James Stewart-A-Thon

It was a genuine coincidence but the last four movies I've watched have all had James Stewart as the leading role in them. I'm on a sort of Hitchcock kick right now that started when I watched Rope last weekend. Stewart played the cynical and sarcastic professor, Rupert Cadell in the film, which before this weekend, was also the only role I've ever known him as.  Dr. Morris told me to watch Vertigo before we met up again and that just so happened to have James Stewart as the lead in it as well. I'm not sure if I like Vertigo as much as Rope but both are truly amazing films. Yesterday, I gave my Dad the option of choosing the next movie to watch, and he randomly chose The Man Who Knew Too Much which also happened to have good ole Jimmy Stewart as the leading man. By this point I was already amazed that the last 3 movies I watched all featured Stewart as the lead and then I popped in Rear Window, for no other reason than I couldn't sleep last night. And as soon as I heard that recognizable drawl, I was laughing to myself so hard that I had to pause the movie right there for like a solid 5 minutes. The entire film I couldn't take entirely serious because of just how many roles I'd seen the man in during the same day. Maybe I like subconsciously internalized that Stewart was in all of these movies but truly, I really had no clue. Stewart is to Hitchcock as Samuel L. Jackson is to Tarantino. This also displays an important aspect of Auteur Theory, director's reusing actors they enjoy. Tarantino with Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, and Tim Roth. Nolan with Christian Bale. To an extent Kubrick with Peter Sellers and now Hitchcock with James Stewart.

 I counted up the rest of the movies I need to watch and there's 19 left. My goal is to be finished with all of them by May 1st and I think it's definitely doable, I just have to stay on schedule.

Kill Bill and Rope

Over this weekend I watched Tarantino's bloody revenge flick Kill Bill Vol. 1 and Hitchcock's psychological crime thriller Rope. Both of these movies I had seen previously and they are personal favorites of mine as well. In a similar vein as Pulp Fiction and Memento, my notes for both of these movies were considerably better than movies that I had only seen once. It's easier to explore themes and write about the mise en scène  of a movie when you are already familiar with the film. 

My goal for this week is to watch 2 more movies. I'm planning on watching Vertigo and probably Kill Bill Vol. 2 but who knows, maybe I'll be in the mood for something else when I actually get around to watching something. I scheduled everything out and I should be finished with all the movies by May 1st. I just have to make sure I stay on schedule. 

The Product

I finally decided what my final product will be. Rather than writing a separate essay for each director I'm instead going to write one large paper that talks about each of the directors. Also instead of breaking up the paper by directors, I'll instead have chapters on certain techniques, themes, characters, etc., and then how each director uses all of these things in their films. I wish I could have decided on this sooner because I practically wasted all of last week writing a rough draft on Kubrick. I definitely have some catching up to do if I want to stay on schedule. Since the entire thing will be one large paper, I'm going to need to watch every film before I start to write it. My goal is to finish all the movies I need to watch by May 1st. I counted it up and I have 29 more essential films to watch.

Over the weekend, I was able to watch Quentin Tarantino's classic crime tale Pulp Fiction (which is my absolute favorite movie) and the Christopher Nolan psychological thriller Memento (another one of my favorites). Having already seen both of these movies multiple times, my notes for these films were much more in depth and just all around better compared to films that I took notes on for the first viewing. It makes me wish I had the time to watch each movie two or even three times, but that's not entirely doable, even if I was just studying two directors. I feel a lot of these movies (especially Pulp Fiction) I could base my entire project on. While watching I just kept thinking that I could write like an entire 20 page paper on just this film. While as a person himself, I think Tarantino is a (for lack of a better word) douchey, white trash, asshole; there's no denying he is a genius filmmaker. He catches a lot of flak from critics and moviegoers alike because of his supposed "film theft". Whereas, I don't think Tarantino steals shots and scenes from other films, he pays homage to them. He takes his favorite movies and incorporates the best parts of them into his movies. I would argue Tarantino is the epitome of a modern day auteur.

Dr.Morris' Gift

Today when I met with Dr.Morris he gave me a book called Film, Form, and Culture by Robert Kolker. I've been leafing through it and it contains practically everything about the technical aspects of film. I think it's gonna help me a ton for this project. Now, I have all the official terms for the tropes and techniques that I've been observing in all the movie's I've been watching! It even contains information on auteur theory which I definitely need to know more about.

I've decided that I'll write separate essays for each director now so I think I'll try to write a rough draft of a structural/technical analysis on Kubrick this weekend. Ill give it to Dr.Morris to look at probably so he can make any revisions.  If I find the time I'll also try to watch at least one of Tarantino's movies this weekend. Probably not Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction because I've seen them like 10 times each but, it definitely wouldn't be torture if I decided to watch either.

Stanley Kubrick: Sexual Maniac

Well, I took advantage of this two hour delay this morning and I watched a rather morally questionable film. This morning I had the pleasure of watching Lolita, Kubrick's infamous tale of pedophilia. You know, it's the classic love story. Man moves into house with woman and her 14 year old daughter, woman falls in love with man, man becomes obsessed with woman's daughter, man marries woman to get closer to the daughter, man's actions inadvertently cause woman's death, and man devotes the rest of his life to seducing the daughter. Just your average run of the mill love story. If I could sum this film up in one word it's uncomfortable. The entire time I just felt uneasy while watching. It was not a fun movie to watch and that's what makes it all the more powerful. I cringed too many times to count and even had to stop watching at some points because it was just too awkward for me. When I found out that the actress that played Lolita in the movie was actually 14 at the time of filming made the whole experience even more uncomfortable. But all in all, even though it wasn't necessarily a fun film to watch it was still a rewarding viewing. Peter Sellers performance was spectacular and Kubrick's attention to detail was just as present in this film as in his others. While this film's over the top sexual implications were a little too much for me, it could no nothing to prepare me for what I watched after school today.

I was told by Dr. Morris to save Eyes Wide Shut for the last. And now I'm kind of regretting it because it's left such a poor taste in my mouth for the director I've come to admire. This was actually the first film that I've just flat out disliked for this project. Personally my biggest gripe with the film was actually the writing. I don't know what happened to Kubrick but in the 12 years between this movie and Full Metal Jacket Kubrick seemed to have forgotten how to write natural and believable dialogue. Lines like "Once a doctor, always a doctor!" and "Hey I think I remember that guy from medical school" seemed forced and out of place. They didn't seem like natural things to say and there are far better ways to expose details about your characters. Also I didn't love any single performance in this film. Tom Cruise felt robotic and self aware. Nicole Kidman seemed like she didn't know her lines at certain points. And Sydney Pollack was alright but nothing noteworthy. Also the way over the top sexual innuendoes became just too much for me. It seemed like every single scene there was Tom Cruise staring at a pair of boobs. The characters didn't talk about anything but sex and at some points I thought I was actually watching a porno. To me, there's a point when theres just too much nudity and sex in a film and this movie hit that limit that at the 15 minute mark of it's 159 minutes. If there was one thing I enjoyed about this film, it was the camera work. Even at 70 years old Kubrick still knew how to work a camera majestically and theres no doubt about that. Each shot, especially in the secret sex society scenes, was like Kubrick trying to make a statement. Saying how, maybe he'd lost his touch when it came to writing but when it comes down to pure cinematography, there's no one better than the Kubrick.

This officially ends the list of Stanley Kubrick films I need to watch.  Now all that I need to do before I fully move onto Tarantino is organize all my notes and ramblings into something cohesive like an essay or something. I'll be looking for ideas this week on what I should I create to go along with my findings.