My thoughts for Dr. Strangelove are that the story line is very good and very condicting of itself. I like the fact that there is cules that lead the audience to something else in the movie.My thoughts on the movie Dr. Strangelove is that I thought it were a very interesting movie. I thought the movie was intelligent for the time period it was made in. The movie made fun of the events that were happening in this time period. I like how the actors used humor to explain topics that were happening to ease the stress that the audience could possibly be experiencing around this time period.
I thought for the time period the movie was made the video effects were good and the angle of the camera was good. The way the camera was used to make an impact on the video shot was very good. I like how the color of the scene make an effect on the way the audience saw the people in that cut. For instance when the room was dark and gloomy the character was usually a dark person and talked really deep. That character was very seriously about everything and didn’t enjoy “making the situation funny”. I thought this a very good idea for the camera crew; it made it show the greater effect of the situation. If the room was light and good and peaceful music was playing then the mood of the characters was nice and calming and humor was added to the personalities of the characters.
I thought for the time period the movie was made the video effects were good and the angle of the camera was good. The way the camera was used to make an impact on the video shot was very good. I like how the color of the scene make an effect on the way the audience saw the people in that cut. For instance when the room was dark and gloomy the character was usually a dark person and talked really deep. That character was very seriously about everything and didn’t enjoy “making the situation funny”. I thought this a very good idea for the camera crew; it made it show the greater effect of the situation. If the room was light and good and peaceful music was playing then the mood of the characters was nice and calming and humor was added to the personalities of the characters.
I like how the different lighting and effects added a plot to the story of the movie. It made the movie more interesting and gave the audience something to look forward too. I think that the directors of the movie did a really good job setting up the movie and plotting everything out. I like how there was little humor parts in the movie that told the audience that they were making fun of the situation. For example there was a part in the movie that the men “can’t fight because this is a war room”. "... it was also Kubrick who suggested that the war room table should be covered with casino green baize, again highly reminishcent of Bond's introduction with his famous catch-phrase over the gaming table." (Stillman 494) I thought that part in the movie was very humorous and kind of told the audience that the characters were just really not taking anything serious.
The way that the characters are played in the movie show different themes in which certain genders played in the 1960’s. Women were typically less or seemed less important than the man. For example the only woman in Dr. Strangelove was the secretary for the general. “Miss Scott , the well-spoken Pentagon secretary under the sunlamp displaying ample navel, also pops up as the centerfold in the Playboy magazine being admired by Major Kong in the cockpit.” (Stillman 491) This should go to show that most women in this time period were not appreciated for the work that they did it was more like how they looked and how women used that. I think that this movie does a good job pointing that out to the audience.
Works Cited
Kubrick, Stanley, dir. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the
Bomb. 1964. Columbia Pictures, 2009.
Stillman, Grant, “Two of the MaDdest Scientists.” Film History. 20 (2008): 487-500.
Web. 24 Aug. 2009.
Kubrick, Stanley, dir. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the
Bomb. 1964. Columbia Pictures, 2009.
Stillman, Grant, “Two of the MaDdest Scientists.” Film History. 20 (2008): 487-500.
Web. 24 Aug. 2009.
This was a good summary overall: although, the few grammatical errors threw me off a little bit in the beginning. You pretty much covered everything that was to be covered. One thing I would suggest is to elaborate more on certain topics, such as the role of women or the effect of the compositional elements that Kubrick used. Also, going more in depth on the summary would have made this a blog a lot more effective. The general overview of the entire thing is very well-thought out.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the movie was very controversial; however, the use of humor, in my opinion, was brought to the audience to make a point rather than make them feel better while watching. The camera angles were spot on, it made the depiction of characters easier for the audience to interpret. For example, General Ripper, was almost always shot from the bottom up showing mainly his face, this is saying that he perceives himself to be superior and of authority. And, on the contrary, Kubric adds a bit of controversy when the audience realizes that Ripper is actually insane. I do think differently on the topic of women, Kubric portrays women as unnecessary, but the absence of women throughout the film made it more obvious to me that he felt this way.
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree with John here. I totally agree that the movie was fun and interesting, but, yeah i do think that the use of humor was to convey a point bigger than the movie itself. Everything else seemed pretty well done. From the summary to your thoughtes on the symbolism of lighting and how that depicts a mood and feel for the movie.
ReplyDelete