usually reflects an unfavorable outlook on a situation by person, or a group people. And without exception, it applies to what I’m about to articulate. In class it was specifically conveyed how Do the Right Thing, a movie made 27 years prior to today is as relevant as ever. America today is being confronted by the ugliness of the ways of our supposed protectors. Those put in place to ensure safety are being fled from for safety. However, it’s being realized no matter how fast or long anyone runs, problems can never be avoided. Eric Garner and Radio Raheem were both involved in a tense atmosphere. Both were in route of being detained because of it by cops. Both were resisting. And both died in moment that no one would imagine losing their life for. Some things never change, but some isn’t all.

2.                  Find a related article (on the film, director, studio, actor/actress, artistic content, etc.) and summarize the content. You may use the library or the internet

The article I chose related to the film is based on symbolism of racial conflict portrayed throughout the movie. It starts with the intro of Rosie Perez dancing to Public Enemy’s “Fight the Power.”  In parts of it she’s wearing white boxing shorts, a black sports bra, and red boxing gloves. According to the article, her attire represents the races, and the red gloves represent the frustration and bad blood between them ("Symbolism In Do The Right Thing"). Also, the color of Sal’s sons shirts in the beginning have symbolic meaning as well. Pinto has a white tank top, while his brother Vito wears a black shirt. This is metaphor of how they interact with the community around them ("Symbolism In Do The Right Thing"). Pinto is opposed and racist towards his environment. While Vito is more accepting with the people around him. Next, another analogy is with Radio Raheem and his radio. He was only constantly playing Public Enemy’s “Fight the Power” throughout his day. To the point he had to get batteries to continue playing it. He personifies the song and his radio both. First, he’s identified by his radio with his name alone. And he fights the power by going against Sal because of his lack of recognition of black people in his wall of fame ("Symbolism In Do The Right Thing"). Furthermore, as the radio is destroyed, soon after Raheem passes away soon after ("Symbolism In Do The Right Thing"). Both by the hands of white people, further intertwine Raheem and his radio as one. There are other symbolisms explained in the article I will use for later, but primarily this is the summarization of content of the article.

Cite the article or copy the URL to your journal entry. Summarize in your own words the related article but do not plagiarize any content.

Symbolism in Do the Right Thing. (). Retrieved from http://www.ar.cc.mn.us/bean/english1121/Movies%20Unit/stsamplemoviesct.htm

3.                  Apply the article to the film screened in class. How did the article support or change the way you thought about the film, director, content, etc.?

There is a quote “Every great film should seem new every time you see it. “- Roger Ebert. This something I resonate with alone because of this movie. I saw Do the Right Thing multiple times, at different times in my life. First time I watched it was just to see it, another time was for entertainment, and other times were for various reasons. As for watching it in this class, I looked at with a different viewpoint. Whether it was my experiences, mood, mind frame, enjoyment, or the climate of the America today; I liked it than more than ever and it resonated with me greatly. And the article just supports my thoughts on the film at this time. One question going over and over in my mind while watching the movie was; who was doing the right thing? For example, after Radio Raheem’s death Mookie walks over with his people, after standing in front of them with Sal and his sons. Subsequently, he throws the trash can through the window damaging the establishment first. Symbolizing he couldn’t play mediator anymore, breaking the transparent yet blurred idea of peace ("Symbolism In Do The Right Thing"). Some individuals can perceive that action as adding to the fever at the moment negatively. Others can see that as a boiling point reached, and clarity after the midst of chaos that can be understood. There can be many other impressions, but I realized doing the right thing can be merely a perspective.

4.                  Write a critical analysis of the film, including your personal opinion, formed as a result of the screening, class discussions, text material and the article. I am less interested in whether you liked or disliked a film, (although that can be part of this) than I am in your understanding of its place in film history or the contributions of the director.

In the words of Radio Raheem the story of life is a battle between the hands of love and hate. At the end of his saying love is ko’d by hate, because what he loves he loves. And what he hates he doesn’t say. I believe what is trying to be conveyed is what we love causes us to hate what affects what we love negatively. And this is acted on in anyway needed. However, I also interpret it as there is no place for hate. If we love with over whelming force, love will knockout hate out of existence. In my eyes this represents the ending credits of Martin Luther King Jr., and Malcolm X. One seeing violence as a means to more confusion and destruction. The latter seeing violence as intelligent, practical, self-defense mechanism means to an end. Both views are personified through Jade and Mookie. Jade in her monologue with Buggin’ Out, and Mookie in culmination with the ending of the movie. Spike Lee gives his contributions as a director and an actor of what is doing the right thing. He lets every character voice their opinion of their truth (Edwards, 2014). That is their validation of their actions, letting the audience decide who did right (Edwards, 2014). This solidifies its place in film history significantly. As the movie itself represents the ideas and situations that are displayed continuously through diverse mediums.

