Sherlock Holmes Acting Review

      The film Sherlock Holmes (2009) directed by Guy Ritchie ended up being a huge blockbuster hit. To most of the crowd Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law's performances playing Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson had nailed it.
       Robert Downey Jr. has been known to the acting industry since the age of five. It helped that his father was directing the first film he was in called Pound (1970). He continued to build his film reputation through the 1980s and 1990s. In 1992 he received an Academy Award for Best Actor for his performance in Chaplin (1992). The Downfall of his career occurred during 1996-2001 when he was involved with drug-related problems. From 2003 he began to regain his career and in May 2008 he achieved critical acclaim and worldwide box office success for his starring role in Iron Man (2008). For his performance in Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes, that earned him a Golden Globe for Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture. And he has outstanding popular commercial success with his roles as Sherlock Holmes and Tony Stark. So it's no wonder why Sherlock Holmes was a huge success.
       Opposite to film actor Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law was better known for his stage performances. He starred in many plays in London and was nominated for the Laurence Olivier Award for "Outstanding New Comer". He was also rewarded the Theatre World Award. Once he finished Broadway he moved onto the big screen. His popularity to film gained through the 1990s and early 2000s withfilms like: Enemy at the Gates (2001), Road to Perdition (2002), I Heart Huclabees (2004), The Aviator (2004). Law is also active in many charitable activities which helps further with his career fame.
       Rachel McAdams is a well-known actress to many audience for her role as Regina George in the comedy Mean Girls (2004). This brought her onto the short list of Hollywood's hottest young actresses. She also starred in the Notebook (2004), The Lucky Ones (2008), State of Play (2009), The Time Traveler's Wife (2009), and Sherlock Holmes (2009). Her performance in Sherlock Holmes hit her perfectly. She is certainly an audience favorite.
       These Three main stars chosen by director Guy Ritchie had helped make the film a huge success.

Sherlock Holmes Ideology Review

       The famous Sherlock Holmes is at it again! It is obvious that Holmes is the protagonist of this film. And it is no question that he does the things he does for the better. He's a detective solving crimes.
        Now in the movie John Watson announces that Lord Blackwood the antagonist of the movie is indeed fact dead. Although later in the film it is revealed that Blackwood has resurrected from the dead. Blackwood's main goal was to become more of a power figure to London. And by doing this he scared the crowd with his so called "black magic". Holmes and Watson's job is to figure out Blackwood's magic tricks and redeem themselves of the goofed up case.
        Some symbols to look at in this film are the black crows which represent death. The occult symbols would be the satanic worships like the sphinx which represents a "gateway to immeasurable power". The sphinx is made up of four parts being: a foot of a lion, and tail of an ox, wings of an eagle and the head of a man. In the film each part was representing as someone who would die. This played a huge part in the film that the audience doesn't immediately make that connection until it is later revealed.
        This film had many great cinematic outlooks and ideas to Sherlock Holmes.

Sherlock Holmes Dramatization Review

      Sherlock Holmes the movie is shot in many different places in London. In this particular set, it is interior. The set is realistic and lifelike, it is styled like a late 1800's Britain room. Since the set is mostly shot in London it definitely makes the audience feel more in depth with the characters and story.
   
       The apparent income level of the owners I would have to say is fairly good, they seem to have a good bit of money to spend on the set. In this specific scene it was a decently sized room. It was filled with things but if it was all removed it's be a bigger room. It's furnished very well, lots of book shelves, some chairs, tables, papers, a fireplace. It is sort of cluttered considering this is Sherlock's work room.

       The overall image this set projects is an old style back in the 1800's. I think they did a great job putting together the set.

       Sherlock's costume falls into the late 1800's. It was a pretty accurate reconstruction. The apparent income level of Sherlock is probably middle-class. He isn't very porr but he isn't rich either. His costume could emphasize his virility, but it doesn't show that he has much power. I would the costume is appropriate to the character's age.

       His costume in this scene is sort of loose and baggy as a symbol of his crazy and strange side who doesn't have much hygiene. The material coarse is sturdy and plain. The costume has overalls which most men wore back then. His shoes are just plain old fashioned shoes for men in the late 1800's.

      There isn't much to the colors in this scene. If I had to decide it would probably have warmer colors and it's bright with solid colors. Not much of his body is exposed in this scene. For Sherlock, it is just for utilitarian purposes. Sherlock has never really cared about his appearance. Sherlock although a slob stands proud and tall with his type of confident attitude.

      The overall impression that the costume creates is a plain and maybe boring look. He is just wearing a usual outfit most men would wear back then.

Pan's Labyrinth Dramatization review

       Pan's Labyrinth is a very interesting movie with such a unique set design of choices. This set in particular is of course exterior. Nature is symbolizing a creepy sort of mood. This is the scenic area where the sacrifice must go in order for the girl to be with her parents again.

       The set is stylized and deliberately distorted. It gives off a dark dungeony cave look. And believe it or not the set is on actual location mostly all in Spain. It was chosen probably for the better effect. The era is close to being post World War II.
     
       The income seemed to be fairly well, it all fit for the movie. Nothing seemed to be lacking about the set. It was decently large for some scenes. Guillermo del Toro said no to Hollywood producers even though they offered double the budget if the film was made in English. He didn't want a compromise in the storyline to suit the "market needs".

       The set is very dirty, dark, damp, creepy, cold. It is sparsely furnished, with lots of room. The rock in the center is the opening to the girl's freedom. As I said previously the overall image it provides is a dark, damp, creepy cave looking area, it looks very cold down there as well.

