kaleidoscope

Comparing "Lord of the Rings" with "Harry Potter"

2005-12-13T15:29:00.000-08:00

It is always risky to adapt a classic, especially one with legions of fanatical followers. Because such followers often savage blundering works. However, "Lord of the Rings" and "Harry Potter" came within a whisker.
If you compare the two series, you will find similarities and differences. For example, they are both classic storybooks which have magics and monsters. But while "Harry Potter" has several stories, "Lord of the Rings" has a story. "Lord of the Rings" has a wider story than "Harry Potter". And "Harry Potter" has a few usual members, " Lord of the Rings" uses a lot of people, especially in the scene of battles.
The most important difference is that "Lord of the Rings" is a kind of epics, which have a wide range of time. On the contrary, "Harry Potter" is short stories, and they have some modern goods such as a car, a train and a bank. So, we will be pleased with the difference though they are both classics.
Which movie is more difficult to film? It is "Lord of the Rings". J.R.R.Tolkien's original story is the origin of every fantasy. Fantasy is also enjoyable worldwide. There were many plans to make the story a movie, but the story did not become a movie because of its enormous size of the world. Only a director, Jackson succeeded in filming, he used the land of New Zealand as the stage, many experts such as linguists, sculptors, weapon designers, craftsmans and fashion designers to make a close copy of the original. So this movie may be very useful to know the old fantasy world. Of course "Harry Potter" is also true to the original, it is also useful to know about the English culture.

Tora!Tora!Tora!

2005-12-07T16:39:00.000-08:00

I think this is a rare movie because this movie doesn't have any grief and serious tension which are characteristics of war movies. This movie shows rather technical features than tragic features. The evolution of this movie is like a game. Japanese movements and U.S. movements appear turn about until Sunday morning December 7 1941. This movie appears to contain all of the events and remarks at that time. One officer said, "Use your common sense" in an operation room. That order definitely does not sound sensible. Overall, the American side didn't have proper actions though they had always exact information and many documents. Is it the reason that the U.S. was a third party until this attack?
Anyway, every performer has good or decent actions in this movie, and use realistic procedure in the oreration of battleships and attacking planes. The sound effects are wonderful. Above all this movie amply use much time at the most impressive point of the movie , although the length of the movie is proper.

My Fair Lady

2005-11-29T16:39:00.000-08:00

The story of "My Fair Lady" is simple enough. I could guess the latter plot after seeing the evolution of the opening. And I liked the former part of the movie in which Professor Higgins and Eliza Doolittle were swearing each other. I think this movie uses good contrast between the early stage and the final stage. Audrey Hepburn appeared with shabby costume and a mop of hair. To my surprise, she was always shrieking. Whenever Higgins treated her badly, she gave a hysterical scream. Such noises must be offensive to the ear, especially his ear.
I'm very interested in the tone of English language, such as vowels after seeing his knowledge and research of phonetics. I have not learned the right pronunciation so maybe he would divine from my expression that I am Japanese. However, if I couldn't pronounce English correctly, would I have no right to live? No, because English already became universal language, there should be a variety of English pronunciations. And if I lived in London for six months, even I would speak as beautifully as her.
Overall, this movie was well decorated with fine clothes, good music and unique acting. They are welcome. But I think the length of the movie is too long to be pleased with such a simple story.

Lawrence of Arabia

2005-11-08T06:50:00.000-08:00

I remembered his name and his achievements as a history book discribed him. But I have known that I didn't know of him well after seeing this movie. I didn't know how should I evaluate him. In fact it seems uncertain among researchers. Although he made a halfway job, the process of his job is interesting to me and maybe to everyone.
Many countries have problems about their borders. For example China and Japan had recently some dispute over Japanese territorial waters. But Iraq has more serious problem about their territory because they contains Kurdish people who speak a Kurdish language. Although the disorder of Iraq was triggered by America, its indirect but essential cause may be their own borders.
Lawrence is the key person of this issue. He had compassion for the Arabian people and supported their self-determination. So if it succeeded, would the Middle East have no racial and religious tension? However the power of the only one person seem to be not enough for the work.
In London's Imperial War Museum, there was an exhibition commemorating T.E.Lawrence. You can know about the history of his adventurous life through his book"The Seven Pillars of Wisdom" and a map which shows his plan of borders in the Middle East.
By the way, why did Lawrence have so much passion for such greedy, gross and cruel countries? He was a scholar and was born in a good family. Is there any relation to the fact that he was an illegitimate child?

