FFS#2 - Francis Ford Coppola

Francis Ford Coppola formal Film Study

 

While watching my formal film study I had the privilege to view some of the best movies I had ever seen.  I thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the Godfather series, even the third one which was said to be the worst (which I can see why, but none the less a great film).  I also got to view "Tucker: A man and his Dream".  This was another movie that I got really invested in.  I noticed that all of Coppola's movies were telling a story about a man in business, and there is also a tie of trouble for the family in the movie.  The trouble in The Godfather being the other mobsters and the trouble in Tucker being the court and the big car companies. 

 

My favorite of the three was The Godfather part 2.  This movie had the best cinematic elements like when they would go back in time to show Vito uprising in NewYork and in Sicily. There was a yellowish feel to the screen.  It reminded me of the effect from the matrix because they do a green tint.  It did a really great job of letting us know that we were in the past. 

I also really like that they kept the emphasis on family, but they put a new twist on it.  When you have someone else running the family you get a completely different outcome.  I would say that Michael was more brutal than Vito was, considering that he killed his own brother. 

 

The Godfather 3 was nothing compared to the previous two, but still a very good movie.  This movie is basically where we get to see the down fall of Michael Corleone.  All of that bad karma is coming back to nip him in the butt.  I thought that some of the acting was overdone. When the daughter dies, it was uncomfortable to hear/watch the mother go through what she was going through.  There are many other better ways they could have done it.  They had some interesting shots though.  When Michael is in the kitchen and has that anxiety attack, they go to a long shot... It was held a little too long, but I still like the effect that it gave.  

 

 

There is always a sense of juxtaposition within these two movies.  Whenever something bad is happening there seems to be birds chirping in the background or they are in a church.  I like these elements, but by the third movie I would have liked to see them get a little more creative with it.  They were merely just using it as a device at that point.  A necessary point in these movies that must be kept is the enemy.  On paper I really like the ideas, but in the third movie I do not they executed the 'bad guy' very well.  It seemed kind of abrupt.  It was just like he decided "i'm going to hate you now". 

 

Even though the third Godfather was made in the 90s, I would say Tucker is the most contemporary feeling movie (1988).  This can mainly be attributed to the style and camera work in this movie.  They didn't experiment too much with lighting or long distance shots.  I didn't even notice anything special about these elements, and I think, depending on the movie, this can be a very good thing.  you don't always want to be thinking about the special effects and the pizazz.  sometimes you want to just sit back and enjoy the story that is being told.  If it's too in your face, it can be distracting.  Here it was like they weren't even there. 

 

For Coppola, it was all about getting the actors into a room and letting them do their thing.  You wouldn't see gigantic action scene where they are running through the streets of the city and they would need 12 cameras and a bunch of cuts.  They mainly just stuck to the  180 and had a lot of dialogue.         

 

overall I give..

Godfather 2: 4 out of 5 stars

Godfather 3: 3 out of 5 stars

Tucker: 4 out of 5 stars

 

 

Film Studies: Auteur Project #Dealin'

History:  I have taken the two most popular things from the 70's and put them into one movie:  Drugs and Mobsters (genre).  This movie is going to appeal to everyone because even even if the people going to see it aren't a mobster or a druggy (which very few weren't ;)) they will still come to see the big names of the 70's this movie has to offer.  There would also be a conformity factor.  People would flock to see this movie because of the popularity and glamorous image that these two elements have in the 70's.

The Story:  This is a tale of two Italian families in a power struggle in Seattle.  There is one family that lives in Seattle and has for a long time so they are in tight with everyone in the city.  This includes politicians, police, business owners.... and yes.. drug dealers.... who are dealin'... But when a new family comes to town with competitive deals and persuasive negotiating, this family challenges the authority the original family has in Seattle.  We see the struggle from the top ( between the two families) and we also see the story from the bottom between two drug dealers who are best friends.  But one of the friends ends up going with the new family, and the other ends up going with the old one.  This leaves their friendship torn, and their allegiances gray.  By the end of it all, the new family wins.  This is a political message to the people saying that if our federal government doesn't take our foreign affairs seriously, then other countries may bully us out of the equation, just as the new family did.

The Studio:  I am going to choose Paramount pictures to produce my movie.  They made some fantastic decisions in choosing Francis Ford Copola and the cast within the greatest mob movie of all time.  I cannot find a better pick for this.  American International Pictures will be my distribution company because they were the first to market towards teen age groups and we believe they will continue to develop their marketing skills.

