Change Your Image
geber1
Reviews
Stranger Than Paradise (1984)
A Change of Scenery Doesn't Guarantee Happiness
This movie is all about boredom and disappointment, following the lives of three characters as they try to make life more interesting by moving to a different location. Willie is in the center of it, and he owns a small apartment in one of New York's lower-class neighborhoods. He is actually from Hungary, but he completely despises his heritage, and hates when his relatives speak to him in his native tongue. His cousin, Eva Mona, comes in from Hungary and he's forced to let her stay in his apartment. They both share a similar disdain for Eastern European culture, but Willie seems to be trying to delude himself that he enjoys his new American life. He tries to be complacent with eating TV dinners, playing card games, and watching TV for hours on end. Eva finds this completely boring and can't wait to go to Cleveland to stay with her Aunt Lotte. Although Willie and her begin on shaky grounds, by the time she leaves, a kind of bond grows between them.
Willie has a good friend, Eddie, and they're both unemployed, getting their money through horse races and fixed poker games. They sense the boredom, the monotony setting in, and they're trying to avoid it. In fact, at one of their fixed poker games, they play with a few men who are in a similar situation: victims of repeated defeat and disappointment. One of them is at the breaking point and displays aggression while the others are cowardly, weak, resigned. They meet another man, a factory worker, and it's obvious that he doesn't enjoy being a working stiff. In an effort to try to avoid turning into these men, Willie and Eddie decide to take a trip to Cleveland and visit Eva.
Cleveland isn't exactly as exciting as they had hoped, and Eddie, bored out of his mind, remarks that "Everything's the same". Eva is working at a hot dog stand and is involved with a man she's only half-interested in. n a matter of days, Eddie and Willie are reduced to sitting around playing card games again. The three decide to escape the monotony by going down to Florida and taking advantage of the wonderful weather. However, the weather is the only thing changes; the men go to the track to try and augment their funds while Eva spends most of her time inside. Once again, this paradise yields no heightened degree of happiness.
The problem the three characters face is that they too often look for external factors to make them happy. Moving to somewhere nicer or making more money cannot change the numbing repetition; to do that, they must look on themselves and appreciate their company more. Unfortunately, by the end, the two men have become more like the people they were trying to avoid becoming: Willie is more aggressive, Eddie is more resigned.
The film really isn't as depressing as this review may make it seem. It has some very funny moments and is generally entertaining. Even the boredom is fun to watch, and this is achieved because of the very realistic dialogue. I found myself often relating to conversations they hold, being all too familiar with the awkward pauses. The characterization is impressive as well; Willie, Eddie, and Eva are all believable and we can understand their problems. If anyone has ever been bored to tears, they'll know exactly what the three are feeling.
12 Angry Men (1957)
An Excellen Film that Uses Little to Say Much
With 12 Angry Men, director Sidney Lumet makes so much out of so little. All of the men are wearing white shirts and ties, and when we first see them they all appear to be as simple as their clothes; they make small talk before casting the first vote, and we make the mistake of feeling like we understand them. But as Henry challenges their decisions, we learn that they each have a complex set of beliefs and motivations.
We soon learn that evidence is not the only thing that's influencing many of the juror's decisions. Some vote guilty because they don't trust teenagers, some do it because they don't trust the young man's ethnicity, which is never made clear (but racial stereotyping certainly is), some do it because it just "feels" right, and some do it to escape the boredom or oppressive heat. These factors, together with the evidence, make it seem obvious that the man truly did murder his father, but Juror No. 8 (Henry Fonda) refuses to let him die without being absolutely certain that he is in fact guilty.
Fonda's character reminds the men of two very important things that they either forgot or didn't take into consideration. The first is that a young man's life is in their hands, and whatever conclusion they come to is going to profoundly affect him. Although this is never discussed, it's possible that none of the jurors have ever had to make such an important decision and are not used to taking the kind of precaution such a situation requires (in fact, Juror No. 12 appears to treat it like a routine board meeting). Fonda is fully cognizant of the severity and tries to get the others to feel the same way. He also reminds them that a guilt verdict must be made free of any doubt. According to American law, a man is innocent until proved guilty, but the men consider it to be the other way around. It is through close examination of the evidence that the men are able to reach a verdict clear of any doubt or outside influences.
Of course, the road from small talk to their final verdict is not a smooth one, and never has there been so much drama in one single room. Although Lumet keeps them in the same room, which has no interesting features, for the great majority of the film, he manages to pull of some subtle yet incredible cinematic effects. In the beginning, the camera is placed towards the ceiling and we are looking down at the jurors, a visual metaphor for our mistaken feeling that they are simple men. Later, it is placed toward the floor and we now look up at them and perhaps even marvel at their complexity. Lumet has challenged our conception of the average man, showing us through camera and dialogue that he or she can indeed be very intricate.
Lumet also uses different lenses to great effect. As the film progresses, he uses lenses with longer focal lengths to make the room seem smaller. The tension is greatly increased as the walls seem to close in on the men, and this can be seen as different metaphor: as Juror 8 dismisses the stereotypes and prejudices, the only thing left is the evidence.
12 Angry Men is a masterpiece and can be the subject of endless analysis. It can be viewed from a political and a sociological perspective, and would be great for a prospective cinematographer to study. If nothing else, the acting and dialogue are superb and make for an entertaining experience.