Gandhi

2005-10-18T16:20:00.000-07:00

Mahatma Gandhi was born in Porbandar in 1869. After he graduated from college, he took a job in South Africa. There he began to canpaign against injustice.
He took peaceful nonviolent noncooperation. One says that his policy was passive. However in this movie he said that our resistance must be active and provocative. And it seems that he just knew western weakness. That was intriguing to me. Additionally, he just took constructive programs for his aim. Overall, his actions were not likely to be passive.
He began a journal and used it for his aim. But why is a newspaper so important? It sounds somewhat different from his way of activity. He took always more primitive way. In the end I felt that this question was solved by his words. He said that one should make the injustice visible. It was one of my favourite words in this movie.
Poverty is the worst form of violence. It was another of my favorites in this movie. He thought British rule of India was evil and it's time the British left. They were trying to make a nation. It must be a hard work. Nevertheless, he was so stubborn a man that he wouldn't use any violent means. He said that the way of truth and love has always won throughout history. So he refused importing the unhappiness of the West. It sounds difficult to prove real but sounds ideal and confortable with it.
I'm sorry, you are under arrest. It was the most frequent words in this movie. He was also memorable in frequency of arrest.

The mission is impossible?

2005-10-04T08:19:00.000-07:00

Can Society of Jesus make the Latin world a better place?
When the Reformation came to Christianity, the catholicity must face up to a need to strengthen their force. So Society of Jesus is strictly organized. And a Jesuit is well known by us. His name is Francisco de Xavier. His mission had difficulty in preaching. Because some Japanese feudal lords were embarrassed when their people had another lord. But finishing seeing this movie, thinking about it, it is sensible for some Japanese lords to reject receiving the religion. Apparently, some Jesuits had a political intention.
Of course not every Jesuits have a bad intention. I am very impressed by Mendoza's atonement. He was, I think, the only one person who was redeemed. He became a good Jesuit. Unfortunately, his good and religious intention was a individual matter in the army-like Society of Jesus.
In the latter part of the movie, there was a shocking end. Many indigenous people fought against the army and die. It was terrible and I realized that this movie had too heavy theme to enjoy it. Overall the most worst point in the act of preaching is speaking with a double tongue. One speaks in favor of the local people.
Another speaks against the people. What a confusing story it is!
The location is set in the middle of the Latin America. So this movie features the grand nature, such as a big river, waterfall and bluff. And the performances of Robert de niro and Jeremy irons, especially when in proceeding his atonement are great. That part is a enjoyable point.

Cast Away

2005-06-28T08:13:00.000-07:00

The life without everything is equal to death. But even in such situation, there were what we should learn and ideas for seeking happiness.

Can you imagine the world without economies and communities? This is the very situation that Chuck Noland met. This is the most impressive movie for me, because this movie avoided using any unnatural facters and too dramatic events. At first he preserved his calmness when he was floated to an island. The instant that he found he was cast away, he did rationally what he could do. If I was cast away, it seemed that I would do the same things. So those cool attitudes make the story real and horrible.

Economics is sometimes explained in relation to the story of "Robinson Crusoe". He also was cast away. The both stories remind us how important an economy is. The system is too general, so we take it for granted.

Communities are also important. In this movie, he named a volleyball, and always talked to "him". Because there were no humans and animals. Thanks to him, he can transform his hysteric misery into common unhappiness.

Every depression, anxiety, conflicts, or relationship problems in modern societies are mere trivial, compared with this story. Additionally, this movie teach us real happiness. The performance of Tom Hanks was wonderful and elaborate. If you can endure long still time, you will enjoy this movie.

Shakespeare In Love

2005-06-21T07:14:00.000-07:00

"Shakespeare In Love"fellows are changing their character. And "Shakespeare In Love" women are consistent and tough.

"Shakespeare In Love" is a proper length and the structure is rather good. In the context of the movie, many radical changes happened. What I noticed are below. All men were changing character. Some person is from stressed to cheerful, some is from a gangster to a serious actor, some is from savage to mild. Someone who had choked in public became a good talker. And what had changed until the show was over? Their costume changed, when they actually exhibited the "Romeo and Juliet", to marvelous cloth. Of course, their performances were being improved.

Secondly, I think the women characters were keeping their belief or aspirations. The reasons are below. Queen of England and the heroine have the common problem of being in the man-central world. Queen slept in a cheep tragic show. The scene was not nice to me. And I thought she just didn't like tragedy. It's a mistake. She was sensible and bored enough to ignore a cheep "love story". I guess she was very sad to see her loveless servants when she was getting on the cub.