The Cast/Crew:  The director for my film will be Francis Ford Copola because of his experience with Mob films.  The main actors of my film will be Dustin Hoffman, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall and Jack Nicholson.  The reason for this is because they all have proven that they can play hard ball.  They will be ready for the rough life of Dealin'.  For my Cinematographer I choose Freddie Young.  We are bringing Freddie in from Britain because of his success in the 70's.  He has 3 Academy Awards!  As Cinematography can sometimes be hard to standout, those three awards really say something.

The Industry:  This movie will be rated R.  I do not believe children should be allowed to view the mature elements of this film.  Not only would it be morally wrong, but to show them the film would be confusing because they would not be able to comprehend the adults themes expressed in the picture.  There will be plenty of money to go around because adults 17 and older will find Dealin' very entertaining.

The Message:  As I mentioned before, this movie will be making a political statement towards our government and how we should be handling our foreign affairs.  I love the dynamic of this because we are getting the average Joe perspectives (the dealers) from the ground level, and we are also getting the perspective that comes from the seat of power, which in this movie is the head of the mob families.  This is not only entertain, but also teach.

MYST #4 - Sappy love story

For my forth pick, the movie Maid of Honor was on FXX and so I decided to give it a go.  This movie got one star and for good reason... It was pretty bad.

I did not like the screen play in this one.  Patrick Demsey plays a slick player who seems to have it all.  They make it abundant clear that he is 'the man'.  He gets all the girls and has the nicest car etc.. But there is one thing that he doesn't have. His best friend, played by Michelle Monaghan.  They have been best friends since college and I could have guessed that they were going to end up together from the very beginning.  When writing, one should not spoon feed the what's happening to the audience.  I think they were lacking in the mysterious department.  It's kind of like when a joke is made, and the audience can guess the punch line before it's even given.... It's not as funny.  There were also some unnecessary elements that were adding to the script like when they talk about the Duke (this is the guy Demsey eventually steal his best friend back from) and they say that they have arrived at the castle.  A girl says it's really big and the butler replies that it the smallest of the four, as they have one for every season.  The castle wasn't that impressive so that tells me they didn't have enough money to rent a legit one.  Also, they never show the other three so why bother?  Another aspect I didn't like from the writing of this was the meeting and introducing of our duke character.  This just got thrown on us out of no where.  They sit down for 5 seconds and at dinner and then the best friend says that she is getting married to him.  Very anticlimactic.

The Camera work here was average.  I was not wowed because they didn't do anything industry changing, but it wasn't so awful that I couldn't see what was going on.  There were close ups when needed and they kept there distance at times when needed.  I liked the shot they did of Patrick walking through the park by himself.  He had just lost her and so he went off to think to himself.  They kept their distance here and I think that this exemplified his inner-thought well.

The acting was a bit sub-par for me.  I thought that Patrick played a good "player" but when it came to his soft side, it felt a little weak.  It seemed really fake when he tried to win over his best friend from the Duke.  He said "I love you" and I cringed.  Michelle didn't have any sophistication to her character.  This performance was waaay too generic.  The character's personality was not fleshed out at all and that is partly her fault and partly the writers fault.

If you look at the pictures below, you will see why I did not enjoy the camera work that much.  The one on the right shows the couple together, and you can hear what they are saying, but I would have liked to have seen it a little more up close and personal to feel like I was a part of the conversation.  The same goes for the one on the bottom.  Let us be a part of the action!!
So the camera work was adequate, but nothing special.



Overall I give this movie exactly what it earned, which is one star out of 5.  Don't bother.

Rebel Without a Cause response: Question 1

I believe when you apply this movie to our generation the meaning changes, but indeed there is a meaning, and with that, an effect on the people who watch it.

This is a movie that analyzes relationships on a personal level and not just on the surface.  We see Jim's family interact with him.  We see the possible product attitude that kids can develop when parents are so oppressive.  I would argue in this day and age that Jim acts the way he acts (not saying that it is good or bad) because his parents are on the controlling side.  His mom decides to move whenever she feels like it or whenever Jim screws up.  This would definitely create a unique environment for a child to grow up in.

On the other hand, people probably would probably say that the parents are not being harsh enough.  This is because teens are being rebellious and depicted as immature.  This is understandable considering how society felt about their youth at that time.

