adrien grosjean

The Fallacy of American Values in Apocalypse Now Apocalypse Now analyses the factors that resulted in the death of the American invincibility myth. Following the chaotic Vietnam war, defined by America's defeat, the movie projects collective guilt in America's endeavor to disrupt peace in Vietnam. The film was produced and directed by Francis Coppola, an American producer. John Milius and Coppola co-wrote the song, while Michael Herr was the narrator. The cast included Harrison Ford, Dennis Hopper, Frederick Forrest, Robert Duvall, Martin Sheen, and Marion Brando. Apocalypse Now had six Oscar nominations in 1979, winning the "Best Sound" and "Best Cinematography" categories. The Vietnam war is critically viewed as a perfect example of American imperialism. Following the rapid spread of communism, the U.S. intervened in South East Asia to prevent the Soviets from spreading their communist ideologies. America's efforts to retain control and influence in the region came with devastating consequences for the U.S. and the people of Vietnam. Individuals like Coppola saw the war as evil and senseless with no contemporary relevance. Rather than helping innocent and vulnerable civilians, American soldiers kill them indiscriminately, showing their arrogance in a foreign land. Apocalypse Now reflects the reservations about America's involvement in Vietnam, painting the war's ugly repercussions on the two countries. The movie is characterized by reappearing visual imagery, for example, weapons, religious symbols, smoke, and fire. In essence, the producer relies on such representations to highlight the nightmarish experiences in the Vietnam war. These representations are sharp contrasts from the movie's opening scenes, characterized by a calm and quiet breeze. Loud rotating helicopter blades introduce the chaotic scenes that follow. Coppola uses various visual techniques to bring the audience up to speed with the movie's themes. For example, the viewers are introduced to Captain Willard with an upside-down image of his head, highlighting his disturbed psychological state. Coppola combines apocalyptic visual representations to show the war's brutal nature and the crimes committed. As soldiers transition from motivated to demotivated, the producer shows the soldiers move from clean-cut disciplined persons to drug addicts. However, the movie has a casual approach to the political situations in Vietnam and America, which led to the war. In essence, it fails to provide a context for readers who may not be familiar with the Vietnamese war. The movie is worth watching; it covers a critical moment in America's history. It is a dazzling representation of American imperialism and presents genuine questions that trigger ideological provocations in the viewers. While it does not answer why the U.S. decided to intervene in Vietnam, it reveals the horror of the war and the suffering that innocent people endured.

The film Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf was adopted from the Broadway theatres into a film in 1966. It attracted huge popularity with the American audiences after casting two of America's popular screen acts, Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. Mike Nichols directed the film, an original Edward Albee's play. The screenplay was the work of Ernest Lehman, who sought to retain the name of the theatre play. Elizabeth as Martha and Burton as George is cast as the main characters in the play, supported primarily by George Seagal as Nick and Sandy Dennis taking the role of Honey. The film remains premised on the comedy genre, building on satirical anecdotes in capturing the themes of marriage in the changing times of modernity. The plot follows the life of George's family. Married to Martha, the couple struggles in their abusive marriage, yet both are bound by their desire to remain married from love and the need to depict a functional family. Their guests, Nick and Honey, are a young couple who appear to be finding their footing in marriage. They are surprised to be audiences to the turmoil of a marriage of convenience between Martha and George. As the plot unfolds, the characters share a bottle of wine during which the deplorable extent of Martha and George's marriage unveils. Once drunk, the couple separate for moments before the audience is let into the equally broken marriage between Nick and Honey. It turns out that, while Martha and George might have had their differences and expressed their disagreements openly, they were committed to their relationship. On the contrary, Nick and Honey's marriage had no such desire as it was founded on betrayal and greed. The younger couples' marriage appears to be more consequential than the older George and Martha. While George only complained of the constant embarrassment, Martha's demeanor, and childlessness, they loved one another. On the contrary, Nick's marriage was full of absurdity. He reveals that he only married Honey for her family's wealth and on the lie that Honey was expecting their child. Nick’s revelation of the nature of their marriage addresses a crucial theme in the film, drawing a sarcastic contrast to an abusive marriage which appeared ill-fated. Different scenes in the film's production capture the audience's imagination. However, it is the "knocking scene that sets the tone and mood of the entire film. George and Martha are waiting on their guests. At this moment, they try to be at their best selves, looking forward to setting their untidy house in preparation for their young guests. However, an argument ensues just as the guests arrive. A knock at the door signals the arrival of the visitor. The untidy house, the lack of etiquette by Martha, and the uneasy demeanor of the guests are all but a precursor to the plot's conflicts as the film unveils. The film justifies its audience popularity after decades. While the choice of the characters may have been questionable, the roles played by Elizabeth and Burton turned out exquisite. However, I believe that the production team would have considered casting a different artist in the role of Martha. Casting Elizabeth Taylor, who was in her 30s on a leading role for a 50-year-old lady, was quite daring and prone to audience misrepresentation. Despite the shortcomings in casting, the film was a success, and as part of the audience, I enjoyed it.

