Star Wars (1977) dir. George Lucas

Boy oh boy. I am not looking forward to this review...

!!!!!!

Since this is probably one of the most talked about, analyzed, beloved, adored, and popular franchises of all time, I really am at a loss of what to say about it. I don't think I this will be a very long review. Or a review. 

I'm gonna be honest with you guys. I didn't even bother watching the film for this review. I mean, I've seen it before, obviously. I think I may have actually only seen it once all the way through. But I've been so exposed to the series that I don't have it in me to write a review for this. I'm not a part of the Star Wars fandom. I like the movies well enough, but I am pretty removed from them. I have none of the merchandise and no nostalgia for it. This also goes for The Empire Strikes Back. That's on the registry, too. The rest of this review is pretty much for the whole series. 

It's a very entertaining movie with one of the most beloved protagonists ever. Luke Skywalker is right up there with Abraham Lincoln, Davy Crockett, all those American heroes. He's humble, honest, kind, and very loyal. He seeks the truth, he does what's right, he wants to know how to be the best he can be. 

And sometimes he's susceptible to being influenced by the dark side. Just like many of us, despite how good we think we are, can find ourselves becoming what we hate in the pursuit of righteousness and truth. Yet, he is able to identify those influences just in time, access his own perception of self, and repair what he has almost broken. And in the end this allows him to win. And good triumphs over evil.

Luke is like that really nice, really popular guy in high school who loved sports but was also a really amazing singer. He showed up to everyone's parties, and despite his best friend since kindergarten hanging out with the chess club/orchestra crowd, he still hung out with him almost every weekend. One time he almost got into a fight with a freshman, but he later apologized and then got the freshman laid. 

You know? Those people who are just automatically successful and popular but are impossible to hate because they are just so nice? And then everyone is shocked by their flaws and human moments?

I really like Luke Skywalker. I couldn't really care less about the other characters. Darth Vader is pretty cool, but that's about it for me. As for Han Solo, the only thing I really like about him is that he's actually kind of dangerous. He's a killer and a criminal.

He fucking shot first.

And that's what draws me to him, not how handsome or "badass" he is, but the uncertainty of him. In fact, I begin to like the second and third movie less and less because he becomes more and more good. 

So yeah. Luke is a really great protagonist. He embodies all of the characteristics of a hero in the form of a young, unsure orphan. He's sort of like Frodo, only more like a teenage boy. Which makes him more relatable. In fact, if you search "Luke" in Google, the first thing that comes up in the suggestions for me is "Luke Skywalker". And I've never searched that before, so it probably does that for a lot of people. 

Significance
You'd have to be a blind and deaf donkey to not know why this movie is significant. 

That said, I'm not totally sure what made this movie so significant. 

Well, I mean. It had great special effects. The story was modelled after old action/adventure serials that were very popular in the country (as was Indiana Jones). It had interesting and compelling re-working of common character archetypes like the young hero, the rogue with the heart of gold, the damsel in distress, the villain, the old sage, etc. 

It came out with so much merchandise and toys that kids didn't grow up with the movie, they grew up with the world. 

But is that it? Can that really be it? 

There has to be something more to this. 

And the closest I've come to understanding it is watching The People vs. George Lucas. I just finished that documentary in preparation for writing this review. It was pretty fascinating. It's the closest I've come to seeing the rationale behind Star Wars fandom. I've never understood it, though always appreciated it. 

I love seeing people who are obsessed with the franchise. I wish I had that. I almost wish I was apart of the fandom, the yearning, the wonder. I don't have that. I watch Star Wars and I'm like "Cool. Not bad."

So I guess just go watch The People vs. George Lucas. It said everything a lot better than I ever could. 

Sunrise (1927) dir. F.W. Murnau

It's been a while. Too long. I'm in a play right now, after a two-year-long acting hiatus. I would say that that's been taking up most of my time, but it hasn't. Just wanted to brag. Other than acting, I've just been working, hanging out with friends, and browsing the internet instead of watching movies.

