Total Pageviews

Translate

Showing posts with label movie reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie reviews. Show all posts

Monday, December 17, 2012

Documentary Review


The Presidents: Truman to Ford 1945-1977

As one can probably tell from the title, the documentary is about the presidencies from Truman to Ford.

Truman was not well known when he became vice-president, and was not too popular when he became president after Roosevelt’s death. Nonetheless, this Democrat was the president of the United States. Many people admired his willingness to act against the wishes of the people to do what he believed was best. Truman’s first decision was to drop the atomic bomb on Japan. Many people respected him for doing so. Truman dealt with the struggle to fend off communism. He created the policy of containment. Truman also made steps to end racial segregation. He left office unpopular but in hindsight, many people appreciated him.

Dwight Eisenhower was an American military hero. He did not like how the U.S. handled the Korean War, so he decided to run for president as a Republican. The narrator called the slogan “We like Ike” as an American sentiment. Eisenhower started getting the U.S. involved in the Vietnam conflict. He sent money to South Vietnam. Eisenhower won reelection with ease. He got a heart attack that made him seem weak. When the Soviet Union launched Sputnik into space, many Americans thought America was losing out to the Soviet Union. Eisenhower, at the end of his presidency, lost some of his “grand-father figure.”

John F. Kennedy was a Democrat the youngest man ever elected president. His generation was the youth of America. Everyone loved Kennedy. He suffered from many illnesses. Kennedy had an open-door policy. His failure with the Bay of Pigs changed him as a president. His audacity led him to challenging the nation, saying that the U.S. would land a man on the moon by the end of the decade. Kennedy’s biggest decision came during the Cuban Missile Crisis. He ordered a naval blockade of Cuba, which turned out to be a good decision. Tragically Kennedy was murdered not even one three years into his presidency. Despite his shortened term, he is still a famous president. 

Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson was sworn into office and promised to fulfill Kennedy’s presidency. LBJ had an ego problem, and often overreacted. He had an “in-your-face” style. It was arguably a gesture of dominance. Johnson’s Great Society created many new laws. This included the Civil Rights Act. In domestic policies, many people respect him. But he lost lots of it because of how he escalated the war in Vietnam. He did try to reach peace with Vietnam at the end of his presidency, but it was too little too late. Under fire, Johnson decided not to run for reelection.

Richard Nixon did a lot of scheming to become president. Nixon, a Republican, pretended that he had a plan to end the war, but in reality, he was only trying to escalate it. He used his presidency to go after enemies and gain celebrity status. While Nixon lied and lied, Watergate started heating up. The House passed an article of impeachment, and resigned immediately. He was a good strategist but will always be seen as a criminal.

Gerald Ford, Nixon’s Republican vice-president, took over president for Nixon. He was an inexperienced president. He tried to aid South Vietnam, but Congress did not allow it. Ford will always be associated with Nixon, which resulted in him not getting reelected.

What stood out to me in this documentary were the cinematic aspects. There was some great B-roll footage, and I always felt engaged. They had interviews and never had the narrator speak over black and rarely even pictures. There was sometimes music over interviews, which made them a little more lively.

There were no dramatic aspects present in the film. All the viewer sees are B-rolls and interviews.

The literary aspects were also impressive in the documentary. The plot was very well organized, in that the director used the obvious organization given: the presidents in chronological order. This saved me potential confusion because I knew that until the next president was introduced, the film was still describing the same one. The story was told in the third-person, and in a very unbiased way. At times I was bothered by how they were a little too acknowledging of a president’s positives. The documentaries recap of Nixon, for example, included it saying something like, “He was a very strategic man.” From the events the film described, he lied a trillion times, he escalated the Vietnam War when he said he’d end it, and he resigned after being found a criminal. I don’t know how he deserves a positive concluding statement.

A voice over narration was used. We never saw the narrator, but he played a huge part in the documentary.

The documentary used the Ken Burns effect, but not like I’d ever seen it before. They zoomed all around a wide image focusing on each individual piece. I have to say, it was pretty cool.

I would recommend this documentary if one wants pure facts. For me, I liked the truths of it, but if it had been a little biased I probably would have preferred it. Whether or not it took a Liberal or Conservative stance, I would have still been able to see a viewpoint. From this video, all I got were facts, given in a very enticing manner.  

 

Monday, September 10, 2012

Movie Reviews


Marshall Fine of huffingtonpost.com created a movie review of the film "The Avengers," titled 
"Movie Review: The Avengers." Based on the opening line, "Here's the best thing I can say about The Avengers," I thought this review would be negative. I was completely wrong. Throughout this review, he generally describes the plot and the humor. For the humor, he compares it to other films. He describes the slapstick as "worthy of Chuck Jones in his Looney Tunes heyday." He does not touch on cinematic techniques, which most likely indicates that the purpose of this review was to mostly describe the plot. Judging by the praise Fine gives to the plot and humor, I'm sure he recommends the film.

For the quarterly movie review, I feel as though we should have certain requirements, but be able to focus in-depth on what stoop out to us most during the film. I don't think there should be a basic structure. If people want to write it all in the third-person that should be fine, and if people want to write it from their perspective in the first-person, that should be no problem either.