Busting Through The Heavens

Over the course of film history, the musical film genre has had a grand history of diverse and entertaining films. In fact, the very first sound films of the 1930’s and 40’s were actually musicals. So today, I’m here to take a look at two musical adaptations with music composed by the legendary Stephen Sondheim. The films are:

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (Tim Burton)
West Side Story (Jerome Robbins, Robert Wise)

Let us begin with Burton’s adaptation first.

Based upon the 1979 musical of the same name, Sweeney Todd tells the story of a barber who murders victims with his razor and with the help of his accomplice Mrs. Lovett (played by Helena Bonham Carter), processes their corpses into meat pies.

Its a heavily dark and macabre musical about the evils of revenge and what tempts those to follow its path. All of the character development in the film is told through the music and lyrics, giving a larger sense of depth as to why Sweeney seeks out revenge upon the man who destroyed his life. Burton’s vision help signify this by spacing the dialogue and the songs apart from each other so they flow naturally, so that way they’re not clashing with each other. However, the next film takes a completely different approach.

West Side Story tells the story of the two feuding gangs (Sharks & Jets) in a completely different way. Also based upon the broadway musical, which in turn was based upon William Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet, essentially films and stages the movie like they would stage the actual musical. While Sweeney Todd more so took the option of treating the musical as a film rather than a musical, West Side Story essentially feels as though you are watching the musical being filmed on camera. So much so that there’s actually an Act 1 & 2 to the film (something that films based upon musicals were known for during the time the film was released).

While this might seem like a complaint, its only minor as the music and lyrics are engaging and the story is very well written with plenty of humor, emotion, and romance. Its the classic story of a star-crossed love and the risks that two extraordinary people will go to make it a reality.

Overall, both films are terrific adaptations of the stage plays they’re based upon and are terrific additions to Musical film genre.

As time has passed by, the world has left a great knowledge of history for many people to discover. But if there’s one thing Hollywood is known for, its creating films that loosely show the history of an event or a single person. Whether or not the facts stated in each film adaptation are true or not normally doesn’t matter to audiences.

However, the films I’m going to be looking at today all have different ways of showing us historical events. The three films I’m going to be looking at today are:

The Grapes of Wrath (John Ford)
Braveheart (Mel Gibson)
Chaplin (Richard Attenborough)

Let’s first begin with The Grapes of Wrath, an adaptation of the classic novel written by John Steinbeck.

Based upon Steinbeck’s classic novel, the film tells the story of the Joads, a family from Oklahoma, who, after losing their farm during the Great Depression, become migrant workers and end up in California.

One of the biggest reoccurring themes that I notice with a lot of with Steinbeck’s work is that most of them take place in California. This could be because of the fact that Steinbeck lived most of his life in California. This is where the film’s historical value comes into play. The film heavily reflects the time period it takes place in, showing what was really going on during the Great Depression of the 1930’s. People were losing their homes and a lot of money during that time, so Steinbeck’s novel as well as the film depict this very well.

But that’s generally what makes The Grapes of Wrath different than the other films I’m going to talk about today. It doesn’t really depict a specific event or the life of a specific person, it shows a specific time period and the negative effects it had on American society. However, the next film I’m going to take a look at, is a completely different story.

Mel Gibson’s Academy Award-winning epic Braveheart is a grand mixture of both of those elements. In the film, Gibson portrays Sir William Wallace and how the 13th Century knight garnered recognition for his defiance towards King Edward I of England when he began the First War of Scottish Independence.

Here we come to our first element that makes the Epic Historical film genre: liberties taken with the actual source material. In order for filmmakers to make the actual film interesting, the filmmakers take it upon themselves to change the course of history to make a more arousing and exciting film. Braveheart is one of these films. While the film might not alter the entire course of events that happen, usually one or two events or scenes need to be changed for it to work in a film, as many fans of book adaptations should already know. 

But what Braveheart does right is that it shows the strength that William Wallace has in terms of defending the liberty and freedom of his people. Although the film doesn’t end on a particularly happy note, it does leave quite an impression on you and it makes you wonder how the actual events happened.

The next film I’m going to take a look at follow the historical events of an incredibly talented and unique individuals. Let’s begin with Richard Attenborough’s Chaplin.

Chaplin takes a look at the life and career of silent film legend Charlie Chaplin (portrayed amazingly by Robert Downey Jr.). The film shows Chaplin’s beginnings and how he created the iconic character simply known as “The Tramp”. The rest, as they say, is history. But that’s generally Chaplin’s biggest problem. The career of such an iconic person in Silent Film history is pretty much a history book in itself. It tries to stuff as much of Chaplin’s life in one 2 hour film, it sometimes glosses over the most important details. However, this is only a minor complaint as the film shows Chaplin’s emotional attachment towards the people he loved and how much effort he put into the role of The Tramp.

