Search This Blog

Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Film Reviews: Run, Lola, Run (Lola Rennt)

“Did you run all the way here?”
"The breathless pace of Run Lola Run is positively exhausting, stimulating and inspiring." (filmsondisc.com)
Dedicated to Paul Nnodim
Hello. I am back. I know it has been awhile since my last review. I took a break during winter vacation and then when I got back some stuff happened and I did not really feel like blogging but I am back
The first time I heard about this film was about three years ago when, bored one day, decided to watch I Love The 90’s, and there was a segment on this film. However, I wouldn’t see it until a year later in my German Philosophy course.
Run Lola Run is one of my favorite films of all time. The actual title is Lola Rennt, which translates as ‘Lola Runs’. RLR is a German film that came out in 1998. It was written and directed by Tom Tykwer and is his masterpiece. The film stars Franka Potente as Lola and Mortiz Bleibtreu as her boyfriend Manni. Filmed on location in Berlin.
The essential plot of the film is that due to a series of unfortunate events, Manni is potentially in a heap of trouble with an organized crime syndicate. Lola didn’t pick him up at the meeting place because her moped was stolen and so Manni took the subway where he lost a bag full of money that he was delivering to his boss and he now has only 20 minutes to find 100,000 Marks ($60,000) or else he is dead. The rest of the plot is Lola desperately trying to acquire the money to save her boyfriend.
However, though this is the plot, it is essentially not, what the film is about. On the surface, this seems to be a crime thriller or action flick but that is far from the case. In truth, the work is an existential film focusing on the nature of time and second chances. The films creative story draws on three films. One well-known classic that the other two films also draw on is Rashomon. This story we have all seen in some form—one story told from several perspectives suggesting that the nature of truth could be subjective. The second film is Blind Chance, which shows the same story happening three different times with slight differences that affect the outcome greatly. Finally the film Sliding Doors which came out the same year as RLR (though RLR is exceedingly better) which shows the same story from essentially two different universes.
I really do not want to give too much away because I could easily break the film down scene by scene and explain its genius, however, that could potentially spoil it for most who have not seen it. I will go into further detail though. The film is 80 minutes long and those 80 minutes are broken down into sections. The first is the opening credits and introduction along with the set up of the plot. Then there are three 20 minutes segments, which are the same twenty minutes in time with different outcomes. In-between these segments are flashback scenes filmed in red to distinguish them as well as express the importance of love as a factor in the film, which are about 1-2 minutes each. Finally, there is the conclusion and credits, which make up the final six minutes.
The film’s point is focused on the clichĂ© of ripples in the pond, the butterfly effect, etc—that the littlest of things can make the biggest differences. Lolo tries to get the money and save Manni three times which means she obviously fails the first two times (I’m not going to disclose if she is successful in the end). However, unlike Blind Chance or Sliding Doors, Lola remembers each of the twenty minutes and the film hints at this in a few subtle but important ways. For Lola, the entire film is linear and so it has been an hour for her, but for Manni, it has just been twenty minutes, which is similar to a later film the most likely was inspired by RLR, Groundhog’s Day.
Tom Tykwer does some wonderful things with the cinematography. Run, Lola, Run has almost every artistic style of camera work thrown into it, each for something particular. All the flashback scenes where Lola and Manni are explaining what happened in the beginning are all in black and white to make a distinction in time. Certain crucial scenes are shot in split-screen to emphasize and build tension. Digital camera are also used for a few scenes to show that they are not part of the main story but are important in affecting the main story and the eventual outcome of the 20 minutes. For the rest of the film 35mm cameras are used. During many scenes, Tykwer uses snorkel camera, which gives the scenes a great movement effect. There are also a few birds-eye-shots. Tykwer also uses still photography for future events and outcomes. Each time Lola goes through the 20 minutes she encounters a few characters that she affects. Despite only touching their lives for less than five seconds, their lives are significantly altered. Tykwer ends the film with this photograph effect but only shows us the first picture rather than showing us what is now in-store for Lola and Manni.
The sounds to the film are also a component of the overall effect of the film. For example, when Lola is running through all the people she could go to for help in the beginning and thinking about who would be best, if you pay close attention, we hear the sound of a roulette wheel, which is symbolic of her choosing a person, but also is very significant to the events in the third 20 minutes. The main soundtrack is mostly sung by Franka Potente, which gives us a bit of insight into Lola’s thoughts as she is running because even when we are panicked our minds are never on just one thing. The music also has a panicked and adrenaline feel to it which fits perfect for the pace of the movie and really gets your heart beating in sync with Lola’s.
There are a few things to pay attention to. A few events do not change for any of the segments. These are fixed either points that happen without Lola doing something different, or things that cannot be changed. Try to spot them. One of them is very important. There is a further sub-message about the passage of times in regards to a woman outside the bank in the first 20 minutes. At first she is blurred and in the distance and she is played by a young woman. However, once she is next to Lola, we see she is played by an elderly woman. One final thing to pay attention to that few people ever make the connection, is that the man who in the beginning stole Lola’s moped is the man on the moped in the third sequence and the theme of Karma is introduced which one could suggest is another theme of the film.
One more thing, the credits at the end go from top to bottom rather than the standard bottom to top which is cool and could further be a critique on time and space
Run, Lola Run is a flawless film. It is aesthetically pleasing, it sounds great, and the sound, camera work, and everything else, line up perfectly with each other to form a genius work of art. The film is so straightforward despite its not entirely linear plot, that the dialogue is essentially unnecessary. That is not to say the script is written badly—the script is also fantastic and the love scenes are especially dependant on dialogue and that dialogue is important to the overall film. What I mean is that if you watch it without subtitles or dubbing you can still fully understand the films plot and message. Speaking of which, if you ever buy the DVD use the subtitles and not the dubbing because the dubbing sound ridiculous. The voices do not match the bodies at all in the right way and the dialogue is changed in stupid ways that I feel takes away from the film. I love the existential heavy message of the movie. The acting is phenomenal and there is nothing one could argue was ineffective in the film or lacking. Even though it is not mathematically possible, I give Run, Lola, Run 6 out of 5 stars!

