Proof

First off, I did a little bit of research on this movie. I googled "Proof" and I saw a movie with Gwyneth Paltrow, Jake Gyllenhaal, and Sir Anthony Hopkins and I just let out a huge groan. But then I looked at the year it was made, and it wasn't even in the 90's. So I felt extremely stupid, to say the least. I then actually looked at the 1991 movie Proof, and it seemed pretty good. I did a little research and saw that Maximus from Galdiator and the Agent Smith from the Matrix series were in it, and I knew that it was going to be good. Now, I know Russell Crowe and Hugo Weaving were nothing like the characters that I just mentioned, but they actually acted pretty well in this movie. Anyways, I should probably get down to brass tacks and analyze a scene. The scene that I enjoyed because it kept me on my seat and had me laughing at the end of it was when Russell Crowe, or Andy, took Hugo Weaving, or Martin, to the drive-in. Russell Crowe was describing the slasher flick that they drove in to see to Hugo Weaving, you know, since he is blind and all. Andy then went to go get some food for the two to eat while watching, what I assuming was a cookie cutter slasher film with a bunch of blood and gore that was described by Andy. Anyways, Andy went to get food, and the people parked next to them saw Martin touching everything in Andy's car and then staring into their car. They didn't really take to kindly to that, and then called Martin a "faggot" and stuff(not knowing that he was blind or anything) and then vandalizing Andy's car. This part made me think of the Wolf of Wall Street when Brad knocked Donnie's block off saying "Who's the faggot now, faggot?" I don't know why, but it definitely reminded me of that. Andy then got back and tried to beat the asses of the posers that were vandalizing his car. He fended them away for the most part, got into his car, and then peeled out. Martin was also in the driver's seat, so you can see how hard that would have been, you know, with a blind man driving. The cops then saw them driving out of the drive in, speeding out and went to pull them over. They did that, but then Martin accidentally put his foot on the gas and hit the back of the police car. But that isn't the funny part. When Martin pretended that he went blind because of it was. He acted his ass off, in my opinion. Andy thought it was sly, you could definitely see it in his eyes. Anyways, this was a pretty good movie.

When Harry Met Sally

First off, I believe that this movie is just, meh. I'm not really trying to detract from it or anything. I know that this movie (and Sleepless in Seattle) are the pioneers to modern movies, but this is just not my wheelhouse. I mean I've seen it before and thought it wasn't anything spectacular and I have said it once, now I am going to say it again. All romantic comedies are the same in one way or another. Anyways, off of my soap box and on to the prompt. The other movie that I will compare this movie is the 40 Year Old Virgin. I know that this is sort of a stretch, but they are sort of similar. The two scenes that I will compare and contrast is the scenes in the 40 Year Old Virgin where Andy thinks that he is over Trish and goes to the club and tries to have sex with Beth from the Barnes and Noble but realizes that he really does love Trish and they get married and when Harry and Sally get married. They are similar because they believe that they really don't love the other character but in fact that they actually do love each other and end up getting married (and consummating their marriage in terms of the 40 Year Old Virgin.) One main difference is that in When Harry Met Sally, Sally is at a New Years eve party when Harry shows up and professes his love for her, while in the 40 Year Old Virgin, Andy, again, was going to have sex with Beth and felt bad because he really didn't love her and chases after Trish and tells her that he is not a sexual deviant and they profess their love for each other and get married. Another two scenes that I can compare and contrast to each movie was when each of the lovers fell in love. In the 40 Year Old Virgin, it was love at first sight and it took time in When Harry Met Sally. That was the contrast, but the compare is that in the end they both get married and are actually in love. I know that this is really unrelated to anything, but the 40 Year Old Virgin has one of my favorite lines that makes me laugh every time, when the guys pay a transgender prostitute to have sex with Andy and Andy says that she "had an Adam's Apple as big as her balls!" I don't know why, but it gets me every time. I am literally laughing at it as I am typing this!

Annie Hall

First off, I thought that the movie was pretty good. I mean, I really haven't seen a lot of Woody Allen movies, but I've heard mostly good things about his movies. Anyways, getting to the question of if Allen's comedic style is successful, and in my eyes, I think it is successful. The movie is sort of Seinfeld-esque, with Woody Allen being kind of like George mixed in with a little bit of Jerry, I think that it made a pretty good romantic comedy. If some parts of the movie are some of the motives for Seinfeld, it would not surprise me because it is sort of dry humor and sort of observational humor, which I enjoy. So overall, since it is like Seinfeld (which is one of my favorite shows) I enjoyed it and think that Woody Allen's approach to his comedy in Annie Hall was terrific, but not the type of humor that I am into. If it was a lot more slapstick and a lot more crude (yes I know that is a little weird because this is pretty crude) I would probably enjoy it more. I do kind of like the asides that are used to talk to the camera and the sort of flashbacks that were used to see Annie's past boyfriends. Overall, this movie was pretty good, but I was not in love with it, but I respect it.

