Houses for Writing

If there was only one central theme to the movie It Happened One Night, it would have to be the theme that love conquers all. Ellen, the main female protagonist, represents a pampered girl who has abandoned the easy life in a rebellious effort to live the life she wants for herself instead of want her wealthy father wants for her. This is clearly shown in the beginning scene when, in her frustration, she leaps from her father’s boat and swims to freedom. The main male protagonist, Peter, represents a guy who’s down on his luck with the opportunity to turn it all around. This is also shown early on, as when the viewer first meets Peter he has been fired from his job as a newspaper writer. However, instead of seizing this opportunity for himself, he selflessly decides to help Ellen through her journey. This heart warming act is shown further towards the end of the film, when he returns the money given to him because he realizes his love for her.

In the beginning of the movie, their relations towards each other are quite hostile. I think that's because, in running from her father’s help, any help at all sort of imposed on her freedom. Peter is persistent in helping her though, clearly seeing that she is struggling to adjust to being alone and on the road. His boldest gesture was when he intentionally missed the bus to wait for her, and to join her on the next one. I feel like many similar actions of Peters demonstrate a concern, and eventually, affection for Ellen. I mean, he plays the part of her husband for almost half the movie: when she was being pestered by another bus passenger, when they had spent the night at the motel, and when the detectives had closed in on their location. The last example might be the best, though, because the way they both acted so dramatically and fluidly together was as realistic as it was humorously faked.

My mood throughout the film was very light hearted. There were many funny moments, and very sweet moments. It was not until just before the end when the miscommunication between Peter and Ellen nearly ended the movie unhappily that I grew worried. But, alas, the truth came to light and they ended up together. Afterwards I felt hopeful in a way I did not understand at first, but later came to realize what it was. The way Peter acted with Ellen, the way he cared for her in the exact way she needed, just blew my mind. That he could read her so well without knowing her, and then hardly treat her differently when he did find out who she was- it was very sweet.

Love conquers all is the perfect theme for this movie because despite all of their hardships, love remained victorious. Even though Ellen nearly married someone else, her love for Peter kept her from saying 'I do'. And even though Peter could have made a small fortune for returning her back to her father, he chose the love he had for Ellen over the money.

Overall, I really enjoyed the movie, mostly because of the creepy, dark, gothic setting. There are similar tones in the movies of my favorite director, so it was very enjoyable to see this movie as a sort of precursor to inspire him. I still cannot believe I am watching movies that are almost a hundred years old- it is so fascinating! Another thing I found interesting in the movie was the way the color of the film would change, the way some scenes would have a strong blue color, or an eerie yellow. I would assume this was for day and night, but it was just cool to see how differently they had to do things back then. The length of the movie was a little hard to sit through; something about silent movies just makes me restless. The music helped, the selections chosen were perfect compliments to the scenes throughout the movie. I thought the costumes and make-up were good, mirroring the darkness of the scenery. The twist at the end was pleasantly surprising; fitting, as well, as the asylum only added to the creepiness.

It is easy to point out how different French New Wave Cinema is from Classical Hollywood Cinema because, for the French, there was an outright rejection for simply following Hollywood cinema. For starters, each film released in these eras had very different influences. Most notable would be Singin' in the Rain, which portrayed how the cinema was evolving beyond silent films. French New Wave Cinema was more influenced through auteur theory, where the directors could have a more creative vision with their film.

French New Wave Cinema had a different reputation. Discontinuity and jump cuts were used, instead of Hollywood’s technique of having the narrative push the story forward. French New Wave also favored more ambiguous endings; for example, in The 400 Blows, the movie ends with the main character running into the ocean. While this is symbolic of his freedom, there is no clear explanation for what will happen to him next. Classical Hollywood films almost always included an ending resolution, like when the conflict gets solved or when the guy gets the girl.

One thing that both types of cinema have in common is their success. Despite the differences between these two genres, the films made in these periods are notably outstanding in both the time they were released, and are still remarked upon today. Speaking for myself, it's easy to see why that is. There are no set rules to film making, and every technique a director uses to make their film unique is going to make an impact, whether it's a big screen musical or an introspective look at the hardships in a youth's life.

Tim Adams of The Observer has written an interesting review for the book “Choke” by Chuck Palahniuk. His review seems unbiased, as his audience may be anyone who has read or are interested in reading the book. Both positive and negative aspects of the book, the writing style, and the author are given, which I found interesting. As the book is about a sex addict's 'road to recovery' (with the book itself being a diary as required in the recovery program), it could be too easy to view the subject matter from an extremely biased point of view. The book's format also leaves it open to criticism, as it is in a choppy, hectic style known uniquely to Palahniuk (and perhaps others, I would not know).

He opens the review with the introduction of the book; a warning to ward the reader off not unlike Lemony Snicket would do with his book series: A Series of Unfortunate Events. While this was one similarity I noticed while reading the book, Tim Adams makes many more references to a variety of other books which I have not heard of. Still, looking past the unknown book titles, the review continues to explain the book and its main character in a way that clearly explains it in, as I have mentioned, an unbiased manner. The only drawback I have found from his unbiased point of view is that I have no idea how Adams actually feels toward the book. Perhaps if I understood the other book comparisons he makes I would know which way he was leaning, but as is, he seems to have almost no attachments whatsoever.

However, Adams review lets you develop your own feelings and attitudes toward the information presented to you. I think if I were someone who had not read the book before reading this review, I would be interested in picking it up.