Charlie Chaplin made films as metaphors, revealing what he believed to be out of order with society and showed it to his audience; mostly about social allegory. The reception of his 1931 film, City Lights, had substantial talks on what would be illustrated to the viewers. Director Charlie Chaplin portrays the marvelous beauty of silence, even though the silent films start to be outdated due to the highly demand of talking pictures. No other film before had received that much publicity and expectation. As stated earlier, Chaplin stayed true to silent films and felt the need to keep this type of film ongoing; it was unexpected.
The films were aimed at completely different audiences and had different purposes altogether. They were set in different eras so the audience’s response would have been different. Olivier’s’ purpose in dramatising “Henry V” was to make the English feel good about themselves. Olivier used this film to form propaganda, creating a world of pageantry in which England overcame tremendous odds to gloriously win a ... ... middle of paper ... ...gh used many of Olivier’s techniques and ideas, the purpose of the film was very different. Both films turned out to be hits even though Branagh had a restricted budget with few actors and less advanced sets and costumes than Olivier.
 Media, such as television, film, magazines, newspapers, and the Internet have all been influential mediums of information in the Twentieth century. Rarely was silent film thought of as a strong medium, but Charles Chaplin used silent film as a medium to present political and life issues through a comedic fashion. In Chaplin's later films, he used sound effects, such as whistle blowing and music, to assist him in relaying a message thoroughly. In fact, when films included speech Chaplin felt that this would distort his messages and eventually his success would crumble. Chaplin's beliefs regarding silence in films was expressed earlier by the theorist, Jean Baudrillard.
Since the ultimate goal of making a film is revenue, this understandably frustrated the film industry. Interestingly though, Richard Maltby claimed that the code was established by Hollywood itself and sort of became its own... ... middle of paper ... ...se the audience did not have to hear their voice and the director could verbally guide them through the process. Many of the actors also had accents or poor voices which did not visually match the character. All things considered, the transition from silence to sound was more of a revolution than a peaceful handoff. Despite its primitive start, sound was a hit from the start.
Danny Boyle said the film has "fascinating character development" but not in the "traditional" way because "audiences are not there primarily to watch a character being drawn...they want the excitement and speed of the journey that cinema can provide". He described the film as "intelligent en... ... middle of paper ... ...inal book, Leonardo DiCaprio's character Richard is English. Boyle felt this would not have worldwide appeal so he chose to make him American and chose Leo to play him. In the film, Richard lies to his girlfriend about sleeping with another woman and later splits up with her. The studio tried to get Boyle to change these things but he retained his creative control.
The colour version by Harry Hook is quite different from the text because of how it has been adapted to fit modern life. It has been adapted so much that it isn’t really a moving image of Golding’s novel. It is quite different because of the variations that have been made. Such as how it is in colour and the children are American and not English. Also they swear in this film.
For example, the tasteless perfect ending is eliminated and replaced with an unconventional one which only adds more suspense to the film. Also the main idea that no place is safe, the use of charismatic villains and a blurred line of good and evil remains intact through out this film as well. It is seen in the setting of a suburban town and even the dialogue as well. Also Lang true status remains a mystery to the public allowing him to stay charismatic, and even the protagonists use unethical means to achieve theirs goals. I believe Pellington honored Hitchcock’s classic elements while adding his own style to the film.
When stripped down to basics it is nothing more than a generic love story with a few twists added in for extra kick. The characters in the same vain can be very bland and not make you care much for them due to their backstories not being deeply explored. The only character that I found to be interesting was Jay Gatsby because of the mystical aura that surrounds his character at the beginning of the movie that leads you to want to uncover more of this ever mysterious man. All in all the visuals clearly outpace the story in this adaptation but the character and... ... middle of paper ... ...cs in America: Anti-miscegenation Laws). So it can be seen that the race relations in the Great Gatsby were in fact accurately portrayed.
A Comparison of Two Versions of The Big Sleep The Production Code attempted to censor sex and violence in film of the 1930's and 40's. Instead of impairing, it encouraged directors to use artistic ideas and integrity to surpass the viewers' expectations -- actively involving them in the film despite Hollywood's censorship. Howard Hawks is one such director who used the restrictions of the Production Code to his advantage. His screen adaptation of the Raymond Chandler novel The Big Sleep portrays the same amount of sexuality and violence apparent in the written word, using a distinctly subtle style, which develops broader themes. Comparisons with the extremely dull 70's remake by Michael Winner further suggest the superiority of Hawks' film noir.
Choreographer Busby Berkeley’s Contributions to Film Berkeley’s creations were not meant to focus on dance. He envisioned an overall moving pattern, which he created by using moving bodies. He made the art of choreography a technique of design and visual mathematics, and combined this with his knowledge of film to bring his vision to life on the big screen. The skill of this multi-talented man brought Hollywood musicals to their full potential, creating a high demand for dance in films. William Berkeley Enos was born November 29, 1895, in Los Angeles.