Attenborough shows the ups and downs of Chaplin’s life and the many struggles he took to tell the stories he wanted to tell. The film serves as a tribute to Chaplin’s lengthy career by showing us the affection he put into his films.

And that’s ultimately what makes this type of historical films such a delight to watch. Its fascinating to see the events in these films that are inspired by real events and it makes you want to find out the true stories behind these events and these people.

If there was always a line I remember most from Disney’s version of The Sword in the Stone, it is the piece of dialogue that Merlin states: “that love business is a powerful thing…I’d say that it’s the greatest force on earth”.

And that brings me to the subject at hand today. Romance is all around us. It just generally depends if you really wanna go after it or not. Love is initially one of the most powerful emotions on Earth and the four films I’m going to be taking a look at today are fine examples of that.

Today I’ll be looking at:
Sixteen Candles (John Hughes)
Casablanca (Michael Curtiz)
The Notebook (Nick Cassavetes)
Love Actually (Richard Curtis)

                                                           

Where do I begin? One of the most interesting things about the Romance film genre is that every film has a different way of showing how someone falls in love with another. So let’s start off with John Hughes’ film, Sixteen Candles.

In Sixteen Candles, Samantha Baker (Molly Ringwald) is having a lot of issues at home. Its her 16th birthday…the only problem is that most of her family has forgotten because her older sister Ginny is getting married the next day. So Sam is of course having issues trying to get through the day thanks to her over infatuation with the popular senior of the school, Jake Ryan (Michael Schoeffling).

And its here that one of the most common forms of romance is introduced, teenage romance. There’s always that awkward sense of uncertainty that comes up when teenagers develop crushes for someone they like and this concept is heavily reflected throughout the film. Sam is constantly questioning whether or not Jake likes her or not. Its only until the end do they finally discover their feelings for each other. The way that Hughes’ saves the reveal for the ending gives the story some great closure and helps develop the characters more.

Hughes’ use of humor, charm, and wit brings the story of Sixteen Candles full circle as its brings forth a coming-of-age tale about the uncertainty of falling in love at a young age. Which brings me to the next film.

The Notebook, based upon the novel by Nicholas Sparks, tells the story of two lovers: Allie and Noah. The main story of the film is told within a frame story. It first starts out with an elderly man reading to an elderly Allie the story of herself and Noah through the pages of a Notebook.

Notebook’s story harkens back to elements from dramas such as Romeo and Juliet, where two lovers of two different social classes become star-bound lovers and how their families wish for nothing more than the two of them to be separated. Its these common elements present throughout classic romance novels and films that ties the drama of The Notebook together. The film’s use of cinematography to distinctly show the line between the past and present is used to great effect to help present the two different stories that are happening and to better explain the drama happening to the characters.

Our third film, Casablanca, is a romance story on a completely different level. The romance presented in the film is one of bitterness and longing.

The film centers around Rick (Humphrey Bogart), a cynical American expatriate who once fell in love with Ilsa Lund. When Rick meets Ilsa in his cafe after not seeing her for years, the truth comes out and the film becomes suspenseful and dangerous as Rick makes it his mission to escape with Ilsa from Casablanca. Its here that the heart of the film comes into view. Rick and Ilsa’s relationship only revives itself after Ilsa explains why she left Rick and it makes sense that Rick puts aside his past and wishes to protect Ilsa.

It makes for the type of romance where it shows how the couple’s feelings for one another can empower them and although the ending to Casablanca doesn’t end on an incredibly happy note, it shows that the relationship between the main characters is still as strong as it was before.

And now we come to the final film in this entry, Love Actually. Instead of focusing the romance upon one couple, the movie instead focuses on the interlinking stories on a numerous group of people. Each story has a different way of showing love and introducing it in each chapter.

Because there are so many different stories present in the film, I won’t go over the details of plot. But Love Actually presents love realistically. Love isn’t always a melancholy thing. It can sometimes be both sweet and sour. Going through an emotion such as love always has its ups and downs but if someone is willing enough, a relationship can go very far. And this is a theme that Love Actually presents brilliantly. Its presentation on love itself makes a very funny and very sentimental look at romance while also showing the disadvantages of falling in love with someone. But its the journey that always counts.

Love Actually boasts a huge all-star cast and each actor uses their comedic talents to give every character a great amount of charm and likability.

