Deep Dive Cinema

By Robert Seebach

Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window was released over twenty years before I was born, and yet it has become one of my favorite films. It was released by Paramount Pictures in 1954 and stars James Stewart, Grace Kelly, and Thelma Ritter. Stewart, Kelley, and Ritter deliver masterful perfomances.

Every mannerism and subtlty of dialogue is captured by Hitchcock. Rear Window was directed Alfred Hitchcock . The screenplay was written by John Michael Hayes based on a 1942 short story by Cornell Woolrich titled “It Had to Be Murder.”

Rear Window was not the first Hitchcock film I saw. Like many people my introduction to Hitchcock’s films were Psycho and The Birds. Once I started, I had to see Hitchcock’s other films. There is something about the way Hitchcock tells a story – the setting, mood, tension.

But it was when I saw Rear Window that I gained a new level of respect, not just for Hitchcock, but for filmmaking as an artistic medium. It was the first time my eyes were opened to what films could be – Art. Rear Window is Alfred Hitchcock’s masterpiece.

When people think of Alfred Hitchcock, they think horror and suspense. Rear Window is without question suspenseful, but Hitchcock relies on the fear of the unknown to create that suspense. I would argue that Rear Window is a complex drama about relationships first, and a suspenseful murder mystery second.

L.B. Jefferies is an adventurous photographer with a broken leg isolating in his small apartment. “Jeff” has nothing better to do but watch the goings on of his neighbors. But things take a turn when Jeff witnesses suspicious activities in the apartment across the courtyard. Jeff comes to believe that his neighbor has killed his invalid wife, chopped her up, and stuffed her in a trunk. Everyone Jeff tells about these suspicious behaviors, including his socialite girlfriend Lisa Carol Fremont, Nurse Stella, and old war buddy turned detective Tom Doyle, believe Jeff is simply experiencing cabin fever. That is, until they too begin witnessing the strange behaviors of Jeff’s neighbor.

Early in the film Jeff approaches Lisa about splitting up, stating that their worlds are too different and neither one is willing to change. The audience watches the progression of their relationship play out on screen. Lisa becomes more involved with helping Jeff untangle the mystery of his neighbor while simultaneously proving that she is willing to adapt to Jeff’s lifestyle. The couple, with the help of Nurse Stella, become amateur sleuths on the case of proving Jeff’s neighbor a murderer.

The film begins with the viewer looking out the “Rear Window” of L.B. Jefferies’s Greenwich Village apartment. The three shades are drawn up in succession, much the way a curtain is raised at the start of a play. The camera follows a first person view around the courtyard, giving the audience a glimpse into the apartments of “Jeff’s” neighbors. Starting the film in this manner accomplishes three things.

Firstly, the viewer becomes a participant in this world from the start. It is an enclosed world, cozy and charming at times, claustrophobic at others. The set design makes us feel as though we are a part of this small world. The couryard is enclosed, which insulates us from the larger world beyond. The audience only sees a sliver of the bustling Greenwich Village neighborhood beyond. The sounds we hear throughout the film also support this feeling of intimacy. We hear music from one apartment, conversations from others.

Secondly, the audience learns something about each of Jeff’s neighbors, observing them as they go about their day-to-day activities.

The shot concludes with the camera tracking back into Jeff’s apartment. Hitchcock shares information about Jeff through the panning of the camera. It moves as if it isn’t a camera at all, but rather a first person point of view scanning Jeff’s apartment, pausing and focusing on certain objects. We see a broken camera, then a series of photographs on the wall – one of which is a wreck at an automobile race track and presumably the event at which Jeff broke his leg. The other photographs depict dramatic events as well, which tells us that Jeff is not just a photographer, but a photographer who puts himself in harm’s way. We learn later that this excitement is extremely important to Jeff.

Finally, we see a photographic negative of Grace Kelly’s character, Lisa Carol Fremont, as well as a stack of magazines, the cover of which depicts this very same photographic image in color. We learn a lot about Jeff just from that one sequence of images. We deduce that Lisa Fremont is the love interest of Jeff. One wouldn’t frame and hang a negative of a photograph and have a stack of the magazines with that image on it unless the person photographed or the event of the photograph were important. We can even assume that this photo shoot is where L.B. Jefferies and Lisa Fremont met.

Through this opening scene, we learn things about Jeff’s environment, the people who inhabit this environment, as well as information about Jeff and his relationship with Lisa. This is something Hitchcock does so well; he “shows” the audience, rather than “tells” the audience information about the characters.

We also learn about Jeff and Lisa’s relationship through dialogue between Jeff and Stella. Stella- portrayed brilliantly by Thelma Ritter- is an insurance nurse who visits Jeff daily to check his temperature and give him a massage, as well as some homespun wisdom on various topics, including relationships. We learn from these exchanges that Jeff is thinking about ending his relationship with Lisa. The primary reason given is that each of them lives in extremely different worlds. Jeff is often on assignment living nomadically, while Lisa is a socialite mingling with New York City’s elite. He isn’t ready to give up the excitement of his work in exchange for a stable home life. Jeff also states to Stella that Lisa is too perfect. Stella dismisses this statement as ludicrous.

Jeff refers to Lisa’s perfectionism later during a scene in which Lisa has dinner from the restaurant 21 delivered to Jeff’s apartment in celebration of his final week in a cast. Remember, this is 1954. High-scale restaurants didn’t deliver food. Lisa made this happen. There is tension in Lisa and Jeff’s conversation. Lisa remarks, “well, at least you can’t say the dinner isn’t right.” Jeff replies, “Lisa, it’s perfect…as always.” (Rear Window, 0026:20 – 00:27:00)

There is one scene where Jeff is watching a pair of newlyweds enter the apartment across the courtyard. He watches with a fond smile on his face, which gradually fades as he begins to apply that situation to himself. Jeff continues to look over at the newlywed’s apartment throughout the film as he continues to weigh his own marital future.

During their post dinner conversation about the curious goings on in the apartment across the courtyard, Lisa comments, “for all you know, there might be something far more sinister going on in there”, gesturing to the newlywed’s apartment. To which Jeff replies with a smirk on his face, “no comment.” (Rear Window, 00:48:40 – 00:48:51)

There is another brief scene where Jeff is watching his neighbor the ballerina dancing in a skimpy outfit and then glances over to the drawn window shade of the newlyweds. He’s weighing his options here. Bachelorhood or marriage.

There is also a scene in which Lisa enters Jeff’s darkened apartment and leans over a sleeping Jeff in his wheel chair to give him a kiss just as he is waking up. Lisa’s shawdow eclipses Jeff. The shadow symbolizes the uncertainty of their relationship. We then see Jeff recognize Lisa, smile, and then Lisa leans in for a slow motion kiss.

Many of the characters Jeff watches through his “Rear Window” are personifications of his possible future. “Miss Torso”, the ballerina, represents bachelorhood. “Miss Lonely Heart” represents Jeff’s possible future of growing old alone. “The Newlyweds” represent Jeff’s preconceived notion about what marriage looks like.

The audience learns Jeff’s thoughts on these possible futures by his reaction to these observations. Hitchcock discusses this technique in a 1963 interview he gave Cinema (US) Journal. “Now we have the other pieces of film which create ideas: Rear Window, a very cinematic picture. But a static figure – in one position, in one room, for the whole picture. And yet this is pure cinema. I’ll tell you why. Mr. Stewart is sitting looking out of the window. He observes. We register his observations on his face. We are using the visual image now. We are using the mobility of the face, the expression, as our content of the piece of film.” (Hitchcock 4-8 & 34-35)

Jeff attempts to explain to Lisa why it would be best if they separated. There are two reasons why Jeff thinks it best to break off his relationship with Lisa: Firstly, his fear of giving up the excitement of being a nomadic, worldly photographer. Secondly, his belief that Lisa would be unable or unwilling to adapt to his lifestyle. Jeff views it as a practical decision. In his mind, he’s doing what is best for them both. Nevertheless, there is a lingering suspicion that perhaps Jeff is fearful of change and looking for an excuse to avoid such change.

The scene concludes with Lisa leaving saying, “Goodbye, Jeff.” To which Jeff replies, “You mean good night?” Lisa states, “I meant what I said.” “Couldn’t we just keep things …status quo?” Jeff asks. “With no hope of a future?” Lisa asks. Jeff asks when he will see her again. Lisa replies, “Not for a long time. at least…not until tomorrow night.” (Rear Window, 00:30:38 – 00:31:08) It is evident by this exchange that Lisa and Jeff have true love and admiration for one another.

It is at this point in the film that the mystery of what is going on in the apartment across the courtyard and the relationship of Jeff and Lisa converge.

Lisa returns the following night, but the situation in the apartment across the courtyard is distracting Jeff. Jeff believes that Raymond Burr’s character- Lars Thorwald- has murdered his invalid wife, cut her up, and stuffed her in a trunk. Jeff’s obsession annoys and frightens Lisa. That is, until she witnesses the same suspicious activity Jeff has. Lisa becomes intrigued and begins helping Jeff uncover the mystery. Nurse Stella also joins in.

The mystery of what has happened in the apartment across the courtyard is the catalyst for the evolution of Jeff and Lisa’s relationship. The mystery is the glue which holds their relationship together long enough for that evolution to take place. As Lisa’s enthusiasm and willingness to help Jeff solve the mystery grows, so grows Jeff’s awareness of Lisa’s ability to adapt. It isn’t just Lisa’s enthusiasm that attracts Jeff, it is her willingness to take risks and put herself in harm’s way. This mirrors Jeff’s willingness to put himself in harm’s way. Their relationship grows.