There is something unusual about the process of becoming an adult. Teens are finding themselves and when they lost it can be seen that the succumb to conformity in any generation and in any environment.  We see the kids in this movie conforming with the rest of the school.  Everyone is following Buzz and not even Buzz knows where he is headed (ironically it is off a cliff).  Buzz even says he doesn't know why he is doing this but "you gotta do somethin".

This movie is definitely relateable in terms of situation and environment.  The writing is kind of awkward and the meaning mysterious, but in the end the setting is very real feeling, even though it was 60 years ago.

MYST #3 Anime Exploration!

For this post I decided to watch an anime movie.  I am not very familiar with the realm of animation but I thought that I would give it a chance!

I chose to watch a movie From the DragonBall Z series.  These movies come from what is said to be the most famous manga (comic) series of all time.  There are 13 movies in total and the one I chose is called Cooler's Revenge.  In this movie Cooler is an alien who has come to get his revenge on Goku (the main character) because he killed his brother Frieza.  Goku is a very kind and gentle person but he also does what needs to be done for justice.  Goku is also an alien but he has lived on earth ever since he was a little boy.  He comes from a warrior race called the Sayians.  His brother and him were apparently on the same level in terms of strength, but Coolers has now found a new form that is even stronger.  Now Goku will have to find a way to defeat the monster.

It is interesting to see how real the animation people can make the outside look so real.  I was actually very impressed.  The detail of the environment was very cool.  They have to create every frame that is seen in the movie and there were any different settings so they had to make a lot of them!  The effort was definitely there from that stand point.




some cool effects that I saw were when the characters would shoot their "ki" at one another.  Goku's special technique was called "kamehameha!".  This was a very powerful blue beam of light that he used to defeat Cooler.  Another cool one was when he transformed into a "supersayian".  His hair turned golden and there was also a gold aura surveying his body.

The lighting was very similar to that of the real world.  The sketches were darker for the more serious ones, and when he saves the day and all is well, the sun comes out and the birds are chirping!

The music that went along with the fighting and action scenes were pretty cool.  They were like a rock and roll version of their own theme song.  This was very unique to start with and I thought it played better than it would have if they had played something like hells bells or back in black.

 

The voices were really good!  As it turns out the voice of Goku is also the voice of another character called King Kai.  But their voices are completely different!  I would have never known that unless i had read it for myself.  They are so spot on with their voices it's freaky!  It sounds nothing like their voices in real life and yet they are so believable!

The character Goku seems to be the superman of Japan.  it was very interesting to see what they consider a hero.  To be honest, I thought he was a better character than superman. This character was much more fleshed out and the back story was much more complex which made it way more interesting for the audience members.  props to creator and writer, Akira Toriama for created such a cool character!  In the end, the good guy wins and that's what we want to see!  But what makes a great movie is when we think that the good guy might lose (and it's believable) and then he comes out on top.

I give it 3 1/2 out of 5.

MYST #2 Moneyball

Moneyball.. I was a little skeptical at first..

Having Brad Pitt play a former athlete who now is the general manger for the Oakland A's was not the ideal pick in my mind.  I was thinking that he should stick with playing the cool, mysterious guy that gets the girl in the end.  But the promise that those four stars gave along with my love for baseball led me to choosing this as my second Movie in My Spare Time.

I am going to have to agree with the critics rating of four stars on this movie.  I think that all elements were very well handled including cinematography, sound, lighting, directing, and acting.

The Cinematography does not need to be noticeable for this kind of movie, it just needs to show us what is happening.  In a movie like gravity, on the other hand, is something that is very precise and very important.  In a movie like this, there are just a lot of over the shoulder shots to show conversation.  very simple.  I must point out two job well dones though.  One would be the cut away to the real season of the Oakland A's from the movie itself.  This movie shows the magic season of the Oakland A's in 2002 when they won 20 games in a row.  For the 20th game they won on a walk off home-run, they cut to the actual game footage of the team and them crowding home plate.  It got very difficult to tell which was the movie and which was the footage... So cool!
The second strong showing of cinematography was the walk-off home-run.  WOW!  This was definitely the best shot of the entire movie and it truly encapsulated the magnitude of the moment.  This was a cool clip I found:)

  


A cool sound effect that I heard was at the cutaway.  They cut all sound out from the crowd and just showed the guys going nuts and the announcer from the actual game.  There were also some moments when Brad Pitt was by himself and he was listening to the game because he didn't like watching the games.  They had a shot of his face and even though the only sound being made in the room was the radio, it felt like it was secondary to his inner-thoughts.  They did a good job of not making it too loud, as to not distract from what was really happening with the character.

