Film Critique: National Geographic 2010 All Roads Film Festival

Critique

Film: Reel Injun (Directors: Neil Diamond, Catherine Bainbridge, and Jeremiah Hayes)

The documentary that I went to see at the National Geographic 2010 All Roads Film Festival was Neil Diamond’s Reel Injun.  Reel Injun is a documentary that informs its audience about how Native Americans were and are represented in Hollywood films.  Diamond, a Canadian First Nation Cree himself, takes his audience on a journey from 50 years back, looking at various western films that were made, and the images of Native Americans that were displayed to the country.  Included in the documentary were comedic happens to serious revolts, all pointed towards the notion of how wrongly portrayed the Native Americans (or Indians) were in Hollywood film all throughout history.

Before I saw the documentary, I honestly didn’t have much knowledge about Native Americans.  My knowledge about them came from all the stereotypes that came from film and stories told to me when I was little.  All I knew was that these people were:

• These people were here in America first.
• Everyone belonged to a different tribe, from war-like tribes to hunter-gatherers.
• They were forced on reservations.
• They wore clothes with feathers and different colors with facepaint-like decorations.
• They had a “war-scream.” (The ‘olololololololololololololo’ thing.)
• All the tribes had a stone-faced chief.
• Primitive.

What I expected to see was just that.  All the stereotypes that I learned, I expected to see and then be told that these were actually the wrong portrayals.  That’s what I expected.  I wanted to know who these people really were.  How do they live?  What do they look like?  Why were they portrayed like the stereotypes?  What is wrong about the stereotypes?  Who really are these people?  These were all questions I had walking into the theater to view the film.  Stereotypes, although they are wrong and improper, they hold a bit of truth to them.  It was because people saw a certain quality that rang true for a lot of one group of people that these images were born.  For example, there is a stereotype that “Asians are good at math.”  Although this is obviously false, it is true that Asian countries are superior in mathematics and other subjects than other countries.  Because their education is ahead, it’s no surprise that they are, in fact, a bit smarter than kids in countries such as the United States.  Thus, the stereotype that “Asians are good at math” or “Asians are smart” is born.  Not all Asians kids fit this images, of course, but it is not entirely false.  Therefore, I wanted to see how the other Native Americans are like, not the stereotypical ones.

Reel Injun focuses its attention on the Native Americans that lie under the surface painted by images created by Hollywood.  Diamond takes us on a journey across the North American continent from Canada to Hollywood, stopping at various landmarks on the way.  He visits the Black Hills of South Dakota and the deserts of Monumental Valley, looking over the same scenery that John Wayne did in his famous western films.  Diamond also interviews many fellow Native Americans, such as comedian Charlie Hill, and even filmmaker Clint Eastwood.  In his “rez car”, a broken down car that all Native Americans supposedly drive (according to stereotypes), Diamond doesn’t just focus on Hollywood, but also takes us through actual historical events that shaped the images of Native Americans.  The documentary is a pleasure to not just the eye and the ear, but also the mind as well.

There were effects used throughout the film, but not a lot.  There were never any unnecessary visual and audio effects that were used.  Sound effects were only used when necessary, such as a zing when something funny was said (I think), and there weren’t much visual special effects.  Interviewees were sometimes shown in grayscale, but nothing major and special.  There of course were effects used in the classical films that were shown, but it was never used during the interviews.  Aside from the classic films that were at times grainy and worn out (as they should be), the rest of the images were sharp and of high definition.  The filming of the documentary itself composed of various shots.  Most were close-up of faces of interviewees, but there were sometimes middle, long, and wide, establishing shots.  Chiefs and subjects were sometimes shot from a low angle, providing a powerful image and a feeling that “this person/object is important.”

The interviews themselves were fun to listen to.  The things they said all rang with passion for this subject.  Some people, such as poets, were very articulate and familiar with the portrayals, and others, such as comedians, made us laugh with their sarcastic comments.  What I learned through these interviews is that the Native Americans never were these stereotypical people that I expected them to be.  They look exactly like ordinary people, working ordinary jobs and living ordinary lives.  It is true that there were tribal Indians in the past, but once civilization became the norm and cities began to dominate the land, they adapted to become normal people.  They did still have traditional festivals, but they were like all the rest of us.  Those who weren’t regular were similar to hippies, which still broke the stereotypes that formed in the past.  I did expect the film to break the stereotypes that I had, but I didn’t expect to this extent.

The parts that I liked most were the interviews.  The opinions that were expressed really gave me and idea of the “real Injun.”  Comedians made me laugh, and poets made me think.  These words spoken in the interviews really showed how wrongly Hollywood was portraying these people.  They were no longer primitive beings, but intellectual, normal humans able to communicate and mingle with the rest of us.  They are able to melt into society, and be modernized themselves, but at the same time remain traditional with their festivals and rituals.  Everyone knows their own history, and hold loyal to it, which is what I come to respect.  These people, although they were ridiculed in films and killed for no reason, they held their head high and endured the pain.  Diamond showed a scene in a movie where the Indian was speaking some native language to an American, but what he was really saying were insults to the man.  Of course the American didn’t know what in the world the Indian was saying, so he never realized how insulted he was.  In this way, the Native Americans kept their head up, enduring the pain in their own way, and kept surviving despite all the discrimination that was pointed towards them.