Edwards, G. (2014). Fight the Power: Spike Lee on 'Do the Right Thing' . Retrieved from http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/fight-the-power-spike-lee-on-do-the-right-thing-20140620

Radio Raheem’s Love and Hate monologue - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa-oUPTr9LI

Ending Do the Right Thing Credits - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b1Nj4w5U0A

Other Examples of idea through other mediums - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R72JZqfxqGY

( A Different World Season 6, Episode 22) (On Netflix)

sex, lies, and videotape

SCREENING REPORT

sex, lies, and videotape

Lorvingsky Dorielan

1.      Relate what was discussed in class or the text to the screening.

Before watching sex, lies, and videotape, I assumed it was just a film about sex and a lot of it in it. There was, but not in the sense I was thinking. The whole movie was centered on it and there were physical sexual scenes. Not as many as I thought would be displayed. And I believe it was because sex was represented throughout the film in verbal interactions more so than physical ones. In my opinion, that was what the director was trying to get across.

2.       Find a related article (on the film, director, studio, actor/actress, artistic content, etc.) and summarize the content. You may use the library or the internet.

After watching a film more times than not, my own understanding of it is all think of. Usually I don’t look for other perspectives because it simply doesn’t come up in my mind. But at times even with my own outlook on a movie I search for viewpoints. This is almost always because I’m not totally confident in my comprehension of what’s going. However, after watching sex, lies, and videotape I was sure of my grasp of it. But after looking for topics on the movie on the internet, I started to question myself. This was because from comments on YouTube to websites, made me feel like I was missing something. And eventually that lead me to this article. The article related to the film I chose to use has ten facts about the film I did not know before seeing it. There are facts from the way it was shot to how long it took, but fact five, six, and ten are what is intriguing to me. Fact five is about using video as a metaphor for distance in the movie (Aquino, 2016). In a way that people believe they can experience things by video, and Graham’s voyeurism is a demonstration of that (Aquino, 2016, para. 5). Fact six is regarding the four main characters personality traits as a reflection of the director (Aquino, 2016, para. 6). And the things that Steven Soderbergh has done give reference to each. Lastly, fact ten is on Steven Soderbergh perception of the film in retrospect. He says that now it seems like a movie made by someone who wants think deep, but really isn’t (Aquino, 2016, para. 10). And he believes the response the film received is indicative to there was so little else for people to latch on to (Aquino, 2016, para. 10).

Cite the article or copy the url to your journal entry. Summarize in your own words the related article but do not plagiarize any content.

Aquino, T. (2016). 10 Facts About ‘sex, lies, and videotape’. Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/75289/10-facts-about-sex-lies-and-videotape

3.      Apply the article to the film screened in class. How did the article support or change the way you thought about the film, director, content, etc.?

When I closed the tab after finishing sex, lies, and videotape my proceeding thoughts was my idea of what I just saw. My outlook was that the sexual experiences and ideas that people have can somewhat shape who they are. I recognized this specifically through Graham and Ann. Ann because I believe as she said in the film her ideas of sex, thus her personality, were shaped because she didn’t want to be like her sister. And Graham because what occurred in a previous relationship molded him to what he became. The outlook I had on the movie ways supported by the article by the three facts in the question above. To me clearly Graham’s past relationship with Elizabeth and voyeurism manipulated his personality. As his only sexual interaction with woman was with tapes, was caused by him believing in some way holding on to the perceived faults of his past. He was able to change finding out it wasn’t really about him. Fact six gave me insight on why the characters were made that way. As we all can display a type of personality based on the mindset we have at that moment. Finally, Steven Soderbergh idea of the movie in retrospect reassures my standpoint on the film. Going through YouTube comments, blogs, magazines, articles I realized I couldn’t connect with what they were saying. In terms of the deeper level and meanings to the movie. I thought the film was what I believed and that was it. But, I started to realize that the experiences, personalities, and ideas others have enabled their perception. As it is nothing for me to understand because I haven’t lived the lives of other people. And there is nothing wrong with me not seeing the depth of it cause I just don’t.

4.      Write a critical analysis of the film, including your personal opinion, formed as a result of the screening, class discussions, text material and the article. I am less interested in whether you liked or disliked a film, (although that can be part of this) than I am in your understanding of its place in film history or the contributions of the director.

sex, lies, and videotape is a film that entertained and interested me as I watched it. After coming to a conclusion of my understanding of it, it is a movie that I more than likely won’t watch again. Not cause I don’t like it, but because once I finished the movie and researched it, the interest was gone. However, that still does mask the importance of sex, lies, and videotape in film history. As it was a movie blatantly about sex that opened the doors for a genre of films in that nature. Also, this film opened the flood gates for independent movies and filmmakers. As it was made on a low budget, and grossed an exorbitant amount that wasn’t expected. 