In the final scene we see Jeff asleep in his wheel chair (now with two broken legs), a smile upon his face. Lisa is reading a thick book “Beyond the High Himalayas”, which represents Jeff’s world. She glances over and sees that Jeff is asleep, at which point she sets down the book and picks up a Bazaar magazine. This of course represents Lisa’s world. She compromises. She has one foot in Jeff’s world and one in hers.

Rear Window is a film which immediately draws the audience into the world of its characters and holds us there, not as prisoners, but observers. We are not observers from afar. Rather, there is an intimacy. Nevertheless, we also feel the clausterphobic nature of this world when Hitchcock sees fit to do so. We begin to care for Jeff and Lisa and root for their relationship to succeed. The evolution of this relationship and the mystery of the missing Mrs. Thorwald simultaneously play out with equal intrigue. The subtleties in each character’s performance, including facial expressions or the way in which a particular piece of dialogue is executed, enhances the authenticity of the story being told. Hitchcock masterfully manipulates what and how we see. Hitchcock treats the audience with a certain intelligence by “showing” us, not “telling” us what he wishes us to see.

All of these elements combine to create a suspenseful thriller and complex love story. This is why Rear Window, a film released in 1954, is one of my favorite films.

Works Cited

Rear Window. Dir. Alfred Hitchcock. Paramount Pictures, 1954. Film

Hitchcock, Alfred. “Hitchcock on Style: An Interview With Alfred Hitchcock.” Cinema (US) August and September, vol. 5, issue 1, 1963: Pages 4-8 and 34-35

By Robert Seebach

Pulp Fiction is Quentin Tarantino’s sophmore feature film directorial effort. It was released in the United States by Miramax Films 14 October 1994. Pulp Fiction was written by Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avery. The film stars John Travolta, Samuel Jackson, and Bruce Willis among others.

The separate, yet interconnected chapters in Pulp Fiction was a fresh storytelling style at the time of the film’s release. Since 1994 others have appropriated this syle with varying degrees of success.

This article will focus on the vignette The Bonnie Situation. Upon watching this movie recently, I noticed something in this chapter, I’d not noticed before. This chapter opens with Jules (Samuel Jackson) stating the bible passage from Ezekiel 25:17 prior to him and Vincent (John Travolta) executing Brad. We the audience have witnessed this scene previously in the opening chapter of the film from a different vantage point. In The Bonnie Situation, the audience sees this scene partly from the perspective of the man who is in the bathroom. It is in this man’s reaction to hearing Jules’s reciting of Ezekiel 25:17 that I noticed something different.

At first the man in the bathroom has a look of consternation. This is understandable. After all, stating a bible verse from the Old Testament prior to executing someone is an odd occurence. But the man’s expression subtly changes from consternation to one of resoluteness. There was something about that bible verse that spoke to this man. Seconds ago he was in full terror, whispering to himself “Oh God, please, I don’t want to die. Please.” ( Pulp Fiction, 01:51:50 – 01:51:54) The bible verse comforted him in a way.

Now I’m not suggesting this man had a religous conversion; however, I do believe that being touched by those words provided him with the resoluteness to burst forth from the bathroom firing upon the two assassins as if he had God on his side.

Divine intervention is one of the themes which plays throughout this film. It doesn’t end well for the man in the bathroom. He unloads the entire revolver and not one bullet finds its target. The man is swiftly shot dead.

Directly afterwards Jules begins his commentary on divine intervention. Jules asks Vincent, “This was divine intervention. You know what divine intervention is?” (Pulp Fiction, 01:54:06 – 01:54:10 ) This is the moment of Jules’s acceptance of the divine within the material world.

One can infer that Jules is acting as a false prophet. The man in the bathroom is affected by Jules’s recitation of Ezekiel 25:17. I interpret this as the man feeling the words of God and thus emboldened to burst forth gun blazing. The man ends up missing Jules and Vincent with every shot.

Was the man not worthy of God’s protection? Why not. Why were Jules and Vincent spared? Does this make Jules a false prophet?

The second time we hear Jules reciting Ezekiel 25:17 is during the diner scene, which is the final scene of the movie, though not the final scene chronologically.

During the diner scene Jules has a different perspective. The man he recites the passage to – “Ringo” – lives. So why is this scene different from the earlier scene? I have some thouhts.

I believe the difference in outcome for both Jules and the person who is receiving Jules’s oration is based primarily on an existential shift.

We see Jules work this out with “Ringo” in the diner scene. My belief is that Jules has been converted by his experience earlier in the day. This is why Jules doesn’t kill “Ringo.” Instead, he allows “Ringo” to complete the task he set out to accomplish. One might say that Jules is helping him. I don’t think so. Jules is simply letting “God’s plan” play out. Thus, in this scene Jules is acting as a true prophet. It’s this philosophy which also causes Jules to refuse “Ringo” the briefcase. Jules is operating by a moral code; a code that challenges the concepts of divine intervention and free will.

Tarantino is skilled in use of wardrobe to quickly inform the audience about a character. When we first see Vincent and Jules, they are dressed in austere black suits. These suits serve as a uniform for the hitmen. The suits let the audience know these men are professionals and they mean business.

during the diner scene, Jules is wearing a basic shorts and t-shirt, the outfit of the common man. This symbolizes modesty. Jules has had his conversion by this point. He is no longer a professional hitman.

Vincent never buys into Jules’s notion of divine intervention. Vincent dismisses the idea and is not changed by the experience. Could this be why Vincent later meets his demise?

So what happens to Jules now that he has had a spiritual awakening. There are subtlties within The Bonnie Situation which point to Jules continuing to work in the criminal underground, perhaps in a different capacity.

I see Jules getting into the “cleaning” business, or “fixer” business much like Winston Wolf. Both Vincent and Jules grow to respect Mr. Wolf. Jules even more so, in my opinion. When Jules and Vincent are eating breakfast discussing their encounter with Mr. Wolf, Jules’s face lights up. “The life” still excites him as he recounts Mr. Wolf’s coolness and professionalism. Winston Wolf even refers to Jules as a ‘prodigy’ while they are discussing the driving arrangements to Monster Joe’s Truck and Tow. Could this be foreshadowing Jules’s future as a “fixer?”

Another mentionable use of wardrobe: Winston Wolf is wearing a black tuxedo. This is a step up from the classic black suits which comprise Vincent and Jules’s attire. The tuxedo signifies a level of status, class, and sophistication – all characteristics Mr. Wolf possesses. We also catch a glimpse of Winston’s Gucci watch while he is on the phone with Marsellus Wallace.

Pulp Fiction is a film about free will and divine intervention. The Bonnie Situation, although not the chronological ending to the story, is the ending of Jules’s story. The Bonnie Situation shows Jules’s character arc from cold-blooded hitman to enlightened sage.

Works Cited

Pulp Fiction. Dir. Quentin Tarantino. Miramax Films, 1994. Film.

By Robert Seebach

Christine is a Science Fiction Horror film released in 1983 by Columbia Pictures. It was directed by John Carpenter and starring Keith Gordan, John Stockwell, Alexandra Paul, Robert Prosky, and Harry Dean Stanton. The screenplay was written by Bill Phillips and is based on the novel of the same name by author Stephen King. The novel was released earlier in April 1983, with the film to follow eight months later in December.

Christine is about an unpopular high school nerd, Arnie Cunningham, whose life does a complete one-eighty after purchasing a dilapidated 1958 Plymouth Fury. Arnie’s best friend, Dennis, tries to persuade Arnie from buying Christine, stating that it isn’t worth the money. Arnie doesn’t listen. He’s mesmerized. It’s love at first sight. Unlike Arnie, Dennis is a popular, good looking football player. How these two become best friends, we never find out. Arnie is harrassed and bullied by a group of switch blade toting classmates. Dennis is Arnie’s protector. Dennis is confident, and sought after by the opposite sex. Not to mention, he has a pretty bad ass 1968 Dodge Charger. In essence, Dennis is everything Arnie desires to be.

Christine, the name Arnie gives his pride and joy, seems to be possessed by an entity who becomes jealous when her owner focuses his attention on anyone other than her. Arnie’s overbearing parents are furious that he purchased a car without consulting them first and forbid him to park the car in the driveway.

Arnie rents space in a garage and begins fixing up Christine. As Arnie brings Christine back to her showroom glory, he begins to change. Arnie quickly goes from the self-conscious bullied outcast, to a hip, sharp tongued rebel who begins dating the beautiful “new girl” at school, Leigh. Dennis notices the change in Arnie and begins to link Arnie’s obsession with Christine with his sudden change in character. Arnie becomes arrogant and egotistic.

Dennis sustains an injury during a football game in which he was distracted by the site of Arnie and Leigh exiting Christine. Dennis is blindsided and winds up in hospital. There is no utility for this event other than to let the audience know that bad things happen around Christine.

The same group of classmates bully Arnie throughout the movie, (all of whom look to be in their 20s or 30s by the way). One night, these bullies break into the garage where Christine is stored, and vandalize her. Vandalize may be an understatement. Buddy and his lackies bash, dent, slash tires, rip upholestery, and bend chrome. Arnie is devastated. But he soon recovers as he watches Christine supernaturally repair itself. Arnie vows to seek revenge and Christine is all too eager to oblige Arnie is this pursuit.