Overall, romance can at times be a truly wonderful thing. Its an emotion straight out of a fairy tale, filled with incredibly warmth but also filled with its many disappointments. Each of the films I’ve looked at today present this concept wonderfully and all show us that all we need is love.

Hello everyone once again to another session of Film Analysis. This semester, instead of looking at films from two different directors of a specific genre, I’m just gonna be looking at 4 films from a genre. It doesn’t matter who directed the film or who produced it. As long as it fits in the category, I shall look into it.

So for the first entry, I’m going to be taking a look at 4 films in one of my favorite genres: Coming of Age Drama.

There’s something timeless about witnessing the story of a young boy/girl going through life’s experiences to become the person he/she was born to be. Its known as the “Hero’s Journey”, but many refer to it as a Coming of Age story. Almost every genre of film has an obstacle for the protagonist (be it internal of external conflict) that he/she must face in the end to become victorious. The four films I’m going to be looking at all primary examples of that.

Today, I’m going to be taking a look at Rob Reiner’s Stand By Me, Disney’s Animated Epic The Lion King, John Hughes’ The Breakfast Club, and Francis Ford Coppala’s The Outsiders


                                                              

First let’s start off with Stand By Me. Based on Stephen King’s novel The Body, the film follows four boys: Gordie LaChance, Chris Chambers, Teddie Duchamp, and Vern Tessio. The four boys are pretty much a group of inseparable, albeit immature, friends. They’re pretty much the type of boys you would expect them to be: they swear, smoke, and drink alcohol against their parents wishes. But past that point, they’re just like any of us really: they want a sense of adventure. Luckily that comes straight towards them when Vern tells the boys that his brother knows the whereabouts of a dead body of a boy and that his older brother plans to find the body.

                                         

What follows is a heartfelt and often hilarious adventure into the forests of Oregon as the four boys bond with one another to overcome the obstacles laid before them. The specifics of a Coming of Age Drama are all presented in different ways. Gordie’s conflict is the fact that his older brother is dead and that his parents are neglectful of himself and the things he wants to accomplish. He knows that his father prefers his brother over him. So thus Gordie is inclined to go onto this escapade.

Most of the film is narrated by an older Gordie, who is referred to as “the writer” in the beginning of the film, who reflects upon these events from his childhood.

                          

Next, let’s take a look at The Outsiders. Based upon the novel of the same name by S.E. Hinton, the film revolves around two street gangs: the Greasers and the Socs (an abbreviation for the term Socials). Much like in “West Side Story”, the two groups hate each other with a passion. From the greasers, we follow a young boy named Ponyboy Curtis, who is having conflict within his family after having lost his parents.

One night, Ponyboy and his friend Johnny end up in a big pickle after Johnny kills a Soc when one of them them tries to drown Pony. Now, the two are on the run and become outlaws.

What classifies “Outsiders” as a Coming of Age Drama is the conflicts that Ponyboy initially goes through. The film is quite violent with gun-shoots and fistfights being abundant. While Ponyboy is initially going through his family conflicts, he’s also having to go through the fact that he’s a constant enemy of the Socs. But there’s a point in the film where Pony has a conversation with a Soc named Cherry who actually is kind to him. It makes Pony think about why the two groups hate each other and whether or not there can be peace between them. So over the course of the film, Ponyboy doesn’t try resorting to violence to get out of the situation he’s in. He tries to remain neutral even though he tries to defend himself.

In the end though, Ponyboy resolves his conflicts as he matures throughout the film.

Often hailed as one of the best animated films of all time, Disney’s animated epic about a young prince from a group of lions trying to reclaim his place as the king of the Pride Lands is in every way the definition of the “Hero’s Journey”.

The story of the Lion King takes quite a bit of inspiration from Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”. The story involves the previous king being murdered by his brother, in this case Scar murdering Mufasa (Simba’s father), thus taking over the throne and destroying the kingdom due to his tyrannical rule. But what’s worse is that he makes Simba thinks that he’s the one to blame for his father’s death.

And thus begins Simba’s journey to become the King he was destined to be. Most of Simba’s conflict deals with his guilt over the death of his father. But unknowable to himself, Simba does not learn that he isn’t responsible for murdering his father until the final confrontation with Scar. But along the way, Simba has companions to aid him towards the path he was destined to take. Some of these include the comedic duo Timon and Pumbaa as well as Simba’s childhood friend Nala (whom he soon finds a romantic relationship with).

Overall, the Lion King serves as a powerful film filled with emotional depth and showcases the genre of a coming of age film beautifully with quality animation and storytelling.