Blade Runner

SCREENING REPORT

Blade Runner

Lorvingsky Dorielan

1.      Relate what was discussed in class or the text to the screening.

It was discussed that many people in your class who watched this did not like it. And without exception, I am a part of the majority. I saw the movie once prior to the screening and did not like it. While watching it in class I was interested in it more than before, but I still would zone out of it. I don’t know if it was because I was hungry at the time I could not focus, or I just genuinely wasn’t entertained. However, after the screening when you revealed how Gaff indicated maybe Deckard was Replicant all along, it gave me another reason to watch it one last time. This is because I realized maybe with enough focus, and being completely comfortable I can understand the movie completely and enjoy it.

2.      Find a related article (on the film, director, studio, actor/actress, artistic content, etc.) and summarize the content. You may use the library or the internet.

The articles I chose related to the film Blade Runner are all centered on the same premise. That premise is if Deckard is a replicant or human? The article Hollywood Mystery, Solved: 29 Movie Head-Scratchers Explained, states that “The original versions of the film are ambiguous about Rick Deckard’s true identity (Kim, 2016).” And that Ridley Scott shared his interpretation on the matter in his final cut. Indicating he was a replicant with the unicorn shown in the ending. Also there is a link on the article that leads to a YouTube video where Ridley Scott is explaining it himself. Next, the second article gives a definitive answer to the mystery in the Blade Runner 2 sequel. Denis Villeneuve the director of the sequel answered “I will take care of it.”, when asked about the mystery (Wicksell, 2016, para. 4).

Cite the article or copy the url to your journal entry. Summarize in your own words the related article but do not plagiarize any content.

Kim, W. (2016). Hollywood Mystery, Solved: 29 Movie Head-Scratchers Explained. Retrieved from http://entertainment.time.com/2012/08/13/hollywood-mystery-solved-29-movie-head-scratchers-explained/slide/blade-runner/

Wicksell, D. (2016). "Blade Runner" Sequel Will Answer The Biggest Mystery In Sci-Fi. Retrieved from http://www.inquisitr.com/2418933/blade-runner-sequel-will-answer-the-biggest-mystery-in-sci-fi/

s. (2006, September 30). Ridley Scott confirms that Deckard is a Replicant [Video file]. Retrieved from Youtube website: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7o0rvVxU0w

3.       Apply the article to the film screened in class. How did the article support or change the way you thought about the film, director, content, etc.?

There is a saying curiosity killed the cat, but that has never stopped them from doing anything. In a like manner, mystery always enthralled humans even if it killed us. Big or small, enigmas always generate interest from people. And the quandary of if Deckard was a human or replicant, put me in a position where I want to watch a movie I didn’t like a first time, for a third time. The article supports my new thoughts on the film in a weird way. This is because I realized this isn’t a mystery to be solved. It seems as the movie is equivocal based on the articles and videos I watched. There is no clear cut answer and is based on the viewer to decide. Whether intentionally or unintentionally there is enough corroboration to support both points. Still, a decision still will be made for the sequel. And even when it is made the decision is based on the director. So I foresee continued reasoning for both because of the paradox the first Blade Runner created. Still, I’ll watch the movie again to understand it more than before, and to see both perspectives.

4.      Write a critical analysis of the film, including your personal opinion, formed as a result of the screening, class discussions, text material and the article. I am less interested in whether you liked or disliked a film, (although that can be part of this) than I am in your understanding of its place in film history or the contributions of the director.

There are times where entities that are not liked, can be appreciated and respected. With the perception I have of Blade Runner as of this moment, the above is prominent. Even as I did not enjoy the movie at this time, I realized this movie was instrumental in elevation of action sci-fi genre of films. As a result, it won Oscars for both its art direction and visual effects. This is because as mentioned in class of creating tremendously great effects with simple technology. Especially being that there is no use of CGI that is commonly used today. And personally, watching dystopian type films before and after Blade Runner they seem cheesy at times. Even more compared to this movie, as the concept of flying cars and robots are almost throughout all. Blade Runner gives a feel and vibe of authenticity, and an visual scenery that has never been seen before, and yet to be duplicated.

