Pretty Village Pretty Flame-Carol and mike

Pretty Village, Pretty Flame is a Serbian film based on actual events set during the Bosnian War. It focuses primarily on the relationship between Milan and Halil, two friends that become divided by war.                

All of the character's backstory is told through flashback so there is quite a bit of jumping around in time, which means lots of jump cuts. It feels pretty chaotic at first because of all the ground it needs to cover but after our main characters get stuck in the cave and the story gets a bit more focused, the timing is really great. For example, when someone gets shot and at the moment they touch the ground we cut to a similar moment, which tells the viewer we are in a flashback now without having to use a weird filter or constantly having text on the screen that denotes the year. And once we get to know them better it becomes even more apparent when we are. It isn't always clear exactly why the director and editor chose the shots they did but often the juxtiposition of one event in that characters life to another can be very telling.

                The overall sound design was pretty good; fired guns, shattering glass, exploding grenades and on down to the more subtle things like the click of Lisa's camera and the sloshing of liquid in the coke bottle were as crisp and present as you would expect. I just had one problem with it though. Sounds of physical contact and stuff like the thumb being cut by the scissors sounded really cartoony and out of place, exaggerated slaps and yells that pulled me out of the film's gritty tone and made me feel like I was watching an incredibly grim three stooges skit for just a moment.

I’m not always a fan of anti-war films something about them has often rubbed me the wrong way. Some movies I don’t mind, like Apocalypse Now or Good Morning Vietnam. Pretty Village Pretty Flame, however, did not restore my faith in the anti-war category. 

The director was trying to show us that war is hell. I think that was even a quote in the movie (way to be subtle). There was plenty of blood, guns, and fire to go around and lots of symbolism. So much so I often found my self disoriented in a labyrinth of symbols. Even after watching it a second time I felt just as mystified.  There were very few, very brief and fleeting moments that I think I understood what the director was trying to convince me.

One of the many elements and symbols that the director tries to illustrate is the psychology of war. There is a scene in the movie when the men of the unit start drinking Milan’s pee because they are getting dehydrated. This is probably my favorite scene in the movie because good instance of how they must do things that are distasteful in order to survive. This is also their greatest moment of unity in the group were they all have to drink one man’s pee. I understood that scene, I felt it, and there was a universal language there. It was the expression of “this is such an extreme event and all I can do is laugh”.

Then he kills it again. The way the director told the story made little to no sense. In the movie we see young Milan, Milan in hospital, Milan before the war, Milan during the war and so on. Every time I felt like I was starting to connect with a character or understand the movie further I was literally drawn way to another scene. Maybe the biggest problem for me is that this was a symbolism movie is for a people in another land, speaking another language of which I have no connection to expect a page from a history book. I was like stranger in a strange land.           

Dr. Stranglove or: how i learned to stop worrying and love the bomb By Kevin Fisk, Zachary Van Buuren, Sung Jin In

In a day when everyone was living in constant paranoia, and nerves were being tested by the possibility of nuclear war, I admire how Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove took a lighthearted stab at what seemed like such a serious issue at the time.  Kubrick uses comedy, suspense and a lot of symbolism to help contribute to the overall theme of the film.  During the opening credits, the audience is treated to a B-2 bomber being refueled mid flight to a fifties lovemaking instrumental.  This, bookended with a bevy of nuclear explosions at the end, is a telling sign.  More symbolism of this sexual nature exists throughout the film in the form of cigars, machine guns, and even a cowboy fighter pilot who rides an atomic bomb between his legs all the way to the ground. Kubrick uses these symbols to show the ridiculous nature of war room politics as well as spotlight the masculine overtones of battle.  Kubrick decided that humor was the most effective way to portray his view of the existential fatalistic view of the nuclear threat of the 1950's. 

The plot originally came from the book Red Alert written by Peter George.  Kubric loved the book, but also thought documentary or drama on a threatening subject like nuclear war could have a negative effect on viewers. 

