my_daroga (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
my_daroga) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
popcorn_gif2012-03-16 01:18 pm
my_daroga) wrote in popcorn_gif2012-03-16 01:18 pm
Entry tags:
[discussion post] Raging Bull (1980)
Note: If you have no access to this movie, please let me know.
Raging Bull is number 4 on this list, and the first Scorsese film we've watched (Taxi Driver is coming up as number 52). It was made after much prodding by Robert De Niro, who had read boxer Jake LaMotta's autobiography and had been pushing Scorsese for years. Initially deemed too violent, it has since garnered critical respect.
The film is unusual in its black and white cinematography and the way the matches are shot with different visual styles, all of which position the spectator within the ring. Here are a few questions to get discussion going:
-Scorsese shot this film in black and white partly because at the time the story takes place, boxing gloves came in limited colors and presumably this allowed them better accuracy. It also set the film apart from others at the time and even then, Scorsese was worried about film preservation and the fading of color film stock. What quality does the black and white give this movie? Do you think it was a good artistic choice?
-There have been many, many films about boxing made in the United States. What do you think accounts for the continued popularity of this sub-genre of film, from Rocky to The Fighter? How does Raging Bull fit into this cultural context?
-Did you notice the sound design in the film? Especially in the ring, the sound editing was very carefully done, from the punches to the flashbulbs to incorporating unnatural sounds in the mix. Is it effective?
-Is the fight footage in general effective? Did you have any favorites? Was it more or less violent than you're used to? Do you think it's a realistic or more stylized portrayal of boxing?
-What, in the end, is this film about? What is the character of Jake LaMotta trying to tell us? Why do you think De Niro wanted this film made?
-Do you see the movie as a straightforward biography/sports picture, or do you see it as a metaphor for something else?
-Did you enjoy it? What aspects did you like or dislike?
Raging Bull is number 4 on this list, and the first Scorsese film we've watched (Taxi Driver is coming up as number 52). It was made after much prodding by Robert De Niro, who had read boxer Jake LaMotta's autobiography and had been pushing Scorsese for years. Initially deemed too violent, it has since garnered critical respect.
The film is unusual in its black and white cinematography and the way the matches are shot with different visual styles, all of which position the spectator within the ring. Here are a few questions to get discussion going:
-Scorsese shot this film in black and white partly because at the time the story takes place, boxing gloves came in limited colors and presumably this allowed them better accuracy. It also set the film apart from others at the time and even then, Scorsese was worried about film preservation and the fading of color film stock. What quality does the black and white give this movie? Do you think it was a good artistic choice?
-There have been many, many films about boxing made in the United States. What do you think accounts for the continued popularity of this sub-genre of film, from Rocky to The Fighter? How does Raging Bull fit into this cultural context?
-Did you notice the sound design in the film? Especially in the ring, the sound editing was very carefully done, from the punches to the flashbulbs to incorporating unnatural sounds in the mix. Is it effective?
-Is the fight footage in general effective? Did you have any favorites? Was it more or less violent than you're used to? Do you think it's a realistic or more stylized portrayal of boxing?
-What, in the end, is this film about? What is the character of Jake LaMotta trying to tell us? Why do you think De Niro wanted this film made?
-Do you see the movie as a straightforward biography/sports picture, or do you see it as a metaphor for something else?
-Did you enjoy it? What aspects did you like or dislike?
no subject
However, I just don't see the point. There are plenty of movies full of characters I do not relate to and do not like. But I need to have a reason to watch them, and the movie fails to provide me with one. LaMotta is just sad, and we're not given much to go on in terms of why he is what he is. Clearly De Niro saw something in this story that spoke to him, but it doesn't come through for me. The starkness of the characters combined with the artiness of the photography just combines to make a movie that feels like it's trying to impress you with how good it is. I almost feel like they're saying, "hey, Rocky was trite and popular, let's see the real version." Which concept I'm okay with, despite liking Rocky a lot. But it doesn't come through here in a way that I think adds much new, aside from the pretty images. And without a context I can get behind, that doesn't amount to much.
I just don't care about anyone in it, and that makes the artistry empty. I don't know why it's here, frankly.