Finally, let’s take a quick look at the final film on our list: John Hughes’ critically acclaimed The Breakfast Club.

Many have hailed “Breakfast Club” as the definitive teen film of the mid 80’s. The film revolves around 5 High School teenagers: Allison, Andrew, John, Brian, and Claire. Due to their principal, the kids are sent to detention and are forced to stay in the school library until school is over. Although the five students at first appear to have nothing in common with one another, throughout the course of the film, they five connect with each other more than anybody else that they’ve known.

Most of the students’ conflict comes from the fact that all five have a distanced relationship with their parents due to the fact that they don’t want to make the same poor decisions that their parents made. And that’s where the coming of age aspects come into play. Its the fact that these teenagers are thinking of what they want to do with their lives but at the same time are also saddened with the fact that once their detention is over, they’ll have to separate and go back to their different cliques.

When a person reaches their teenage years, its generally the time to start thinking about the road ahead of you and that’s what Breakfast Club captures beautifully. These kids who soon become friends with one another want to make good decisions with their lives as they go along. It shows a sense of maturity that most seem to forget about when growing up.

And that’s what a Coming of Age Drama is all about. It shows us that growing up is inevitable and at some point or another, we’ll have to say goodbye to our childhoods and cross over into adulthood. But these films ultimately teach us that we can use the advice and the experiences we’ve shared to chart our own course. And that is the greatest lesson of all.

When it comes to film, the Drama film genre has been one of the most popular genres in film history. Drama films are always the topic and center of attention for the Academy Awards as each new film opens in theaters. Today, I’m looking at two drama films from two of the most influential directors of that category. Those two directors are Robert Zemekis & Christopher Nolan.

Both directors have an extremely different style of displaying human emotions on screen. Both physically and psychologically. This analytical post is gonna be taking a look at Forrest Gump and Inception.

Like I said before, both of these films deal with drama on two completely different levels. To explain what I mean, let’s take a look at Forrest Gump first.

The film ultimately follows…well…Forrest Gump and his life story as he reflects on his past experiences. Forrest Gump is ultimately a film that deals with its drama in a more sentimental light, showing not only the bad sides of Forrest’s life but the good highlights as well. In the film, Forrest is portrayed as an ordinary man with an extraordinary life. A man who has done and seen it all. Now while this may seem happy and lighthearted, Zemeckis shows that not everything in a person’s life is perfect and shows us the negative effects of war, drugs, and heartbreak. Couple it together with an Oscar-winning performance by Tom Hanks and a fantastic score by Alan Silvestri, and you’re thrust into an extremely believable if somewhat tall-taleish story.

Now let’s take a look at Inception, a film that many consider to be Christopher Nolan’s magnum opus. The film revolves around Cob (played by Leonardo DiCaprio), an agent who specializes in the ability to enter people’s dreams to extract or plant new pieces of information. To create the amount of suspension in the story, Nolan roles with the endless possibilities with the dream concept to create a dramatic and dynamic story. Nolan’s film in comparison with Zemekis’ film is much more dark and more brtual, but at the same time, equally human. Nolan decides to focus on the psychological aspects of Cob past to create the tension between himself as well as the people he interacts with. Not only does this seem like it could create some good drama, the tension rises and rises until it reaches an incredible finale where the payoff becomes extreme.

Overall, both directors find a way to get their audience caught in-between the drama by presenting it differently. One director chooses the more light-hearted path while the other chooses to go the more darker route. Either way, both films get their point across in a very dramatic way.

What’s the first thing you think of when you walk into an adventure movie in the theater? Action scenes! Adventure! Danger! Explosions! Supernatural and mystical beings duking it out or trying to beat each other! The Action film genre has come a long way from its original roots. Today, I’m once again going to be looking at two different Directors who both have a different way of bringing the heart-pounding action the screen. These two directors are Academy-Award Winning Director Peter Jackson and Stephen Sommers.

The films for today’s topic that I shall be looking at are The Lord of the Rings and The Mummy.

Much like last time, these two directors have a completely different way of showing the action on screen. Let’s start off with Jackson’s film.

Based on the classic fantasy adventure books by J.R.R. Tolkien, Jackson manages to bring to life the world of Middle Earth. The story of Frodo Baggins’ journey to destory the ring of Sauron (The One Ring to Rule Them All), is adventurous despite its heavy fantasy theme. Ultimately, what Jackson does here is that he uses the book’s material to tell the story first and saving the action for the later portions of the film. But whenever they appear, they are extremely lush and gallant in scale and scope, they’re dare I say Epic. But ultimately that’s what Jackson’s biggest strength is. He substitutes the action for the story, giving us plenty of time to care for the characters and the situations that these characters go through. Because of this, this gives the action and the adventure aspects much more of an impact whenever they appear.

