Blow Out

In our last class we watched Blow Out starring John Travolta. This was an early eighties film with super unique cinematography and a cool plot. It was almost a genre of its own because it had comedy, thrill and action. At the same time the ending was derranged enough to qualify as horror. I enjoyed the first half of the movie, but when the plot steered into John Lithgow's character I lost interest and found it quite cheesy. The cheesiness was capped off by an entirely too long slow motion run by Travolta to the not so much rescue of the girl. Overall, however, it was a cool movie that I learned a few things from.

The main observation that stood out to me was the distinctive difference between the movies that we've watched from the fifties and Blow Out, which was made in 1982. First, I noticed that the style of acting changed drastically in three decades. A more realistic, everyday style acting was apparent in Blow Out than in the overly-dramatic Sunset Boulevard or Singing in the Rain. In the older movies it was obvious to the audience that the actors were acting, but in more modern movies it seems that the skill in acting is in seeming believable. Second, and most obvious was the amount of sex used in the more modern age of film. In the fifties, the nudity from Blow Out would have offended audiences. Even if nudity was used in older movies, it would've had to have been used much more tastefully. It seemed like it was thrown into Blow Out for the shock or pure entertainment of it. The gist of it is that movies from the fifties seemed more like a play while more modern movies seem like an inside perspective on real life.

The main fascet from Blow Out that caught my eye was its cinematography. It was really unique and gave me a lot of ideas as the camera man for our group project. The movie began with a point of view shot and gave the audience a creepy feel. My favorite part of this shot was when the camera moved to the side a bit and showed the weird murderer guy in the mirror. I like how the movie shifted from this cheap horror film camera angle to a formal modern movie shot of Travolta in the studio. Second, I noticed that there were many extreme close ups with a depth of field in the background. A few examples include a close up of an owl's face with Travolta about 15 yards behind it and a frog with Travolta about 30 yards away. I find these focus shots really captivating because they capture two different stories at once. A camera man can completely hide the truth of something in the shot and then reveal it by changing focus and make the audience feel dumbfounded that it was there the whole time. Finally, the end of the movie was pretty cool because of the fireworks shot when he is holding the woman. It was cool because it was one of many juxtapositions in this film showing a celebration clashing with tragedy. I got a few good ideas from this film to use as a camera man so hopefully I can use them with just as high of quality.

I learn something new from every film we watch. I think that is really cool too because I have never seen watching movies as a learning experience until now. It's always been just for entertainment, but now I am more entertained by being impressed with cinematic techniques used in movies. It's like when you're watching a show and they allude to something that you've heard of. You feel a little more intriuged with the allusion because you actually understand it. This is how I feel about movies now and hopefully I can filter this interest into use with our film project.