Dr. Strangelove is full of colorful, hard headed but passionate and outrageous characters. The names chosen for these characters, were an obvious attempt at the aforementioned symbolism, and also added to the films comedic effect.  During the first scene we are introduced to two characters who could be described as polar opposites.  Ultra-masculine Airforce General Jack Ripper tells Captain Mandrake, a stuttering flight commander with a broken leg, his decision to destroy Russia with multiple simultaneous nuclear attacks. Throughout the film, Mandrake ignores multiple opportunities to dissuade the maniac Ripper.  He just isn’t masculine enough. In the next scene, there is American President Merklin Muffley.  Muffley is a small, bald man who can’t seem to commit to anything, even when he is told his planes will be attacking sites within Russia in under 25 minutes.  Muffley argues with one of his subordinates, General Buck Turdgeson over how to handle the situation. Muffley then has a hilarious exchange over the phone with the Russian president, where they argued with one another about who was the most sorry out of the two.  The amazing thing is Captain Mandrake, President Muffley and Dr. Strangelove were played by the same actor, Peter Sellers.

The film wasn’t an exact depiction of the government and military, however it probably was a conscious choice by Kubrick to show the contrast between ordinary humans and the qualities of humans who rely on machines and technology to serve the purposes they were programmed for.  The way Kubric portrays the use of technology sticks out in this film with constant scenes that focus on large mechanisms that surrounded these central figures.  Whether it was in the war room or cockpit of the air force plane. Ironically, all communicative devices always failed to serve their purpose except to lead mankind to doomsday. I.E., when the R.A.F officer tried to contact President Mufflin though a public payphone, the destroyed radio on the plane that made it impossible to recall the order. Even if the use of these communicative devices were successful, it often had ridiculous conversation that just strayed the characters from their original purposes (like the conversation between the US President and the Russian Premier). Ultimately technologies can only carry on what they were programmed to, but how they are used, are up to those who are capable of logical thoughts, such as human beings.

The film also does a good job blending genres.  During the war room scene, the war table resembled a massive poker table with the country’s top officials partaking in the action.  The camera shots were slow and methodical, milking the suspense out of every shot.  It was as if Kubrick wanted this scene to seem like a poker match was taking place with the fate of the world in balance.  The theme of impotent leaders of society leading to the earths destruction was so in your face, that I think the level of ambition is quite high.  The entire film was not shot the same way either.  The ground battle scenes had more of a documentary feel, and when the plane was dodging a Russian missile, the cuts were quick. 

Peter Sellers performance as multiple characters in the film adds greatly to the humor element, but detracts from the plausibility of the message of the film. While the message could have been delivered more accurately with a full ensemble cast, it would detract from the greatness of the film as it is. Sellers performance is a quality and charm by itself that is an element that makes the film historically great. 

I enjoyed the film greatly, especially in regards to the time it was made and what was considered to do that was "acceptable" as contemporary cinema. Kubrick's characters and imagery have seeded many homages since the time of the films release. It is a prime example of it's genre. 

The Tin Drum

by Aaron Charny an Jordan Kulm

  

          The Tin Drum focuses on the parts of World War II that are often overlooked in other films. Being a German film, the narrative follows one extraordinary German “child” through his dealings with the ordinary passive middle class under Nazi control. Through the use of somber and often dramatic events, director Volker Schlöndorff conveys the chaotic state of Nazi Germany leading up to the first battles of the war.

            From the beginning our main character Oskar (David Bennen), introduces the troubled state of his family’s social status. When Oskar becomes three, he is given a tin drum which he utilizes to act up and make himself heard. His final defining moment comes out at this time as he consciously decides to cripple himself and physically remain a child forever. This allows Oskar to safely exist amongst the Nazis without fear of being recruited or executed.

          When thinking of a regular anti war film, you might think of the war veteran returning from war and taking action against the war (Born on the Fourth of July), but not this German flick. This film shows us the perspective of an unusual kid, who finds no inspiration becoming a Nazi soldier or being involved with Nazi Germany. So to keep clear of that he decides to stay small and play his tin drum. 

          When you think of a young boy growing up in Nazi Germany, you might assume that this young lad will be excited to fight for his Führer. But not Oskar Matzerath. What made Oskar different? Some of my thoughts might help us understand the reason for Oskar’s unusual behavior. 