There were several unfortunate aspects of the documentary, but they all share a similar line.  What I wished for the film was: if the film was longer, there could have been so much more stuff. The film really could have been longer.  I wished it covered more movies, more countries, and more interviews.  I wanted to see more important landmarks and I wanted to learn more about the real Native American.  Of course money was an issue and time was also another, but that was the only unfortunate aspect of this documentary that I can think of.  I would definitely recommend this documentary to my friends and family.  They should, and in fact everyone should, take the time to watch this documentary and discover who and what just is the “real Injun.”

Photo Critique: Fotoweek DC

Critique

Exhibition – Simply Beautiful: Photographs from National Geographic

“Selected from National Geographic’s archive, these photographs are based off the new National Geographic book, Simply Beautiful Photographs and make us ponder what creates beauty in a photograph.  Often one of these elements, such as light or palette, will stand out, adding a distinctive note.  How photographers compose and image can open our eyes to a multitude of beauties, things we could not have seen before the advent of a frozen moment in time.  Photographs give us visual proof that the world is grander than we imagined, that there is beauty, often overlooked, in nearly everything.”

That was the description of the exhibit on the Fotoweek DC website.  And as the description described, the photographs that I saw at the exhibit were: simply beautiful.  All the photos in the exhibit showed a sense of beauty.  In every photograph, whether it be artificial or natural, there was a simplicity to it.  Each picture was very simple in every way, and yet was able to fully show its potential in delivering a beautiful photograph.  Just like the title, they were “simply beautiful” in all its meanings.

The natural pictures (meaning the pictures of nature and living beings) were one “type” of picture.  They involved various colors and textures, and everything was “in sync.”  Even if a human being was in a picture of a forest, he looked completely natural in that environment.  Some nature photos were absolutely stunning.  A picture of a mountain and its reflection seemed as if there were two worlds due to such clarity in the reflection.  The framing of the picture had the reflection dominating more of the photograph, and it in fact made me wonder if the world was turned upside down, meaning the reflection’s clarity made me doubt that the world above the water was really real.

Another nature picture was of a little boy bending down from a rock to drink water from a river.  This photo particularly caught my attention for its serenity despite all the elements in the picture.  There were leafs everywhere (since it was in an untamed forest) and plants and nature dominated the picture.  Yet the boy seemed completely natural in that environment, and the green of the forest subdued the boy’s bright orange skin.  Although nature dominated the picture, the boy was in the center, giving him full attention while complementing it with the life of nature.  All the colors, textures, elements were in sync with each other to present a beautiful, yet strangely natural picture.

There was also another nature photograph of light coming through fog of a forest’s aerial view.  It may not have been aerial, but you were able to see from the top of the trees in the forest.  Either way, this picture was beautiful because of how it simply looked.  The light that escaped through the fog illuminated the tops of the trees, and casted shadows onto the fog of that tree’s color.  Meaning, the red tree casted a red shadow onto the fog because of the bright, early-morning sunlight.  Honestly, it seemed almost unreal because it looked like a painting of nature.  From a glance, it was as if God had taken the colors of the trees with his hand, and smeared it all in one direction onto the fog.  The appreciation of beauty that comes from how unnatural nature can be can be seen clearly in the photograph.

Then there was the artificial photographs.  These involved man-made buildings and architecture, but they did not lose in terms of beauty when it was compared to its natural counterparts.  One picture had a night scene of New York City engulfed in fog.  The scene was “painted” light purple, and although the fog was taking over the city, the skyscrapers stood tall and eerily lit up the world with its lights.  It gave off a strange and wonderful fantastical feeling.  It showed fantasy mixed in with mystery, and your mind wanders into its streets wondering what would happen in this situation when you stare at this picture.

Another artificial photograph was of a underground canal with holes in the roof.  Through these holes, light from the outside came beaming through, illuminating the canal.  I really liked this picture because of one thing: it gave form to something that we normally cannot see.  Here in this picture, we can see light take form.  We can look at this picture and point out “that is light.”  In normal life, we can just point randomly and say that “there is light here,” but we can never in this way see it take a certain form.  In the picture, we can see it actually take form as a beam that enters the canal, and lights up the world around it.  And yet the contrast of darkness of the underground and brightness of the light makes the beam of light completely noticeable.

There were other photos that incorporated both natural and artificial elements.  One photo had a monkey running across the field of grass in front of a Mayan pyramid.  The ruins in the photo have completely become a part of nature, despite being artificially made.  The nature elements of the photo — the monkey, the trees, the vines — all dance around the ruins without even a bit of uncertainty.  Nature is acting natural, and it shows us accepting an artificial building as part of its own.  It’s a scene of two completely opposites coming to terms with each other to create one coherent picture.

Another that incorporated both was a picture of the milky way over the maoi Easter Island head sculptures.  All the stars in the universe seems to have gathered to take this one picture, and the night sky is a spectacle that cannot be easily replicated.  The milky way features different colors and the stars are of different sizes, adding variation that rids boredom.  However, the maoi are simply looking out in a different direction, as if to not care.  The light cast on the sculptures puts emphasis on the white parts that represent their eyes, and these eye are looking out in a different direction, as if telling the audience that this scenery is nothing new to them.  Here, in this photo, the natural and artificial become one, with each being used to one another’s existence.  The angle and framing of the photo also makes it look as if the sky and ground has merged together, bringing more togetherness to the heads and the starry night.  Ironically, removing these statues would seem to make the photo even more unnatural.

