A Place in the Sun

A Place in the Sun showcased a lot of interesting elements. While the major plot points were pretty well known before the movie was even shown, I did find some of the camera work interesting. The extreme close ups of two characters at once, such as when George and Angela confessed to each other that they loved one another, really worked well in my opinion. However something that bugged me was some of the dialogue in the first act of the movie. Some of the characters, George especially, had odd dialogue. Watching the early scenes it many of the lines by George felt clunky and didn't really sound like what someone would say. It may have been an attempt to show how introverted George by having his dialogue poorly worded.

Now on the case on whether or not George is guilty of murder. Now we never see what happens when the boat tips, just that they both go in and we see George stumble onto the beach later on. Its not really a case of guilty or innocent but rather what he did or didn't do. Right before the boat flips George is shown to be changing his mind on murdering Alice and he even tries to keep Alice from rocking the boat when she gets up. We never see if he tries to help her or not so really his sentence (which is probably 1st degree murder from what the DA accuses: that he had the intent of murder and the sentence of the death penalty) was a little excessive for the crime.

The whole trial scene showed a real lack of effort by the defense, such as when they just sit back as the prosecution accuses George and even when he slams down the oar (it even looks like some of the debris hits people in the audience). The prosecution's actions would have probably forced a mistrial (he really went out of his way to look like some kind of crusading lawyer and that George was evil incarnate) and the real lack of evidence such as witnesses as physical proof (nothing actually to show that George had struck Alice) would be lacking for a 1st degree murder sentence in my mind.

While he did plan the whole act, we really don't know what happened after the boat capsized so I would have to say George was innocent, at least at the level of murder the prosecution called for (he was most likely guilty of man slaughter or a lesser degree of murder). I think the whole idea of not showing what happens in the water, what George did or didn't do, and how Alice was knocked out was a great choice in the movie. It allows the audience to draw their own opinions on whether or not George was guilty.

Pulp Fiction Films and Double Indemnity

Double Indemnity proved to be an interesting movie to me for several reasons. For one it crafted very interesting characters. Keyes to me was a very interesting character to watch with his quirks and his dialogue with the Insurance company head and Walter was excellent. Also the film took a very interesting approach to the Pulp Fiction genre by having it not about detectives but about insurance agents. Finally, and probably the most important aspect that made the film appeal to me was the fact it represented a genre not often seen in recent years.

Pulp Fiction as a genre is a quintessential American genre in my opinion. the idea of a single character, a detective, doing what needs to be done in order to right a wrong embodies the whole American mindset. The characters in these types of stories, though usually fitting a distinct role, are varied and fascinating to watch on screen. What is odd to me is that a genre that is so ripe for interesting characters and stories isn't shown much in cinemas. To my recollection there hasn't been a Pulp Fiction movie in quite time. Probably the last one I've personally seen was Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

Admittedly not a true crime movie, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was a dark comedy that used the Pulp Fiction Genre as a setting. It had all the trappings of a Pulp Fiction film but was a dark comedy more than anything. It was set in LA, featured a detective (though not as the central character) trying to solve a murder, there was crime as well as the good guys doing wrongs to set things right. It was an interesting movie and though saying it is "interesting" is more of a subjective take on a movie that did rather poorly in theaters, it showed how the Pulp Fiction genre can be used to create a differing an unique take on a crime movie.

Portrayals in Grapes of Wrath and Sullivan's Travels

Both Sullivan's Travels and Grapes of Wrath portrayed basically the same time period. While watching, I was interested in the portrayals of people of differing status at the time between the two. The two movies took different approaches in the portrayal of certain people throughout, though there were some commonalities.

Grapes of Wrath first off had the poor, the people most affected by the Depression and lack of employment, displayed a tragic figures. Through the intersection of between characters of this type we see how the poor were merely trying to survive, with what seemed at times like the whole world against them. Sullivan's Travels portrayed a similar view of the poor but with a few differences. The poor are at times shown to be out for themselves, not the loosely joined groups in Grapes of Wrath. This is best illustrated by how the two train hoppers react to Sullivan when he and the girl hitch onto a freight train. Additionally it was interesting to see how Sullivan's Travels showed how some of the poor were out for themselves, such as when Sullivan was mugged and dumped on a train. The two films painted similar overall pictures of the unemployed, though Sullivan's Travels showed them in more of a darker light at times.

Another portrayal I found interesting was how both films showed the law as cruel in most cases. From Grapes of Wrath we have the police at the plantation beating and brutalizing workers and later we see how the police at another camp tried to incite a riot in order to dissolve the camp. In Sullivan's Travels we get a similar display when a train yard guard assaults Sullivan and when Sullivan stirkes back he is arrested and sent to a labor camp where he is mistreated by the guards. It is an interesting portrayal that both films seemed to share and demonstrates a view of the cops not actually being righteous characters.