“Let me tell you what ‘Like a Virgin’ is all about…” – Reservoir Dogs (1992)

I remember after watching Pulp Fiction (1994), I had a craving for that particular type of Tarantino films. If you look after Pulp Fiction in his filmography, you see a different style of Tarantino. I wouldn’t call his later work more matured because I don’t consider Pulp Fiction any less mature. So, with this craving I then turned to Reservoir Dogs (1992) and I remember feeling it was nice but not as nice as Pulp Fiction. Years later, after watching Reservoir a number of times, I have come to realize the genius with which this film stands on its own in Tarantino’s entire body work.

Reservoir Dogs was Tarantino’s debut into the world of films. It was his independent venture which he had decided to make with $30,000 and his friends at that time. When the script found its way in Harvey Keitel’s hands, Keitel wanted to be a part of this independent project solely because he loved Tarantino’s writing. With a big name then attached to the film, the producers were able to raise the budget to above a million dollars and the result is what we today see as Reservoir Dogs.

Jean-Luc Godard once said, ‘A story should have a beginning, a middle and an end but not necessarily in that order’. The non linearity of Reservoir’s story accentuates the main points of the film which otherwise would not have been so beautifully done in a linear form. The story delves deeper into the character’s past when needed and reveals relevant details of the plot as the main story goes on. If you really look at it, the movie feels more like a novel with chapters jumping in time to tell the story better. In a broader sense however, the movie can still be divided into the traditional parts of a story.

Cinematography wise what I found very interesting was that the whole movie was blocked like a play. Maybe it is because of the fact that it was shot almost in one location but I feel it is more to do with the way it was shot. We see the very first Tarantino-trunk scene in this film when they open the trunk of the car to take out the hostage policeman. There are also slow dolly ins and outs throughout the film to emphasize on the drama of the scene. For example, when Mr. Blonde is first shown standing in the corner (slow dolly out). There is another dolly in later when Freddie’s cop friend Holdaway first asks about ‘The Commode Story’. The camera work is not totally amazing but it is simple enough to complement the story.

Tarantino films have music carefully chosen by him. He chooses songs not just to punctuate his stories but to also to juxtapose the action going on. The contrast then provided by the song with respect to the action thus makes it a memorable scene. Take the scene where Mr. Blonde cuts off the policeman’s ear. If that scene had been just simply scored, it would have still been a grotesque scene but it would have been just another grotesque scene in the movies. But when Mr. Blonde plays that fine Dylan-esque Stealers Wheel track ‘Stuck in the Middle with You’ and he is dancing towards the bound policeman and then he whips out his straight razor, there is only one thought going in your head…’That man is bat shit crazy! I am never going close to him.’ It is then, anything but a scene in the movies. That scene then successfully ruins the song for you, reminding you of a sliced bleeding ear every time you hear it. It still makes me dance and cringe at the same time. Similarly, whenever I hear ‘Little Green Bag’ by George Baker Selection, I imagine a group of tuxedo-clad men walking in slow motion. That is the power of cinema. Successfully branding your head with an image you cannot forget easily. That damned ear.

The story is sprinkled with conversations about pop culture. Tarantino genuinely feels that pop culture is a common language that everyone speaks. He himself being a big pop culture enthusiast, it is only right that his films be full of pop culture or pop culture references. The movie starts with a quite ‘detailed’ analysis of the Madonna song, ‘Like a Virgin’ given by Tarantino himself in the film. Later we see the characters discussing their infatuation with the actress Pam Grier (who was later the protagonist of Tarantino’s ‘Jackie Brown’).

My favorite scene (other than that stupid ear scene) from this Tarantino classic has to be when Tim Roth (Freddie/Mr. Orange) is practicing and telling his ‘commode story’. That scene is just pure story telling (pun intended). You can see his confidence rising as he is practicing his story, first telling to his cop friend Holdaway, then to himself, then to Joe, Nice Guy Eddie and Mr. White and then at last to us. Finally, we see him standing in the toilet, facing the cops and the dog, continuing to narrate his story. If you think about it that is the moment when Tarantino merges his story with his character’s story. For me, that is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen in terms of storytelling.