I think we can all understand Arnie’s desire for revenge, not just for the trashing of his car, but for a lifetime of persecution. Arnie simply goes full tilt on revenge. It’s as if he has been infected with the evil with which Christine is possessed.

Shortly thereafter, the band of bullies start to turn up dead. One of the most stunning scenes is when Christine chases the head bully, Buddy. Christine crashes into Buddy’s car at a gas station and then hunts Buddy down like a killer in a slasher flick as Buddy runs down a dark street. Christine is on fire from the carnage at the gas station as she overtakes Buddy and runs him down. The red ’58 Plymouth Fury riding down the pitch dark street with flames ripping in the wind is a sight to see.

Detective Junkins begins investigating the deaths of Arnie’s antagonists. Dennis, Leigh, and Arnie’s parents all recognize the scary transformation of Arnie and the link between this transformation and Arnie’s obsession with Christine.

Let’s get back to what makes this film different than other revenge tales.

At the outset, Christine seems predictable. The audience is led to believe that they will be rooting for Arnie. Arnie will gain confidence and popularity with the help of Christine and enact revenge upon his bullies. Dennis will be the one who feels self conscious because his best friend no longer needs his guidance and help. Dennis will become jealous and there will be a split in the friendship. In the end, Arnie and Dennis will see the error of their ways and reconcile. Dennis and Leigh will help Arnie see how he has changed from the loyal, kind person they’ve always known him to be, to the vengeful, narcissist he’s turned in to. They will convince Arnie to give up Christine and move on. The end.

But that isn’t what happens. As I watched Christine recently, I began to notice something; there is no redemption with Arnie’s character, and there is no hero in the story. Not really. The audience is led to believe that Arnie will be the hero of the story, or that Dennis will be the hero because he will save his friend from self-destruction. Again, this does not happen.

Not only does this not happen, but evil wins. At the end of the film, Detective Rudolph Junkins tells Dennis and leigh that they are heroes, a label Dennis rejects on the grounds that they were unable to save Arnie. He’s right. He and Leigh are not heroes. There are no heroes in this film. Dennis and Leigh attempt to save Arnie by devising a plan to trap Christine in the garage and crush her with a tractor. They succeed, or so they believe. But Arnie is killed in the process.

Detective Junkins, Dennis and Leigh watch as Christine is crushed and compressed at the junkyard. At least they’ve put an end to Christine, they think. The final shot is a close up of the compressed cube of metal, formally a 1958 Plymouth Fury. A piece of chrome twists and moves ever so slightly, as if to grin. Christine lives!

This is a fun supernatural thriller. Any fan of John Carpenter’s other films will enjoy watching Christine. There are no real heroes in this film and no redemption for any of the characters, which is a departure from the usual structure of revenge tales. This, combined with the unexpected dark reality of Evil prevailing, make Christine a devilishly good ride.

Works cited

Christine. Dir. John Carpenter. Columbia Pictures, 1983. Film.

By Robert Seebach

The Darjeeling Limited is a film about three estranged brothers who reunite for a spiritual journey across India aboard The Darjeeling Limited Railways. The film was directed by Wes Anderson- director of Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums– and was released by Fox Searchlight Pictures in 2007. Wes Anderson co-wrote the screenplay along with Roman Coppola and Jason Schwartzman. The film stars Owen Wilson, Jason Schwartzman and Adrien Brody.

The Darjeeling Limited is more than just a story about three brothers reuniting after being estranged for over a year following their father’s death. It is a film that explores the grieving process from three different perspectives.

Wes Anderson has been criticized by some as creating films which are more style than substance. I’ve never agreed with this and The Darjeeling Limited, perhaps more than other films of Anderson, is a perfect rebuttal. This film explores the subtle nuances of the human experience. In particular, this film explores the complexities of the grieving process. It is humorous, quirky, and sad; and that is why I love it. Too often movies attempt to portray difficult emotional subjects in a way which feels pre-packaged. Anderson is relentless in his decision to portray these emotions in a way which feels authentic.

Three brothers, Francis, Peter, and Jack, travel separately to India and reunite on a train to journey through the Indian countryside. From their first couple of interactions, we understand that these brothers have not spoken or seen each other in quite a while. We soon learn that this estrangement was precipitated by the death of their father.

Francis, played by Owen Wilson, expresses his desire to reconnect with his brothers, who at first seem ambivalent towards the idea. While this film is about three brothers rekindling their relationship, it has more to do with the grieving process.

Psychiatrist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross developed the five stages of grief in 1969. In this model Kubler-Ross outlines the five stages of the grieving process as: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, and Acceptance. The basic concept is that when one experiences a loss, the individual goes through a series of emotions. Each emotion is necessary and an individual will often vascillate between these emotions. The end goal is to experience and process the complex range of emotions following a loss, and reach Acceptance.

Throughout the film, we see each character weaving in and out of these stages. Anderson does an excellent job showing each character’s grief in action through their behaviors and a series of flashbacks.

This is a story of how three individuals attempt to grieve by isolating themselves from each other. The audience sees this played out in unhealthy behaviors and coping skills, which are often self-destructive. We discover that these characters are grieving more than the lose of their father; they are grieving the loss of their connection to each other.

Before taking a look at each character individually, it is worth noting that every decision made by Anderson is done so with the intent of presenting these characters as damaged souls.

Each character’s manner of speech is often bordering on monotone. They present with a flat affect. And their emotions are not regulated well.

I found the attire worn by the three brothers to be revealing as well. Each wears slacks, a sport coat and a button down shirt of neutral color. Firstly, this gives the audience a piece of knowledge about the social economical class from which these characters belong. It lets us know that these brothers come from a wealthy family. This is also made apparrent by other means throughout the film. Francis has an assistant who is traveling with him. In The Hotel Chevalier – the short film which precedes the feature film – when Jack’s ex-girlfriend asks how much his hotel room costs, Jack makes a joke about it, as if it is of no concern to him. I also see the wardrobe of the characters as a mask; a nice exterior to hide their inner turmoil.

So let’s look at each brother individually, starting with the oldest brother. Even though Francis is the one who takes the initiative to organize this trip, he is in my opinion, the brother about whom we know the least.

Francis Whitman is the oldest brother. He arranges the trip on the Darjeeling Limited. Francis appears with his head bandaged and soon tells his brothers what happened. He tells them that he was in a motorcycle accident and almost died, which caused him to have an epiphany – he needs to reconnect with his brothers. We learn later that Francis’s accident was more than just an accident. He drops hints during his initial telling of the story, such as mentioning that he lives alone now. There is an implication that Francis had a break-up with his significant other.

Francis takes control of every situation. He prints out laminated itineraries, orders their meals for them, and even asks his brothers, “Did I raise us, kind of?” (The Darjeeling Limited, 00:11:27 – 00:11:31)

As the brothers sit for their first meal, they exchange various intoxicants each of them they have procured for the trip. The use of substances, is in some ways “Bargaining” on the part of each brother. All of Francis’s planning, pseudo-parenting, and controlling could be construed as part of “Bargaining”‘ as described by Kubler-Ross. The idea of – “If I do this, control this, then things will be okay.” This is the whole point of Francis’s planned journey, taking his brothers to holy sites, performing rituals, and ultimately to see their mother in the Himalayan mountains, which Francis does not initially tell his brothers about. Francis is attempting to control as a means to cope.

Francis, like his brothers, is rooted in the “Denial”, “Anger” and “Depression ” stages of grief. After all, they haven’t seen each other in a year, isolating themselves from each other because the very sight of one another would remind them of the loss of their father. The denial is so strong with each character that throughout most of the film each brother focuses on secondary events in their lives in which to place blame. Francis even states at one point, “We’re in an emergency here.” “I got my face smashed in, Jack’s heart has been ripped to shreds, and “Rubby” ( Peter) is having a child.” (The Darjeeling Limited, 00:25:57 – 00:26:04) While these events are certainly important, they are not the cause of their grief. This film is about the journey through these stages of grief towards “Acceptance.”

Peter Whitman is the middle brother. Peter left behind his pregnant wife to reunite with his brothers in India. Our introduction to Peter is him running alongside Bill Murray’s character, trying to catch the train. Bill Murray’s character doesn’t make the train. Peter does. Peter stands at the back landing of the train looking at Bill Murray’s character with a slight grin on his face, as if he is taking pleasure in the misfortune of another. For a brief moment, Peter feels good about himself.

Like Francis, Peter is deeply rooted in “Denial”, “Anger”, and “Depression.” Peter appears wearing his deceased father’s glasses and using other personal items, such as his father’s razor, much to the annoyance of his brothers. This is Peter’s way of remaining close to his father – not letting him go. We see Peter’s anger as well. He is curt with fellow passengers, and gets into a brawl with Francis.

Peter is the first brother to show any real sadness. This occurs when Jack asks if either of his brothers would like to read a short story he’d written. The story is autobiographical. Peter reads it at the table during their first meal on the train. He chuckles at one point as he reads. He gets up, goes to the rest room and reads the story over again in privacy with tears welling up in his eyes. His initial chuckles may have been a defense mechanism. Perhaps Peter felt uncomfortable displaying feelings of sadness in front of his brothers and thus decided to excuse himself to go to the rest room.