The movie Monster is a psychologically stimulated drama directed and written by Patty Jenkins. It was produced by Denver and Delilah Production and released in 2003. The characters include Bruce Dern, Charlize Theron, and Christina Ricci, among others, with Theron standing out as the main character. In the story, she is referred to as Aileen Wuornos, a troubled prostitute from a shaky family and has a drug abuse history. In the movie, she is accused of murdering some of her clients, spending twelve years in jail. The director and the scriptwriter focused the movie on the love story and not on the actions of the advocate or judge towards Wuornos. Aileen meets Christina Ricci (Selby), a young, immature lesbian, in a gay bar as the movie starts. Selby is rude and defensive and not attracted by the flirtation from Aileen as she has not yet accepted herself as a lesbian, and prostitution life created a negative attitude towards society. She encounters a brutal confrontation with one of her clients as she seeks to protect and provide her same-sex relationship with Selby. The movie director had the purpose of making the main character take charge of the scenes instead of the scenes leading the character. In such a case, the set revolves around external factors, and the main character has to act based on those factors. The colour-grading has also been uniquely added to ensure that the audience does not get distracted from the main character’s actions and focus on the background visuals. The director did not apply an enhanced colour scheme but instead decided to subdue the colours. The film aims at deconstructing some conventional cinematic codes to represent femininity fully. It seems to analyze the inadequacy of positions held by women in society. The producer attempted to challenge the usual traditions in filmmaking whereby society is portrayed as an extension of male intransigence, domination, and exploitation. As Aileen tries to avoid her role as a victim, she seems to assume several male attributes. This could be as a result of attempting to stop being castrated and become castrating and phallic. The movie shows the aggressiveness of women towards the injustices inflicted on them by men. The abuse they face provokes a desire for revenge to change their position in society and avoid being victims. I would highly recommend the movie, although it does not offer closure towards the end instead raises more questions from a psychological point of view. The aggressiveness in the film defies the social and economic codes because the women end up in crime and violence and thus not resolving the underlying issues.

“Do the Right Thing" film was written, directed, and produced by Spike Lee in 1989. The film focuses on the ethnic diversity in a ghetto in Brooklyn, New York. The film entails how race, social class, and moral decisions the characters make affect the way people interact. In the first scenes, characters are seen waking up to start the day and culminates with the riot in the neighbourhood after the excessive restraint by the police officers, who have killed a young black man. As such, the film's historical perspective is its portrayal of racial discrimination of the time in 1989. The film's social commentary shows police brutality in history against black people, which is relevant even today. Lee seems to entertain and build the emotional cues that communicate social and racial disparities to the audience. The approach in the film appears realistic, showing different races and cultures. Lee embraces racial stereotypes and uses this capacity to criticize those stereotypes. While the police drive in a neighbourhood, the residents are not seen involved in any acts of violence. However, the police officers seem to have no respect for the residents despite being their job is to protect these residents. Lee shows how conflict builds slowly throughout the film and ignores the ridiculousness of racial stereotypes. The film depicts racial discrimination, and those in power are not willing to address it earlier until the end. "Do the Right Thing" film portrays racial identity and police brutality targeted on the racial minority. It shows the "beauty of ugliness" embedded in leadership systems affecting the racial minority and those in the low socio-economic class. Lee uses visual arts as tools for challenging structural racism. The music accompaniment communicates directly about acute social ills. The director has a background as a freedom fighter and speaks through artworks about the power of the time that discriminated the minority race. The film recommends remaining committed to addressing critical issues such as economic inequality, social justice, and structural racism. It can be concluded from this film that; love and hate are simply ideologies. It is possible to consider treating people with equality despite their ethnicity. "Do the Right Thing" seems to be challenging structural racism and recommends a commitment to addressing critical issues affecting equal co-existence. The significant problems portrayed in the film include non-commitment to social justice and economic inequality.

