Double Indemnity

Film noir literally means “black film.” As you are watching the film, keep track of all the elements in the picture that seem dark or depressing. Think about the characters, the setting, and the storyline.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51yNWpAzy8L.jpg

The film Double Indemnity is the perfect example of film noir.  After watching it in my film class, I have learned many common aspects included in film noir.  Most of them are seen in the storyline of Walter Neff and Phyllis Dietrichson.  The term began with French film critics and described the darkness expressed in many films after the war to represent the anxiety and pessimism in society.  Everything about the films seemed dark, including the characters, the setting, and the story.  

First, the characters are seen as very dark and corruptive.  The film focuses on Walter and Phyllis, who both exemplify the dark characteristics of men and women in film noir.  Walter does not appear to be such a bad guy at the beginning of the movie.  He rather appears confident in his actions and with his relationship with Phyllis.  He comes off as a man who has seen it all, which is common in film noir in the male characters.  However, he grows darker as the film progresses due to Phyllis' influence.  He is shown as being weak as he is easily put into danger with Phyllis by his side.  He gets caught up in her plan to murder her husband, making him more evil as he kills a man he barely even knows just because of a woman.  Phyllis is also a very dark character, because she is the one who set all of the events into motion in the first place.  In film noir, there is usually a fatal female who comes across as powerful, sexual, smart, and threatening.  Throughout the story, she is able to convince Walter to help her kill her husband so she can receive the money.  She does it in a very sneaky way, and tells Walter how horrible her husband really is.  Then the audience learns that Phyllis might have been behind another woman's death too.  It all comes together at the end when she is holding the gun at Walter, and it is revealed she never really loved him at all.  This makes her appear very evil for how the murder was all a scheme concocted by Phyllis from the very beginning.  She is amoral and manipulative, only caring about herself.

The setting was also very dark, with helped emphasize the depressing themes seen in the film.  With the help of cinematic techniques, the film appeared dark and shadowy in almost every scene.  The dark themes of murder and corruption were displayed with the use of dark lighting and deep shadows, which are common in film noir.  The settings in Double Indemnity included darkly lit, small rooms, and gloomy, shadowy streets at night.  One interesting insight on the movie was that the film was shot on location.  It was shot in real cities in Los Angeles to better reflect on reality at the time.  Concepts like venetian blinds, low key lighting, and deep shadows are used to alter space psychologically and display dramatic isolation.  All of these aspects add to the suspense and darkness portrayed in Double Indemnity.  

Finally, the storyline was overall dark and depressing.  The film focuses on murder and crime, and deal with corruption, evil, guilt, manipulation, etc.  Due to these dark themes, the film had to deal with censorship.  The government did not like seeing criminals simply walking around freely, which is exactly what Walter and Phyllis were doing after committing murder.  Because of censorship, film noir films tended to be more psychological in that they forced the audience to think.  In Double Indemnity, conversations about adultery and murder were very discrete.  One example is when Walter first speaks with Phyllis and their flirting turns into spoken words of speed limits.  It was left to the viewers to fully decipher what the characters actually meant.  Also, the love story is dark.  It can be described as passionate and deadly.  They plan a murder together, and it turns out there was no love between Walter and Phyllis after all.  There was only manipulation and corruption between the two of them, clearly shown when the two of them are willing to shoot each other at the end.  To add to the depressing themes, there was no happy or optimistic ending.  Both characters reached their ultimate downfall.  Overall, film noir aims to show the darker sides of human nature, and Double Indemnity does just that with its characters, setting, and storyline.   

Netflix Recommendations for Macbeth

Netflix: a source of television shows and movies to entertain oneself for endless hours.  It is created to provide a variety of shows and movies, with many different genres and stories to satisfy one’s boredom, especially perfect for lazy days at home.  There is truly something for everyone.