When Peter becomes uncomfortable, he puts on his father’s glasses. As the film progresses, we see Peter doing this less and less. It starts at the funeral of the Indian boy, whose death Peter feels responsible, having not been able to rescue him from the river. (More on this scene later) On their way to the funeral the brothers walk to a tuk tuk. Once they get into the tuk tuk, Peter puts on his father’s glasses, but spontaneously decides to put them on his forehead instead. He turns to his right and looks endearingly at his brothers. It is at this point where we see the one and only flashback in the film. The flashback is a mirror image from the tuk tuk in the sense that the brothers are sitting in similar positions in the back of a limousine on the way to another funeral – their father’s

Peter asks the driver to make a stop at a garage where his father’s Porshe is being serviced. Even though they are running late, Peter insists they stop in order to get the car so that he can drive it to the funeral. This is the genesis of Peter’s coping mechanism of using his father’s possessions in order to cope with his feelings of grief. This can be construed as a manifestation of the “Denial” and “Bargaining” stages.

Jack is the youngest brother. Jack vacillates between all five stages. We get an extra glimpse of Jack through the short vignette The Hotel Chevalier which can be viewed prior to the main feature. Jack is “running”, which means he is in “Denial”. Through conversations with his estranged girlfriend in The Hotel Chevalier – played by Natalie Portman – we understand that Jack has been nomadic since his father’s death approximately one year ago. This “running” also plays into Jack’s “Bargaining”. ‘If I keep moving, I’ll be okay.’ ‘I won’t have to deal with reality.’ He is also in an enmeshed relationship with his former girlfriend. There is a sense that Jack knows this relationship is not healthy, but it is familiar and something he hangs onto. Throughout the film, Jack’s brothers are concerned about this unhealthy relationship and try to protect Jack from it.

Jack ultimately comes to terms with this as evidenced in a scene near the end of the film in which Jack reads the ending of an autobiographical short story he’s been writing. Jack reads, “He would not be going to Italy.” This is in reference to Jack having purchased airline tickets to Italy, presumably to meet up with his estranged girlfriend.

Jack’s “Anger” comes out interestingly, when his brothers are arguing with each other. There is a scene in which Francis and Peter are antagonizing each other and end up wrestling on the floor of the train cabin. Jack, usually calm and with flat affect, becomes emotionally charged at this site. He grabs a can of mace from his luggage and sprays into his brother’s faces, shouting, “stop including me.” (The Darjeeling Limited, 00:41:31 – 00:41:34) In reality, I think Jack often feels as though he is not included, perhaps because he is the youngest.

“Depression” has a hold of Jack. He is quiet, isolating, lonely and abusing substances such as cough syrup in an attempt to self medicate his depression. He also uses sex as an unhealthy coping mechanism. This is evident by his codependent relationship with his ex-girlfriend, as well as his relationship with the train stewardess, Rita. Jack feels as though he cannot really connect with anyone.

In The Hotel Chevalier there is a scene in which jack puts on a song just prior to his estranged girlfriend entering the hotel room titled “Where Do You Go To (My Lovely)” by Peter Sarstedt. He specifically chooses this song as if there is an emotional attachment or history associated with it. Jack plays this song on the Darjeeling Limited later in the main feature prior to Rita entering his cabin. The playing of this song is an emotional tether; it connects Jack with memories of emotions which he is currently unable to fully access.

The turning point of the film is the death of the Indian in the river. After having been kicked off of the Darjeeling Limited due to bringing a poison snake on board, the brothers are walking with their luggage on the banks of a river. They watch as three young Indian boys on a raft are battling with the rapids. The raft flips over, spilling the boys into the river. The Whitman brother spring into action, jumping into the raging river in an attempt to rescue the boys. Francis and Jack safely bring two of the boys to the bank of the river. Peter loses hold of the third boy in the rapids. The boy dies. Peter shows little emotion as he holds the deceased boy in his arms. He dissociates. Each brother dissociates during various scenes throughout the film.

The brothers arrive at the poor village of the boys. Peter is the most affected by this tragedy. The boy who perished was the boy Peter was attempting to save. Also, Peter’s wife is pregnant and he will soon be a father. We see him interacting with the parents and young children of the village as a father-to-be.

A village boy invites the brothers to attend the funeral. This is the beginning of their spiritual journey of which they set out days before. Referring back to Peter’s analysis: It is after the funeral when all three brothers are sitting in the tuk-tuk, we see Peter instinctively reach to place his father’s glasses on. But instead of doing so, Peter slides the glasses onto his forehead. The experience of the boy’s funeral enlightens Peter.

The brothers go to the airport intending to go their separate ways until they decide that they need to see their mother after all. So they travel to the Himalayan convent where she’s been hiding out. They confront her about abandoning them after their father’s death. Again, the anger comes out. Their mother, who unbeknownst to the audience, has been going through her own grieving process. It is what led her to a distant land to live and work in a convent. She is not ready to see her children, let alone process the emotions associated with that. So she leaves early one morning. The brothers feel abandoned again. The entire time, Francis, Peter, and Jack have been grieving the loss of their father, but they have also been grieving the loss of their mother who abandoned them in their time of need.

The ending of the film is actually a beginning. The brothers arrive at the airport, once again intending to part ways. There is a discussion, which we the audience cannot hear over the sounds of the engines on the tarmac. The brothers talk back and forth and then they rip up their boarding passes. The Whitman brothers have decided to stay in India, fulfill their spiritual journey and truly go through the grieving process – together, as brothers. We can only hope that they find “Acceptance”.

Works Cited

The Darjeeling Limited. Dir. Wes Anderson. Fox Searchlight Pictures, 2007. Film

The Hotel Chevalier. Dir. Wes Anderson. Fox Searchlight Pictures, 2007. Film

Kubler-Ross E (1969). On Death and Dying. New York: The Macmillan Company

Kubler-Ross E, Kessler D (2014). On Grief and Grieving: Finding the Meaning of Grief through the Five Stages of Loss. New York: Scribner.

Sarstedt, Peter. “Where Do You Go To (My Lovely)? Where Do You Go To (My Lovely)? (Single) , United Artists, 1969

By Robert Seebach

The Village is a suspensful romance about an isolated community living in a 19th century village. The Village was written an directed by M. Night Shyamalan. The Village features an ensemble cast including Joaquin Phoenix, Bryce Dallas Howard, Adrien Brody, William Hurt, Sigourney Weaver, and Brenden Gleeson. The Village was released by Buena Vista Pictures in 2004.

As any cinephile knows, M. Night Shyamalan had a series of less than stellar films at one point in his career. There are debates about which film started this period. Many point to The Village as the first film in which the master of plot twists had started to lose his edge. One reason cited for this is the execution of the film’s plot twist. I disagree. The plot twist in The Village simply carries less weight than Shyamalan’s previous films. Shyamalan attempted to create a different type of film in which the payoff didn’t rely so heavily on the plot twist.

The Village was a victim of poor marketing. The scary, suspenseful thriller portrayed in the trailers for the film is not what the audience got. I believe The Village marks a period in Shyamalan’s career in which he proves that he can produce work outside of his comfort zone.

There are many directions one could take when analyzing The Village. Like Shyamalan’s other films, there is a heavy use of symbolism, color, and a surprising plot twist. Since the film’s release in 2004 many of these topics have been explored. In this article, I intend to focus on the community of The Village and the secrets perpetrated by its residents for virtuous means. Having said this, Blog Man Ry gives an excellent analysis on the symbolism of the scenes in The Village that portray empty chairs. I have not read or seen any other analyses on the “empty chair scenes” and I found it to be an interesting take. Here’s the link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysc5rppBLwg.

There are two huge secrets which shape the community. The first is that it is modern day. The Village was established by trauma survivors who sought a simpler, safer, and a more virtuous community. The second is that the monsters are not real. Secrets are part of the culture.

The idea of a group of trauma survivors creating a new world carries with it fundamental philosophical questions. The group must create new doctrines and beliefs for their new world. This new world begins by keeping the biggest secret of them all from the younger generation. The Elders create a creature mythology. This lie – or secret – is justified in the name of preserving their way of life. For The Elders this is simple and straight forward; the ends justify the means. But what about everyone else? Secrets beget more secrets. We see this play out in various ways with some of the younger generation of villagers.

Edward Walker potrayed by William Hurt, is the default leader of The Village. He is also the school teacher. There is a scene which takes place after the school children find the skinned animal in which Edward Walker discusses with the school children who the culprit may be. The children easily come to the conclusion that the perpetrators were “those we don’t speak of.” It is evident by this scene that the younger generation has been indoctrinated into the mythology The Elders have created from an early age. The Village live by late 19th century values based on community and virtue. The villagers are taught that all evil comes from the outside world. The evil creatures lurk just beyond their borders. Beyond the woods in “The Towns” are a host of depraved people where bad things happen.

Saying that “The Towns” are bad, is not enough. Curiosity gets the best of every teenager and one might venture through the forest to see for themselves. In a way, the mythology of the creatures is a type of homemade terrorism designed to keep people safe and The Village in tact. However, creating this mythology means that The Elders must periodically participate in acts of deceit in order to keep that fear alive. This means that they must every so often don the creature suits and terrorize The Village. In between these events, a few spooky sounds emanating from the woods suffice.