Night of the Living Dead

George Romero's Night of the Living Dead was extremely ground breaking AND pretty good for a 1960s thriller movie. If we still had the other movie in Psycho, I would still probably watch this, because I have already seen Psycho, and it is just...meh, for an Alfred Hitchcock movie. What I am trying to say is that I am glad we watched this movie, since I have heard so much about the movie, and we got to watch this movie. Again, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Anyways, on to the prompt for the blog post. There were plenty of things that could be many political implications in the film, but the one that I am assuming of right now is that the political implication is the use of an African American for the main character in the movie who is the hero and has normal hero qualities. He can also be compared to many ground breaking people throughout history, but the one that people most compare Ben to is Martin Luther King, Jr. because he was an African American leader that was killed by a bunch of rednecks (or in Martin Luther King, Jr's case one redneck,) and was the leader of many people. You could actually compare Ben to any leader that had been assassinated. All in all, I loved this movie because it was campy, and I like some movies that are pretty campy.

Bigger Than Life...It's Breaking Bad before Breaking Bad

First off, I'm going to say, I liked this movie. Why? Probably because I enjoyed Breaking Bad and this movie is so much like it. I'm going to go off on a tangent, but did you see Better Call Saul? It's not that bad of a spin-off, in my own opinion. And Tuco is back? That is my favorite character in the series! Anyways, back to the prompt. There are a lot of similarities between Bigger Than Life and Breaking Bad. First off, they are both teachers, just Walter White was a chemistry teacher and Ed Avery is a history teacher. Both of them have side jobs, White with the carwash and Avery with the taxi cab company. And the thing that is pretty much the biggest kicker: there is a "miracle drug" that is enacted that saves their life and then turns them into monsters in their own kind. With Walter White, it was hysteria and being power-hungry with the meth that turns him into a monster that is a threat to his family and himself, but with Ed Avery, it was the hysteria (again) and the addiction of the drug with the addiction to the cortisone that (much like Heisenberg) makes him a threat to his family and himself. There was also a masculine uncle that makes the lead character look much less masculine. The only thing that was different was that there was no Jesse Pinkman that was yelling "bitch" every few minutes. I kind of wanted to see that in Bigger Than Life, but it is what it is.

Screwball Comedy

His Girl Friday was a pretty funny movie for a movie in the '40s, which I really didn't think I would enjoy, but it was pretty damn funny. Anyways, on to the blog theme. There are many subtle differences between slapstick comedies and screwball comedies, but the main difference is that women are the lead roles and they engage in the battle of the sexes, in this case it was Rosalind Russell and Cary Grant. Funny stuff. I also watched this movie right after watching Beavis and Butt-Head Do America, so I guess I will compare it to that in terms of comedic content. After watching Beavis and Butt-Head Do America, it definitely made me turn my brain on and was pretty witty in comedic relief. Getting back to the differences between the slapstick and screwball comedies, slapstick is just for comedic entertainment and screwball is to show equality towards the sexes and is a battle of the sexes comedy. What I really liked about this is that they did not use a bunch of special effects and used a lot of comedic timing to get the point across and it wasn't in-your-face comedy, it was kind of intellectual to an extent. Overall, I liked His Girl Friday because it wasn't like your typical everyday comedy where there are effects used and uses comedic timing to get its point across.

Freaks Blog

While some critics see the film Freaks as a defense of equality while other critics believe that it is just shuns people that are "different" than  the people classified as "normal." Both of these arguments could be upheld from either perspective, especially in the movie, but I think that it is a defense of equality. There were the ones that would be considered "normal" were the ones that demonized the "freaks," but for the most part of the movie most of the people were accepting of the people that were not as normal as the others. The ones that were accepting of the "freaks" were also normal people that were more down to earth and accepted them as who they were. I think that it showed throughout the movie that there are people that will shun others and make fun of others differences, for the most part, people are more accepting of small differences and quirks. I believe that the movie is like a reality check for people, since there are a bunch of people out there that have differences (subtle or not) and that we should be accepting. Oh yeah, and I believe that it in the end, people that you make fun of and take advantage of will have their revenge, just like Hans and the other freaks tarring and feathering Cleopatra.