Over this past summer, I watched the award-winning musical La La Land. This movie is about two people who find love for each other by doing what they love, and when their success rises their relationship becomes more fragile, and their dreams either pull them apart or bring them closer. This movie was very good if you are someone that loves the cinematic experience. What makes this film cinematic that the fact that the audience has to think it through. Like in most films there is the information given to you explicitly, while with a cinematic experience there is more room for interpretation. The genre of this movie is drama and romance. This is very clear throughout the film due to the man and woman falling for each other. As for the romance interpretation, that is shown through low key lighting, which a lot of the time means suspense or fear, but in this case, it is used for the characters to be romantically mysterious with one another, also the contrast with the city lights adds romance to the film as well. In addition, the non-diegetic audio of slow jazz that it the selection of music for this film, also casts a romance feel during the night, as opposed to if the director used violent music we wouldn't get the same tone of love.
As for me, I think that if I was watching this movie for the reason a critic or movie guru, watches it I would have enjoyed it a lot more. I thought that the music in it was excellent, but as for the plot, I was very lost. I, personally like movies that have a faster pace, to keep me interested. I was also very distracted while watching this because I was with my whole family so I would like to try sitting down and really focus on just the movie because I feel like it I could really enjoy it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pdqf4P9MB8
This is a link to the movie trailer, which displays the love concept with a low key lighting and gives a look into the relationship of the characters and what the movie is about.
I really like how you used multiple examples of Mise-en-scene to describe certain parts of the film and it’s impact, but I wish you would’ve tried to explain or go more into detail about the other aspects of the movie that you liked. I definitely agree with your view of the film because although I particularly didn’t enjoy it very much, I felt that a lot of effort was put into it and that it was objectively, a quality movie. While I felt the same about the plot not leaving a good impression on me, I disagree with your statement about the film being confusing or slow paced because I thought it was rather straightforward and progressed quickly. One reason why I didn’t think the plot was confusing, was because it told the linear and (purposefully) cliche story of two people who don’t get along well, falling in love and how great the feeling is, until their difference in priorities and goals split them apart. I occasionally like fast-paced films, I didn’t think the pacing of the plot was that slow because the structure of the movie was broken down into the four seasons and dedicated a seemingly equal amount of time to one part before moving onto the next. By separating the movie into four parts, I felt that the movie progressed quicker (even a little too fast) and set a clear indication of how long the movie was going to last. I’m glad you expressed a reason why you personally disliked the movie, but I wish you would’ve given more examples to why it didn’t leave a good impression on you, rather than just having one of the reasons be because of the environment you were in. Also, don’t forget to say whether or not you thought the film was good objectively and subjectively, not just how it affected your opinion of it.
ReplyDelete