The locker room of the Oakland A's was used a lot in this movie.  But every time we entered it as an audience, the lighting was slightly different.  This is because the lighting crew is trying to convey the connotation of the moment.  When the players and the team were doing well, there was a bright lighting in the room.  When they were down in the dumps or a tough decision was being made, there was a dim lighting.

I enjoyed the acting of both Jonah hill and Brad Pitt.  I thought they played off each other very well.  It was almost as if Pitt was the mentor to Hill and then it switched because Hill had so much to teach Pitt.  They ended up learning so much from each other which really was just teaching us.

I would say that the directing had that much of a presence in this movie.  There were not many moments where I thought to myself that I liked the choices that the director made.  Sometimes when you have a crew and actors like the director had here, you have to just let it fly!

Overall this movie was very solid.  The critics hit it on the nail.  four stars out of 5 is more than fair.  They told a simple story and created a spell that entrapped us all.

Here are some of my favorite scenes!

1935 movie creation! Come and see the patriotic feel good: "Rock Bottom" for only 5 cents!

A team of intellectuals gathered during 10th period film studies to create... Rock Bottom!!

Rock Bottom is a story of greed, perspective, and love.  Overall, this is a feel good  Romantic Comedy that seeks both laughter and sympathy from its audience.  We see the journey of Frank, played by Gary Cooper, and his early success in life as a banker.  As we know, in 1935 bankers were not thought of as the good guys to say the least.  Nonetheless, Frank finds much success in what he does until one day when he is fired! The bank cannot afford to keep paying all of their employees, and even though he has emotional ties with the people at his bank, they let him go.  As Frank is enduring this struggle to find a new job, he runs into an old friend from high school.  This friend is none other than Vivian, his love from high school played by Claudette Colbert.  Vivian is a single blue collar mother fighting to provide her kids with a decent life (which will attract an audience, as most people in 1935 are in this situation).  The two sides of blue collar and white collar are mixed together as the two begin to fall in love.  By the end of the movie we are hoping that the audience feels good about where they are in life.  Ironically, we have doing a low budget film and we are taking the side of the blue collar worker (who in 1935 probably didn't make a lot of money) and sending a message to say that they should be proud to be a blue collared worker and they should be proud to be an American!

A helper in mix would be Maxwell, Vivian's mentor.  Maxwell, played by Sam Jaffe is also a blue collar man and has been from the very start.  He is a hard working man and is always on the look out for Vivian's best interest.  We have chosen this cast because they are all from Columbia pictures and they have all worked with Frank Capra before.  We wanted Frank to be our director because we like the way he handles the interactions with the characters.  He does a great job with the positioning of his actors.  You can see the leadership within the great timing of the actors with their lines.  

Of course this team would not be complete without the help of Joseph Walker, a cinematographer from the ASC (American society of Cinematographers) who has had a history working with Mr. Capra.  His variance of distance is just the right amount from what we've seen.  We really like the way he can mix in close-ups and long shots in the same scene while still having that continuous effect.  This is definitely a movie that has to flow from scene to scene and even within scenes because of movement of setting.  

For the Hays code, we will be abiding by the rules.  There should not be any dispute on whether or not our movie is too scandalous for the public eye.  The biggest step we would take towards breaking that rule is the scene where Frank and Vivian share a milkshake. We feel that this is perfectly appropriate.  

Special thanks to all that voted!  Hope to see you in theaters!!

Formal Film Studies #1

For my Formal Film Study I have chosen to take a slightly different approach in the picking of my movies.  I
have decided to watch movies that star Paul Giamatti.  At first, I did this because he is one of my favorite
actors, and yet I had only seen him in a handful of movies.  Paul has the ability to grasp the sincerity of a
moment in an instant, just by giving a show stopping stare or stroke of his magnificent beard.
Paul Giamatti was born on June 6th, 1967 and is the youngest of three.  He has one sister and one brother,
both of whom have indulged themselves in the delight of the arts.  Paul has a mother who was an actress
before marrying Dr. Bart Giamatti who was the commissioner of Major League Baseball for six months before his untimely death.  (all of this bio info came from IMDb)The three movies that I have decided to formally critique are Sideways, Duets, and Barney's Version.  As

expected, all three were excellent.  The interesting thing about these three movies is that Paul seems to play a very similar character in all three of these movies.  One can easily deduce that there is depression apparent in all his characters throughout these motion pictures.  In each, Paul plays a middle aged man who just can't seem to keep a relationship together.  Though these movies are dark at times, given the nature of his characters, these movies can get dark at times.  But Paul never fails to bring back the balance with some comic relief or passionate monologue/song.  Here's an example! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMlKHz3wzyM
In this fun clip, Paul Giamatti mixes his humorous character singing with Andre Braugher's talented vocals.

