The Stain

      I couldn't find an Image from the Film so this will have to do, sorry.

 I assume you guys know what film I'm talking about. You know the one about the to eighty-year-olds who get in an argument over stain and kill each other? 

 I have to say that this film was awful...In the best way possible. From the overall design, to the constant, unwarranted medium switches and the quiet narration made for a very unique experience.

First the way in which the story was first conceived was pretty clever, though morbid, the writers (I wish I could remember their names) were able to reverse engineer a very interesting story.
The film also creates a very surprising tone, it is unsure whether it is funny, sad or angry. This is something that would easily ruin any other story, but here it just works. There is no easy answer to the film, therefore, it makes sense that the tone would be just as uncertain.

Finally we have the actual design of the characters. The film does not concern itself with continuity and is perfectly willing to shift the characters any way in which the scene demands. The film does an amazing job of bringing together elements that just don't work and they do not necessarily make them work, they just fit the movie perfectly.    

 I am really sorry that I don't have visual aids to help elaborate what I'm talking about but, I just couldn't find anything (But I found a ton of images of Tide products)

Anyway thanks for reading and let me know what you think of the film.                                

Using The Uncanny Valley To Your Advantage.

Just watch it first.

 For those of you who don't know this is the opening to the Half-Life 2 (from Valve) , and the character is known simply as the G-Man. He's just your typical dimension jumping government agent who knows far more than he will tell. It is apparent that the developers are fully aware of the limitations of CG humans and use it to their advantage. The combination of the pale eyes that are never quite looking in the right direction and strange way in which the head moves, down to the robotic but clearly human voice makes for a character creepy enough to rival the Xenomorph. But one thing to note is that the rest of the characters are actually very well animated, especially in the face. I wasn't able to track down a quick clip from a cut scene that showcases the animation, so I guess you will either have to watch a play through or just play the game yourself.This picture kind of shows of the semi-caricatured characters which allow them to avoid the uncanny valley fairly well. Unless they want them to. I'm sure some of you are still creeped out by them but there are people who find teddy bears creepy so its all about the individual person.

Anyway thanks for reading and let me know what you think if you've played, or if you think I am 100% off the mark and you think these characters are creepier than a ten foot spider.           

Zack Snyder

Let's talk about Zack Snyder.

More specifically, how he has helped shape the modern movie landscape. This is the part where I start yelling like a little kid and complain about how movies are horrible now a days and what not. No, but seriously it is apparent that he, Christopher Nolan and Micheal Bay have seeped into everything coming out of Hollywood these days. From the overuse of slow motion to the mass explosion epidemic and the focus on how many cars can be flipped in two hours, a pattern is not hard to spot. But lets really take a look at what Zack Snyder has produced.
                                         
With it's incredible scope and absolutely amazing cinematography, 300 was truly a landmark in the modern film age. Some argue that The Matrix was the piece that changed the movie landscape. In actuality it was just the first domino in a trail that comes to 300. The commercial success made this type of film more appealing to big name producers and therefore easier to profit from. Then came...
                            
The Graphic Novel that could not be made into a movie. Which Zack Snyder made into a movie. An awesome movie. Not only did it somehow capture all of the elements that made the graphic novel so incredible but it also gave each character the time to develop the level of depth that they needed. The film was even brave enough to alter one of the most iconic aspects of graphic novel, the ending, (I wont spoil it for you) and actually made an ending that a lot of fans prefer. What's next?
                                     
                                                           Okay what's next? 


                                    
Now I have not seen Man of Steel, yet, however I have seen a pretty apparent split in reactions between people who like the movie and those who do not. I can't judge until I have seen it so I don't have much to talk about on the matter. Although I had the ending spoiled for me, and I really like the decision to do what they did. It was brave and I think it was the right choice.

So what's the point of all of this? Well, it upsets me to see so many films that look the exact same coming out in the past couple of years. But then I took a step back and thought about looking at what the Genesis was, while it can be traced to Zack Snyder, he is actually a very good film maker who makes a lot of movies that I really enjoy. It is not him that is the issue, it's us. Because we are so willing to accept the same thing over and over again Hollywood keeps giving us the same thing over and over again. Now you may be asking yourself; what should we do, stop going to the movies? No, we wait. This whole "Slow-Mo, Explosion, Action-Fest" is no different from the Western Film craze that swept through America in the 40s and 50s. Eventually the people grew tired of it and the market changed. Eventually we will move on to something that else I hope it's better, it may not be but, we could be surprised.    

Where The Wild Things Are.

