Most recent public comments by Vanessa Ramos https://nowcomment.com/users/19052 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43785?scroll_to=525470 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43785?scroll_to=525470 As with many film makers, they have the ability to create a reality, whatever that may be for them, for its viewers. And so selecting the best scenes out of a event, creates the image that the entire Olympics was exciting than it might've been Fri, 20 May 2016 15:43:23 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43785?scroll_to=525468 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43785?scroll_to=525468 I agree. Both films promote Hitler, just in Triumph of the Will it is much more direct then in the other film. Using a subtle approach still very much in fact creates vivid image of how important an individual is. Fri, 20 May 2016 15:39:51 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43785?scroll_to=525461 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43785?scroll_to=525461 Perhaps he meant appealing. Selecting the triumphant music just marries the prideful image that the film maker is trying to portray. Fri, 20 May 2016 15:31:07 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43763?scroll_to=502630 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43763?scroll_to=502630 I agree. We're shown a Hitler from the perspective of Riefenstahl in regards to the film. He is able to paint the picture of both Hitler and the 1936 Olympics in whatever light he saw fitting: which was in a positive light, opposite of what is known from history Thu, 24 Mar 2016 20:56:31 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490968 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490968 I agree. As with most film/movies, the music is selectively chose to create a mood/feeling, or to further enhance an effect. Tue, 08 Mar 2016 08:15:17 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490967 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490967 I agree. This film presents the ideas and craft that goes into creating a film while actually depicting a film. It gives you behind the scenes as well as the actual content. Tue, 08 Mar 2016 08:14:40 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490966 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490966 This film combines a majority of unrelated elements to create a bizzare effect, which is the definiton of surreal. For example, the film maker shows a scene in which we see an empty row of seats and then another shot when they are being opened up to be sat upon. The speed in which this is shot creates a surreal mood. We can also say this when a shot is shown of pigeons flying backwards. These are all everyday activities but with the power of speed and angles, it is in turn a bit bizarre. Tue, 08 Mar 2016 08:03:23 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490580 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490580 The fast paced fluttering of the film lets us see each image only as long as what is necessary to the film maker, while staying aware of the music and tying it in with its rhythms. I believe Vertov used clever tactics in his film such as fast and slow motion, freeze frames and even close ups. This allowed for it's audience to not only stay engaged, but to realize and remind us that the film maker has the control of the messages being conveyed Fri, 20 May 2016 15:32:26 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490558 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43761?scroll_to=490558 The flim has an awareness of its identity. The film knows it's a film and doesn't try to insult the audience's intelligence. Althought it is a film, there is no need for a plot. The images match together simultaneously creating such a connection that no words are necessary. Thu, 12 May 2016 19:09:04 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474619 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474619 I agree with this response as well. To call something aesthetically pleasing is to call it beautiful and is pleasing to the senses of sight and hearing. The scene in which the entire family is climbing out of the canoe is most memorable for the simple fact that its mind boggling as to how many people come out of the canoe and its also humorous. Flahherty uses different cuts in the shots to give the effect that many people were inside of the canoe. This shot engages the audience and is definitely memorable. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474617 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474617 I believe that the scenes that Flaherty manipulated were only to promote the authenticity of the film. For example, although the characters were currently using updated weapons, Flaherty used bow and arrows to keep the dying culture alive. Does this subtract from the truth value? Definitely. However, at one point in time these items were used to hunt so I don't believe its a complete form of manipulation. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474612 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474612 A noble savage is a human without civilization. Without civilization, humans are naturally good. Its with civilization that makes them act in bad ways, according to Wikipedia. I believe that Nanook does fall under this category because he simply lives in harmony with his people and environment. And because he has not been influenced by civilization and lives a simple life, he is therefore considered to be a noble savage. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474590 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474590 I don't feel sorry for Nanook and his family only because that isn't the message that the film maker is trying to depict. I believe his intent was to just showcase the life of a culture that not widely known. Some key factors that interpret the film maker was portraying these characters in a positive aspect is by using upbeat music and having the characters smile frequently throughout the film. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474584 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43758?scroll_to=474584 I believe the moral lesson that is taken away from Nanook of the North is best described as the beauty in the struggle to survive in everyday life of a harsh environment. It is subtle because the film maker, Flaherty depicts different scenes that allows the audience to piece together what is happening and form a conclusion. He doesn't just blatantly come forward with this; you would have to make connections with the different scenes. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43742?scroll_to=471132 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43742?scroll_to=471132 I do not believe that seeing is believing. The illusions of visualization can easily distort our perception so that we see whatever we are being told to be "seen". It's so easy to trick your senses by altering images. This is a problem as far as film is concenered simply because the audience consumes whatever image and/or idea that the film maker wishes to portray. There is no room for the audience to make their or assumtions or judgements based on what they are viewing. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43742?scroll_to=471037 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43742?scroll_to=471037 I agree! As long as technology adanvances, films must always find a new method to entice its audience. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460331 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460331 In the Lumiere Brothers' films, they used a side angle of the workers leaving their jobs. This created a different effect when visualizing that allowed the audience to feel connected, as though we were front and center watching. They used the technique of moving the camera as the people moved as well. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460327 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460327 What the Lumiere Brothers' accomplished is considered breakthrough simply because it was never done before. They found a way to convey emotions and actions of people to the public. They opened a lot of doors for future cinematographers. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460326 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460326 I was a little bit bored, however, I do believe I am biased. We live in a generation where technology is so advanced and images are seen clearly and with much more depth. These films were mainly about life during that era and so it is difficult to relate. It is fascinating to see how much film has advanced and the thought process the Lumiere Brothers' were going through when trying to depict a picture. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460325 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460325 Timing is key. Timing ties in the visual aspect and the relevance of what the film maker is trying to say. As stated previously, the Lumiere Brothers' films used timing to have their viewers relate immensely, simply because they portrayed a world that everyone was currently living in. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460324 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460324 This statement is inadequate because of how heavily influenced the film makers' ideas are of the content. While the film maker can present facts, its the way that they go about presenting these facts. The way they are presented, or the way the film maker sees fit to present these "facts" can heavily influence their audience. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460323 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460323 Although the cinematogropher has complete control and influence of the view, i do not believe that this is dishonest. In a conversation, each and every individual may have an alternative way to explain the message that they are trying to convey, nevertheless; the message gets across. This can be compared with film makers. The nature of the work that they are in is to give out content that they see in their mind and wish to spill out to others. Opinions will be in abundance. Thu, 19 May 2016 17:45:36 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460321 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460321 The aesthetic and moral result can be viewed in such a way that a film maker can control the effect that they wished to portray to their audience. It allowed for ideas to be presented in a different form, however, to create the same effect. Stimulation of the eye is the goal of cinematographers and this allows them to go in depth with these type of tactics. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460320 https://nowcomment.com/documents/43736?scroll_to=460320 1. An example of a montage is a shot in which shows a character performing an action over and over again, which in turn creates the effect that the character is now skilled at this action 2. Another example can be still movements that highlight important portions of an event, such as highlights of a football game. 3. Montages can be used to show timing, for example a character on a mission or journey, that takes time to accomplish. Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:33:08 -0500