          Hold on folks these things aren't just weird; they are Germany wierd: Oskar’s Mother (Angela Winkler) has two lovers. The first one is her cousin Jan (Daniel Olbrychski), whom she is very intimate with and master chef Alfred (Mario Adorf). After mama finds out she is pregnant with a second child, she freaks out and goes on eel and raw fish eating rush. Shortly after her fish eating disorder she commits suicide.

          A little bit later, the little sixteen-year-old Oskar gets a sixteen-year-old normal size babysitter. Oskar develops feelings for the babysitter only to find out she is sleeping with his guardian Alfred. This created a noise for Oskar that he could not listen to, so the sound of drum and his high pitch scream was his replacement. Oskar constantly witnesses death from his mama, to his two papas and the Jewish toy merchant from which he got his tin drum. Hopefully that helps us understand little Oskar.

            Much of the film was well executed for its time. The use of color filters and even green screen technology only helped sell the visuals. Some of the sound design would seem a bit ridiculous by today’s standards, as Oskar has the ability to shatter glass with his screech, but as I said, for a late seventies film it does well in comparison with other films of the era.

            While the underlying tone of the film is the passive middle class, the immediate drama ranges from Oskars pregnant mother killing herself after splurging on fish to sixteen-year-old Oskar impregnating the same 16 year old girl his father is sleeping with. The Tin Drum is riddled with lust and obscene violence from beginning to end while still carrying an impactful statement about Nazi Germany. In fact, the ending is so unfair and ridiculous that it is perhaps the only ending that would do the subject matter justice.

Born on the Fourth of July (1989) by Noelle Henderson and Crystal Nehler

"Born on the Fourth of July" is not a story of a soldier in combat and the horrors he faces, but rather the story of a soldier who changes his stance on said war.  Oliver Ston, a Vietnam veteran himself, was inspired by the book "Born on the Fourth of July” which told the true life story of a Vietnam vet named Ron Kovic.  Stone bought the rights to the memoir and other than a few editorial changes, brought a very accurate version of the autobiography to the silver screen.  

Ron Kovic as a child was in love with America and with the idealistic image of war.  Often playing war games and dreaming of being a soldier he, along with most of America, had no idea about the horrifying reality of war.  At a parade he sees the Vets as symbols of hope and bravery, with crowds of people cheering at their heroism.

When a teenaged Ron Kovic first hears about the Vietnam War he is not concerned about actually going to Vietnam, but rather that he will miss out on the action because he was told it was going to be a short war.  He loves his country, and sees this as a chance to serve it in a real way.  Stone communicates that the young American men being recruited were misinformed about what going to really war meant.  The movie implies that a whole generation of boys were indoctrinated into a “Rah-Rah” view of America.  They worried about the “Commies” and would rather “be dead than red”. 

The marines at Ron’s school made joining up look glamorous and what the boys should do if they want to learn to become a real man. Naturally this was very attractive to many young men because of the societal beliefs about masculinity and being a soldier, as well as following in the footsteps of their fathers whom fought in WWII.  One of Ron’s friends said that their dads “got to go to WWII” as if it was a privilege, being completely ignorant of the fact that over 60 million people died during the war.  This mirrored the way Americans at home viewed Vietnam, out of sight out of mind.

The movie spends little time focusing on Kovic’s time in Vietnam, and primarily shows the aftermath he and the other soldiers experience.  However a pivotal scene does take place during a battle in Vietnam, when Kovic first sees the dark reality of war.  He and his men accidentally murder Vietnamese civilians, including babies and children.  Stone shows examples of where the Americans made mistakes in the war, and raises the question of what the real purpose of being in Vietnam really was.  Kovic keeps saying things were so confusing and chaotic, which shows the lack of organization the soldiers actually had.  The confusion hits a fever pitch when Kovic shoots Wilson, a young soldier in his unit, killing him almost instantly. The movie becomes more about survival and shooting at anything that moved.

After Kovic is shot twice, becoming paralyzed from the chest down, he is thrown into a veteran’s hospital in the Bronx.  There he faces the harsh reality of being stripped of his manhood (as he has lost the ability to have children) as well as his basic human rights. The hospital is rat infested, both the patients and the staff use drugs constantly and there isn’t even a real doctor in it.  Although he experiences great physical and emotional pain during his stay at the hospital, he still believes the war has nothing to do with his agony.  His patriotism and denial about the war continues to run strong, and he makes it a point to attack anyone who says something negative about the war.  