                                 
 I'm sure most of you have seen Where The Wild Things Are and came out with a strange feeling. Not really knowing how to feel as the film has a bizarre tone that is both happy, uplifting and charming but at the same time somber, eerie and tense. Even the scenery seems to have no rhyme or reason, changing from a vast desert to a lush forest instantaneously with no explanation. That is because the film is told through the emotions of a child rather a coherent storyline or plot. Like a child, who switches from happy to sad to angry relatively often and without much provocation, the movie switches in tone and environment. When Max is happy everything is bright and welcoming and the creatures are friendly and warm. Whereas when he is scared, like the first time he sees the creatures, everything is dark and mysterious and the shadows cast by the fire make the creatures seem twice their size. And there is confusion, in these moments you can see that things are happening that Max cannot understand. The characters act irrationally and without any real motivation or provocation.
                     
In a film that could have easily been a write-off like Horton Hears a Who or the Lorax or any adaptation of Dr. Suess that is not a traditionally animated short, the filmmakers took chance and did something different something risky. Which seeing as it was directed by Spike Jonez, who has made his mark as a music video director, the fact that the film focuses more on emotion than story makes sense. I was excited when I saw that a movie adaptation was in the works, but had a ton of apprehension, since it would be so easy to mess up. I'm really happy that the film came out the way it did and I'm really excited to see what Spike Jonez is going to do in the future.

So what do you guys think? Did you enjoy the way the film was handled or would you have preferred more literal storytelling?                 

Simple

Now I would like to show you one of my personal favorite music videos "Mouth Like A Magazine" by Showbread. Now the reason I love this video so much is that it has nothing to show off, nothing to hide it's just a bunch of guys in a room, having fun and playing music. It is the clever editing and camera work that makes the video, just fun to watch. The song may not be everybody's cup of tea but hopefully you can appreciate the video.

       And even after 8 albums and 8 years they still know how to keep it simple. 

Music Videos

First of all I would like to say that I am a huge fan of simple Music videos, that really focus on the music rather than try to distract you from how bad the song probably is (I'm not going to make a Top 40 joke, use your imagination.)  Luckily we have videos Like Johnny Cash's rendition of Hurt.

Not only do we get the amazing vocal performance by Johnny Cash, but we also get a video that compliments the words so well. The visuals do not try to overpower the song with some half-baked effects or distracting camera angles. The producers knew that they had Johnny Cash and that's all they needed. 

And I'm still riding that Johnny Cash train, with the incredible video for "Ain't No Grave" The fact that it is fan created gives incredible weight to the video, not to mention the fact that its playing against a absolutely incredible song.

Another Music Video that I saw on the schedule but was not shown, that I really enjoy is by the White Stripes titled "The Hardest Button to Button" and its a shame that it wasn't shown it is really clever video that was probably a pain to shoot. But I'll let you check it out for yourself. 

      

Finally a video that I had not seen before by The Shins "The Rifle Spiral" This is some great animation. The characters are not super complex but they convey the perfect amount of emotion. This is a case where instead of paying attention to the band, the video is meant to showcase the music. And it does so in such a way that just works so beautifully. 

         

Thanks for reading and I apologize that most of my selections are Johnny Cash, but come on can you blame me.     

    

IKIRU! IKIRU! IKIRU!

 CURSE YOU FALL BREAK!!
I bet you can't figure out what this blog is about. Yeah I was really looking forward to seeing Ikiru at Signs&Wonders. It is such an amazing film, about what it is to have a happy, meaningful and purpose driven life.
The film stars Takashi Shimura (The Doctor from Drunken Angel) as a middle aged man who has worked in the same bureaucratic position for several decades. He soon finds out that he has stomach cancer and decides to skip work and try to enjoy the time he has left. (Which results in a hilarious scene of his co-workers gossiping about his absence) During this time he meets up with a younger man who convinces him that the secret to happiness is living for oneself. With this in mind he accompany the man to bars, parties and strip clubs, but finds no joy in this. In a depressive state he meets fellow employee Toyo, who needs his signature on her resignation letter. He is taken aback by her enthusiasm and love for life. He begins to want to see her more and more. She soon grows weary of his intentions and tries to avoid him. He convinces her that he just wants to know the secret to her happiness. She reveals that it is her new job making toys, she feels as though with each toy she makes she is, in a sense playing with every child that plays with that toy(Which would suck if she made My Little Pony Toys.) and this gives her life purpose.
 I won't spoil the ending (Not like it's a twist or anything, but it is worth watching with fresh understanding.), but he finds something worthwhile to spend his time doing and ends with one of the most amazing scenes in film history.

Again I'm really disappointed that it did not get shown, however, I just so happen to own it on DVD an might be able to play it in the screening room if anyone is interested?    