I believe Reservoir Dogs is very instrumental if you want to understand Tarantino films and what his aspirations were when he started out. It helps you appreciate his later films even more. For me, this is what Tarantino is in his bare bones. Without the big budget, without the big names attached, without any hype. This is what Tarantino is at his core. A powerful story inspired by the films he has watched in his life. If you haven’t watched it because like the past-me you thought you wouldn’t enjoy the early Tarantino flavor, you double click on that file today! Watch it for the regular story told in an irregular way. Watch it for the dialogues. Watch it for Tarantino’s explanation of ‘Like a Virgin’. If nothing else, then just watch it to put that ear slicing scene in context.

Why I love watching Goodfellas (1990)

Scorsese once claimed that The Departed (2006) was his first plot based film. His previous films (Taxi Driver (1976), The King of Comedy (1983), The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) etc.) have been more of character studies. Similarly Goodfellas is a character study of what a gangster’s life was like in the 60’s and 70’s. The film is based on the book, ‘Wiseguy’ by Nicholas Pileggi which in turn was based on real life people and events. Scorsese first got hold of the book and it was the flavor it was written with that drew him to make a film on it. The whole point of the film is to examine the inside working of these mob families. Called by Roger Ebert as the ‘best mob movie ever’, Goodfellas was instrumental in inspiring a lot of mob related films and TV series. One major inspiration was the TV series Sopranos, where the creator called the Scorsese film his Quran.

Goodfellas is an excellent example of the insane camerawork and editing in Scorsese movies (and I mean that in a very positive way). One very characteristic aspect of the film was freeze frame. In theory, freeze frames shouldn’t work. Imagine when you’re watching a movie and suddenly the picture stops but the sound and music keeps going on. It is supposed to jerk the audience out of the flow. Not with Scorsese however. He used it as a way to tell the story more efficiently if anything. It is almost as if you are sitting down with Henry over a few drinks and he is telling you his life story and then stops the flow of events to explain you more about how he figured out Jimmy wanted to kill Morrie.

I am generally a big sucker for long shots (maybe that is why Rope is my favorite Hitchcock film). So naturally, the scene where Henry takes Karen out for their first date just kept my eyes wide open and a big smile on my face. Long shots, if pulled off correctly invest you more into the mood of the film. Just like in that scene, you feel you are walking behind Henry and Karen when they enter the club from the back entrance and go through the kitchen. The way through the kitchen and Henry stopping by everyone to say hello sold the idea more convincingly of him being an influential person.

I cannot talk about the camerawork in the film and not mention the iconic Vertigo effect/ Hitchcock shot/ Dolly zoom used in the film. This is when Henry meets Jimmy towards the end of the film to discuss Henry’s case. When they are sitting in the booth, you would notice there is a very strange fluid like movement between the foreground and the background. This is the Dolly zoom or otherwise known as the Vertigo effect, since it was first seen in Vertigo (1958) by Hitchcock. This shot implied that there was something wrong, a certain bad vibe that the protagonist was feeling.

The music is beautifully interwoven into the story. Scorsese handpicked all the songs used in the movie himself. If you notice, as the movie progresses from the late 50’s to the 70’s, so does the music. We start the movie with Tony Bennett’s ‘Rags to Riches’. If you have seen the movie enough (or are obsessed with it like in my case) then it is very hard to listen to that song without Henry’s voice describing his childhood ringing in your head. The beginning of the movie itself has 3-4 songs playing behind the voice over. The music complements the mood of the film as it goes on. It becomes romantic and loving when we see Henry wooing Karen, promiscuous when Henry is with his mistress, dirty rock when we see De Niro smoking a cigarette (looking for the next person to kill), soft sympathetic music when we see the dead massacred by Jimmy and uptempo jazz and rock to underline the chaos of a coked out Henry running around. Using music to tell the story is just one of the many things possible in movies and Scorsese uses this to his advantage.

Along with the music and the camerawork, I feel that food played a big role in the film. The ‘dinner in prison’ scene has to be one of my favorite scenes from the movie, if not THE favorite. The little things that Scorsese adds to his scenes are the small strokes defining his big masterpiece. The razor cutting garlic technique was a small detail in the book but he dedicated an entire shot to that. In fact the whole film would have worked without such an elaborate dinner scene in the prison altogether. However it is because of these unnecessary details that we realize what grandeur life they were living in the prison, thus making that scene almost necessary for the film.

After the Godfather films, Goodfellas can easily be considered the next essential mob related film to know. It laid the basic ground rules on which later mob related cinema or TV series were made. The reason why some people might find Goodfellas as boring and clichéd today is only because this film was one of the big ones to define that genre. Watch it for the significance it holds and if not then just watch it for Robert DeNiro and Joe Pesci coming together in a Scorsese movie.