I find that many times the concepts I just recently heard about or discussed pop back up in other things I encounter.  I can see connections to the topics in other things I see throughout the day.  Especially when I read books, I can relate the characters and events to others.  This is true when I read Macbeth.  Once my mind was on it, I could easily connect it to various other shows and movies.  The character Macbeth has many similar aspects to others, through the themes that were presented in the play.  This includes the ideas of ambition, masculinity, blood, supernatural, prophecies, and appearance vs. reality.  Here are some of my recommendations for the character of Macbeth:

    1. How to get away with Murder: This show is about a group of law students and their criminal defense teacher who become involved in a crazy murder plot that will change all of their lives.  Just the title relates enormously to Macbeth, simply because Macbeth really needs to learn how to get away with murder!  It’s similar in that everyone gets caught up in the awful murders that are committed.  Also, Macbeth’s intentions behind the murders are in the hopes that they will change his life so he can become king.  This show recommendation reveals Macbeth’s ambition about his evil actions, and hopefully he would be able to get some tips about committing murder and simply enjoying the rewards instead of leading to his own death.

    2. Supernatural: In this case, the title also reveals much about Macbeth.  This show is about two brothers who hunt the supernatural creatures that roam the Earth.  It relates to the aspect of the supernatural in the play.  When Macbeth and Banquo first encounter the witches, they don’t know who they are and are startled by what they reveal.  This show would hopefully teach Macbeth how to handle encountering supernatural beings better.  In the play, Macbeth relies on the witches too much, and then he is haunted by the appearance of Banquo’s ghost.  It reveals that he needs help handling the supernatural, that he can receive watching this show because the supernatural are a daily presence.

    3. Chronicle: This movie is about three friends who stumble upon a source underground that gives them super powers.  At first, they use them for fun, but soon they become irresponsible with them.  They start to embrace their darker sides, especially Andrew, who uses his newfound powers for evil, which eventually leads to his death.  This recommendation reveals the aspects of appearance vs. reality as well as ambition.  Macbeth is similar to Andrew in that he receives this power, but quickly uses it to his advantage and turns to evil to get what he wants.  His intentions are selfish and he is driven to remain in power.  Finally, people rise up against his evil actions and he dies because of it, just like Macbeth.  The movie also displays appearance vs. reality because they gain this power, but they keep it hidden for the most part.  They aren’t what they seem to be, especially Andrew who was at first shy and nice, but vicious and evil by the end.  Even his friends eventually turn against him, just like how the people of Scotland turn against Macbeth.  All about power and corruption, this movie is perfect for Macbeth to show him the consequences of evil actions and what he should not do.

    4. Reign: Finally, this television show is a great recommendation for Macbeth.  It takes viewers to the past to when Mary Queen of Scots is betrothed to Prince Francis. They become the rulers of the kingdom of France, and experience the conflicts that arise in and outside the castle while trying to stay in power and keep the people content.  It’s the perfect show because it explains a lot of similar events.  First, Macbeth relates to King Henry, because he has a lot of power at first but then becomes corrupted.  He actually starts to lose his mind.  That abuse of power is similar to Macbeth.  Also, he relates to Francis, because they both kill the king and then become kings themselves.  Then, they are both haunted by the ghosts of the ones they murdered.  In Macbeth, Macbeth is haunted by Banquo’s ghost.  In the show, Francis is haunted by Henry, who is his father and former king, after he kills him.  Furthermore, there is a prophecy in the first season of the show, like the prophecy in the play.  Both characters try to take actions to either fulfill or destroy the prophecy.  In addition, balance of power is constantly changing in the relationships.  This show could probably help Macbeth understand the shifts in power between a husband and a wife.  The show also reveals the concepts of guilt, blood, masculinity, and ambition.  I think in many ways, the show could teach him how to get over the guilt in a positive way and continue as king.  Mostly, it should help him understand what he should or should not do to be a good leader.