Sour Death Balls

(A) Awesome Title (B) Such an awesome concept. The film displays the human face in all of its glory. I think the human face is absolutely amazing and the fact that a filmmaker was able to capture it in such a way that was so honest and real is just awesome.
 What this film does is remind my why I love the films of Sergio Leoné (The Good The Bad The Ugly, A Fistful of Dynamite, Once Upon A Time in America, etc... who really saw the human face as a landscape, with each wrinkle and pore serving as the dips and valleys of a vast landscape.  
   
I feel like this may be an element of film making that has been lost in recent films. Where the main use of the wide angle close up is reserved for uncomfortable comedy shots or attempts at "Artistic" film making that forgets the initial purpose of the shot. I really appreciate that there are others who understand how incredible the human face and that Jessica Yu was able to present it in a clever and interesting way.

What are your thoughts? Do you like the wide angle lens in comedy, or are you sick of it? Or do you think we  should stay as far away from the face as possible in films?

The Walking Dead

Recently I decided to replay the TellTale Games game, The Walking Dead, and it certainly brought back some memories
For those of you who don't know the Walking Dead Game is a decision based survival game where the choices you make effect certain elements in the game itself (Who will be in you party, who will survive, etc..) and it is heart wrenching. You play as Lee Everett, a convicted criminal accused of murdering a state senator, with whom his wife was having an affair. The game starts with you in the back of a police car headed towards prison and if you know anything about the Walking Dead franchise, you know the ride does not go so smoothly. After hitting a zombie and wrecking the car you escape and make your way into a suburb, there you meet Clemetine.
 
 Clementine is an eight year old girl whose parents went out of town before the outbreak. She had been hiding out in her treehouse(As the babysitter had turned) she immediately gravitates to you and joins you, hoping to find her parents. Suddenly the game becomes less about survival and more about protecting this little girl. This is what makes the game so amazing, every decision you make from that point on is focused on Clementine. If you haven't played the game I won't spoil the ending but I can tell it is rough and thats putting it mildly. The first time I played through to the end I was to the point of bawling like a little baby, and then I asked myself: why? I knew these characters were just cartoons, programed to respond to commands, but even with that knowledge I still felt connected. This could be in part due to the choice-based system however, your decisions do not really affect the ending (and I was playing with this knowledge.) Another very big factor is the voice acting, Lee Everett, voiced by Dave Fennoy(Captain Planet' Additional Voices-'Darkwing Duck' Additional Voices'-Sonic the Hedgehog 'Additional Voices, you get the gist) The best part about Lee's voice is that it does not sound like someone acting. It is engaging and easy to see yourself as this character in his situation. Clementine: voiced by Melissa Hutchinson, adds the level of innocents and compassion that makes you want to care for her. Amazingly she actually sounds like a real little girl (unlike most games and movies.) The rest of the cast helps to make your decisions seem more weighty as if these are real people. This is becoming pretty lengthy, but in the end I really recommend that you check the game out (Especially with it being Halloween) Keep in mind though it is violent, it is about a zombie apocalypse.

Anyway thanks for reading and I hope you enjoy the game.         

Pleasantville Parody

                                             

At first glance Pleasantville seems like masterpiece of religious symbolism and moral inquiries…and in a lot of ways it is. It certainly has the imagery and the thought provoking cinematography but something is off. This could just be me asserting my cynicism, but the whole movie almost came across as a parody of a thought provoking film. Before you beat me down with blunt objects hear me out. First off the religious imagery: Especially the scene where David is offered the apple in the picturesque park. This scene is so overt that it borders on an SNL sketch. The symbolism does not even attempt to be subtle. Another thing to note is the color. Again the aspect of of color seeping into a colorless world to represent "Enlightenment", is so glaring that it is hard to not find it funny. Finally lets talk about sex. The whole idea of the characters discovering the appeal of intimacy and the physical expression of love in a community that discourages such an activity, was certainly not a new subject. But the film puts a spin on this idea with character of Jennifer, who discovers that sex is not the solution to the emptiness she feels and finds a cure in the radical idea of love. With its overt imagery and story that contradicts the general ideas about sex and rebellion, the film comes across very much as a parody film, the question is: Is this a bad thing? Well no, not at all. Now when I'm talking about a parody , I'm not talking about Scary Movie or anything else those producers have poisoned the waters with, I'm thinking satire. Satire is really just holding a mirror up to ourselves and hoping that we see what it looks like. The film does this very well. By putting a spin on the concept of imagery (which usually tries to be more vague and subtle) it forces us to pay attention and gives us the opportunity to discuss ideas without fear of too much misinterpretation. By demonstrating the character change through something as noticeable as the colors changing we are once again forced to pay attention rather than something that is more subtle like a characters clothes changing, the room color or anything else that is commonly used and can be ignored. Finally by twisting the perception of sex and placing a mirror on the idea of rebellion among a younger generation, gives perspective to a topic that is often hard to discuss outside of a raunchy comedy. The overtness of the film always bothered me but looking back on it I finally understand that it is not meant to create many interpretations on different topics, but a distinct cohesive, worthwhile dialogue about a subject that needs to be discussed without being danced around.
                         