The photography in the exhibition showcased beauty when, at least to me, when it is most beautiful.  It uses simplicity to emphasize how beauty can be found in basically anything that we see if we choose to see it.  Each photo is a still picture, and yet it seems that the objects in the picture could at any moment start moving as if there was no one watching.  Yet at the same time, nature seems to be posing for the camera.  Water seems to stop its movement to allow the perfect reflection photo to take place.  It’s as if nature is telling us to realize that there is something beautiful, so go look for it, because we will easily find it even in the simplest things.  This gallery shows us how far we can go with photography, and how much beauty we can capture within a single frame.  The photos in this gallery emphasize how anything can not only be beautiful, but also anything can be simply beautiful.

Movie Poster

Movie: THE DARK KNIGHT

Poster:

 

The Dark Knight (2008)

This particular movie poster is for the movie The Dark Knight, the major blockbuster released in 2008.  The movie itself was amazing, and I think that this poster also is quite effective.  The poster is effective and sells the movie well.  In fact, I plan to watch the movie again after writing this post because this poster is making me want to do so.

The poster is effective because it instills fear into the viewer.  If not fear, then it gives off a feeling of uneasiness.  There are many symbols and semiotics that create this uneasiness and fear in the viewers’ mind.  First off, to see a hero’s face in this state makes the viewer of the poster uneasy with the blood, the cards, the smile, and the knife.  The cards themselves show that the Joker is well involved with the plot, along with all the quotes written on Batman.  The cards create the shape of our hero, and the chaotic way it is taped together could represent the chaotic mind of the villain.  The knife, however, gives off the most fear, because the knife itself has blood on it.  We can infer from this that the blood-smile and the blood-stains were made by the knife, and the fact that it is on Batman means that Batman himself may be the main target.  There are also words all over Batman, most likely written by Joker (and most likely his thoughts).  These lines also epitomizes the twisted mind of the Joker, and how he has a plan to kill Batman.  The “ha ha…” that make up the Batman symbol illustrates how the Joker is mocking Batman and taking what he does as, well, a joke.

The elements and principles of design involved in this poster also helps to make it effective as well.  The lines and borders of the joker playing cards create the form of Batman.  This could represent an important idea that is revealed in the movie (although this is sort of a spoiler, but this post isn’t a review anyway), which is the idea that “Batman and Joker complete each other.”  Joker explains this during the movie, and how Batman “completes” the Joker.  Without Batman, Joker would be doing nothing with any worth, and he needs Batman for him to have any worth.  At the same time, he says how Batman is Batman because he is the Joker.  The villain completes the hero, and vice versa, and can be seen in this poster.  This adds to the principle of unity, because all the objects in the poster come together to create one entire idea.  Every object has its meaning and plays an important part in the overall theme and picture.  Aside from lines and form, there is also the emphasis of the color red.  The poster throughout has a dark tone, with the dark Batman and the desaturated colors of the playing cards.  These colors are coherent with the title: The DARK Knight.  However, the color red stands out boldly.  The red represents blood, but it draws attention because of its boldness compared to the rest of the poster.  It emphasizes the amount of blood shed that will be involved in the movie, and the knife helps to make the viewer understand that the main weapon will be this knife.

I wanted to turn the attention back to the phrases, and their relation to the picture itself.  The juxtaposition of the knife and the phrase “lets put a smile on that face” means that the Joker will most likely use that knife to carve a smile on the victim’s face (as he actually does in the film).  The phrase “why so serious?” is also written near the smile made from blood on Batman, also emphasizes that action.  He is going to carve the smile on his victim’s face because he doesn’t know why they are so serious.

Overall, I think this poster is a great poster.  It sells the movie well, and I think that part of its selling point is the conflict between the Joker and Batman.  It’s selling that it won’t center around Batman fully, but it will also focus on the Joker and his “plan” against Batman.  The poster is surrounded with mystery, fear, and uneasiness that makes viewers want to know more, which is what the artist wanted when he/she created this poster.

Now that I’m done, I will excuse myself because I am now going to go watch this movie.

Lumiere

This is our Lumiere Film using a digital camera (by Brandon and Dio):

The camera is a bit shaky because of wind and a faulty tripod.

CRITIQUE

On our own film:

At first, we were planning to film people going in and out of the metro train, but then we learned that it was against the law to do so.  Therefore, we took the next best thing, which was filming people coming in and out of the station itself on the escalators in front of the Tenleytown station.  What we were planning to shoot was people coming in and out at the same time.  We soon figured out after we set up the camera that it was not going to be as easy to fully capture people going in and out simultaneously.  We decided to choose one, and at first we were leaning towards shooting people going into the metro, seeing that we could calculate when they were going down the escalators by studying the AU shuttle bus.  But we ended up actually filming people coming up the escalators, since the train seemed to have arrived first before the shuttle bus did.  It was raining, and so we didn’t want to keep the camera out in the wet weather too long, too.

