Welcome

            With this web site, I hope to present a user-friendly forum for everyone to critique films.  Although films will be the starting point, analysis of many different modes of communication will be the ultimate goal.  There are all sorts of social, political, spiritual, personal, etc., messages and meanings in most of the media that we consume.  At times, these messages and meanings can be very apparent.  At other times, they are hidden, and require extraction.  With all of these messages coming at us on a daily bases, it is wise to have a desire to know what they are communicating to the subconscious.  If we are aware of what is really coming into the psyche, we can filter that which is unhealthy and unwanted.  And embrace that which enlightens and inspires.
            Coming Equipped with the tools that will allow us to distinguish the gems from the rubble, we can make better decisions in our daily consumption of media products.  We can also demand what we may feel are better end-products.  By engaging in the mere act of critical analysis, whether for good or bad, we are communicating directly to the artist (because they probably search the web on a regular basis to find out who is talking about them and their work, or most likely, they have hired help to do it for them) that we appreciate them as true artists; we are enamored by the gems that they produce, and (pardon the cliché) keep up the good work!  On the other hand, those who are sometimes in our opinions, not really true artists at all, but paper champions, we are communicating the fact that we do not view them as artists at all, so bury the rubble, and come correct if they want to survive in such a highly evolved forum.  Whichever the case may be, we can be heard.  Our participation in the media industry in this manner will leave historical documentation of our rolls in manufacturing a better society.  By demanding that the art we ingest have sustenance, we are providing blueprints for future generations.  With the history which we will provide them, they can live healthier lives, because they too will be equipped and able to demand better media products.  It would behoove us to give them better opportunities, or positions in the chess game. We can do this by shedding some light on critical world issues.  Because that is what the true artist does through their films, they effectively communicate with us and draw our attention to real world concerns, from A to Z.  Those elevated products do exist, but some of us need to let down our walls of prejudice, and embrace some of the old gems.                                                                                                    A great example is Sherlock Jr.  Directed by Buster Keaton in 1924, it presents a tale within a tale.  It is self-reflexive, a film about making a film.  Keaton’s character is a film projectionist with aspirations of becoming a detective.  He is also trying to win-over his love interest while he is framed by a competing courter.  The theater that he works at is where his cinema visions come to fruition.  As Keaton looks out onto the screen, he alters the story, and the camera with the POV of the audience presents Keaton to the back of them in the booth within a frame and on the outside of the booth, is a frame. 
            Like other silent films, Sherlock Jr. is unique; it contains title cards as a part of its narrative.  But the narrative is expressed of course largely in part by certain aspects of the mise-en-scene since it is after all a silent film:  The character movements and expressions are what tell the story.  The most interesting and innovative part of the film occur about 20 minutes in.  Keaton has so much talent as a director, it is amazing.  He is befuddled by a strange string of events.  He begins to walk down a porch, but steps off of a bench into a whole totally different location.  He attempts to sit on the bench, but falls down unto a street in another location.  With his next step, he almost falls off of a cliff.  The cycle continues, every time he takes a step, he ends up at different locations in various potentially dangerous situations.  This was 1924, how brilliant!                                                                                                                                                  This film serves as an instructional on some of Hollywood’s conventions, and how to make a film.  It also ties our cinema experience to the unconscious by demonstrating the dream-like quality of watching films.                                                                                                                       Of course, I can do it no justice; you really have to see it.  I am in total concordance with the Europeans and Robert Sklar, author of a great historical reference on the motion picture industry, Movie Made America.  He writes…“The physical genius the Europeans regarded as the hallmark of American silent movies found its embodiment in one man, Buster Keaton, and in his struggle to wrest order from the recalcitrant machinery, natural environment and moral values of the American landscape” (Sklar pp. 120).  Keaton was a nova, and he was not afraid to make the world aware of his political consciousness. He was the consummate auteur.  He is the kind of artist that we can appreciate and extol because people of this nature manage to confront the system with vigor, and express many of our sentiments within their motion pictures. 
