Analysis Of The Thin Blue Line And Cloverfield

1202 Words3 Pages

The films, The Thin Blue Line and Cloverfield are both alike and dissimilar in different film aesthetics. The aesthetics that are presented to the film’s viewers vary in many ways ranging from the type of camera used to the lighting in the films. Despite the differences both films present truths about the world using aesthetics. I think these certain aspects helps the audience give a full, undivided attention to what is currently happening in the movie. When the movie has our full attention that is when we fully understand the truths that are being presented to us from the two films, The Thin Blue Line and Cloverfield. One of the first notable differences between the two films is the lighting. In the film Cloverfield is mainly natural lighting, and on the other hand, The Thin Blue Line uses lights to help cast the attention directly on whoever is being interviewed or what event is happening in the movie at the time. Each film has a specific purpose for the types of lighting used. I think, the purpose for the natural type lighting in Cloverfield is because the movie is
Like I said earlier, most of the film The Thin Blue Line is interviews of the people in the movie. Although, Cloverfield does have one or two interviews of characters in the movie, that is not an important factor that helps make up the movie. The interviews in The Thin Blue Line are essential to helping the audience get a full understand of what the movie is trying to present to its audience. Just like the other three aesthetics, this one always provides more truth about the world and that truth that is offered by this is the truth of what is real and what is not. In the film The Thin Blue Line events that occurred is what the movie is about, and Cloverfield is a science fiction film in which the events did not actually happen. We learn the truth about what is reality and what is not real and is made

More about Analysis Of The Thin Blue Line And Cloverfield

Open Document