Despite some flaws, we (at least I was) were happy with our film’s overall look.  I thought we were able to capture a similar scene to the people coming out of the factory in the original Lumiere film.  It also helped me to realize how some people could find “normal life” to be entertaining that they can watch it for a long time.  There certainly were some interesting stuff that went on in the film when we looked at the video later to cut it.  I just wish that would could have had a steadier tripod so that our film wouldn’t give off that “this-is-being-filmed” feeling that takes the audience out of the realism of the film.  Other than that, I thought it was a good film, and I particularly liked the bad weather, because that gives a different look to people than when they live their life during a sunny, good day.

To show the class what we filmed was an interesting experience.  Looking at all the films made me realize both how long and short a full minute was.  In terms of how the class reacted to our film, in all honesty, I did in fact like how they were laughing at some parts and enjoyed our film.  They may not have liked our title or framing, but I think we did a good job overall.

Someone Else’s Lumiere:

I chose Alex and Sarah’s Lumiere film with the fountain.  I liked their film a lot, because of the unexpected appearance of the squirrel in the middle.  It had a different number of moods also.  At first, we see peace and serenity from looking at the water continuously pouring down the rocks.  It’s a peaceful mood that makes the audience feel more relaxed.  But then, all of a sudden, there’s energy when the squirrel comes and runs up on the rocks.  The sudden movement and appearance of the squirrel makes it almost seem fake, but that’s what makes these Lumiere films interesting.  It made me realize that something so ordinary such as a squirrel on top of a rock can seem so interesting when viewing a bigger scene for a certain amount of time.

I think the reason they were able to capture such energetic motion during a time of peace was through the fixed camera.  We saw some of the films being shaky (even ours), and I can see a big difference of impact between a fixed camera and a shaky camera.  The colors also helped, as the squirrel’s color matched the colors of the rocks, making its appearance more dramatic and something we couldn’t really see until it poked its head out from behind the fountain.  There was a single aspect that could use improvement, however, which was the length of the film.  Although the manifesto states that it is a maximum of one minute and therefore doesn’t need to go the full minute, I believe that the film may have been more interesting if they used the minute to its full advantage.  Like I said before, I was able to feel how long one minute really is while doing this project.  Comparing 30 seconds to a minute may not seem like a big difference in our everyday life, but I realized how short 30 seconds can be after watching these films.  If they used the whole minute, I think that their film could have been greatly improved, and there would be more to talk about after the film finished.

Lumiere Manifesto Critique

Critique

I do agree with the Lumiere Manifesto in some aspects, but disagree with some as well.  I do agree with the statement that “film lacking context and artistic modification in any way beyond perspective, technology, and equipment is essential in an era of unrestrained, theatrical Internet TV.”  It is true that modern television and film uses a great deal of editing and technology, and it is important to sometimes have a simple film such as a Lumiere video that uses natural footage to show natural life.  Nonfiction can bring us back to appreciate reality in a world where fiction dominates Hollywood.  However, I disagree when the manifesto explains that Lumiere films bring a “collective” consciousness and a “universal” view on existence.  I don’t believe that any style of film can present itself in a way that forces all of us to think the same way.  No matter how hard a director tries to simplify a piece of video, there will always be different interpretations depending on each person.  There is no universal view or collective consciousness.  It is basically impossible when there is a countless number of words to serve as adjectives, and there is an even greater amount of eyes that view the same film in different ways.

I do agree that it is more meaningful to a viewer when he or she must think about a certain film, solving his own mystery rather than having it directly told to him, especially when nowadays everything is served to us on a silver platter.  I don’t agree when it goes on to say that it is only truly meaningful when it is in this form, because to those who cannot understand in the short 60-second span, they may need assistance to find true meaning.  Not all persons are leaders.  Some are followers, and need some assistance in directions before they find their own way.

As I read on with the manifesto with mixed feelings, I became confused when it stated that “the value of the moving pictures are in their potential for a multitude of interpretations.”  It’s contradicting itself from its earlier statement that Lumiere films aim to produce a “collective” consciousness and a “universal” view.  A multitude of interpretations may cause a rejection of the world that they share, which goes directly against their desire for a collective acceptance.  A personal relationship between the viewer and the video through private screenings have the risk of breaking a collective understanding and a cohesion between viewers.  A general viewing would have a better chance at a more cohesive interpretation of the film.

Lumiere pictures requiring no zoom, effects, or edits is also something that I don’t necessarily agree with.  There are some things that can be achieved in a positive way through zooms or pans.  It can allow viewers to focus on aspects that they can’t really see.  It can also allow for the camera to act similarly to the eyes of a human being, focusing on certain objects just like a human being would.  And even without these effects, a simple camera angle can change the interpretation of the film completely, and if Lumiere films require a simple clip of absolutely nothing to allow the viewer to interpret the movie for himself, then there should also be a requirement for the camera to be parallel to the horizon in order to reduce the risk of changing beliefs through camera angles.

Is it possible for a film to truly be “realistic”?

I believe that it is possible for a film to be realistic.  But first, we must define what “realistic” really means.  According to dictionaries both online and text, realistic means “interested in, concerned with, or based on what is real or practical.”  In this sense, it is possible for any movie to potential be “realistic.”  The movie 2012 can be considered realistic by the fact that it is based on and interested in the end of the world by 2012, which many believe to be practical if they believe in the Mayan calendar.