Superman (1978) by Richard Donner

 

Even if you are still waiting to buy your tickets for the ‘Man of Steel’, you would have still heard about the disparity existing between the critics and the fans about it. Either way, it was undeniably a movie worthy of a summer release. I, being a hardcore Superman fan, have been following the red cape since his earliest films (Superman (1978), Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut(2006)) to his much recent animated movies (All-Star Superman (2011), Superman vs The Elite(2012)). Following him through all these different forms of the media, one can notice how the perception of the character has matured over the years. From being a simple comic book character for the kids to now being a cultural icon for those same kids who have now grown up. He is, as Zack Snyder put it, ‘The Granddaddy of all Superheroes’.

Although Snyder has respectfully chosen to ignore the Superman films released in the past, I couldn’t help myself to go back to the first movie of the franchise that started the trouble in the first place, Superman (1978) by Richard Donner. The first movie had established the long known hero on the screen and set the tone in which Superman would be looked at for years. This mood, created for the film to be enjoyed in, was (obviously) more relevant to the late 70’s. I, not being able to handle all the anticipation for the new film, went back to the Christopher Reeve starred Richard Donner version. While the special effects and the (whatever little) fight scenes do seem out of date, it is still a great example of classic story telling of this great superhero.

The story is classically told in a linear fashion. There are no flashbacks and we follow the life of an infant Kal-El to an adult Clark Kent. I found the story to be easily segregated into three distinct acts. The first act being the sci-fi segment of the film set on Krypton. What I found interesting here was the idea of their planet’s superiority over Earth’s being conveyed through simple imagery. Their luminous costumes, their obscure crystal technology and their justice system were some of the things that convinced me that their planet was what Earth could be in a few decades. What was also very interesting here was (casting wise) Marlon Brando playing Jor-El. The character had very little screen time compared to the impression he was supposed to leave on the audiences as one of the important people in the protagonist’s life. Brando lent that stature to the character. This was a very smart move on the director and the casting director’s side. One of the iconic scenes from the movie takes place in this act when Jor-El bids farewell to his son before sending him off to planet Earth. That classic Brando delivery is near perfect, if not impeccable.

The second act can be seen as the drama segment of the film showing us an adolescent Clark living with the Kents on their farm. Just like every other teenager he is shown having problems fitting in with the other students. The third act, which is the major chunk of the film, is the action segment of the film. We finally get to see Christopher Reeve donning the red cape and fly away from the Fortress of Solitude.

A very important part of any superhero film is the dramatic irony concerning the hero’s secret identity. The film uses this fact to its advantage and injects small amounts of humor in the story. Take the scene where Clark wants to accompany Louis on a helicopter ride and she just dismisses him saying, ‘If only you could fly’. Or the scene where Clark saves Louis from getting mugged. My personal favorite being, the one where Perry White has a discussion with Clark about his lack of aggression in general. These little moments of humor accounted by the irony make us love the protagonist even more.

A very common argument that I have heard since the dawn of time is how come nobody recognizes Superman when he puts on his glasses and becomes Clark Kent? There is this very beautiful scene in the movie where Clark is in Louis’ hotel room while she is getting ready and he contemplates telling her about his secret. There is this brief moment where you could see the transformation between Clark and Superman when he takes off his glasses and straightens his posture. If you notice in the scene, the director has placed a mirror right behind Clark so that we get to see the change more explicitly. That scene is the answer to the debate. The brilliance with which Christopher Reeve pulls off both the characters is simply remarkable.

Another very interesting thing I noticed was about the antagonist, Lex Luthor. This man believes himself to be superior to every other human on the planet and yet lives underground (in a grand fashion nonetheless). He boasts of his IQ while bullying his two accomplices and yet they are his only company. I found these juxtapositions to be very fascinating.

The thing with Superman stories is that they cannot be treated the same as Batman or Spiderman stories. Superman, being nearly indestructible prevents normal modes of storytelling since we know he wouldn’t be getting his back broken easily. The best of his stories are about what it takes to carry the weight of the world on his shoulders. He is a benevolent God, who always chooses to do the right thing. There is a lot that can be said about Superman and his way of being but that would be a discussion for some other time and would also sort of deviate from the film. This film not only stayed true to that image but helped put a face to that name. Now, whenever I think of Superman, I can’t help but think of Christopher Reeve too (even for a second). That, in my opinion, is a mark of a good movie.