Let’s take a look at the secrets kept by each individual throughout the film. Let us start with the Elders as a sub-population. All of the Elders are keepers of the biggest secret of all; namely, that it is not the late 19th century. The purpose of this is plain to see. A more simple way of life, free from modern distractions and social influence provides meaning. All of these individuals come from trauma and the fear, confusion, and hopelessness associated with their former lives. In a way, The Elders have lost hope for modern society. To remove themselves from that failed system, they decided to start anew.

The Elders lied from the beginning about everything – the date, the monsters – all in the name of protecting their social experiment. As I stated earlier, The Elders had to construct a complete mythology and culture. However, in doing so, they teach their children to keep secrets as well, as if it were some cultural trait passed down to the next generation. I will discuss more on this point when discussing the non-Elders.

The Elders keep other secrets. It is these secrets that older and more observant young people begin to notice. The audience witnesses these events through the eyes if Lucius. Lucius questions the secrets he notices.

Lucius, portrayed by Joaquin Phoenix, becomes aware of The Elders’ “boxes”. He confronts his mother about the secrets she keeps. Lucius’s questions have an edge, as if he is exasperated. He even goes so far as to challenge his mother to open it. Lucius sums up The Village’s culture of secrets with this piece of dialogue between he and his mother: “There are secrets in every corner of this village. Do you not feel it? Do you not see it?” (The Village, 00:23:55 – 00:24:04) Lucius audaciously points to his mother’s locked “box”. Alice replies in a manner which suggests that this is not the first time Lucius has asked her about her past and the contents within her locked “box.” “That is for my own well-being, so evil things from my past can be kept close and not forgotten.” (The Village, 00:24:04 – 00:24:10) It is at this point Lucius challenges her to open her box, which she does not entertain.

Lucius receives a cryptic response from the grieving Mr. Nicholson, potrayed by Brendan Gleeson, earlier in the film. The burial of August Nicholson’s seven year old son is the opening scene in the film. As Lucius brings in firewood for Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Nicholson tells Lucius, “Like a dog can smell you. You may run from sorrow as we have, sorrow will find you. It can smell you.” (The Village, 00:15:49 – 00:16:10) The camera tracks August Nicholson’s gaze to where his “box” sits in a corner beneath the stairs.

Lucius is observant and suspects that The Elders’ secrets extend further than their locked “boxes.” Lucius also notices Edward Walker’s affection for his mother. As a continuation of their conversation about secrets and his mother’s locked “box”, Lucius explains that Edward walker also keeps secrets. “He hides, too. He hides his feelings for you.” His mother asks, “what makes you think he has feelings for me?” “He never touches you”, Lucius responds. (The Village, 00:24:21 – 00:25:23) The affection Edward Walker and Alice Hunt have for each other is kept secret.

Lucius keeps two secrets. One of the creatures observes Lucius when he wanders into the forbidden woods. Believing that the subsequent animal mutilation the following day is a result of this border breach, Lucius exposes his secret to The Elders. Lucius keeps his secret for a day at most. He exposes his secret because he fears he may have put the village in danger as a result of his actions.

The other secret Lucius keeps is his affection for Ivy Walker. This secret he also brings to light after Ivy confronts him about it during the beautiful scene in which the two sit on the Walker’s porch discussing Lucius’s lack of fear. It is in this moment, Lucius expresses his affection for Ivy. “The only time I feel fear as others do, is when I think of you in harm. That is why I am on this porch Ivy Walker. I fear for your safety before all others.” (The Village, 00:48:15 – 00:48:33)

We can speculate as to why Lucius hid his affection from Ivy for so long. Perhaps it was because he knew that he would be unable to act on his feelings for Ivy until her older sister, Kitty has been married. These are the customs of the village. Perhaps he feared rejection? There is no evidence which suggests this is the case. Who knows. The point is that Lucius feels uncomfortable keeping secrets, while everyone else appears complacent.

Ivy, portrayed by Bryce Dallas Howard, embodies what I call the cultural normalcy of secret keeping which has been passed down to the younger generation of villagers. The younger generation is not blatantly taught to keep secrets, nevertheless, if one is raised in an environment of secrecy, one will undoubtedly inherit these characteristics.

Ivy perpetrates the culture of secrecy as casually as any other character in the film. She playfully refuses to tell Lucius what his “color” is. Ivy, although blind, can see auras of color surrounding people. We never learn what color Lucius’s “color” is, but there are a few hints throughout the film which suggest that it is white or amber.

Ivy reprimands Noah for terrorizing the younger children with a stick. She leads him to a room where he is to sit in solitude. However, Ivy forgoes the punishment on the promise that Noah will not hit anyone again. Ivy then asks Noah what they should do with their “stolen time.” She even tells Noah that “It would be prudent to keep our deal a secret.” (The Village, 00:17:33 – 00:19:05) They decide on a foot race. It will be their secret that Noah has been released from his punishment.

Prior to her journey through the woods and destination of “The Towns” to get medicine for Lucius’s wounds, Edward Walker lets his daughter in on one of the primary secrets The Elders have been keeping. The monsters are not real! Edward explains to his daughter that the monsters are simply Elders dressed up in costumes and that the sounds heard emanating from the forest are them as well. Edward explains their reasons for this being their shared trauma and their desire to escape the evil of “The Towns.” Edward does not tell his daughter that it is not the 1890s. It makes you wonder when The Elders would let certain people in on that secret.

So, Edward lets her in on the secret of the creatures, but does make a point of telling his daughter that through his studies he did read accounts of strange creatures residing in the woods surrounding The Village. This is simply for the sake of exposition. Edward sends his daughter on her quest with two companions who are to accompany her until they reach the outskirts of “The Towns.” Her companions of course are not in on the big secret of the creatures not being real so Ivy attempts to soothe their nervousness by telling them that they are protected because they have “the magic stones.” When both of her companions ultimately leave Ivy out of fear, she begrudgingly dumps them to the ground.

Ivy now has the burden of this huge secret. Or does she? As she continues alone, Ivy comes across a creature who attacks her. She dodges her potential abuser who lands in a deep sink hole where it dies. The audience sees that the creature is in fact Noah who had discovered one of the creature suits. He is also the perpetrator of the skinned animals. Noah had been keeping secrets all along.

Up until then The Elders assumed that one of them was leaving the skinned animals without the knowledge of the rest. Again, more secrets. When The Elders learn of Noah’s death upon Ivy’s return, Edward Walker attempts to give meaning to Noah’s death by stating that, “We will tell the others, he was killed by the creatures. Your son has made our stories real. Noah has given us a chance to continue this place.” (The Village, 01:39:39 – 01:40:03)

What is interesting about Ivy is that in a brief span of time she went from believing that the creatures were real, to being told by her father that they are a farce, to now believing that they are real again. This is where the exposition of Edward Walker’s statement about reports of creatures living in these woods comes into play. In a way this all plays out perfectly because now Ivy will believe in the reality of the creatures once again. Or perhaps not? Would Edward lie to her? Obviously, Ivy will hear the story concocted by The Elders that Noah had been killed by the creatures. Ivy is an intelligent young woman. I think it’s reasonable to assume that she will figure out what had actually happened, namely that she mistakenly killed Noah.

Which begs the question: If this community is to survive The Elders will have to tell certain other people of the ruse. At what point do they decide to do this? Will people like Ivy and Lucius, whom I think it is safe to say would be among the first to be told the truth, accept this truth? That is difficult to say.

The Elders created this community because they were all trauma survivors. But are they not traumatizing their youth by perpetrating the myth of the creatures and instilling fear? There is an old saying: “you’re as sick as the secrets you keep.” Has the community of The Village been a success? I believe in many ways it has. Nevertheless, as Mr. Nicholson told Lucius, “You may run from sorrow as we have, sorrow will find you. It can smell you.” (The Village, 00:15:49 – 00:16:10)

I enjoy this film. I believe it receives undue criticism, primarily because of poor marketing. This film was marketed as a horror film from the master of plot twists. People were expecting to see a scary movie with monsters and a characteristic Shyamalan twist at the end. This is not a horror movie and although there is a plot twist, the twist is not as integral to the overall story being told as many of Shyamalan’s other films.

The Village is a romantic folktale played out on film. If the film was marketed as such, I believe more people would see the beauty of this film. The acting is stellar, Roger Deacons’s Cinematography is immaculate, and James Newton Howard’s beautifully crafted score compliments the story. The Village is not Shyamalan’s best film, but it is by far not a bad film. I’m confident that if viewed through the lens of the love story that it is, more people will fall in love with this film.

Works Cited

The Village, Dir. M. Night Shyamalan. Buena Vista Pictures, 2004. Film.

“Film Analysis – The Village.” YouTube, uploaded by Bog Man Ry, 21 May 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysc5rppBLwg

By Robert Seebach

Star Wars: The Last Jedi was released by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures in 2017. It was directed by Rian Johnson and stars Daisy Ridley, Mark Hamill, John Boyega, Carrie Fisher, Adam Driver and Oscar Isaac. The screenplay was written by Rian Johnson.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi is the second film in the Star Wars sequel trilogy. We follow Rey as she tracks down Luke Skywalker and attempts to enlist his help in battling The First Order. Since it’s release at the end of 2017, The Last Jedi has polarized the Star Wars fan base. There are some who claim The Last Jedi as being the worst Star Wars film ever made. I disagree, but that’s for another article.