The online article we were given to read constantly attacked the murder films of today, but although they are not the majority of the murder crimes that occur in real life, they may certainly be real enough by what they are based on.  These movies, although dramatic, are based on those rare occurrences of killing-spree murders, and are very realistic in what various killings happen.  Just because they are made more than normal heart-attack-death movies, doesn’t make them less realistic than they may be.  The author of the article should know the rule of “quality vs. quantity” before bashing movies genres that made in mass numbers.  The article itself seems to be tilted towards a certain viewpoint the way the author goes on to attack even books, calling dialogues and quotes “made up” and “fake” when he hasn’t even been at the interview in person.  Before he goes on to attack directors and other authors, he should look up the definition of “realistic” and then determine whether movies nowadays are realistic or not.  I do give it to him when he says Independence Day is not realistic, but not everything made in Hollywood is phony.  Some are based off of real events, and just because they are made more in numbers, does not take away any points off of realism.

Therefore, I believe that films have the possibility to be realistic.  If it successfully recreates reality based off something practical, then it can be considered realistic.  It may certainly not be real, but it can be realistic.  Even reality itself sometimes does not seem real.  We see some extraordinary things everyday, and even filming Lumiere films, where we attempt to capture life as it is, we occasionally come across a rare instance of something different and out of the ordinary.  And yet it is real.  It is not fake, it is real.  And if, for example, a movie is made based on that extraordinary experience, then that movie is indeed realistic.  It may not be real to many who cannot believe something like the events in the movie actually happens in reality.  But it is based off of that extraordinary situation, and it should be considered realistic.  If pictures can be realistic, why can’t moving ones be?

Next time we see a movie that we can’t help but exclaim, “That can’t happen in real life!” we should think twice and try to imagine a real life example of it.  Many movies are inspired off of actual experiences.  That movie we thought was impossible may actually be more realistic than we thought.  Who knows?  Government secrets seem to be at an all-time high these days, and in today’s society where, literally, anything is possible through technology, it may actually be harder for something to be unrealistic rather than the other way around.

Photo Manipulation Critique

Critique

After reading the two articles, I certainly have more intense views on photo manipulation in the media.  I already knew that there was photo manipulation in magazines and almost every other form of media today, but I didn’t know that it existed in history.  It was interesting to look at the Abraham Lincoln picture and the Kent State University picture in the “Photo Tampering Throughout History” article.  I didn’t know photographs were being manipulated by world leaders to show that they no longer have connections with certain people.

There certainly is a problem with photo manipulation in media.  It could be used to sell images that are not necessary to young adults, outlined in “The Illusionists” article, but it can also hurt people’s images as well.  The photo of Sarah Palin holding a gun half-naked can definitely hurt Palin’s image and her popularity.  Invoking emotions of viewers with photographs are fine, but I don’t think it’s the right thing to do manipulate photos to invoke a certain emotion.  It seems like manipulating not just images, but also people’s emotions.  There is also a problem of an identity loss.  Photoshopping a person’s head on a body that isn’t his/her own forces him to lose his identity.  That picture is no loner a picture of that person, but a whole new individual; someone who doesn’t even exist.

What we can do to possibly combat this problem is to hire more people to check these photos that appear in magazines.  We need more people like Professor Hany Farid, who decides whether photos are fake or not.  The more people we have in this industry, the more “innocent” photos get, and it also allows for the technology to tell fakes and reals apart to advance and be up-to-date with the advances of photoshopping.

However, I highly doubt that we can do anything more to help this problem.  Airbrushing and manipulation has been in the works since the 1800s, and nothing has changes two centuries later.  We are still doing the same altering of images, and even further now with computer generated images enhancing hairs in shampoo commercials and skin on babies.  Those who spend their lives altering images will always find a way to get around the experts who spot the mistakes.  They will learn, and they will improve with photo manipulation as technology advances.  There is also the “disclaimer” method, where in a small caption, they actually say that the photo is digitally altered, except it’s so small that no one notices.

But most of all, we viewers ourselves are getting so used to digitally altered images that we can’t tell apart the real and fake unless it is so drastic.  Our eyes are now so used to the idealistic and fake hair in the shampoo commercials, that even if we see them on the television, we don’t see anything wrong with it.  Perhaps, even if technology advances enough that we can easily tell apart fake images and real ones, our eyes will be too manipulated already that we will not notice anything anymore, no matter how fake.  By then maybe the news agency won’t even care about “faith”, because our brains will be also be manipulated so that we will basically anything.

Photo Essay and Critique

Photo Essay:

The story is about my trip to and from the Apple store in Bethesda for some cords and cases that I needed to buy for my iPhone.

 

Photo #1

I began my trip from Anderson Hall, where the AU shuttle bus always stops.  This is a photograph of the bicycles chained to fences in front of the clothes donation box.  It is next to the shuttle stop, under the dorm hall building.

Photo #2

This is the photo of the shuttle stop itself.  It took a while for the bus to get here, and an even longer time for it to leave the stop.

Photo #3

I finally got to the Apple store after a couple hours.  Choosing the right case and cord out of so many choices took a really, really long time.

Photo #4

When I left the store, it was already dark.  It really was a nightmare to get to the store and choose a product.

Photo #5

Walking through some of the streets in Bethesda to the metro station was a bit scary.  There are scenes like this, where everything around a door is dark, except for one lone light.

Photo #6

Eventually, I found myself back to the Tenleytown metro station.