       While the set is a great thing to look at, it's also good to look at types of characters. Capitan Vidal is the antagonist of the movie. The era of the costume he is wearing falls into the World War II era. I'd say it's pretty accurate considering he's suppose to be a captain of an army. His costume certainly does emphasize his virility. It shows he has power and that he's in control which in this time period men had more authority than women.
 
       The income of Vidal is that he gets paid good money to be a captain in charge. The costume is appropriate to the character's age. He's a man probably in his 40's and I'd say that the costume fits his power. He has a form fitting outfit. The costume is sturdy and plain. I wouldn't classify it a delicate considering he must be prepared to fight in that if anything happens. With his outfit it contains an overcoat, sunglasses and  belt he wears to hold his gun. The shoes are typical military boots if they were shown in the image.

       The colors are very "cool", "subdued", with solids, there aren't any big patterns other than the button arrangement on his costume. The symbolic implications of the colors is that its dark and a miserable time. The costume is very concealed. He's a military man there isn't much exposure to his body.

       The function of the costume is for work purposes, it can be meant to impress but it is also utilitarian, he certainly can use it to his advantage to show that he's in charge. His posture is proud and tall and the overall impression that the costume creates is power, fear, ruling, and potential.

Sherlock Holmes: Writing Review

It’s a dark night as the police carriages race to a crime scene through the streets of London. This is the opening scene to the movie “Sherlock Holmes”. The way the opening is played out is great because it gives you that late 1800’s in London feel. There is an emphasis on talky scenes specifically with the character Sherlock Holmes. He is very moody and even sort of a lune. He seems to ramble on as he analyzes something and he purposely puts himself out there to lead people to believe that he is insane. Although he might be.

            One really cool symbol in this movie are black crows. Black crows are usually a sign of death which in this movie are the case. You know someone is going to die when the camera is on a black crow. Once the person is dead the black crow flies away. Even though this sort of thing is quite obvious in the movie I found it to be a nice touch to the movie.

Sherlock Holmes: Story Review

      To say the least Sherlock Holmes the movie is mimesis. The events definitely speak for themselves. There isn't one specific narrator throughout the movie meaning that there isn't one character telling the story. Obviously the story is shown mostly through Sherlock's view (played by Robert Downey Jr.). The only time you hear Sherlock's actual thoughts is a few fight scenes he has with some enemies. The way the fight demonstrates his fighting style in the slow motion takes to show the audience what kind of pain the enemy is going to receive and then seeing the fight in normal speed again is such a cool director choice to the movie.
      It is obvious you cannot go through the movie without understanding what kind of person Sherlock is and the relationship he has with his friend Dr. John Watson (played by Jude Law). And of course there must be some romantic love connection between Sherlock and the lovely Irene Adler (played by Rachel McAdams).
      The opening scene has a good attention grabber to the audience which gives the story a better impact. Holmes and Watson take action into stopping the satanist Lord Blackwood (played by Mark Strong), which he is sentenced to death. It is soon discovered that Blackwood has somehow resurrected from the dead. Sherlock must figure out Blackwood's mysterious tricks and stop him before it's too late.
      The other interesting thing this movie adds is how they reveal into the second Sherlock Holmes movie. Throughout the movie we notice Irene Adler's conflict between her mysterious boss that we never actually see. We only hear his voice and know he is a genius inventor. By the end of the movie, it reveals that this mysterious man was up to no good and Sherlock Holmes is on the case to solve the mystery.

Adaptation: writing and story review

       Adaptation the movie directed by Spike Jonze was based off of a book called The Orchid Thief written by Susan Orlean. What was quite interesting about this movie was that it seemed to be more of a comedy but going further and further into the story it gets a little funky and twisted almost becomes a thriller. 

       This movie was based off of true events meaning that all the main characters Charlie Kaufman, John Laroche, and Susan Orlean were actual people. Charlie Kaufman was the actual screenplay writer for Adaptation. The whole point of Kaufman's writing was to not hollywood-ize it. He wanted the movie to be genuine and not have all the typical things you would expect to see with hollywood like drugs, sex, crazy action murder. Throughout the movie Charlie Kaufman (played by Nicolas Cage) explained that he didn't want his character to succeed in the end, which by the end he ends up submitting his screenplay that is not typical hollywood writing style.

        This Film also has a lot of wordy dialogue or voice-overs. This movie is definitely Diegesis because at some points the Charlie is reliable and sometimes he is not telling the story. We hear a lot of Charlie Kaufman's inner monologues going on in his head. By doing this kind of wordy dialogue it helps the audience get a grasp on what is going on and understand Charlie's thoughts. 

        The question is who is telling the story? In the movie we are introduced to Charlie Kaufman as well as what looks to be his twin Donald Kaufman (also played by Nicolas Cage). The only two characters we hear the thoughts of is Charlie and Susan Orlean (played by Meryl Streep). But we can assume Kaufman is the narrator of the story although the audience wouldn't grasp the story as much without the bits of narration on The Orchid Thief without Susan Orlean. 

        Throughout the movie we go back and forth through flashbacks to Susan's experiences writing The Orchid Thief which gives the story more of an impact on what Susan and John's relationship developed into. However the movie gives the ending a twist to the unexpected sexual relationship between Susan and John. In some research, it was discovered that the real Susan Orlean was not comfortable with her character being exposed like that. She had said "It wasn't even the idea that the character had unsavory habits, it was more that I was uncomfortable with just having my name being in the movie". Another interesting thing to think about is who is Donald Kaufman? Researching, it was discovered that Donald Kaufman was a fictional character created for the film which can make us question if Donald was really Charlie's twin or just Charlie's inner thoughts shown physically or like his alter ego.

        This movie has quite a twisted ending that we question everything that we had already tried to understand about the movie. Pretty amazing right?