            Although many media scholars have lamented the fact that it is almost impossible for one to pick out all of the hidden meanings and messages, I propose that we work collectively to decipher the meanings. We can all contribute pieces that will grant us access to solve the conundrums.  Participation will be a challenge that can be both fun, and rewarding. 
            Criticism is something that we all do anyway.  When we discuss issues within media texts with our friends, we are engaging in a form of criticism.  It may not be as detailed as a five or ten page analysis, but it is still criticism.  For instance, if we say that such and such wore jeans                           when it would have been more appropriate for them to have worn a suit in a particular segment; we are discussing an aspect of the films’ mise-en-scene.  Or perhaps why do we continue to hear or see a particular object, we are discussing an aspect of the film’s motif.  We talk about these things, but it would be great if we could understand what they mean.
Many films are made to give the audience insights to a particular historical time or event, such as Oliver Stone’s Platoon.  It gives insights to some of the occurrences of the Vietnam War.  Or, This Film Is Not Yet Rated gives information about the history of the MPPA Ratings board.  If the information that can be derived from the media is both entertaining, and relevant to our concerns, it serves a great purpose.     
            A film may be just a film, or it may, like the ones sited above, have a purpose.  In order to understand the purpose, some media scholars suggest that it is important to have a wide range of knowledge in many different areas.  In the text Film Analysis, Editors Jeffrey Geiger and R. L. Rutsky site a quote from film scholar Stephen Prince:  ‘The film critic needs to do much more than simply watch movies.  The critic must be sufficiently well read, educated, and cultured to possess numerous frameworks of reference…’ (Geiger Introduction).  I believe that this is true for professional critics, but I also think that everyone can analyze films especially with the internet at our disposal.
            The internet community is composed of people from many different races, backgrounds, cultures, etc., therefore, in my opinion, we as a community can work together to be one “sufficiently well read, educated, and cultured” system, and do our part to provide the information that is needed in order to get the job done.  If one observes that a certain cultural aspect is lacking in an analysis, one can fill in the blanks.  This will in turn give us better understandings and interpretations. 
            In the 1940’s there was a big movement by the French film critics to push film analysis.    Auteur (author) Theory grew out of a desire to validate neglected filmmakers, (the independants) and to examine ‘a personal’ methodology to cinema (Dudley pp. 188).    This desire belonged to a young and free-spirited intellectual by the name of André Bazin.  As early as 1943, Bazine proposed ideas of critical film analyses, and a need for public education pertaining to films.  He felt that people should be equipped with the knowledge of the filmmaking process.  To Bazine, this knowledge could help the public to discern good films from bad ones, while at the same time, making the public a part of the filmmaking process by incorporating an element of reception. (Dudley Introduction). 
            So, per the suggestion of Bazine, I am ready to do my part in making the public aware of the filmmaking process.  The glossary of terms contain only some of the key words used in the analysis of films, but they are ones that I find myself using quite often in my interpretations.  They are also often utilized by others in the analysis of films.  Also included are a couple of my own analyses.  At this point, a disclaimer is necessary, so here goes, in no way am I suggesting that my interpretations of these films are those intended by the artists, nor that they are correct.  I do not know,  I could be way off.  If you strongly disagree with my opinions, and you think that I am wrong, correct me.  Embracing constructive criticism is a vehicle to improvement. This could turn into an interesting debate on films.  Or better yet, I strongly suggest that you write your own interpretation.  Because one of my goals for this site is to have different people write about the same films so that we will have many different viewpoints.  So hopefully, there will eventually be perhaps some odd number of analyses of Fried Green Tomatoes and Malcolm X and so on. 
            Since I am suggesting that we work together to help one another in our understanding of different social, political, cultural, etc., aspects of the world,  I feel that it is apropos to offer as my first analysis, my interpretation of the film Crash.