Photo #7

Finally, tired and exhausted, I walk back down the stairs to my terrace-level dorm room.

Critique:

Photo #1:

I like the Photo #1 because I was able to frame the bicycles and donation box between the two brick columns that hold up the building.  I was able to frame it so that the emphasis of color goes to the color of the bicycles and the yellow of the box in between.  What I don’t like is how I wasn’t able to fully center the image.  It seems to be weighing a little more to the right, and it, in a way, throws off the balance of the picture.

Photo #2:

I like how I was able to capture the different colors of the two posters and the blue newspaper holder.  Each has a different, vibrant color of its own, and I was even able to frame the red poster with the butterfly within the frame of the shuttle stop.  I don’t like how it is on an angle, though.  Looking back at it now, I wish I had taken it from a more straight-forward angle so that I could see the rectangle of the frame better.  Then again, I wouldn’t be able to see the light blue of the poster if I took it that way.  I do wish, however, that I took the picture earlier in the day, when the colors would be more vibrant and bright.

Photo #3:

Again, I like the different colors of all the cases and boxes that were on display at the Apple store, and I especially like how the Apple employee in the back, with his bright blue shirt, fills that empty space.  What I dislike is the angle.  I wanted to take it (like Photo #2) on a more straight-forward angle, but this time the limited space in the store prohibited me to do so.  If i had taken the picture like that, other objects would be in the way, and cropping the picture wouldn’t make it any better.

Photo #4:

I enjoy looking at this picture because of the different colors of the lights from the stores in the background.  And even though the lights are bright, you are still able to see the “Elm Street” sign in the foreground.  I still wish that there were more colors other than white in the picture, and I wanted to fill that empty sky at the top, or add something a little bigger on the left side of the picture, since the two poles dominated the right side.  The description “it was a nightmare” was supposed to be a play on “A Nightmare on Elm Street”, by the way.  I did like that.  I thought that was quite clever.

Photo #5:

With Photo #5, I was able to capture the eerie side of the night life with the single light source over the door, but the picture isn’t as vibrantly colored as the other pictures.  I wanted more than the color green in the photo, and I also don’t really like the reflection of the light in the wall next to it.  It makes it seem like there are two light sources in the picture.  I do feel like I was able to recreate Eggleston’s style well in the picture, however.

Photo #6:

I like this photograph for its subtle framing of the “Tenleytown-AU” sign in the background.  The column that shows all the stops of the train, the ceiling (which is really the underside of the floor of the second floor), and the platform helps to frame the sign well, I think.  What I don’t like is how the colors are a bit dry and washed-up, and not as colorful.  The subway is dark, and when I tried using flash, the background was pitch black.  Despite the problems taking the picture, I like how there is a connection throughout the entire photo, from the red dots on the column matching the red lights on the platform, to the words “Tenleytown-AU” matching the words on the column.

Photo #7:

Photo #7 adds emphasis on the red on the pipes, but frames the small blue sign in the middle so that you can focus on that as well.  I think this picture also captures the style of Eggleston better than some of my other photos, because the white background also emphasizes the bright colors of the red and blue.  I just don’t like how it seems all “crunched” into the picture, since Eggleston’s photos are more large-scale.  Even his picture of the red ceiling looks like it has more room, but because I took it from the stairs in my dorm hall, I didn’t have as much space as I usually do to take a picture.  It ended up being a bit tight-fitted and too close-up.

On Emulating Eggleston:

I found emulating Eggleston’s style of photography to be quite difficult.  It was harder than I thought it would be.  His use of color, framing, and balance throughout the picture was something that I found to be a lot more difficult that I expected.  I definitely wasn’t difficult to take the picture, but it wasn’t easy to have it match up to Eggleston’s style.  My digital camera is obviously different from his, which makes our pictures come out differently, but the framing and balance was still hard to emulate in his style, even with modern technology.

On Improvement:

Since Eggleston is known for being able to see the complexity and beauty in the ordinary world around him, I refrained from using Photoshop to enhance my pictures.  I wanted to capture them in their regular image and states, rather than changing their colors artificially.  Some improvements that I could make are to better capture those vibrant colors.  A lot of those colors seems to get washed up and dry when I take them on my camera, so perhaps I can take them from a different angle, or use different settings on my camera.  That I can even be able to better balance my pictures, or change the framing of the object.  I may even be able to add some fill to open space.

Newfound Appreciation?

Although I found it a lot more difficult to take good pictures than I expected, it didn’t necessarily make me appreciate artists more.  I knew professional photographers before, and some of my friends are into photography, so I already knew how difficult it was to take pictures.  I already had a high appreciation for photographers, and this never really raised the bar to a higher level.  I didn’t surprise me, either, that it was harder to take than I had expected, and it certainly didn’t take me by surprise that some of my pictures were horrible.  It’s not like I don’t appreciate these artists and photographers, but there really isn’t any new appreciation from this.

Graphic Advertisement Critique

Advertisement for Sony Headphones

Critique:

This particular magazine advertisement was for new Sony headphones that claimed to deliver great, studio-quality sounds.  The first thing that comes to my attention is the Moai (the “Easter Island Head”) in the foreground with the Sony headphones on.  It catches my attention first because it’s in the front of the picture, and is also drawn the largest out of the rest of the Moai.  In addition, the Moai that Sony wants the viewer to focus on also is the only head that has a smile on its face, therefore standing out even more and grabbing the attention.  Because of that smile, it gives a more lightened mood to it, and a feeling of a peaceful yet entertaining night (to the head with the headphones).