When he returns home he sees that people treat him differently not only because he is in a wheelchair, but because he chose to be a part of the war in the first place.  His first realization that the anti-war movement exists is during the Fourth of July parade, which turns out to be quite different from the one he saw when he was a child. During the parade the community was not cheering and honoring the Vietnam veterans like they were the WWII veterans, but instead they were flipping them off and shaming them for being supporters of the war.  After he witnesses the Kent State rally in which violent police attack and arrest peaceful protesters, is when Kovic begins to rethink his stance on the war.  

If the Vietnam War is a wrong war, what did Kovic lose his legs and by proxy his manhood for?  This realization leads Kovic down a dark path of drugs and alcohol which ends up leaving him incredibly depressed and alienates him from his ultra religious family. 

Though he finds redemption through political activism with other vets rallying against the war, you also feel Kovic finds closure through revealing his role in the death of Wilson, whom he shot during the war.  Stone was able to make his statement in the movie without putting everything in dialogue, but also through Tom Cruise’s compelling performance.  The film lives and dies by Cruise’s portrayal of Ron Kovic, and he shows the usual manic intensity that makes Tom Cruise an acting force to be reckoned with.  Cruise received his first Academy Award nomination and won a Golden Globe for Best Actor, Stone also received an Academy Award for Best Director.  The film’s success can also be seen through the strong use of editing and through the use of long dolly shots, POV shots during battle, and the sound editing that makes each scene really live and breath.

“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country,” JFK’s famous quote rings true in the story of Ron Kovic, a man who gave up everything, short of his life for what the film perceives as an unjust war.  Kovic’s values and idealism do not serve him well as he realizes that he has been truly betrayed by the government he trusted so much.   

Generation Kill - Jake Lyon and Chris Moreti

David Simon and Ed Burns have been hard at work. Since the massive success of their five season HBO television series "The Wire", the two have shifted gears to portray the similar but more distant reality of of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Generation Kill follows the 1st Recon Marines on their journey from Kuwait to Baghdad.

The Company commander, code named "Godfather", is a self-rightous battle hardened marine, who speaks with a raspy voice due to a bout with throat cancer. Under his leadership the chain of command is divided into a number of lieutenants, half of whom are completely incompetent and the other half having to pick up the slack and deal with the errors as they come. The company travels by way of armored humvee's through Iraqi highways and is fronted by Sgt. Brad "Iceman" Colbert played by Alexander Skarsgard and Cpl. Josh Ray Person played by James Ransone.

As the Marines press forward they are constantly cut off at the knees by bad leadership, poor planning, lack of supplies, and general sense of "what are we doing here"? Orders and chain of command are questioned and challenged on a regular basis. The mission itself, is extremely bleak.

The portrayal of Operation Iraqi Freedom leaves a trail of questions in our minds that one could assume are the questions of the men who were fighting. So little information is given as to why they are there or what they are supposed to do. This results in Marine companies rolling around Iraq in humvees searching for random targets like cowboys in the old wild west. No true objective is ever present and the Marines are in a constant state of confusion.

This exposition of realism is a common thread in the work of David Simon and Ed Burns. Many similarities can be drawn between Generation Kill and The Wire. In the The Wire, police, politicians, journalists, teachers, and criminals all shared the experiences of bureaucracy in their chain of command. The end result in every scenario was always the unraveling a structurally unsound system of operating put in place by the higher ups.

Putting the big picture aside, David Simon and Ed Burns focused in on the personal experiences of the Marines. What they saw and dealt with on a daily basis. An excellent quote from Iceman sums it up pretty good; "We've been training for years, we are one the most elite fighting forces in the world, the government spends millions of dollars on each one of us, and they just throw us in faulty vehicles and send us into battle with no plan. We're Fararri's in a demolition derby".