The Last Jedi has always counfounded me with its inconsistency of quality. Let me be clear. When I talk about quality, I’m not talking about how the film looks. Rian Johnson and his crew created a beautiful film with some stunning visuals. The quality of which I speak, are specific scenes and the decisons the filmmakers made. Some of these scenes are emotionally moving. Others simply leave me shaking my head wondering what the Hell they were thinking. Let’s take a look at some examples.

Arguably, the worst scene in all of Star Wars is when Princess Leia Organa gets blasted out into space, freezes and then uses the force to float like Mary Poppins back into the ship. This scene is horrible on so many different levels.

Leia IS a Skywalker and undoubtably has honed her force abilities to a certain extent. I think most Star Wars fans are willing to grant Rian Johnson some creative license to that point. After all, it has been nearly 30 years since the fall of the Empire and it is reasonable enough to assume that Leia has honed her force abilities during that time. Nevertheless, it is absurd to assume that she has advanced to such a high level so as to be able to pull off her Mary Poppins act. It just isn’t believable. If you are going to make that big of a jump, you had better explain how it’s possible.

Rian Johnson provides no explanation on how Leia has become so advanced in the ways of the force. Could we imagine Luke or Yoda pulling off such an act? I think not.

Not surprisingly, there is the same issue with Rey. How is she so powerful without proper training? Again, that is for another article. As I’ve already stated, the film is visually stunning, however, the “outerspace/Mary Poppins Leia scene” looks silly. There is no kinder way to put it. It doesn’t look good. What is inconceivable is that the scene didn’t need to happen. Leia could have been blasted into space and killed and that would have been that. Due to Carrie Fisher’s untimely death, this could have been a practical end to Leia’s character.

Instead, Rian Johnson chose to keep her character alive, executed in the most ridiculous manner. This of course means that all of Leia’s screen time in Episode 9 will either be CGI or extra footage from Eisodes 7 and 8. This seems to be irresponsible on the part of Rian Johnson, especially considering that there was no need to keep Leia’s character alive. Maybe Rian Johnson, like George Lucas, believes that a film can be made with over 50% CGI and still look as good as live action? So, that is the worst scene of any Star Wars film ever made. There are some other, somewhat less egregious scenes which have left a bad taste in my mouth.

Now that we’ve explored the worst scene in The Last Jedi, and arguably the worst scene in any Star Wars film, let’s examine other questionable scenes.

It is evident that Rian Johnson made a conscious decision to take his Star Wars film in a new direction. I admire his desire to take a chance at interjecting something new and fresh into the Star Wars universe. I take umbrage with the manner in which this was executed.

One of the ways in which The Last Jedi departs from previous Star Wars films is its use of humor. To be fair, Star Wars films have a history of balancing dramatic scenes with interjections of comedic relief, often executed by strategically placed witticisms from various characters, from droids to smugglers. The humor used in The Last Jedi is not witty. It feels forced and awkward.

One of the very first scenes in the film shows Poe Dameron bantering with General Hux. There is no need for this silly banter and it comes across as being silly simply for the sake of being silly. I remember seeing The Last Jedi for the first time and feeling awkward as this scene played out. It appears the filmmakers were looking for cheap laughs.

Not only does The Last Jedi force humor into inappropriate scenes, it also employs humor which distracts and diminishes the emotional weight of dramatic scenes.

Case in point: Luke explaining The Force to Rey. Luke implores Rey to “reach out”. Rey says, “I feel something”, as Luke tickles her hand with a leaf. (Star Wars: The Last Jedi, 00:48:34 – 00:48:45) This is a dramatic scene in which Rey, who is hungry for any knowledge of the force is receiving insight from Luke Skywalker himself. Luke Skywalker is a legend in Rey’s mind. She is struggling with her place in the universe and finally she is receiving the knowledge she desperately craves. The dramatic importance of this scene is squashed before it has a chance to take root.

The same thing happens when Rey first meets Luke and hands him his lightsaber. At the end of Episode 7: The Force Awakens, Rey meets Luke on Ahch-To. She extends the lightsaber to Luke and the film ends. Star Wars fans wait for the next film in order to see what happens. In The Last Jedi, Rey hands Luke his lightsaber only to have Luke toss it over his shoulder into the ocean. It’s done in a dismissive and almost slap-stick manner. Rian Johnson is attempting to show the audience that Luke is disenchanted and no longer wants to be involved. There are many other ways in which the filmmakers could have shown this aspect of Luke’s character. Rian Johnson took the easy way out and sacrificed this potentially dramatic moment for a cheap laugh.

I won’t even bother discussing Finn and Rose’s subplot of tracking down a code breaker on Canto Bight. It’s as if the filmmakers didn’t know what to do with the characters of Finn and Rose and had to create something for them to do. DJ is a wasted character and the entire sublot has little to do with the rest of the film, and appears to be included simply for the sake of providing Rose and Finn with something to do while at the same time making a statement about animal rights. It’s a mess and a waste of time. The time that was wasted on this insignificant subplot could have been used to show Rey’s third training from Luke, which the audience was expecting, but never received.

It’s not all bad though! The Last Jedi has some beautiful cinematography, as well as some scenes which have the potential to be among the most iconic scenes in all of Star Wars. This is what makes The Last Jedi an enigma.

The final battle scene on Crait displays some beautiful cinematography. all the blaster and artillery fire which kicks up the red soil underneath the salt encrusted surface of Crait creates a stunning contrast. Likewise, the ski speeders of the Resistance create organic lines of red in the surface terrain.

The battle of Crait also has one of my favorite moments in the film. Rose has three Tie Fighters closing in on her. Just as her destruction seems imminent a single shot pierces through all three Tie Fighters. We see the shadow of the Millennium Falcon and the roar of its engines, quickly followed by a short snippet of the Millennium Falcon theme. I absolutely love the way this short scene plays out. We see the shadow of the Falcon before seeing the Falcon itself. This is a clever way in which to demonstrate that the Millennium Falcon, after decades of being lost in the shadows of the past is once a again a symbol of hope and rescue. This scene is reminiscent of A New Hope when Han fires on Vader’s Tie Fighter from behind, allowing Luke to fire the torpedo shot that will destroy the Death Star.

There are two notable scenes in The Last Jedi. Yoda’s conversation with Luke, while the two Jedi masters watch the Jedi texts go up in flames (or so they think) within the ancient tree was extremely satisfying.

Yoda still refers to Luke as Young Skywalker, which is so endearing. Yoda stresses to Luke the importance of failure and learning from one’s failures. All the while Luke is attempting to teach Rey about the Balance of the Force, so too is Yoda attempting to remind Luke that part of that balance is about accepting one’s failures and learning from them. Yoda’s wisdom is relevant to Luke’s tutelage of Rey, but also to Luke himself. Luke may have failed Ben Solo in certain ways, but we all have choices to make regarding our destiny. Luke did not create Kylo Ren.

The most poignant scene in The Last Jedi is Luke and R2-D2’s interaction aboard the Millennium Falcon.

Luke saunters into the Falcon taking in the familiar sights of its interior, which can only recall for Luke his loss and sadness for his now deceased friend Han Solo. Luke collects Han’s dice and sits, head down. R-2 activates and attempts to encourage Luke to return to civilization and help The Resistance. As Luke states to R-2, “I wish I could make you understand. But I’m not coming back. Nothing can make me change my mind.” (Star Wars: The Last Jedi, 00:34:26 – 00:34:35 ) R-2 turns and starts playing the old projection of Princess Leia begging Obi-Wan Kenobi for help in “Our most desperate hour.” (Star Wars: A New Hope, 00:34:39 – 00:35:00)

This was the image that sparked Luke’s journey to learning the ways of the Force all those years ago. Once again his sister needs his help. This scene connects the original trilogy to the sequel trilogy in a meaningful way and is one of the best scenes in the film.

This one scene almost single handedly saves The Last Jedi from being completely irrelevant. It is by far the scene which holds the most emotional weight and has the potential to be one of the most iconic scenes in the Skywalker saga. It is difficult to comprehend how this scene can be in the same film as Leia floating through space like Mary Poppins or Poe Dameron prank calling General Hux amidst a space battle. But this is the paradox of Star Wars: The Last Jedi.

Works Cited

Star Wars: The Last Jedi. Dir. Rian Johnson. Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, 2017. Film.

Star Wars: A New Hope. Dir. George Lucas. 20th Century Fox, 1977. Film.

By Robert Seebach

Goodfellas was released by Warner Bros. in 1990. It was directed by Martin Scorsese and stars Robert De Niro, Ray Liotta, Joe Pesci, Lorraine Bracco and Paul Sorvino. The screenplay was written by Martin Scorsese and Nicholas Pileggi based upon Pileggi’s 1985 book Wiseguy.

Goodfellas follows the lives of three anti-heroes who are members of an organized crime family. The film focuses on Henry Hill and his progression as a member of a Mob crew. Henry narrates the story. His wife, Karen also narrates. Scorsese’s use of music acts as yet another narrator in the film.

Martin Scorsese is on record stating the importance of music within his films. For Scorsese, music is never simply background music. Rather, music serves a direct purpose. It enhances the storytelling. Scorsese grew up during the pre-television era. Scorsese states in a recorded interview with The Narrative Art, “Music was played when we were living on the Lower East Side, particularly in the summer, the windows were open, we’d see things in the streets – fights – or people dancing or something. And there’d be music coming from different windows, different places, whether it was rock and roll, swing, or opera, or anything like that; so that my life was scored with music that I never heard in film. So I said, if I ever make a film, I’d put this song against that.” (Scorsese, 00:1:03 – 00:01:27)

Goodfellas is a perfect example of this. This storytelling through music begins immediately as we hear Tony Bennett’s “Rags to riches” playing over the title credits. The mood and lyrics of this song inform the audience about Henry Hill’s character. Henry’s acceptance into the Mob allows him to go “from rags to riches.” Scorsese uses music to describe Henry’s trajectory throughout the film.