The ad uses different elements and principles of design to help project its message.  It uses the elements of point and gestalt in order group the heads through similarity and proximity.  It illustrates the Moai in a realistic form, with realistic scenery and also using texture to show the roughness of the rocks that the heads are made out of.  In terms of principles, there is a balance between the four heads, although unequal sizes, and that balance creates a certain unity throughout the overall picture.  There is also certainly a lot of emphasis on the foremost head, with the headphones and smile and all the things I listed earlier that grab the viewer’s attention.  The quite yet happy mood, as explained before, is created by the lack of movement in the facial expressions of the heads.  It is at night, with no living creates and just four stone carvings of heads staring somewhere outside the borders of the drawing.  It creates a very peaceful mood, yet the smile makes the one Moai in front have that sense of happiness and a sense of being entertained without disturbing the peace around it.

I think that there are a couple different messages that this work shows.  One is the effect of the headphone itself (as said before), and its ability to deliver great-quality sounds without disturbing the peace around the listener.  The other is the satisfaction that one can get from using headphones of Sony’s quality.  The semiotics that I can see is the smile on the one Moai’s face using the headphones versus the lack of expression on the others that don’t use the headphones.  By putting the phrases next to the head – the words reading “Your head will thank you for it” – the advertisement connects the idea of “thanking” with “smile” by using the headphones.  It encodes within the ad that wearing the headphones will make one happy and thankful that he/she chose Sony.

Although it may not be the best ad out there, I believe it does a good enough job in communicating the positives of the headphones in such a simple way.  To someone who uses headphones to listen to music and sounds often, like me, it would definitely have a positive effect, because the serenity and happiness that comes out of the art shown in the ad makes the headphones quite attractive.  Even if it may not matter so much to some that it would not disturb the people around them, the fact that these headphones deliver studio-like quality makes it attractive, enough to make them think that if they buy the product, then they might just do what the ad predicts and thank themselves for buying Sony’s product.

Principles and Elements of the Hirshhorn Museum

ELEMENTS OF DESIGN

"Last Conversation Piece" by Juan Muñoz

Point:

When we look at this sculpture by Juan Muñoz, our eyes are forced to look at the piece as a whole, and not as three separate pieces.  Although each point is placed far enough to be standalone pieces, the four concepts of Gestalt theory (closure, continuity, similarity, proximity) forces us to seek some kind of relationship within the work as a whole.  Our eyes are then able to ‘connect the dots,’ and see that there is a full scene of a story that cannot be seen when looking at each piece separately.

"Tropes de Teens" by Stuart Davis

Line:

Stuart Davis uses lines of various colors and sizes to create a unique work of art.  Painting random lines will mean little, but when artistically constructed with different colors at different angles and curves, they start to form shapes that represent what we can realize, such as faces and hands and bodies.  This painting not only has visual functions, but also has verbal functions, being able to communicate different emotions by the look on the faces in the background.

"The Doubter" by Yves Tanguy

Form:

This painting is a great example of how there can be different forms of art.  It is a great example of abstract art, as we cannot tell exactly what geometric or organic shapes are drawn in this painting.  The abstract colors and shapes helps to create this three-dimensional surrealistic world.  It creates, like most abstract art, an unnatural, yet strangely realistic world full of unique shapes and colors.

"Horse and Rider" by Marino Marini

Movement:

This sculpture of a rider and his horse is a great presentation of the element of movement.  We can see the head of the horse tilted back with its legs straightened, forcing the rider to lean back and keep his balance.  The horse itself is an animal that represents grace, speed, motion, and power.  One can imagine this scene of the rider struggling to get control of his horse gone lose.

"White Relief over Dark Blue" by Ellsworth Kelly

Color:

This piece is simple, yet presents a great example of the element of color.  Although the color blue presents a cool and spiritual feeling, it can also mean sadness and depression.  To that, the bright white, as stated by the title, relieves the viewer of the sadness by adding to the piece more energy and lifting up the overall mood of the work of art.  It’s just enough relief that it does not overwhelm the blue, but it cancels out its emotional effect, making it a viewable piece.

"Wall Drawing #1113: On a wall, a triangle within a rectangle, each with broken bands of color" by Sol LeWitt

Pattern:

This wall drawing is made from the repetition of rectangular shapes.  The pattern, full of different colors, come together to create a triangle within a rectangle, as the title says.  Borders create definition, and even though the colors aren’t in a pattern, the borders the cells come to create allow us to see clearly what the overall shape is.  Patterns, in this way, are able to maintain order in a world of chaos.  No matter how disorganized the color pattern is, we can still see the overall picture: a triangle within a rectangle.

"Landscape with Poodle" by Jean DuBuffet

Texture:

Texture, by definition, is the quality of an object which we sense through touch.  But it doesn’t always have to be physical.  The creation of the illusion of texture is also important, and this piece creates that illusion well.  The patterns, shapes, and styles that exist throughout the painting create a busy feeling, and also a sense that the surface is really rough and hard.  Similar to a rocky road, the areas around the poodle create illusion of a rough texture, even though it is a two-dimensional picture.