I'm pretty excited about this one, not only because it's a new blog post to write, but it's a film that I've never seen until now. Also, it's from a foreign director, and the closest we're gonna get to any foreign films on the registry. It's a strictly American list, but this is the first American film by the acclaimed silent film director, F.W. Murnau, who until Sunrise had worked only in Germany. 

A major reason I picked the registry instead of, say, Sight and Sound's Top 50, is because it's way longer, and it has more obscure films. But alas, we are restricted to the U.S.A. Luckily, we still get to take a look at the Ufa! (More on that later...)

F.W. Murnau

Along with Fritz Lang, Robert Weine, and many other, less known directors, Murnau was a silent-era filmmaker and a major part of the German Expressionist film movement. He's probably best known for making the first official Dracula adaptation/vampire movie, Nosferatu: Eine Symphonie des Grauens (1922). 

A bunch of his films are now lost, which is unfortunate because he really was a great artist. His visual style was not only stylish and characteristic of German Expressionism, but innovative as well. He championed the "unchained camera" technique, which established the use of tracking, panning, and dolly shots. And he was among the first to utilize the subjective camera, using the point of view of a character to take us into his or her mind. 

And none of it even looks primitive. His films have insanely complex and extravagant camera movements and tricks that will make you shit a house. 

He moved to America in 1926 and made three films here. Sunrise was the first. 

He died, sadly, in 1931. 

Oh yeah, and he was a part of the major film studio Universum Film AG, or Ufa, that put out most of Germany's films at the time and included many famous German directors and cinematographers and whatnot. That's what the reference earlier was. 

I'd have more interesting things to say about him because I learned a lot about German Expressionism in my Film History class, but sadly, I lost my Film History notes.

The Movie

One thing I ought to put out there is that while Murnau's films are beautiful, inventive, and hugely entertaining, they're also kinda stupid. The plot in this one is just ridiculous. 

It's about a farmer who is fed up with his home life, despite seeming to have plenty of prospects, a child, and a loyal and faithful wife. A seductive and wicked lady from the city stops by his house at night and whistles, and one night he decides to abandon his family and run away with her. 

The devilish woman convinces the farmer to drown his wife and make it look like an accident. Although why the couldn't just run off, I'm not sure. She makes two bundles of reeds for him to stash on his boat, so that when he pushes his wife into the water, he can use the reeds to float back to shore, dispose of them, and say that the boat sank and his wife didn't make it. 

So he goes to his wife and tells her to come out on the boat so they can go on a trip to the city. And I should also mention that his wife is way prettier than the city girl. 

He goes to push off the boat and she recoils in fear. He changes his mind and takes them to the city. He spends the rest of the day comforting her, telling her it's okay, it won't happen again, etc. She reluctantly stays by his side. They go into a church to see a wedding, and upon hearing the vows, the husband breaks down and begs forgiveness. He realizes that spousal homicide is a lame thing to do, after all! Happy ending. The end. 

Oh wait, just kidding. 

A lot of what happens next could have been cut out. It's kind of irrelevant to the story. It's still entertaining though, so whatever. 

The man and the wife, having renewed their love, spend the day in the city and get into all kinds of wacky shenanigans. 

Gets a shave and wife gets jealous of the manicurist.

Then this dude hits on his wife and the farmer pulls a knife on him. Dude's crazy.

They break a photographer's statue and just leave it there. 

They go to a fair and dance among other things.

There's actually this really hilarious part in the dance sequence where a male spectator keeps noticing a female spectator's dress strap falling down and fixes it for her. I laughed. Like, out loud. Here it is. It starts at about 1:10. Watch it to the end, it's the best. 

So they head home on the boat, but disastrously, a huge storm hits. The famer takes the reeds (which he was gonna use to float himself to safety after he killed her) and puts them around his wife. The boat is overturned, and it looks like the movie will end in a complete reversal. I guess they hadn't invented swimming by 1927. 