Paths of Glory (1957) by Kerry Kutzer & Andrew Barrick

Stanley Kubrick’s 1957 film Paths of Glory follows the story of Col. Dax (Kirk Douglas) as he attempts to defend the lives of three French soldiers when they are sentenced to death for exhibiting cowardice in the face of the enemy.  When Col. Dax is ordered by Gen. Mireau to lead his French soldiers in an attack on a heavily defended German outpost, nicknamed “The Ant-hill”, Dax reluctantly follows those orders.  When the attack fails and Dax’s men retreat, Gen. Mireau and his commander, Gen. Broulard, deem it necessary to make an example to rest of the military and execute three soldiers from the retreating force.  Dax attempts to take the bullet for the men but it is to no avail.  Col. Dax then sets off to prove that these three men were not cowards and deserved to live.

            As a Kubrick film, Paths of Glory’s narrative seems rather straightforward.  Stylistically, the film has all your standard Kubrick-ian elements.  The fluid camera, the zooms and the wit.  As an anti-war film, Kubrick managed to take all of the tropes of the classic war film and flip them on their head.  In Col. Dax, we still have the handsome and noble commander bravely running into harm’s way, but the direction he runs is not towards the enemy.  Col. Dax is fighting his own chain of command, his own country.  He fights for his men, who he led into an impossible battle and are now facing death.  You can feel the strain of this on Dax throughout the film.  Early on he attempts to convince his commanders to put him in front of the firing squad.  When that is shot down he immediately volunteers to defend his men in court.  He fights for these men knowing in his heart that if he had refused the attack order from the beginning, his men would not be facing their own mortality.

            The message the film sends out is clear.  War is futile.  Whether you agree or disagree with that statement, Kubrick makes a very good argument to support it.  Throughout the film we see examples of the futility to resist the futility to fight.  In the opening scene, Gen. Mireau refuses to attack the Anthill, but is eventually swayed by the fact that if he doesn’t, someone else will.  Dax finds himself in the same situation when Mireau passes down the order to him.  During the meat of the film, Dax does everything in his power to secure the three soldiers lives, but in the end they are put up against the firing squad and executed.  Even when Dax manages to prove that Mireau had attempted to fire on his own men, there is still no feeling of victory.  No one wins in this film.  The gears of war just continue churning.  The somber final scene of the film tells the whole story.  French soldiers, torn by battle, have a moment to reflect on all things while being serenaded by a beautiful German captive.  It is only a moment however, as soon these men will be pushed back out onto the battlefield once again.

            Stanley Kubrick presents us with a solid and well-crafted story of bravery, cowardice, sacrifice and failure.  As depressing as it sounds, the film is still an engaging and reflective film that shows us the futility of war and, depending on how you may read it, the futility of life.

La Grande Illusion - Benjamin Hilton and Bradly Davis

There is a reason that Empire magazine ranked La Grande Illusion as #35 in its “100 Best Films of World Cinema” in 2010. La Grande Illusion is a movie that was far ahead of its time. For an early anti-war film, it is a model of simplicity and grace; with emotional effects that move you as only master filmmaker Jean Renoir can do.

The film opens with French soldiers, aristocratic Captain do Boeldieu (Pierre Fresnay) and working-class Lieutenant Maréchal (Jean Gabin), being shot down by German aviator and aristocrat Rittmeister von Rauffenstein (Erich von Stroheim). The film chooses to show the first of its many themes, the neutrality of classes. Von Rauffenstein and Boeldieu converse with the simplest of ease, discussing about people they both know and various similarities. Showing the familiarity of the upper class, despite being enemies.

Boeldieu and Maréchal are then transferred to a prisoner of war camp where they meet people of various nationalities, ranging from fellow Frenchmen, to British, Russians, and of course the German guards. Here the plot of the movie gets underway as these soldiers look for a way to escape from their captures and make their way through perilous enemy territory to reach Switzerland. But the journey is far more difficult then the map suggests as they are constantly reminded that not all of them may make it out alive.  
The film makes reference to the divide between the aristocratic and the lower-class soldiers. The aristocratic look out for each other, and grant each other privileges that they wouldn't think to offer to the lower-class soldiers. Even as a POW Boeldieu is offered certain special privileges by von Rauffenstein. One of these is a show of trust when the POW quarters are being searched. This scene shows von Rauffenstein's belief that the aristocratic hold power over those of a lower-class, where Boeldieu shows his acceptance of everyone, regardless of class.