I noticed in all of these movies special camera angles that gave the moment a sense of anticipation.  I liked the cinematography in the scene in Sideways when Paul's character Miles is getting the news about his new book.  He is on the phone finding out whether or not his book is going to be published and as this is happening he is walking farther and farther away from the camera.  When he receives the crushing news that his book would not be published, he stops right before the shadow ends in the sunlight.  I thought this emphasized the blow he just took.



The message that I received by the end of all of these movies were surprising close to each other.  They all meet at the point of depression and hardship, but all three have a kind of encouraging yet open ended ending.  If the message of these movies had to be broken down into a catch phrase I would say it was "Don't give up!".  It really is as simple as that!  his character just has to find a way to keep going and the characters around him are trying help him achieve this goal.

Each film had a different kind of sound to it.  Sideways had a very 50s sounding soundtrack.  A lot of the time it would be a simple trumpet just bouncing in and out of scenes.  This went perfectly with the two crazy characters of Miles and Jack, running around causing trouble.  Barney's Version on the other hand, has a lot of piano and strings playing in the background.  This made his movie much more elegant feeling than Sideways, which in my opinion were two very similar movies.

Sideways being one of Giamatti's most prestigious pieces, grossed 71 million dollars.  Duets, a modest 12 million, and Barney's Version (the best of the three), a measly 7.5 million.  None of these movies were ground breaking in terms of their sales, but an argument can certainly be made for groundbreaking production.  The directors and crew behind the scenes did a great job of capturing moments when needed but not trying to do too much.  They weren't moving the camera so much or flickering the lights on and off so quickly that it made you dizzy and/or uncomfortable.  They let the professional grade actors do their thing from a medium view throughout with just a few long shots and close-ups when necessary.

 To give a view of the most popular, Sideways, David Ansen said, "Sideways stays resolutely life-size. And that, in this age of hype and hyperventilation, may be the most radical thing about it".  96% on Rotten Tomatoes!!!

Gran Torino MIYST

   Though many who have seen the movie “Gran Torino”  believe that it is an ugly movie, I see the beauty in the truth.  This movie has an interesting irony, bringing back the Korean War to America as we see the conflict unfold between the patriotic conservative (Clint Eastwood) and the growing population of Korean descendants. 

         

  It is obvious to anyone who has seen this movie that Clint Eastwood plays a racist.  His character’s racism is particularly shown in comments given towards Koreans, though other racial slurs are said towards the Jewish, Irish, blacks etc..  I believe this is an essential truth that needs to be shown for this movie to have any credibility or impact. 

       

     The well acted/directed movie, brings realism, bravery, nobility and change of heart.  I loved watch the affect that the boy and his family had on Clint, especially since they were the people he felt threatened by.  It exemplified the classic saying “Don’t judge a book by its cover”.  Clint’s change of heart, as affected through the Korean boy and his family, allows him to use his attributes of bravery and nobility in a fight for his neighbor’s safety. This was a fight that he otherwise may not have paid much mind to prior to meeting the family and experiencing their kindness. The kindness that was shown to this cranky old man set him free to do good for the people he hated. 

           

Another reason I liked this movie was that Asian culture is intuitively interesting to me and I enjoyed seeing the mix of Asian culture with American.  This is a classic conflict within our nation's history that is not always addressed in the best way.  What I liked about this movie is that Clint Eastwood showed the truth in the conflict. 

This is my third time watching Gran Torino and it is still my favorite.  I am glad I had the opportunity to watch it again through this class because it allowed me to view like a real critic!  I noticed lots of things I didn't before. 

 I think that Clint Eastwood is trying to leave society w/ something from his era. They make the disrespectfulness of the younger generation very obvious and apparent. He shows his disgust and also what a little discipline can do for our generation. But, he also shows how the younger generation can show something to the older generation just as they did with their kindness.  

He also shows that no matter what your age is the mixing and harmony of cultures can be difficult but prosperous. Both sides (Caucasians and Mung people) benefited by the end of the movie. 