Amazingly, he comes to on a bed of rocks by the shore, completely unscathed. His beloved wife is nowhere to be seen. He calls for help, and a search crew is summoned. They find no trace of her, except for the scattered bundle of reeds. The farmer is beyond devastated. He is led home, with the woman from the city watching, assuming all went to plan. 

She stops by his house as he grieves, hoping to finally run off with him. Instead he comes at her much like he did his wife. He begins strangling her. So at first, it looked like he would die in the storm ironically. And now, it's a case of "be careful what you wish for". OH, WAIT. A fisherman kept looking for his wife and found her. ALIVE. 

So he runs back to the doctor where they have her, and sits relieved and overjoyed at her bedside as she opens her eyes. The woman from the city, who did not end up getting killed, just sorta leaves. The sun rises on the happy couple and their child in the final shot. 

Significance
There's a lot to say about this. First off, it won Best Picture at the first Oscars, ever. Well, Wings (1927) got "Outstanding Picture" and Sunrise got "Unique and Artistic Production". But they're basically the same thing. It's pretty much a tie. It also the won Best Cinematography and was nominated for Best Art Direction. So yeah, it's pretty Historic. And way more remembered (and probably better) than Wings. So it also got the very first Oscar snub. 

But other than it's place in history, it's also just a stunningly beautiful film, filled with the complex shots and camera tricks that were relatively new at the time. Murnau's use of the "unchained camera" and Subjective Camera is everywhere in here. Earlier on, there is a long take done in a tracking shot, and it's super complex. 

Starts off looking at his back in a wide shot.

Follows him over a bridge. Also, note the eerie lighting and use of fog.

Goes into a medium shot and follows him through some trees.

Pulls to the side of him and follows him from behind the trees.

Tracks him over some hilly plains and through a fence. He's in a wide shot now. God damnit, how did they do this???

He turns into the camera and starts walking towards us. The shot begins to pan left.

Camera moves through some foliage and reveals...

His lover waiting for him. That's right. It's a POV shot. The long take turned into a POV shot. They went from objective to subjective shooting in one long shot. Oh. My. Gourd. 

And it's not just that (although that is by far my favorite shot in the film). There's elaborately staged and edited fantasy sequences that use double exposures...

Miniatures and special effects...

Split screens that scramble time and space...

And those examples are all from one sequence that is only a few seconds long. There's more where that came from. 

When the camera is still, the scene is always framed and lit in classic, trademark expressionist style. 

A bit of a minimalist example, but a great shot. Dark background, stylistically lit midground. Beds framed in a patternistic, square manner. Looming atmosphere, trapped feeling.

There are symbolic lap dissolves and double exposures to communicate characters' inner thoughts...

The man lying in bed, contemplating murder, while the lake overlaps the image. Both a symbolic use of editing as well as subjective camera. 

Even the intertitles are artistic. 

Additionally, this was one of the first films to use the Fox Movietone sound-on-film system. Meaning it comes with a soundtrack and sound effects. It's scored very nicely, foreboding, and sweet during the romantic parts. But the sound effects are what shine. There's a sequence when the farmer and his wife, having made up and renewed their love, walk out into the street, holding each other. 

Shot against an early version of a green screen, dollying in, with cars zooming all around them. Another very complicated and breathtaking shot. 

And when they get to an intersection, they almost cause a multiple car collision, and get blocked in by cars and a mob shouting at them to get out of the way. Sound effects of horns, screeching, and the cacophony of street voices play over the soundtrack. And this was before Modern Times (1936). 

So, I've pretty much exhausted the extent to which I can talk about this movie. The story is goofy as hell, but it's very entertaining. And it's more than forgivable both for the era it was made in and for the sheer visual poetry, inventiveness, and all around artistic integrity. This is a classic case of a film using every kind of new technology and technique at its disposal to spot on thematic and tonal effect. 

You know how movies are being praised for their use of 3D today? (Particularly Gravity [2013]) 

This is pretty much the same thing, only with sound, editing, and camera techniques that were just being used back then.