P.S be on the look-out for Simon Pegg week!
©2010-2012 ~ZeTrystan---(Picture)

Friday, January 27, 2012

Women and Philosophy: The Beckdale Test

Welcome all to the first edition of a new philosophic category on my blog. Like with music and philosophy, this too is for a class. However, instead of music, I will be discussing women. Anyone who reads my blog knows I am a fan of film and the genre of film is a great medium to discuss not only philosophical points but also women and so today’s blog is about film.
Rather than be a about a particular film, I will be discussing the issue of the Beckdale test. The Beckdale test was first created in a comic called Dykes to Look Out For and the first film they mention that passes it is Aliens although Alien also passes.
Here is how the test works: watch a movie, any movie, or even a particular episode of a television series, and then see if it fits the following criteria:
1)      There are at least two female characters that are credited with actual names so it does not count if they are called “female officer 1” or “girl at diner”.
2)      Any two named female characters must then at some point in the film have a conversation with each other.
3)      This conversation must last at least 45 seconds…
4)      …and it must be on any topic other than boys, men, or males in general.
It is in fact quite scary to discover just how few films pass this test. This test does not prove that a movie is bad or sexist, chauvinistic, or anti-feminist. There are plenty of masterpiece films that do not pass the test simply because the plot never allows for it. However, it is a very each fix. Some films, but not all could easily switch the gender roles of characters and it would be fine. This of course only applies to films where the gender of certain characters really does not matter. Although that raises the question of “should it ever even really matter?” The real problem is not that every film passes this test but that films are made typically centered around male characters and male stories and plots. Even certain films in which the main title character is female and the film for the most part follows her around, fail the test. Take for example Run, Lola, Run (which coincidentally will be the next film I review. I promise I will start doing zombie films again also). RLR is a fantastic masterpiece of existential and empirical bliss. I can honestly say it is in my top-five-favorite-movies-of-all-time-list. However, it fails. Of course, Lola never talks to any character really for more than five minutes and the film is not exactly dialogue driven but the fact still remains. Again, the point is not that these failing the test makes these films bad or anything like that—it simply makes one think a bit more about popular culture. There are dozens of films where this problem could be erased by switching roles of minor characters or just adding an extra character or something and none of this would ruin the feel fo the film. Some films must fail the test simply because of their plot, theme, and message like the film No Country For Old Men—another fantastic film. If a scene or character was added or a role was reversed in this film, it might take away from the films mood. I am not saying that women in films take away from the film—all I am saying is that in a film about middle-aged men that is a work on middle-aged men encountering certain plot points, it would make little sense to change it. You can even watch it and decide. An example of a great film that I love that fails the test but could have passed it if it wanted to is Dawn of the Dead 1978. In one of the opening scenes when Fran is in the television newsroom, she interacts with many characters and none of the dialogue refers to men. The best way to fix it I can think of it when the one of the crew tells Fran they are shutting down later so it is okay if she leaves, the cameraman could easily be changed to a female and then given a name with simple dialogue like Fran responding “You sure Jen?” or “ok Ruth” or something simple like that.
What can we do about this? We can always make a few more female centered films, which would not only solve this problem but the simple bigger problem that not many films still today are female centered.
In addition, I challenge you to:
Go watch your favorite film and see if it passes
If you are a film lover like me, own a ton of DVD’s that you have seen countless times, and think you can remember without re-watching them if they pass, go thru your collection and see how many out of how many pass.
Determine which films that fail, regardless of how great they are, could not be altered to pass the test such as NCFOM.
Feel free to report back with your findings and leave them in your comments.