Shakespeare is known as a tragic dramatist , but this movie is somewhat comic and satiric. I saw a shakespeare's new aspect. Good.

Islam World

2005-06-07T09:22:00.000-07:00

This is not an amusing story. This is a mannered history of Islam which may be unfamiliar to many Japanese people. We know Santa Claus and Christ and do church marriage but never do in an Islamic way. However there are about a billion of Islam nowadays and the Islamic sphere of influence extends many countries.
Unfortunately, economic progress divide people into the rich and the poor. That division didn't exist until late 6th century when two empire, Sasan and Byzantine, fought each other. Because of this war, Mecca became a new central point of tradings.
Muhammad denied admiring images and polytheism. polytheism means to believe in many Gods. Because the Carva shrine gathered a large number of Gods from each tribe. So all the Arabic nomadic tribes must drop in this city to pray. Mecca flourished due to these decoys. This is why Muhammad and the poor opposed the rich.
A book said that he came into contact with monotheism when Muhammad participated in commerce. And the author thinks that he might feel ashamed of his home religion. I don't know why he felt ashamed. Maybe Japanese people feel so. We hardly criticize any religion. At best we just think some religion strange or amazing.
Finally I talked about Arabic design "arabesque"to you. Arabesue is peculiar to Arab, and has same pattern continuously. This same pattern shows that Muslims think that each indivisual has a close relation mutually and equally. I wish Islam would become more attractive than present Iraq.

Overall review of "Ben Hur"

2005-05-22T21:42:00.000-07:00

Over all, this movie is consisted of many conflicts, between Juda Ben Hur and Messala, Romans and Hebrews, one idea and another idea. In addition to these, the movie contains many scenes which deserve consideration. So that I categorized the scenes into four groups, Culture, Society, Religion and Life.
In this movie, Messala said that Roman culture was great. But I think he must learn about his culture, if possible, compared with Greek culture. Even when the Roman Empire was in its greatest glory, the Roman culture was inferior to the Greek one. They gathered good materials by their roads, ships and forces. That is not "culture", however.
The Roman society was established by conquering countries. So that it seems to be based on this fact. In this movie, slaves rowed Roman battle ships and Romans saw Hebrews as conquered people. Therefore a victory is important in this society. Above all, the sea fight and the chariot racing is interesting to me. Because of the materials of the ships, when the commander said, "Fire! Fier!", the ships really flew "fires". The most impressive things in the chariot racing are rescures with a stretcher. I think they have a lot of danger during their jobs.
Next,we must think about the christ. As he had opposed the thought of "the Chosen People", Christianity occurred from the Jewish religion. The most interesting was that the christ was crucified in the stream of Roman oppression. It is said that he was betrayed by Judas, but this fact is not important in this movie.
Finally I will pick up two lifes of Quintus Arius and Pontius Pilatus. Arius is the most favorite character. He had heart and humanity and tried to commit suicide for the humiliation. Pilatus, by contrast, didn't have even patriotism and faith in his remarks.

Interesting frames of "The Ten Commandments"

2005-05-17T22:28:00.000-07:00

I am introducing my reviews and my way of interpretations of some interesting points which I noticed after seeing "The Ten Commandments".
The first interesting point is the statement of the opening scene. I watched that section many times. The host in the movie said that it showed the dawn of Hebrew liberty. And he said also that the theme taken by the movie exists then and now. Do you know that the issues of the State of Israel have been unsettled by now. And what politics and countries should be is being discussed in many countries. So I watched it carefully. I was also interested in the atmosphere of mystery such as fast moving clouds and the sun's rays come through clouds.
The structure of this movie is different from that of "The Prince of Egypt". "The Ten Commandments" is based on historical facts so that it chronologically goes. This style of showing is plain but boring. The order of "The Prince of Egypt" is more impressive because of the scene in which Moses know everything about his origin. That scene is expressed like a picture.
I noticed many historical events in "The Ten Commandments". Three thousand ago, Egypt was a very big empire and Pharaoh had every power. I was pleased to see the way of greeting of Ethiopians. They had much gold at that time. Hebrews escaped from Egypt and then immigranted to Palestine near the Mt. Sinai. These are historical facts.
What I noticed is the resemblance between the two movies on labour working. I was surprised that how slaves worked were described similarly.There must be some documents about that. Another one is about the God Moses refered to. At first Moses said that the God was for everyone. However, as he saw his God's miracles, he began to admire their own God. Is this the origin of "the Chosen People"?

Hello

2005-05-17T09:19:00.000-07:00

This is my blog named kaleidoscope. Enjoy it.