In both Blade Runner and Minority Report, there is a question of what it is to be human. The replicants are treated as sub-human, so they get no rights and their life span is set to four years. These androids are sent to the Off World which is another planet that is becoming habitable to humans.
Society is scared of the androids' intelligence. So limiting their lifespans and keeping them on another planet protects the humans. These replicants begin to become so much like humans it is difficult for Harrison Ford to distinguish them.
Both films show a future that is suffering from society's attempt to make advancements in technology only to bring us back to contemplate on humanity. W. A. Senior talks about the importance of this dirty and hostile world. Without this type of condition, the non humans would not have come into existence. Our world is slowly holding onto an illusion of a peaceful nature, yet, sadly, our future is becoming more dependent on technology.
So, the predicament arises. We create these androids to save our race, yet we don't treat them as humans because they are merely slaves with an expiration date. But, what makes us human? and how can we differentiate human from replicant?

Political Expediancy in Casablanca

The Casablanca script was brought about in the midst of World War II, and the movie is largly a propaganda film. Rick Blaine is representative of America at the time of WWII. He is a neutral in his politics and is very private about his affairs.
The filmmakers made Humphrey Bogart an ideal American. His development follows a path from uninvolvement to involvement, which the United States government used as a way to create an implicit ideology behind the movie. The movie suggests that even if a person likes to keep to himself/herself, sometimes there is a greater calling for the individual to step up and do the right thing.
In this scene, the filmmakers throw in a very wealthy entrepenuer (Sydney Greenstreet) to ask Humphrey for his Restaurant. Of course, Humphrey says no because in this part it is established that he is not going to get involved with anyone. Sydney says, "In this world today, Isolation is no longer a practical policy." Taken out of context, this exact line applies to someone urging America to go into World War II. The political expediance comes in the filmmakers ability to put all American values into this one character of Rick. After Rick gets involved, the public percieves it as America's duty to get involved. The American agenda is make more accessible through this Hollywood-style, romantic plot.

Catch-22

I tried to read the book a long time ago, but never could actually finish it. Recently, I saw this movie was on instant play on Netflix, so I decided to watch it. Catch-22 is defined in this movie as the armies tricky way of keeping its pilots in the war. A pilot can leave the military if he is crazy. If the pilot claims he is crazy, then he has the grant to leave the war. The catch is that the soldier would be considered sane if he did not want to fly, yet insane if he does consider to fly. Therefore, he cannot leave the military because the moment he decides not to fly the plane any more he is sane.
There are famous actors in this movie. Alan Arkin plays the protagonist who sees the backwardness in the military and cannot get out of the catch. Arkin is the only character who sees the insanity in the war, but he has to bare insanity due to the troubles of war. Young Martin Sheen plays a fellow pilot. Jon Voight plays some sort of high officer who tries to capitalize on the resources found in America's base in Italy. Orson Welles plays a high ranking general who visits the base and has no real compassion for anything or anyone. There is even a small role for the beautiful voiced Art Garfunkel in the movie. I would consider Alan Arkin, Martin Sheen, and Jon Voight professional actors. Since this is a dark humour movie, the acting can be a bit goofy and unrealistic at times. The attitudes given about war in this movie is horrifying; a plane crashes in one scene and the two actors (Jon Voight and Martin Balsmin) do not even look at the incident. Generals raise the ante for air bombings, keeping the soldiers in Italy for an uncertain amount of time due to his ability to raise the number at any time. Even though the humor is dark, it still rubs at me in a strange way. The humor is just different because the movie is 40 years old, but I enjoyed it anyway.
The editing in this movie is psychologically stimulating. Scenes could be dreams, or scenes could be reality. The movie plays with reality in its style of editing. After Arkin gets a sheet metal in his leg, the movie switches to his subconscious. He is trying to help someone else who has hurt his leg, but then it cuts to his sexual drive. He is trying to swim to the nurse that is helping him with his leg. He is stuck out at war with no one to be intimate with. The only real intimacy is the intense conversations that the soldiers have with each other. There is a scene where it is cut from Alan Arkin trying to caress a girl to him in the middle of a strategic meeting.
The movie is purposely edited to leave the viewer out in the dark, questioning what is real. There is no guiding story line, just scenes of what is happening. Catch-22 is one of those movies that you have to watch twice or even three times to pick up on the subtleties. I have watch it twice now and feel like i have a some-what good understanding of it.