What do you think? Was it the intention of the filmmakers to do a parody, if you even think that it is a parody? Or do you think that the filmmakers thought they were being subtle? or if you think I'm am an idiot who knows absolutely nothing let me know.
 and Thanks for reading.             

I found something and I don't know how to handle it.

So for those of you who don't know the popular FPS franchise Call of Duty released their newest game yesterday, Call of Duty: Ghosts. Now I'm not here to argue for or against the game I want to talk about the merchandise. Specifically this:

                               
I'm not going to rant about the effects violent games have on children, the fact is the game is rated M as in Mature, meaning you cannot purchase the game until you are 17. Now Mega Bloks seems to be  advertising to children (mature people prefer Legos anyway) Now this isn't the first time Mega Bloks has released a game tie-in, they released a series for the game Halo 4. However this never bothered me, which brings about an interesting discussion about how the enemy in the game affects the acceptability of it but that's for another day. Also games do release merchandise such as action figures or weapons from the game that do appear to be toys and could be mistakes as an advertisement towards children. Which begs the question; Is this series meant to be collector items? First of all, unlike the Halo series the Call of Duty Mega Bloks are given their own display away from the rest of the Mega Bloks and they are given the Collector's Items tag. But while looking into this I realized something.
                                       

What makes these any different? The fact that they're green, because they don't look completely human? No, none of the above. I realized that is there was a little sticker on the packaging that said: Call of Duty, I might have been going after Mattel or something. In fact looking back, whether it was with my little green army men or just a stick disguised as a gun, I have been playing Call of Duty, Red Dead Redemption and Halo since long before they were released.  And no one has been sued for the sale of the little green army men(in the 80's violent toys were on the hot list, but video games squelched that pretty quickly.) So, where does this leave us? No where. It's the controversy that fuels the controversy, meaning if there was no issues related to video games and violence, if MegaBloks had released just army men without the Call of Duty tag I would not be talking about it.


So, what do you guys think? Should Treyarch (Call of Duty developers) be held responsible for allowing these toys to be distributed? Or are you just tired of hearing about this topic? 

Yeah, so here's the thing I have a ton of blogs that I never posted… Well now I am. The thing to note is that a lot of these were written a while back but never published so some of the topics are older, which isn't such a bad thing, I hope by reading these you think back to all of the good times and amazing movies that we watched. So that's my disclaimer, and explanation for all of the blogs pertaining to old events. Thanks for reading.                

The Lost Treasure

A few years ago I taught a children's art class, mostly craft type things and few fundamental things like landscapes and human faces. However, for the final project they wanted to do a stop-motion film, (They had seen the sets from one that I was working on.) Needless to say it was a challenge but they had fun and really enjoyed the final outcome. I have to say it was definitely the most fun project I've worked on despite the fact that it was a nightmare to find any useable footage. But that's what makes me love it so much, stop-motion is a very tedious form of animation, but the fact that children were involved as much as they were and enjoyed the process as much as they did makes me overlook all of the technical issues. I'm sure if I was using Premier or Final Cut I could have polished it more, but it wouldn't have made the film any better or anymore meaningful. In fact I don't think the kids would have cared if it looked like a Martin Scorsese film or a piece of lint rolling across the floor, it was the process of making it that they enjoyed. A lot of times that can become the case were we are so focused on what the final outcome is going to be and we lose sight of why it is we love movies and want to make them. Its amazing what children have to teach us "All Knowing" media students.              
  Hope you enjoy.

MitchellCordey

  

Mitchell Cordrey

 Hello, my I'm Mitchell Cordrey. I am a Freshman Animation Major at Huntington. I, like most, am awful at writing bios and thing of that sort on myself, despite the fact that I have a vast resource of information on the subject in question. Now that I have lowered your expectations I can begin. I enjoy spending my time writing, drawing and watching an obscene  amount of movies.

     Despite the fact that I am an Animation Major I tend to watch more live-action movies than animation, (Although I love me some cartoons.) My biggest influences have to be Directors Sergio Leone,  John Carpenter, Sam Raimi and John Ford. However my favorite Directors has to be Genndy Tartkovsky(Samurai Jack, Dexter's Lab, Sym-Bionic Titan, Hotel Trannsyvania and more.) Thanks for reading. 

Here is some of the things I have drawn.

This site didn't have enough Bill Murray, so I thought I would give it some.