The film Napoleon Dynamite was written, directed, and produced by Jared Hess in 2004. The film can be considered as oral history by Hess. It introduces an awkward teen who is having challenges fitting in a controlled environment. Napoleon, who is the main character, lives with his grandma, and his life worsens under his uncle, who keeps an eye on Napoleon during the hospitalization of grandma. Napoleon is showed with a frowned face with a gaping mouth, probably to show his frustrations or disappointments. The body position offers his depressed status or containment of his frustrations. The production of this film has been based on the negativity indicating uncertainties that can befall individuals in the course of life. The film portrays steady progress towards social unacceptability. Napoleon seems to be depressed and is happy when left alone. His red hair magnifies his look as bad and the idea that he is lonely by choice. Napoleon Dynamite can be recommended for a person with a problem with self-image. There is a low-key sense of humour, sentimentality in the film does not show any slightest whiff. The film portrays antisocialism; however, it has plenty of sense of humour. The tone is one of the significant features that make the humour in the film work; for instance, how the actors seem to underplay everything. The director has a dry wit and seems unconcerned with mocking the characters, but in the end, it shows them affection. In conclusion, the appearance of Napoleon has not changed in the entire film. He has a consistent frustrating life in the whole movie. Being a senior in school, there were many challenges he underwent compared to other students. Therefore, illustrates that he had consistent struggles both in school and at home—many challenges such as being bullied, lack of comprehensive skill, and pressure from his uncle.

The Great Dictator is an American comedy film directed, acted, and produced in 1940 by Charlie Chaplin. The film was Chaplin's most successful work, which satirized Nazism and Adolf Hitler and condemned anti-Semitism. The action of the film began in 1918 after the Tomaini army was defeated. A Jewish Barber rescues a wounded pilot from the enemy, Schultz. The barber suffers amnesia for 20years after the crash landing, and he flees from the care home to the ghetto which Schultz governed. However, Schultz protects the barber from the troop, which makes him be retrenched for rebelling against the oppressive regime of Hynkel. Schultz and the barber are confined in a concentration camp, but they escape later from the camp. Chaplin portrays a Jewish barber as a mistaken tyrannical dictator. He plays up the charade and ultimately gives a speech in which he calls for peace and compassion. Chaplin is in a dual role, also played the fascist dictator, modelled after Hitler. The release of the film was before the United States raging war with Nazi Germany. The film was made as a talkie about 1932 colonialism. Although it was not produced in 1932, it was delayed and produced in 1940. Although the Great Dictator contains enhanced soundtracks and dazzling visuals, Chaplin seems to have minimal interest in cinematic technology and focuses more on the narrative and character. Chaplin's technique was silent characters and accompaniment of soundtracks or music. The most significant feature in The Great Dictator is soundtracking, which seems to have been orchestrated to develop the intended theme. The silent technique appears to be an eloquent communication of social issues that could not be voiced because they were controversial and had only the minority opinion. Although the silent technique offers cheap entertainment to the viewers, it overcomes the language barrier to portray power struggles and condemning tyrannical regimes. The music accompaniment in The Great Dictator is an important feature that gives emotional cues to the audience for the actions occurring and their thematic contribution. The comic is used to portray war and criticizing the way the army operated. The people in command of the military are described as incompetent and not well trained, which leads to unfortunate events on the battlefield. Social change is displayed when the war ends, with newspaper clippings mentioning the social and economic depression of the time, and the Hynkel party rises to power rather than the regime of the Nazi. In conclusion, The Great Dictator film was Chaplin's most successful work in history, satirized Nazism and Adolf Hitler, and condemned anti-Semitism. The silent technique helped overcome the language barrier and communication of controversial and critical social issues in the minority opinion. Social change is portrayed when the Hynkel party rises to power, and the Nazi regime is defeated.

Basic Information The film was directed by Martin Scorsese and was released in 1980. Jake LaMotta wrote it. The main stars are Robert De Niro, Cathy Moriarty and Joe Pesci. Brief Story Description Unlike people’s perception, the film is not about boxing. Instead, it’s about a man who is jealous and driven by sexual insecurity. He takes the punches on the ring as a punishment. Therefore, his fights are driven by fears and confession. After his wife, Vickie, commented that his opponent was good looking, Jake punched his face into a pulp. Therefore, he was punished. However, rather than looking at the man’s face, he looked at his wife as a way of delivering the message to her. He is obsessed with her wife’s beauty, and at some point, he tortures himself with the fantasies that she is cheating on him. However, she did not get her cheating. Nevertheless, he kept on beating her as if she had caught her. He treated his suspicion as proof of being guilty. His violence and temper led to self-destruction. He could not handle his relationship with people outside the ring, an aspect that made friends and family members stay away from him. Production highlights Although the film is in black and white, the producer can use great visuals to ensure that the audience is glued until the end. The producer can use slow motion as a visual strategy to increase the level of awareness. However, some of the violent scenes are not ideal for young people. Also, it seems to promote violence against women in society. Overall Recommendations The film is ideal in teaching the young generation the importance of managing their fame and success. It expounds on how fame can destroy the lives of people and make them lonely. Furthermore, sexual desires might impact the success of the person. However, it is recommended not to use violence to settle the differences with other people. Nevertheless, the film is ideal for the young and older people in society. Conclusion Raging bull is one of the best movies that can teach the audience how anger and sexual insecurity can lead to self-destruction. The producer can use Jake’s anger triggered by paranoia to create a film that has stood the test of time. It remains one of the best films that can combine low self-esteem, sexual inadequacy, and fear to depict how men can destroy themselves despite achieving a lot in life.