Raging Bull

SCREENING REPORT

Raging Bull

Lorvingsky Dorielan

1.                  Relate what was discussed in class or the text to the screening.

In life it’s always hard to have empathy towards the world as you would yourself. This is because we judge most people on their actions. While we give ourselves leeway because our intent can supersede what we done. In class much of the discussion was whether Jake Lamotta was a good or bad person in their perspective. Seemingly, everyone came to a conclusion that he was a bad human being for the things he’s done, and how he went about it. However, in my mind those thoughts never came into fruition because it wasn’t about that to me. In the ending monologue of the movie, Jake is staring into the mirror practicing his routine. In it he was blaming a figurative man “Charlie” for his mistakes. Mistakes that he recognizes he took and what it played to who he is today.  Signifying he is who he is, he found his own peace, and all he can do is move forward. And the ending quote of a once blind man not knowing whether or not a being is a sinner, but just understanding he can now see enhances my idea on the movie.

Srinivasan, S. (2008, June 1). Raging Bull Final Scene [Video file]. Retrieved from Youtube website: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLNft6cO0I4

2.                  Find a related article (on the film, director, studio, actor/actress, artistic content, etc.) and summarize the content. You may use the library or the internet

The articles I chose show facts that I did not know about the movie. What’s interesting about it to me was the way the film came into fruition. According to the article 10 things you didn’t know about “Raging Bull,” “This film helped save Martin Scorsese’s life (Cobb, 2016).” This is because he was in the hospital listening to the pitch of a type a film he didn’t like. And then he had some sort of an epiphany about it and went on with it (Cobb, 2016). Also, the fact of how some of the cast was chosen. Joe Pesci quit his acting career, and was running an Italian restaurant (Snider, 16). This was because a Broadway show closed in a week that he was in (Snider, 16). Furthermore, the first movie he was in “The Death Collector” flopped (Snider, 16). But the same movie that flopped got him his recognition. Robert De Niro loved Joe’s performance in it, and he and Martin Scorsese tracked him down getting him out of retirement (Snider, 16). Because of that Joe Pesci is the one who found a new unknown Cathy Moriarty to play Jake Lamotta’s wife (Snider, 16). She never acted professionally, and Joe Pesci thought she was right for the part based on a beauty contest she was in (Snider, 16). There are over twenty more facts about the movie, but this was a summary of what was intriguing to me.

Cite the article or copy the URL to your journal entry. Summarize in your own words the related article but do not plagiarize any content.

Cobb, K. (2016). 10 THINGS YOU DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT ‘RAGING BULL’. Retrieved from http://decider.com/2015/12/19/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-raging-bull/

Snider, E. D. (2016). 15 Punchy Facts About ‘Raging Bull’. Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/66911/15-punchy-facts-about-raging-bull

3.                  Apply the article to the film screened in class. How did the article support or change the way you thought about the film, director, content, etc.?

To the people outside of it, sometimes seeing a masterful finished product of anything; seems like the perfect conditions were prominent to make that result. The hard work and dedication and what really occurred is rarely ever seen. It happens with so much in life, and without exception with the film Raging Bull to me. The articles I chose show facts I may not have known about the movie. And in my opinion it reveals circumstances that I would never assume that were a part of this movie. I just assumed that everything in the movie was planned, structured, and was executed to the tee. It was, but in a way with variables I would have never thought of as stated above. These things helped me change my thought about Raging Bull and films in general. And that is seemingly perfected movies to me and others can arrive from imperfect situations.

4.                  Write a critical analysis of the film, including your personal opinion, formed as a result of the screening, class discussions, text material and the article. I am less interested in whether you liked or disliked a film, (although that can be part of this) than I am in your understanding of its place in film history or the contributions of the director.

There is a thing with today’s world that is enthralled with only two aspects of storytelling. In my opinion that is in the ending of being fairytale like, or what wasn’t wanted to occur happens. It seems many people want to see everything go right in movies. And the other majority wants to see the exact opposite because they are tired of the above. In all honesty, I catch myself being a part of either two at times. However, there is a slim minority that tells it like it is, or a feel that is how a story should be told based on the story itself. Raging Bull was about the boxer Jake Lamotta during middle and post boxing career. And that is exactly what we got with this movie unfiltered. Basing it on his autobiography and people apart of that time period. Martin Scorsese greatly depicted Jake Lamotta, a raging bull that gained and lost everything for who he was. The montage in the movie showed everything he loved and gained by being him. And a part of who he is causes him to lose it. Still, in the end he realizes it and comes to terms with it. The contribution of the director by telling it as it is in an artistic format separates it from many of its time. Thus, cementing its place in film history.

My perception of Jake Lamotta as a “Raging Bull” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGsc2_d4Z9w

Montage of the “Loved and Gained” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYKIWjKO5Vw

Part of him that causes his lost - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fEIn_5OkoY & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOXp0ABEFC4

“Realization & Coming to Terms” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJFz2LZjTGk & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLNft6cO0I4