The music used during Henry’s childhood is period appropriate music which is either upbeat or romantic. There is an innocence to the music of this time period of the 1950s. Henry views the Mob in terms of a better life; he romanticizes it and the music used throughout these scenes reflects this. As an adolescent Henry begins spending more time around the mobsters, skipping school in order to work for them parking cars, selling bootleg cartons of cigarettes, and making sandwiches for wiseguys. They become his surrogate family. The nostalgic, upbeat music of the ’50s and ’60s symbolizes Henry’s outlook on life. Henry’s home life is mundane and his father physically abuses him. Henry is now a part of the romantic, powerful family of mobsters he used to idolize from his bedroom window.

An example of this is when Henry meets Jimmy Conway for the first time. The song played during this scene is another 1950s upbeat song titled “Speedo”, performed by The Cadillacs. Henry is enraptured meeting Jimmy. The song choice here reflects an elevating cadence from previous scenes, mirroring Henry’s elevating involvement in the world of wiseguys.

When we see Henry as an adult, Scorsese uses classic rock and roll songs. This type of music from the 1960s and 1970s symbolizes rebellion, decadence, and a carefree attitude. This of course mirrors Henry’s lifestyle during this period in the film. The Rolling Stones’s “Gimme Shelter” initiates Henry’s drug abuse. There are scenes of Henry as and adult which still utilize more innocent, romantic music. When henry first starts dating Karen, he takes her to the Copa Cabana. Scorsese uses The Crystals’ song “Then He Kissed Me” throughout the long shot of Henry escorting Karen in and through the Copa Cabana. This is Karen’s introduction into Henry’s world. Henry’s lifestyle seduces Karen. The romance is merely an interlude however and the carefree rock and roll lifestyle continues to grow.

Scorsese uses Cream’s “Sunshine of Your Love” to depict the exact moment Jimmy decides to kill Morrie. By using slow motion, along with the use of “Sunshine of Your Love” which is a brooding song, and with Deniro’s facial expressions, we the audience not only know what is going to happen, we feel it. It’s almost as though we experience the thought at the same time Jimmy does.

This occurs in an earlier scene in which Tommy kills Billy Bats in Henry’s restaurant. As Tommy returns to the restaurant Donovan’s ominous song “Atlantis” plays. The song begins slowly and builds to a more intense chorus as Billy Bats’s beating takes place.

If there is one scene I’d recommend someone to watch which exemplifies Martin Scorsese’s use of music in film, it would be the “Helicopter Chase/Last Day as a Wiseguy” scene near the end of Goodfellas. This is a perfect scene. And Scorsese’s use of music is what drives the scene.

This scene depicts a hectic, paranoid, drug-fueled day in the life of Henry Hill. The scene starts out with a time stamp consisting of the day, month, and year, as well as the exact time. The scene opens with “Jump into the Fire” by Harry Nilsson and Henry snorting Cocaine.

If one listens to the lyrics of this song, they coincide with the actions and feelings of Henry’s character. As the song starts we see Henry snorting a line of Cocaine, getting ready to head over to Jimmy’s house in order to sell him some guns and silencers. The first two lines of the song are “You can climb a mountain/You can swim the sea.” (Nilsson, Harry, 01:53:21 – 01:54:02) These lyrics describe perfectly, the euphoric “I can do anything, I’m invincable” feeling Cocaine produces. This song is used as an anchor and is employed two other times throughout this scene. It’s utilized to mimic Henry’s Cocaine use, which by this point in the film has become a habit. We hear Muddy Waters sing “Manish Boy” when Henry is at his girlfriend’s apartment snorting lines of Cocaine and packing up the rest to take with him.

One reason I describe this as a perfect scene in terms of its use of music is that it isn’t just Scorsese’s choices of music, but the way in which it is edited. Camera movements coincide with the music. The abrupt cutting of Mick Jagger’s “Memo From Turner”, to The Who’s “Magic Bus, Live at Leeds”, coincides with Henry’s distraction while driving and nearly getting himself into an accident.

Another example is Henry and Karen driving to Karen’s parent’s house while the helicopter follows. Henry careens around a corner, driving erratically as The Rolling Stones’s “Monkey Man” plays. Before leaving Karen’s parent’s house, Henry surveys the sky for the helicopter. Henry concludes that the “coast is clear” and we hear “Manish Boy” by Muddy Water singing, “Everything, everything gonna be alright this morning.” (Waters, Muddy, 01:58:15 – 01:58:20) The music quickly changes to George Harrison’s “What is Life”, reminding the audience that what we are witnessing in this scene is Henry’s unstable life.

Editor Thelma Shoonmaker and Martin Scorsese brilliantly use short clips of various songs to not only mirror the sentiments of the main character, but to set the pace of the scene. Scorsese uses six songs throughout a scene in which the running time is approximately 10 minutes. Shoonmaker chops songs up into small portions, frantically skipping from one song to another. The scenes mirror the music. Periodic time stamps flash on the screen adding to the urgency. All of these elements working together produce a frantic, chaotic, paranoid feeling, which was exactly Scorsese’s intent. He wants the audience to feel the chaos which has becomes Henry’s life. Henry is spinning out of control.

Another notable use of popular music is the outro to “Layla” by Derick and the Dominos which plays over a montage of mob associates being found dead, having been “whacked” at the orders of Jimmy Conway. The outro to Layla has a melancholy, “this is the end of the road” feel to it, which is a perfect song to choose because at this point in the film Henry’s life with organized crime is coming to an end.

Scorsese also uses the lack of music as a tool. Once Henry is captured by DEA agents and his Mob lifestyle is over, the music ceases. In fact, there is no music for the final few minutes of the film while Henry goes through the transition of an exciting, decadent life to one of obscurity. The lack of music in these final scenes symbolizes how dull Henry’s life has become. The music is over.

There are many more examples of Scorsese’s brilliant use of popular music than the one’s I’ve mentioned here. I implore everyone who enjoys Scorsese’s films to review Goodfellas with a focus on how he uses popular music as a secondary narrator. No one utilizes music in film better than Martin Scorsese, especially in the “Helicoptor chase/Last day as a wiseguy” scene in Goodfellas, which is cinematic gold.

Works Cited

Bennett, Tony. “Rags to Riches.” 1953: Colombia 78: 40048, Adler, Richard, Ross, Jerry, Colombia Records, 1953.

The Cadillacs. “Speedoo.” The Fabulous Cadillacs, Navarro, Esther, Josie Records, 1955.

Cream. “Sunshine of Your Love.” Disraeli Gears, Brown, Pete, Atlantic Records, 1967.

The Crystals. “Then He Kissed Me.” And Then He Kissed Me (single), Spector, Phil, Greenwich, Ellie, Barry, Jeff, Philles (US, Canada), London (UK), 1963.

Derek and the Dominos. “Layla.” Layla and Other Assorted Love Songs, Polydor Records, Atco Records, 1970.

Harrison, George. “What is Life.” All Things Must Pass, Apple Records, 1970.

Jagger, Mick. “Memo From Turner.” Performance, Richards, Keith, Decca Records, 1970

Leitch, Donovan. “Atlantis.” Barabajagal, Epic Record, 1969.

Nilsson, Harry. Nilsson Schmilsson, RCA Records, 1971.

The Rolling Stones. “Monkey Man.” Let It Bleed, Decca Records, 1969.

Goodfellas. Dir. Martin Scorsese. Warner Bros., 1990. Film.

The Narrative Art. “Martin Scorsese on Music and Film.” Online video/audio clip. YouTube. YouTube, 4 May 2018.

Muddy Waters, “Manish Boy.” Manish Boy (Single), London, Mel, Diddley, Bo, Chess, 1955

The Who. “Magic Bus.” Live At Leeds, Decca Records, 1970.

By Robert Seebach

Jaws was released by Universal Studios in 1975. The film was directed by Steven Spielberg and stars Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss and Robert Shaw. The screenplay was written by Peter Benchley, Carl Gottlieb and Howard Sackler, based upon Peter Benchley’s novel of the same title.

Jaws is a classic story of good versus evil. In this case, the evil is mostly unseen. The beach town of Amity has had a shark attack, but the Mayor attempts to downplay this initial attack as a fluke. Mayor Vaughn is concerned that the local economy will be irreparably damaged if the myriad tourists who’ve just arrived for the Fourth of July weekend discover that there is a man- eating shark off the coast of Amity Island.

The Mayor and other figures of Amity downplay the event. The shark takes another victim. A town hall meeting is called and a reward is offered to anyone who can catch the shark. Local fishermen catch and kill a large Tiger Shark and the town briefly breathes a sigh of relief. However, Matt Hooper measures the bite radius and determines that this is not THE shark.

Chief of Police Martin Brody- not an islander himself- finally convinces the Mayor to hire the only man capable for the job, Mr. Quint. Quint, Chief Brody, and Matt Hooper set out to capture the shark and soon realize they are in over their heads. In the end, it is Chief Brody who slays the proverbial leviathan.