I finally figured out the line! "The thing that haunts a man the most is what he isn't ordered to do".   This is a line a i didn't really understand when i watched it the first two times so I really thought about it this time through.  He delivers this line to the priest of the town and they are talking about the Korean war and the horrible past that burdens them.  He is talking about the guilt that a soldier feels when he has to do an appalling act in combat and is not ordered to do it. The guilt must be much stronger because if the he was ordered to do it then the solider could just deal with that by Saying they had to. But if they aren't then there is always the feeling of what if they had done it differently or let the person live?  

I give this movie 5 stars out of 5! I loved it!
Go Clint!

Spencer Wawak

9/2/13

Review of the Reviews

We’re the Millers

            http://christylemire.com/were-the-millers/

http://www.timeout.com/london/film/were-the-millers

1.  Both of these reviews are in paragraph form.  The critics basically re-tell the plot of the story, which was a predictable one.  They talk about all of the events taking place in this movie and while projecting their opinions through comments on the choices made by the writers, directors and actors. 

It was very clear which one was negative and which one was positive.  The negative one had sarcasm evident throughout, making fun of the climax, and making it seem unworthy.  The positive one focuses on their pleasure of seeing Jennifer Aniston pick this role whereas the other one does the exact opposite. 

The positive one is definitely a lot smarter than the negative one based off of their word choice and flow throughout.  Both of the people were focusing on Jennifer Aniston, whether it be positive or negative cementation is not the question at hand.  The point being that they do not pay much attention to the non- “big name” players in this film.  That tells me that there were no surprises which I find interesting because I thought Will Poulter did an excellent job. 

2.  A negative review of We’re the Millers states “Their high-risk strategy is to go deep undercover – disguised as wholesome midwestern American tourists. A couple of delinquent teenagers (Emma Roberts and Will Poulter) are roped into playing their fake kids. They’re the Millers”.  This is obviously a very sarcastic and smug comment in which the critic was attempting to take a jab at this films dignity.  I agree with them when the critic is implying that the plot was obvious before you even saw it but the connotation is just flat out incorrect and misused.  The Positive Critic said,  “Will this fake family end up functioning as a real family in time? Of course they will. It’s pure formula — you can tell where “We’re the Millers” is going from the billboards alone. But to its credit, the comedy from director Rawson Marshall Thurber, from a script by small army of writers, stays mean and maintains a bit of an edge even when it threatens to go all soft and gooey”.  This critic says that it is predictable but the connotation of this person is completely the opposite.  They say that it’s okay because the director made it happen. 

3.  The negative one would be more convincing because it is very far that way.  It says that it is horrible and basically recommends no one see this movie.  But, the positive one says that its good, even though it is predictable.  In this case the person is not ecstatic about this movie but it is likeable.  I would probably side with the negative one if I had never seen this movie because of the strength of its hatred. 

4.  I would include all of the outstanding performances by the actors, directors and writers, whether it be good or bad.  I would also include what I think the meaning of the film was in order to stir thought in the minds of my readers.  Finally I would elaborate on the themes that were evident in the film in order to give a deeper understanding to the meaning.  

Film intro survey

1.  The first movie that made an impression on me was Toy Story because it is the first movie that I can ever remember seeing.

2.  My top 4 are comedy, drama, action/adventure, and gangster/crime

3.  I'm not a huge fan of of biographies, documentaries or sci-fi movies.

4.  My favoite film is Gran Torino.  That has been my favorite for a long time now.  Four other movies that come to mind are we're the millers, sky fall, the shaw shank redemption and harold and kumar go to white castle and 21.

5.  Three characteristics of a good movie would be first that it makes you think.  The best films always leave you with something to ponder.  Another would be when you feel some sort of emotional tie with the message they are sending.  Finally, a great characteristic for a movie to have is a teaching.  I feel like every great movie I've seen includes a lesson I can bring back and apply to my life.

6.  Percy Jackson and the sea of monsters.  Burt wonderstone and the incredible..., and Texas Chainsaw Massacre

7.  a.) No point  b.)  unbelievable characters  c.) cheesy endings

8.)  spielberg.  Clint Eastwood.  Ron Howard

9.)  Clint Eastwood.  Matt Damon.  Tim Robbins.  Robin Williams.  Hugh Jackman and Al Pacino

10.)  Gran Torino, Remember the Titans, Social Network and Charlie Wilson's War.

11.)  Casa Blanca

12.)  Rise of the dark knight

13.)  Elysium, Jobs, dead poet's society, Apollo 13 and The Godfather