Critical Analysis of "The Untouchables"

I had always liked Brian de Palma's film "The Untouchables." I am a big fan of gangster movies, so this was definitely my kind of movie. I had always simply liked it because it was entertaining. Watching it again this weekend though, I saw it in a new way. I found that I paid much more attention to the actual techniques involved in the filmmaking. Though I watched the movie in a completely different way, I didn't like it any less.

That's because "The Untouchables" isn't only an entertaining mob film, it's also an extremely well made one. From it's opening to it's close, it's an extremely suspenseful film that was made with great care. The director, Brian De Palma, knows how to make a scene suspenseful. With his choice of music and several point of view shots, you never completely know what's going to happen. He also throws in enough surprises, be it a man on a balcony far away, or a group of mounties charging at the wrong time. Though they may seem like nothing, these little moments actually increase the suspense by making the scene less predictable.

Another aspect that I just noticed this time was the amazing cinematography. De Palma infuses the film with long tracking shots that follow the characters from room to room. This makes the viewer feel more like they're in the scene, because they're vision wouldn't cut from shot to shot. This is an especially effective technique when used as a point-of-view shot, because it really increases the suspense.

De Palma does know, however, when to just cut the shots somewhat quickly. During his shootouts he cuts from shot to shot quickly enough to get the viewer's adrenaline pumping, but slowly enough so they can tell what is occurring. Also, the inclusion of slow motion into the shootouts is fairly ingenious. This takes what may be a short shootout, and doesn't let the suspense go for a much longer span of time. Of course, all of these elements come together in the stairway shootout. This scene is easily the most exciting in the film, from it's perfect use of cinematography, slow motion, and music.

Speaking of music, it's the one thing I did notice the first time I saw the film. This is mainly because it is somewhat obnoxious. It plays very loudly over the film, covering up much of the sound. This would be annoying if it weren't for the fact that the music is actually very good. It perfectly evokes the feel of a suspenseful scene, or a triumphant scene, or even simply of Al Capone reading the paper.

When all of these elements are put together, it's almost difficult to remember that the movie is about a real group of men trying to get a real mobster. Because of the direction, there is enough suspense so that, even though people may know how Capone was eventually defeated, they are still almost not sure how the movie will end. This is because it plays more like a fictional film than like a biopic. The main things keeping it grounded are the performances. From Sean Conerry's Award winning performance to Robert de Niro's grounded portrayal of Al Capone, this is a film that leaves the viewer wondering if it is really a true story, because it seems like it's to exciting to have ever happened.

Reality and Paradox in Un Chien Andalou

It is no secret that Un Chien Andalou is an extremely surrealistic film. It has no plot, and is instead a montage of seemingly random moments strung together. The real question, though, is how random the moments really are. Could there really be some sort of pattern to them, or are they simply put into the film for no true reason?

If there is a reason for the sequencing, it is most definitely not a conscious one. The filmmakers have found a way to put whatever ideas they had into a film for seemingly no reason. From this idea comes one of the psychological paradoxes that the film deals with: even if there is no conscious reason for the scenes, mustn't there be a subconscious reason? There must be a subconscious reason for the filmmakers to want to have each of these scenes. As such, the film works more as a psychoanalysis of the filmmakers than as a psychoanalysis of a certain character. The film itself is evidence of the filmmakers and why they'd put a film together in this particular way.

Another interesting fact that fits in is the "reality" of this surrealistic film. The film is surrealistic in the order of its scenes, but with very few exceptions, each of the scenes themselves is pretty realistic. The film even has a realistic look. The sets and objects of the film are identical to the ones that would exist in real life. This is evidence that the filmmakers live in the real world, and are thus aware of the true physical laws that everyone has to follow.

The film doesn't make any sense as a whole, but it is rather a series of individual scenes, each of which reveals a subconscious trait of the filmmakers.

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari Comparative essay

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is a film that is now ninety years old. This means that most of the reviews for the film are also almost ninety years old. These reviews, though old, still bring some interesting views of the film to the table. The article titled "A Cubistic Shocker" references the fact that the film is told by a madman. This article comes up with the theory that the film's surreal look comes from the fact that the madman is telling the story. The strangely cubic style is how the man views the world around him, and the director lets us see his vision of it. This theory is very interesting as it gives an actual reason for the style.

The article titled "The Screen" brings up some different points. In this article, it is stated that the general audience isn't supposed to understand the visual style of the film. They are merely supposed to enjoy the viewing. This idea also has some merit. The film is, at its heart, an entertaining murder mystery. It is a distinct possibility that the style is merely a way to better showcase the story, instead of having another reason for it.

Finally, the article "Brought into Focus" digs even deeper, using The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari as a means to compare German films of the time to American films. At that time, American films were working towards the use of sound, while German films were moving towards being seen as a more visually inventive art form. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari certainly proves this. The film's visuals greatly resemble those that would be found in a surrealist painting, though the film's storyline is somewhat basic. The film doesn't try to be about the story, it is about the images, much as a great painting is.