Out of all the movies we have watched thus far, I would have
to say this one is my favorite. I enjoyed the satire and unpredictability of
the plot. I felt the actors did a good job of keeping their character and sold
the film to me. I also believe I enjoyed this film the most because it was the
closest representation to Western film that we have seen in class. The film was
produced with a large budget and followed many standard film protocols and
angles, unlike many of the low budget documentaries we have watched. Not to say
one is better than the other, but they do produce two separate types of feelings
when being watched.
The main
difference I noticed between the play write and the film was the ending. I was
a bit disappointed when the film decided it was necessary to prove Miranda
guilty on screen to wrap up everything up. Unfortunately many movies do this in
our culture because if the ending is left hanging, they are deemed as bad by
people stating “What a horrible ending!” and “I can’t believe they just left us
hanging like that!” The majority of people who watch films like to go through
the whole story, including the ending, and when the end is not clear there is a
feeling of anger or resentment towards the film. I feel that Polanski tried to
avoid this negativity by adding in an ending, but this did take away from the
impact of the story. By having the ending open ended like in the play, it
creates a sense of pins and needles, trying to figure out what happened and who
was actual crazy and who was right? Leaving the viewer with so many questions and
not sure what to do next, to me, is a sign of a great work of art, distilling
passion and curiosity in its viewers.
No comments:
Post a Comment