The film is carried greatly by its character development and the strength of its actors. Boeldieu and von Rauffenstein have several interactions throughout the movie as they discuss the futility of their lives as aristocrats after the war. In one scene von Rauffenstein has invited Boeldieu to his study where they share a drink and discuss the war and the heavy price that they have paid. Von Rauffenstein talks about how his plane crashed, causing him to have metal implants throughout his body, and suffering immense amounts of pain because of it. But by far the emotional scene takes place between von Rauffenstein and Boeldieu on his deathbed.  The conflicting views of the aristocratic favoring von Rauffenstein and the commoner accepting Boeldieu creates a conflict that is still prevalent today.

Though far from the current view of what a POW experiences, these conversations take the results of war and brings it to the audience to show what it is that these men are experiencing. The acting alone should take you away when you watch this movie. It is clearly a movie that is in a league of it’s own. Not just for 1937, but even today. Coming highly recommended and with the credentials to back it up, La Grande Illusion is an excellent movie that is a must see for anyone who enjoys movies.

4/4 stars

The Burmese Harp (1956) by Bryan Tosh and Mark Zuiderveld

                                                    Kon Ichikawa's The Burmese Harp (1956)

The Burmese Harp tells the story of a Japanese regiment on a mission in Burma fighting against the British during World War Two. One of the soldiers, Mizushima, is employed as a scout to look out for British enemies in the jungle/forest. He plays a harp for the purpose of lifting morale of the soldiers. The other purpose of the harp is to signal to the soldiers if the British are nearby, or if it is clear to continue on. When they reach a Burmese village, the Japanese regiment seeks refuge in an empty house. At night they hear a British army singing a hymn, and the harpist plays the exact melody to the song they're singing, in order to ward off the British suspicion that they're nearby. Mizushima leaves so that he will meet again with the regiment in Mudon, Burma. The regiment surrenders (because Japan surrenders at this time in the war) and Mizushima is left by himself. After a fatal battle leaving many Japanese dead, Mizushima becomes a monk who is driven to a peaceful lifestyle, tending to the war dead, and believing that war is never the answer to ending conflict.

Masculinity plays a role in this film; there are clear opposing aspects to the Japanese army itself. The regiment we initially follow is calm, yet resolute in their honorable duties. During the cave scene, when Mizushima (the harpist) is told by the British to force the Japanese holdout in the cave to surrender within 30 minutes (because WWII has ended and the Japanese surrendered), we see a more vigilant perspective from the warring Japanese soldiers. They are defiant and disobey the act of surrendering. This is the first time we hear the theme of the film: in response to the act of dying for country and nationalistic views, Mizushima responds by saying that it is a useless ideology; that dying for your own country is meaningless (it's better to surrender and survive). This furthers the point that war is meaningless. There is also a misinterpretation happening when Mizushima is waving a surrender flag to the British, but the cave is bombarded because the time limit was up.

A subtle message of The Burmese Harp is to visualize the role of a Japanese soldier who is transfixed by spiritual enlightenment. After Mizushima roles out of the cave after it was bombed, a Buddhist monk discovers him lying there. The harpist looks around at all of the dead Japanese and realizes throughout the film that he must stay in Burma to comfort the dead (he buries them after the bombardment). This is key in terms of coming to closure about the war and how irreparable a war's damage is to a person's psyche. Mizushima is sorrowful and becomes a new person. He sees himself as separated from the regiment, and has started a new life beyond his expectations, which is an unpredictable plot point in the film.

The film is powerful because of the inner display of the individual and his inner peace in the milieu of war and chaos. There is wise attention paid to the abrasion between Mizushima's belief and new lifestyle when contrasted with the role of Captain Inoye. This is where dramatic irony comes into play. The Captain wants to reunite with the harpist in Japan so that they can continue to live life happily. They seek the help of an old lady to get information about Mizushima's whereabouts (they trade goods with her while the regiment is in captivity in Mudon). The Captain buys a parrot, and trains the parrot to say a phrase "Mizushima, let's go back to Japan together!" and gives the parrot to the lady, so that the harpist will receive it and get the message. But no matter how resolute the regiment (especially the Captain) is in reuniting with the harpist, nothing can sway Mizushima to rejoin his regiment. He can never go back to being a soldier. The reading of the harpist's letter on the boat by Inoye is a clear "telling" of how their paths have separated.