Movement in George of the Jungle

George of the Jungle as a movie is very loyal to its attempt to satirically tell the story of a boy growing up in the jungle. A talking ape teaches him how to live in the jungle, then he has to teach him how to show his affection to a girl. The fourth wall is often broken during this film. The narrator or a character speaks of the movie, or George (Brendan Frasier) slightly goes out of character.
The movement in this movie is used in the best way, to show the audience the silliness of this entire film. During the scene where George is swinging to save the girl, it appears that he is flying at the speed of a jet plane. His swing is drawn out for too long, giving the audience a feeling of faux suspense. The movie makes it apparent that the characters are going to make it out alive, and George and the girl will live happily ever after.
The movement is a pivotal technique used in this film. A lot of movement is obviously fake, and a lot of acting seems intentionally horrible. But this is what I like about the movie and what makes it work.

My Personal Avatar

A head phone with loaded bullets would be the best avatar for me because my avatar is music. These headphones perfectly describe the power of music. Music is the gun that shoots the bullets (songs) to affect the world. A gun is not the direct cause of an act; it's the person holding the gun. Steadily grasping the grip of the gun, the artist uses the music to express his own ideas and feelings.

When I listen to music, I feel as if I am right there with the artists as the song was being recorded. Music is like a time capsule where I can visit my different moods, journeying through my mind. It may sound selfish, but, when music is playing through my headphone, I internalize the music vibrations and forget everyone else.

Michael Arruebarrena: The Transformation of the Wolf man

The fact that Lon Chaney, Jr., the actor who plays the Wolf man in the 1941 version, puts on the wolf man makeup and outfit even 30 years after the movie was made brings light onto how revolutionary this movie was. The Wolf man (1941) was the second time a werewolf was put onto the big screen, and, though the effects seem cheap and unrealistic, they were spectacular for the time.

The transformation in the classic film was much more strategic. The frame focuses on Chaney’s feet as he grows hair then walks away. This method was a money and time saving technique. Yet, the transformation was affective and makes the viewer see the wolf man as more human. Also, the story line is held stronger. So the approach is to show the audience that he is changing, then show him completely changed, sort of a way to shock the audience. All of this transformation happening with a film orchestra playing a thrilling score.

When Benicio transforms, his bones realign. His feet bulge out, and he grows sharp fang teeth. Most importantly, the audience sees all of the changes. The effective result is the transformation feels realistic. What the film looses is the stylistic method in capturing a believable transformation without ever really showing any truly realistic effects.

Whether the older or the newer Wolf man is better becomes irrelevant. The times were completely different. The newest version lost its style in the transformation, while the older one was obviously not real. While the newer one gets multiple shots at different angles, the older one tries to keep one continuous show of his transformation illustrating the patience of the time. As the CGI improves, the more our spectators expect real looking, fast-paced special effects.

Michael Arruebarrena; I'm Not There

The movie I chose was I’m Not There, which is an abstract movie where multiple actors including a female plays Bob Dylan. In this scene Bob Dylan is spending time with his wife. The dominant is the burning pieces of paper that are positioned at the bottom right corner of the screen. In Heath Ledger’s scenes with his wife (Charlotte Gainsbourg) he spends much time in relaxation and love away from his hectic life. The burning paper symbolizes the love that the two characters had.

The subsidiary contrast is heath ledger’s face, dazed and concentrating at the burning papers. The lighting key is high key with real light. The lighting gives the viewer the feeling that he/she is in the room with the characters while they interact.

The two characters are intimate; they lay with comfort on the floor next to each other. The camera proxemic is intimate; the viewer can’t totally see Charlotte’s body but get a decent view of Heath’s.

Since this movie was made with different people acting as Bob Dylan in different sections of his life, Heath’s Bob Dylan was solely for illustrating his love life. The director tried to give the audience a sense of the other side of Bob Dylan that many people never saw, as opposed to the rebel image he is often given. The flame symbolizes their growing love, but, like all flames, they burn to ashes.