Basic Information The film was directed by Robert Altman and released in 1990. It falls under the biography and drama genres. The main characters are Paul Rhys, Tim Roth, and Kitty Courbois. Ludi Boeken produced the film with the help of David Conroy. Brief Story Description The film depicts the life and struggles of Vincent Van Gogh, who had died more than a century ago. The scenes open at the London auction where his painting sold for 39.85 million pounds. It quickly shifts to his house, where he is lying at his poorly lit and ventilated house. He opens up to his brother and informs him that he has decided to pursue painting. However, the art career turned out to be frustrating, and he had to depend on his brother, who deals with art. Theo is the patron of his brother’s art. Vincent art is misunderstood, an aspect that makes him fall into depression. On the other hand, Theo is struggling with his marriage. However, both of them focuses their energies on art. Lack of progress made Vincent commit suicide. Also, life became unbearable after Vincent death, an aspect that led to Theo’s death. Production Highlights Robert has directed the film using the correct mix of visual richness, drama, and psychological nuance. For instance, by starting the film at the London auction, the producer can give a glimpse of the events that follow. The film is mainly appealing to the group of audience that value the myth of tortured genius. Furthermore, it can reveal some of the challenges that young people go through to establish themselves in society. However, the theme of prostitution does not auger well, especially considering that it is more of a family film. Overall Recommendation The movie is ideal for young people who are struggling to make it in a competitive society. It is ideal in teaching the value of persistence and perseverance. Conclusion The movie is well produced with a major focus on visual richness. Despite its age, it fits well in the current society that is characterized by capitalist ideologies. It can enlighten the young generation on some of the challenges they are likely to face before achieving their goals.

The Grapes of Wrath is an American drama movie or film directed by John Ford, with Darryl F. Zanuck as the executive producer. The movie is based on a book written by John Steinbeck in 1939 named “Grapes of Wrath.” Nunnally Johnson wrote the screenplay of the movie. The film featured key Tom Joad and Ma Joad as the main characters playing as husband and wife. The story based on John Steinbeck’s book talks about the Great Depression on families and possessions. The story begins with Tom Joad being released from jail and asks for individuals for transportation to get to their family farm in Oklahoma. Tom meets Jim Casy under a tree seated on the roadside. Additionally, the story revolves around the Joads as the family is based in Oklahoma lost their farm due to the Great Depression that caused economic downturns for the family. The Great Depression happened in the 1930s, thereby forcing the Joad family to become migrant workers. The family ends up in California, with the movie detailing the journey in the United States, looking for better places for their livelihood and opportunities. The Grapes of Wrath is an interesting and great movie with outstanding scenes in a happy ending. For instance, the ending scene is produced under a balance of colours. However, the production of the Grapes of Wrath brings out a negative aspect with the movie showing deplorable and depraved state within the camps occupied by migrant workers in California was extremely exaggerated. The exaggerations of the conditions may cause a divide between the Californians who may boycott or yell at the scenes. The Grapes of Wrath is not a cruel movie. Despite having exaggerated scenes about the depraved conditions of Californians but the movie is not focused on depravity as one may perceive. Instead, it is focused on the effects of the Great Depression and its effects on the United States. This gives it a reasonable and relatable experience of the historical Great Depression with the audience or viewers. Succinctly, the Grapes of Wrath is an interesting movie that focuses on the journey that explores a family’s role in looking for better opportunities in the United States. The movie looks magnificent with a balance of colour, magnificent, and qualitative, which makes it worthy of time to watch and value the time. Considering the director’s experience and skill in delivering the scenes, the movie has an outstanding cast, balance of colours, and the plot’s intensity.