Becoming Evil: Macbeth Edition



http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327866505l/8852.jpg

There have been plenty of stories about a great person suddenly becoming evil after one fateful decision.  Sometimes it is a quick, hasty choice the character does not think twice about and then has to deal with the consequences.  Other times, it is a choice that the protagonist spends time about, weighing the pros and cons, and ultimately chooses what they think is right, but what the audience knows is wrong.  That is what happens in Shakespeare’s story of Macbeth.  The character Macbeth is overall a great man that is honored by everyone else.  Even the king admires him for his loyalty and courage.  Towards the beginning of the play, the king Duncan calls Macbeth, “O valiant cousin, worthy gentleman!” (Macbeth, 1.2).  The admiration was returned.  Macbeth saw himself as the king’s warrior and his friend.  So what made him kill Duncan? Why did a seemingly not evil man take the first step into evil?

There are various reasons one can be led to evil acts.  I think a very common reason is temptation.  If the temptation is too much, the person will be willing to do anything to get what they want.  Wanting something so badly can lead to dangerous acts.  In the play, Macbeth is too tempted to be king that he gives up his innocence when he murders Duncan.  I think it was the witches’ prophecy that tempted him into the action.  They declared that Macbeth would become the thane of Cawdor and king.  When the previous thane of Cawdor was executed and he took his place, he believed the witches.  However, he believed the only way he could become king was to kill Duncan.  In my opinion, it wasn’t fate that led him to this decision.  I think he was still able to make his own choices and that the title of king was something he consciously always wanted.  Therefore, Macbeth was overwhelmed by his desire to consider the consequences killing the king might bring.

Despite his temptation, he was also hesitant about committing the murder.  That’s why I think the other reason a person turns to evil is the influence of others.  Someone can be pushed into something they don’t want to do by another person.  It’s even harder to resist when the act may be something he/she is already considering.  Another person’s advice could be the thing that pushes the decision over the edge and into action.  In Macbeth, Lady Macbeth is the one that pretty much forces Macbeth into killing Duncan.  When he is hesitant, his wife treats him like he’s foolish for not completely be committed to the crime.  She convinces him it’s the right decision, and is able to persuade him into doing it.  Her push led Macbeth to killing his previous friend Duncan so that he can achieve the power he desires so much.

Much of the consequences for causing Duncan’s death are internal.  Talking about the crime beforehand and actually committing it are two very different things.  The aftermath of an evil act can cause negative effects to a previously good person.  They are unexpected and can take control of someone.  The guilt and regret can instantly rise up.  An internal conflict can come about whether the decision was worth it or was it a waste and simply the wrong thing to have done.  These consequences are portrayed through Macbeth after his wrongful deed.  He starts to go a bit crazy.  His mind won't allow him to stop thinking about what he has done.  He becomes frantic and restless, not being able to go to sleep.  He says, "Macbeth shall sleep no more" (Macbeth, 2.2). 

 

Overall, he has trouble accepting what he did.  Simple things like saying "Amen" are even a struggle.  He cries, "I had most need of blessing, and "Amen" stuck in my throat" (Macbeth, 2.2).  Taking steps towards evil can really affect a person and their behavior.  He/she must deal with the consequences.  In the play, Macbeth's innocence disappears and evil only builds up leading him to commit more evil acts, like forcing Banquo's death, to protect his new found power.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contemporary Art Analysis

My sketch of Miradas 1

While walking through the exhibit at the Contemporary Art Museum, I admired all of the wonderful art pieces.  They were all so unique and different from any other art pieces I’ve seen before.  Of the museum itself, I liked the feeling of openness it had.  Everything was spread out and there wasn’t too many art works present.  It’s very different from other art museums which have tons of pieces and makes it a little overwhelming.  In those, I feel like I don’t have enough time to look closely at all of the art.  In this museum, I could spend time viewing each of them carefully.  Also, I like that the exhibits are always changing.  It’s cool that I could go back to the museum and see completely different pieces.

The focus when we went was limited visibility.  Something was missing from each piece and it was our job to figure out what it was.  I think that was such a cool way to view the art works because it has relevance to our everyday lives.  It’s difficult to see the whole picture when people are rushing through life.  This exhibition allowed me to examine each piece through that lens and realize what I simply just glance over without really seeing it for what it is.  The idea of limited visibility was present in each piece in a unique way, causing the exhibition to reflect the concept in various situations.