PRINCIPLES OF DESIGN

"Column of Peace" by Antoine Pevsner

Balance:

This sculpture is a perfect example of symmetrical, formal balance.  If we draw a central line down the middle, we can see that both sides are perfectly equal.  There is equal weight on both sides, and we see visual equilibrium that indeed gives us a feeling of peace inside.

"Woman with Baby Carriage" by Pablo Picasso

Proportion:

Proportion is the relationship between objects of a whole, and Picasso’s sculpture is a great model that shows proportion.  Although the actual sculpture is smaller than a regular human being, the way it is proportionally made with the baby carriage allows to know that it is an actual woman.  Because of its relation to the carriage and the piece as a whole, we can easily visualize a real life counterpart of a woman and a baby carriage.

"Morning Light (Dover Hills, October)" by Oscar Bluemner

Rhythm:

This painting has a visual beat and a flow through space to it.  The way the scene is split up into different rectangles gives an almost sequential order to it, and it makes it look as though each small rectangle piece represents a certain time of morning.  It’s darker on the right side, and it seems like each rectangle after is a period of time, slowly and gradually getting brighter and closer to day.  It creates a timed movement through the space within the frame of the picture, creating rhythm and a visual beat.

"Self-Portrait" by Francis Bacon

Emphasis:

Francis Bacon’s “Self-Portrait” has a great deal of emphasis, as we are forced to look only at the person in the painting.  The lack of a detailed background with a strip of brown as the only other detail in the background, creates a focus on posed man.  Bacon’s appearance also creates emphasis with him painted in a brighter color than the rest of the background.  There is a lot of space around Bacon in the painting, but we never focus on it, because there is so much emphasis on Bacon himself, with brighter colors and his pose.

"King and Queen" by Henry Moore

Unity:

This bronze sculpture by Henry Moore shows unity that can be shown through art.  Both the form and color of the two people are very similar, and their style is also the same.  Both the King and Queen look similar to each other in every way, from their size to their pose to their clothes.  The concept of a king and queen also unifies the design.  A king and queen must always be unified in order to rule their territory.  One can’t possibly live without the other, and that is well shown in this sculpture.  It is the same that even in this sculpture, the King cannot sit alone without the Queen, and vice versa.

CRITIQUE

"Penance No. 3" by Manuel Neri

This bronze sculpture, called “Penance No. 3”, was created by Manuel Neri in 1982.  When I first looked at it, I noticed immediately the different colors, but also the position of the person.  A person is on his (or her) knees, and when I look even closure, it also has the hands in front, as if it is repenting or saddened by what has occurred.  During the early 1980’s – around when this piece was sculpted – there were many wars and numerous terrorist attacks throughout the world.  There were hijacks and terrorist bombings in Canada, and also the Lebanon War of 1982.  America itself was still involved in the Cold War, and in 1981 were nuclear threats in the Middle East.  With Neri coming from a family that experienced the Mexican Revolution, these events might have had a great deal of effect on Neri, leading to a darker mood in this sculpture.

Neri uses a variety of colors in his sculpture, but nothing in order or pattern.  Colors seems to be precisely splattered all over the head and body, giving a more disorganized look that makes it seem like the person is having mixed feelings.  There is also a rough, hard texture to the statue, adding to the disorderly look in the work.  The lines, however, are still definite and clear, with curves to show that the sculpture is a statue of a person and not a random object.  Yet this seems to be the only function of the lines that Neri uses, to show that this is a person.  There is also a lack of movement, and the fact that the person is still creates more emphasis on the emotional aspect of the sculpture rather than the physical action that the person is taking.

I believe this sculpture’s has the meaning of looking at the world in sorrow, asking for forgiveness.  The colors and the pose that the statue is taking gives it that feeling, but also the lack of a face.  It might mean that he is trying to hide his face from the wrongdoing throughout the world.  The word “penance” itself means: voluntary self-punishment inflicted as an outward expression of repentance for having done wrong.  After researching what was happening throughout the world around the time this sculpture was being made, I would have the same feeling.  Wars, terrorist attacks, and nuclear threats throughout the world would have me asking “Why?” too.  Especially if the generation before me experienced a revolution in my home country – which was the case with Neri – I would also be asking God for forgiveness for the foolishness of mankind to be repeating the same mistakes over and over again.  I can relate to such feelings, because I’ve also had times when I was asking why I was making the same mistakes.  Perhaps Neri thought to express his own emotions through his art, and chose to create it in the manner that he did.  He did it to express his own feelings, by showing how he saw himself.

By showing his own feelings, I believe that this work has a good amount of intrinsic value.  It presents a good social message, and makes the viewer wonder why there still needs to be penance in what we do.  It makes us ask why we never learn when we make the same mistakes repeatedly.  The work has worth that it connects to the guilty and sad feeling inside we have when we do something wrong, and we have that desire to repent and ask forgiveness.  I also think that Neri’s sculpture has value because it could be beneficial to other artists and sculptors who look at this piece.  They are given a way to express themselves the way Neri did, to use color, texture, and the position of the figure to show how the artist themselves really feel.  It communicates an idea that certain artists may have not known before, which is why Neri’s “Penance No. 3” is not only a wonderful piece of art, but also an important and valuable sculpture that helps to express one’s true feelings of sorrow and one’s desire for forgiveness.