Another scene that illustrates the indifference of Mizushima from the regiment is when they pass each other on the bridge. They cross paths but don't speak or utter any words. The Captain is sure it was the identity of Mizushima, but it's already been too late for the harpist to change his ways, for he has become a stalwart Buddhist monk with a pacifist ideology.

Bryan's reaction:
Director Kon Ichikawa makes a bold statement in this film. Parts are subtle, other parts aren’t so subtle, but it's clear that Ichikawa wants us to know his perspective of the Pacific side of WWII. What struck me as an example of the boldness in this film was his take on the masculinity of Mizushima’s company. It isn’t represented in the traditional sense. Which also brought up a question in my mind, do we REALLY know how a Japanese soldier FELT about the war or their role in it? In most films involving a culture like Japan’s, we hear things about honor, courage, sacrifice, and duty for country. In The Burmese Harp, we see battle weary soldiers in Burma who sing and play music to lift their spirits. I’ve spent 10 years in the military. I never saw battle or was "in the trenches”, but we never sang to lift our spirits or morale. Not saying it is a bad thing, but that it is not what you would normally assume a company of soldiers would do. Maybe Ichikawa was TRYING to show us this side of Japan. Maybe he was trying to say, “HEY, we’re not a bunch of patriotic, kamikaze, victory or death types. We have a soul. We were affected by this conflict just as everyone was.” Ichikawa does show the traditional side of masculinity and the conflict that arises when opposing viewpoints come to a head.

To be quite honest, this film would not be on the top of my “Must Watch” list. That being said, The Burmese Harp did grow on me as the film went on. What caught my attention immediately was how well the film is made from a technical perspective. From this standpoint, the film was ahead of its time in terms of camera techniques (dolly shots), editing, pacing, and even the opening titles. Now I was paying attention. The characters and story finally took hold and guided me through a time and place I had no clue about previously. As I sit and write up this analysis, I realize now how many themes and ideas are pouring out of this film. Some of the themes or ideas are subtle, such as a newly realized idea of harmony – which is both represented figuratively and literally. Others, such as dying for country/war is meaningless, are more obvious and are literally said by our main character.

Again, to be honest, I wasn’t really sure if I even liked the film after the fade to black. The more I am forced to analyze this piece and look at all the angles, the more I’ve grown fond of it, not just as a technical achievement, but also on the multitude of levels the film transcends. Just when you think this movie hasn’t spoken to you, it suddenly yells in your face.

Mark's reaction:
The plot takes an unexpected, unpredictable turn; we are forced to look at the characters we first see, and to break them apart in terms of their need. There is an immediate dramatic tension in the middle when we see that Mizushima and the regiments' paths have become separated; the harpist is a nomadic monk wandering the land, and the regiment is left to return home and desiring being in their homeland safely. The monk has chosen a life that is wrapped in peace and theory, while the regiment is just happy to be alive. According to the voiceover in the beginning, the monk has an emotional connotation: "The soil of Burma is red, and so are its rocks." This is a conveyance of inner turmoil and sorrow from Mizushima, an indication that war has spun havoc which cannot be undone.

Related film for Mark:
I was reminded of the film Runaway Train (1985), an American thriller (directed by Andrei Konchalovsky) about two prison inmates who escape an Alaskan prison and hop on a train which is headed towards an undeveloped track and eventual wreck. The character arc of Jon Voight's Manny is similar to Mizushima, because the man has become so involved in his own resolute belief to be free; freedom from war, strife, imprisonment. One could interpret the harpist as fleeing from the chains of being a soldier, just how Manny is physically free from the bars that once surrounded him. The power of both of these films illustrates the intensity of the inner state of the main character that the supporting characters don't realize, or can't realize.
Runaway Train is a screenplay adapted from an even earlier original screenplay by Akira Kurosawa, a prolific Japanese film director. The fact that Kurosawa wrote this indicates a similar Japanese way of thinking to Ichikawa's film, which both films explore: "a peace of mind" or inner closure.