The one piece I chose to analyze was called Miradas 1.  It was created by a Latin American artist, Moris.  He was born in Mexico City and completed this piece in 2012.  The piece is 640x391.  It consists of black acrylic covering an enlarged digital print on a large canvas.  The piece focuses on the eyes of six people.  The rest of the enlarged photograph is covered in black, which makes the eyes stand out even more.  I think this piece represents the limited visibility people have on others’ personalities and life styles.  I saw it as concealing these people in a way that viewers can’t learn much about them.  The audience can only look at the eyes, which also limits their knowledge on who the actual person is.  Moris is an artist who likes to show a bit of the darker side of Mexico through his work.  He is influenced by the violence and poverty in Mexico.  I think this is seen in this piece because some people in the lower class of Mexico might have to learn to withhold some of who they are to survive. 

The style of this piece is very unique.  It’s significant that the artist chose black paint to block out their bodies.  The color brings a darker tone to the painting.  Furthermore, he does use black, but it’s not solid.  Viewers can point out different shades that were used.  I think it’s very interesting that even though the focus is on the eyes, the rest of the people’s bodies can still be seen if you look hard enough.  I could barely see the outlines of their bodies through the acrylic, but they are there.  I think this is interesting because it shows that the artist didn’t want to block them out completely.  If it was completely black and the bodies were hidden from sight, the piece would just look like random pairs of eyes on a canvas.  However, viewers can still barely see the bodies which show that it was a real photograph that was taken and that there is more of the person to be seen. 
 
Miradas 1 fits right in with the theme of limited visibility.  The idea of this throughout the exhibition draws attention to what is missing.  When looking at this piece, we focus on the eyes that are shown on the canvas.  The piece represents the absence of the rest of the body.  We instantly notice that we’re only shown the eyes and everything else is concealed under the black acrylic.  It’s up to the viewer to fill in the rest of the image.  This may require some imagination on our part.  The people in the piece can be anyone.  The eyes don’t give us enough information to figure out who the actual person in the image is. 

While looking at the piece, I asked myself: Why the eyes?  Why did the artist choose the eyes to show to the viewers rather than any other part of the body?  It made me think of the saying, “the eyes are the windows to the soul.”  In some ways, I think eyes can hold a lot of truth and emotion within them.  They do show some of who a person is.  However, I think there is still more that needs to be shown to fully understand someone.  The artist chose only to show what he wanted.  In this way, the piece reveals something about the people in the society.  The meaning of the piece is that people choose what to display to others.  They’re not giving others a full view of who they are.  It’s very likely that everyone is hiding something that they don’t want to show to the other people around them.  Because of that, we are never allowed a full picture of someone’s true self.  People choose how they wanted to be presented and limit others’ visibility of them.  I think this piece would still have relevance in any time period, because people will still withhold parts of themselves so they can be seen a certain way in society.  Therefore, this piece perfectly fits the idea of limited visibility and reveals a very important message about society.     
   
 

7 Deadly Sins, 1 Deadly Advertisement

This old ad takes sexism to whole other level.  It was published by the Phillips-Van Heusen Corporation.  In 1951, it appeared in Collier's Magazine.  The advertisement shows a well dressed man lying in bed while a woman kneels on the side serving him food.  The purpose of the ad is to persuade men to buy Van Heusen ties.  At the bottom of the ad, there is writing that is promoting the ties by promoting a "man's world."  The most ridiculous part of the ad is how it thinks man domination will make women happy.  It says, "man-talking, power-packed patterns that tell her it's a man's world...and make her so happy it is."