The protagonist of the story is Chief of Police, Martin Brody. He is an unlikely hero because in many ways, he is not respected or accepted. Spielberg portrays Brody as weak at times. Brody has flaws, but he is self-aware enough to recognize his shortcomings and rise above them.

One trait Martin Brody has in abundance is altruism. Throughout the film, Brody’s actions are based on the well being of the community as a whole, despite having knowledge of the personal risks and dangers before him. He doesn’t expect any reward or acknowledgment; he proceeds out of a sense of duty.

From the very beginning of the film (and I’m speaking strictly of the film because the novel has some variations), we understand that Martin Brody is a good man. Spielberg shows us this through his interactions with his wife and children.

Perhaps the best example of this is the scene at the table where Brody and his son are left alone after dinner. Brody notices that his son is mimicking him and engages his son. Keep in mind, that at this point in the story, Brody is under immense stress due to the recent shark attacks and being undermined by the Mayor. But sitting across the table from his son, the only thing that matters is this moment he’s sharing with his son. He is present. This scene shows what grounds him – his family. Brody’s wife, Ellen watches the scene play out with a smile on her face. She appreciates her husband. He’s a good father.

Brody is also a protector of his family. He yells at his son to “get out of that boat”. (Jaws, 00:23:55 – 00:23:57) We see Brody as the protector in another scene where he tells his sons that he wants them to play in the bay because it is more safe. The culmination of that scene is Brody running to the aid of his son who has encountered the shark and gone into shock.

Even though Martin Brody is a moral man who has his family’s and the town of Amity’s best interests at heart, he is constantly being undermined. Brody and his family are outsiders.

Ellen asks an Amity resident, “when do I become an Islander?” (Jaws, 00:14:07 – 00:14:17) The resident tells Ellen that she will never be an islander because she wasn’t born in Amity.

There are numerous scenes where Brody is disrespected and marginalized, but the most obvious involve the Mayor of Amity. Brody wants to put up “no swimming” signs (“Let Polly do the printing!”). (Jaws, 00:11:16 – 00:11:20) Brody wants to close the beach for the Fourth of July. In each instance, Mayor Vaughn and his awesome pale blue suit with the anchors on it, shuts him down. Mayor Vaughn even colludes with the coroner to change the cause of death of Crissy Watkins. Mayor Vaughn continually points out that Brody is an outsider and adds further insult to injury by questioning his ability to perform his job, stating, “This is your first summer, you know.” (Jaws, 00:12:23 – 00:12:25) But Brody perseveres in the best interest of the town of Amity. Why? Because Chief Martin Brody has integrity!

Chief Brody isn’t the only character who is unaccepted, disrespected and marginalized. Matt Hooper from the Oceanographic Institute experiences the same disenfranchisement that Brody does.

Hooper feels unwelcomed the moment he steps off the boat at the harbor. He’s a rich outsider who isn’t taken seriously. Mayor Vaughn questions Hooper’s motives while standing in front of the Amity billboard along with Chief Brody. Hooper implores Mayor Vaughn to pay attention to the proportions of the shark fin painted on the sign by “paint happy bastards.” “Those proportions are correct”, states Hooper. To which Mayor Vaughn replies, “Love to prove that wouldn’t you. Get your name in the National Geographic.” (Jaws, 00:50:23 – 00:53:06)

At first even Brody questions Hooper’s analysis that this is not “THE shark.” “There’s no other sharks like this in these waters.” (Jaws, 00:34:56 – 00:35:38) However, Brody listens to Hooper, perhaps because he knows what it feels like to have no one listen. He respects Hooper and thus forms a partnership with him. Both Hooper and Brody have the best interest of Amity in mind, but they each possess the quality of humility. They know that they alone cannot catch or kill the shark. It’s beyond their expertise and each character recognizes this fact, sets aside their pride, and does what needs to be done.

Enter Quint. The residents of Amity do not accept Quint any more than they accept Brody and Hooper. The difference is that Quint neither needs nor wants their acceptance. Quint is a man who has forged his own path through life. Quint lives by his own code. He’s not there to help the people of Amity; he’s there for the money and the glory. The residents of Amity appear to despise Quint. But they do respect him, as evidenced by his blackboard scratching entrance into the town meeting: “You all know me. Know how I earn a living.” (Jaws, 00:20:53 – 00:20:57) Brody and Hooper, too grow to respect Quint. He is a necessary evil. They need Quint.

Quint wastes no time asserting his authority. Just like everyone else in Amity, Quint makes Brody feel inadequate and less than a man. Quint teases Brody as he’s saying goodbye to his wife. He points out Brody’s shortcomings when it comes to “being on the sea.” In fact, throughout the film, Brody is made to appear weak in this area, which he is. But this is also what makes his triumph in the end all the more satisfying. He is the unlikely hero, the underdog.

Brody’s own wife undermines him during their after dinner discussion with Matt Hooper (who thoughtfully brought a bottle of red AND white wine because he was unsure what they’d be serving.) Ellen informs Hooper that “Martin hates boats, Martin hates water. Martin, Martin sits in his car when we go on the ferry to the mainland.” (Jaws, 00:42:18 – 00:42:27) She isn’t consciously trying to embarrass her husband, but the effect on Brody is clear.

Apparently just about everyone in Amity knows that Chief Brody doesn’t like the water as we see when Harry (in his bad hat) states, “we know all about you, Chief. You don’t go in the water at all do ya?” (Jaws, 00:16:07 – 00:16:13) Hooper later states to Brody, while they are both on Hooper’s boat in the middle of the night, “well, it doesn’t make much sense for a man who doesn’t like the water to live on an island.” (Jaws, 00:46:25 – 00:46:41)

I see this scene as the moment when their partnership is solidified. Each has the same goal and are willing to accept their own limitations in certain areas, while respecting each other’s expertise in others.

Quint challenges Hooper because Hooper represents the establishment of which Quint will never be a part. He is aware of Hooper’s knowledge, so he challenges his seamanship. Quint first does this upon meeting Hooper and asks him to tie a Sheep Shank. Hooper passes the test without difficulty. Quint then attacks Hooper’s real world experience by taking his hands and stating, “you’ve got city hands, Mr. Hooper. You’ve been counting money all your life.” (Jaws, 01:08:14 – 01:08:35) Quint also teases Hooper about his “expensive equipment.” In a sense, Hooper represents modernity, while Quint represents the ancient.

In my opinion, Hooper does gain a small amount of respect from Quint. Quint and Hooper develop a camaraderie based on mutual respect. The “USS Indianapolis” scene masterfully illustrates this. This is one of the greatest scenes of dialogue ever captured on film. Robert Shaw’s delivery is sublime.

During this scene, we witness a family coming together around the table. Whether they like it or not, they are a family, or at the very least a tribe.

Hooper and Quint go tit-for-tat sharing increasingly heroic experiences and physical scars – battle wounds. It is through the sharing of these experiences that Quint begins to realize that Hooper is not the inexperienced, rich city boy he had originally thought. Hooper learns that Quint was a player in the real life, legendary maritime drama of the USS Indianapolis.

Meanwhile, Brody feels left out because he has nothing to share. We feel his discomfort when we see Brody off to the side lifting his shirt to examine his appendix scar, pondering for a moment whether this is a worthy enough story. Hooper is vying for Quint’s respect and approval, while Brody cannot compete. Instead, Brody turns his attention back to Quint asking him what the scar on his arm is. “Oh well, it’s a tattoo, I got that removed.” Hooper drunkenly quips, “Let me guess… Mother?” and laughs hysterically. Quint retorts, “No Mr. Hooper… That’s the USS Indianapolis.” Hooper swallows hard and asks, “You were on the Indianapolis?” Brody askes, “What happened?” (Jaws, 01:26:28 – 01:34:44) Thus begins Quint’s soliloquy concerning his experiences on the USS Indianapolis. The mood shifts from jovial to somber in an instant.

At its conclusion, Quint states that he’ll never put on a life jacket again. I take this statement to mean that Quint has experienced hell and if he ever finds himself back in hell, he doesn’t want to come back only to have to live with the experiences accrued there.

Quint and Hooper begin singing an old seamen’s tune in an attempt to break up the mood. Brody joins in. The tribe unites. The shark rams the boat, interrupting their solidarity.

After playing a game of cat and mouse with the Great White it becomes increasingly apparent that the crew of the Orca are in over their heads. Quint, in a rare moment of hopelessness even asks Hooper about using his more modern equipment. Again, we are witnessing the analogy of modernity taking over for the primitive. He’s desperate. Unfortunately for Quint, it isn’t enough.

In a way, Quint becomes a sacrifice to the evil entity in the most Dantesque way. Quint is the father figure who guides his companions into the dark depths of a world unfamiliar to them. Quint’s death is a metaphor. Quint has been on borrowed time and the agent of death has come to take what is his.

However, his companions have a higher purpose. They are on a mission for the greater good and owe the agent of death nothing. Brody becomes the unlikely hero. Brody is not a seaman. He doesn’t have harrowing tales of danger and adventure. Heck! He doesn’t even like being in or on the water! What Chief Martin Brody does have is morality, ethics, humility, and integrity. He is the personification of altruism. A man who selflessly took on the battle against evil for his fellow man because it was his duty and the right thing to do.

Works Cited

Jaws. Dir. Steven Spielberg. Universal Studios, 1975. Film.