Captain Inoye with Parrot

Related film for Bryan:

Although the film The Last Samurai (2003) was critically viewed as somewhat of a failure, and often a butt of many jokes involving Tom Cruise, it does have its’ merits. Cruise's character comes from a different world, a different culture. He has seen far too much war in his day. He is changed and reborn into the new culture he adopts as his own, the way of the samurai, and comes to befriend the Ken Watanabe character. In many respects, this is quite similar to what our main character Mizushima does in The Burmese Harp. He is a war torn veteran from Japan. He’s seen his share of death and battle. One final act of war is too much for him and he is introduced to the world of the Monk in Burma. He adopts this culture and therefore is spiritually reborn. For both of these characters, whether you like Tom Cruise as a samurai or not, adopting these new cultures is a way for them to bring closure to their weary war minds and perhaps bring a sense of peace as well.

Clip to show to class: (1:37:30 to 1:43:00)

Near the end, when the regiment is aware they will leave the POW camp in Mudon in three days time, Mizushima shows up outside the camp's fence, where the regiment gathers to watch him and the little kid play harp as a farewell.

Check out the trailer for The Burmese Harp on the Criterion Collection website: 

http://www.criterion.com/films/817-the-burmese-harp

Sources:

http://www.google.com/search?num=10&hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=873&q=the+burmese+harp&oq=the+burmese+harp&gs_l=img.3..0i24l9.43.2007.0.2222.16.11.0.1.1.0.210.1257.0j7j1.8.0...0.0...1ac.lTSd4WgqMkw

The Burmese Harp. 1956. Dir. Kon Ichikawa. The Criterion Collection DVD.

Taxi Driver by Crystal Nehler

Title/Year:  Taxi Driver/1976

Director/Birth Country/Year Born:  Martin Scorsese/United States/1942

Budget:  Estimated $1.3 (USD)

Gross:  $28,262,574 (USD)

Synopsis:  Vietnam veteran, Travis Bickle lives in New York City, working as a Taxi Driver.  As he deals with loneliness and insomnia, he becomes increasingly disillusioned and frustrated with the other denizens of the city.  When he meets a young prostitute who he hopes to save, his violent tendencies hit a fever pitch.  Will he be able to overcome his lot in life?  Or will he succumb to his demons?

Political/Social Commentary:  This movie is all about the after effects war has on a single vet.  Integrating back into society after being so profoundly damaged can be almost impossible.

Narrative and Visual Keywords:  New York, Vet, Vietnam, Taxi, Loneliness, Prostitution 

Camera/Lighting/Editing Technique:  Use of street lights to set the mood, Lots of Dolly shots, Slow Mo, POV, Vague Ending

Main Character/Arc:  Bickle transforms from quiet and lonely to psychotic and lonely.

Notable Collaboration:  Marin Scorsese has used Robert De Niro in a bunch of his most celebrated films including, Casino, Goodfellas and Raging Bull.

Historical Relevance/Recognition:  "You talkin' to me?" has become a landmark phrase in pop-culture.  Nominated for 4 Academy Awards including Best Picture and Best Actor.

Random Fact, Etc:    

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxi_Driver 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075314/ 

Response Questions:

1)  Absolutely not.  Bickle is very much portrayed as a victim of what he went through in Vietnam.  He has had no practical background in dealing with the day to day activities that would make him more comfortable in dealing with society.  For example he begins to see Betsy and then takes her to a Porn Theater, which is something a man with more awareness would not have done.  He also suffers from Insomnia which doesn't help his issue with integrating into society in an effective way.

2)  Taxi Driver is all about diving into the mind of the Vietnam Vet.  How the war left a whole generation of men broken and unable to cope with mainstream society.  Palantine is a symbol of that mainstream; even so much as spelling it out by saying "We are the people" in his campaign.    

3)  Masculinity is seen as broken and dissociated for sure.  The relationship with his emotion Travis shows is very unhealthy.  Bickle is kind of the symbol of masculinity, being a soldier, a Marine, who are quite often viewed as American heros.  However he can't deal with what happened to him in in Vietnam AT ALL.  One could argue that Travis is attempting to reclaim his masculinity throughout the film, but finding romance, attempting to rescue the young prostistute or even at the end of the film with his assassination attempt.