 

The ad supports a "man's world" in which the men have all the power and the women's purpose is to serve them.  The message is that men will gain confidence and power just by wearing these ties.  It's trying to persuade viewers to buy this product by convincing them that male domination is right in the world.  The fact that the woman is kneeling shows that females were seen as subservient and powerless at the time this advertisement was published.  By putting women down, the ad gives more reason to men for buying the ties.  The written part of the ad further persuades men to buy the ties by the ridiculous assumption that by showing women it's a man's world, they will be doing their wives a favor.  The chauvinist language tries to make it seem okay that females are less than males.

 

The intended audience of the ad is men who are most likely older and married.  They are also probably middle and upper class.  The publisher also uses stereotypes to portray gender inequality.  It uses typical gender roles to get the point across.  For example, the man is dominating over the woman in the household.  Also, the man seems to be employed while the woman's job is to stay at home and do the cooking. 

 

The deadly sins the advertisement portrays is pride and avarice.  Pride is shown by the man as he relaxes and seems perfectly content being served food by his wife.  The advertisement uses pride as a persuasive device by boosting men's confidence and power.  It's telling them to take pride in being men and using their power to get what they want in life.  Therefore, they should take pride in wearing these ties.  Avarice is also shown because it displays men as wanting anything that benefits them.  They're greedy for power and will take anything they can to truly have a "man's world."  

 

Freebie!

Significance in Names

Names on one hand seem like really simple things we are born with.  On the other, they are a part of our identities.  Losing your name is like losing a part of who you are.  I also believe names mean different things to different people.  Some names are more common than others, but it's rare to have the same exact name as someone else.  In that way, names add to our uniqueness.  I don't think that names define wholly who we are or our personalities.  However, I think they are significant in differentiating us from each other, and passing on some of our heritage throughout generations.

Naming someone is an important decision.  Some people have a hard time deciding, desperately trying to pick the perfect name.  Others know right away what they want to name their child.  That's what it was like for my parents.  When I asked my mom, she said her and my dad both liked the name Kaitlyn.  They had no difficulty.  When I asked her why, she didn't have a reason.  So they agreed on my name.  However, they did have some disagreement about how to spell it.  My mom argued for it to start with a C while my dad wanted a K.  Today, I'm so thankful for my dad writing my name with a K on the birth certificate, because I just think it fits me better for some reason.  I like my first name the way it is.  The name Kaitlyn is a form of Caitlin, which is derived from the name Catherine.  It's an Irish name meaning pure.  I think that meaning is very much me. 

Along with my last name, Colucci, my name connects me to my family and my heritage.  My first name is Irish and my last name is Italian, representing both sides of my family.  A cool story about my last name: Colucci was originally Coluccio until my relatives in Italy moved to America and dropped the "o".  I think what is so great about my last name is that a lot of people find it fun to say.  Because of that, my last name has become one of my nicknames in a way.  Some people just call me Colucci, and two of my friends call me Coluch.  I love that my last name can define me like that because it's so unique and plays a strong role in my life.

"There are two me's, the me who is the individual and the me who is a part of a family of four."  I think this statement by Anna Quindlen can relate to everyone in some way.  I think the way I most relate to being "two" is by being a twin.  All my life, I've been alongside my brother.  We shared a room as kids, gone to the same schools, had the same friends, and shared 17 birthdays together.  There are not a lot of things that one of us has done and not the other.  However, we're also very different individuals.  Even though we have similarities, we also have differences in our personalities, hobbies, etc.  Therefore, I completely believe there is the me who is the individual and the me who is a part of a set of twins, not to mention the rest of my family.  I love being the me who is a part of my family, a part of a larger whole.  We are all strongly connected to each other in a way I can't even begin to explain.  However, I am also the me who is an individual and has different thoughts and perspectives about most aspects. 

I think the dilemma with being both an individual and a part of a larger whole is that it's hard to differentiate between the two.  Growing up, I've always been connected and compared to my brother.  Sometimes I feel like some people only see us as a set of twins rather than the two of us as individuals.  It's frustrating at times, but it's also great being a twin and I wouldn't change it.  I just believe there is a clear difference between the personalities of me as an individual and me as a part of larger whole.  In my opinion, it's great being "two," but there are times when there should be a separation.