Sommers’ film on the other hand relies a lot on the adventure present in the film. Its consistently fast-paced and never lets up. The story ultimately isn’t needed, but it serves the plot of the film rather well. The Mummy is ultimately a film that should be appreciated for its entertainment-value. Its fun if cliche. Both the action as well as the special effects are the driving force for the movie rather than the characters or the plot.

So what do both of these directors have in common? Considering the situations that both of these films present, both are very special effects heavy. However, Jackson’s film uses more practical effects to bring the world of Middle Earth to life, only relying on visual effects for the more impossible shots. Sommers’ film on the other hand uses visual effects for even more simpler shots especially on the titular Mummy.

Overall, despite their differences, both directors manage to shoot exciting action sequences to increase the entertainment value for these films.

The animated film genre has had a long history, dating way back to 1937 when Walt Disney introduced “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” to the world. From there, the world of animation has evolved with how stories can be told. Whether it be tradition animation, Stop-Motion, or Computer generated, the animated film genre has has a huge evolution over the years. Today, I’m going to be taking a look at two different films from two different directors that both use two different styles of animation. The directors I’m going to be looking at today are Stop-Motion master Henry Selick and Critically-Acclaimed Japanese Animation Director Hayao Miyazaki.

The two films I’m going to be looking at from these two directors are The Nightmare Before Christmas & Spirited Away.

Despite the title of the first movie being called “Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas”, Selick is in the fact the real director behind the stop-motion classic of the king of Halloweentown trying to create a Christmas of his own.

Now that that’s out of the way, let’s get down the main subject at hand: Despite the two completely different forms of art, what makes these two directors so unique compared to other animation directors in the industry? The answer is how both directors tell the story.

Selick’s film souly relies on the technical aspects of the film. Every single detail is imaginative and gorgeous to look at, thus allowing your imagination to run wild and get lost in the the dark gothic world that the film has to offer. But at the same time, the visuals do not detract from the story or the characters. The film has plenty of heart and soul thanks to Danny Elfman’s legendary songs and score as well as Tim Burton’s imaginative story and concept. But deep within the film’s context lies a message that many can relate to: finding yourself and finding what you feel you’re good at. Its because of these things that has made Nightmare a classic. But what about Miyazaki’s film?

Miyazaki’s direction couldn’t be anymore different. While Miyazaki’s films are filled with glorious details, the main attraction for each of his films is the story. Spirited Away is no different. Miyazaki doesn’t just put focus on the imaginative and fantasy-filled aspects of his films, but more so on the main characters which most of the time happen to be strong female protagonists. Spirited Away mostly revolves around 10-year old Chihiro, a whiny if apathetic child. Its one day while her and her parents are moving to another city that they come across an abandoned town. There, Chihiro finds herself lost in a world where spirits come alive and her parents turned into pigs. Now, with the help of a mysterious boy named Haku, Chihiro sets out to break the spell put on her parents and return to the real world. The film mostly revolves around Chihiro’s journey to save her parents, but ultimately shows her journey of becoming a more independent and mature person, a trait that Miyazaki has put into most of his films. Couple this together with fantastic animation and a lush score and you have yourself a classic.

And that’s ultimately the big difference here: style over story. Both films have relatable themes and characters but ultimately handle them on two different types of levels. But if there’s one thing they both share: they’re dark. Both movies offer something a tad disturbing for younger viewers, but never anything too scary to frighten children away from them. Either way, many film critics and fans consider both of these movies “animation classics”.

Over the course of film, the Sci-Fi film genre has evolved greatly over the years. Something about exploring the inner reaches of space has fascinated mankind for decades. And with that curiosity in hand, filmmakers have all had their ideas on how science can be interpreted. However there are two very influential filmmakers in that category that I’m going to discuss. Those filmmakers are James Cameron & Steven Spielberg.

I believe that these two directors need no introduction. Both of these filmmakers are considered giants in the world of American cinema for creating movies that are both critically and commercially successful. But the two films I’m going to look at are Sci-Fi films that are complete opposites of each for numerous reasons. The films I’m going to look at are Aliens and the Spielberg classic E.T. The Extra Terrestrial

While both of these movies have an Alien/Aliens, both couldn’t be any more different. Cameron’s sequel to the Ridley Scott originalviews the titular alien race as ruthless, terrifying, and evil. Aliens is a Science-Fiction film that uses action, adventure, and tension to grab its audience. This is ironic because the original film was actually a Sci-Fi horror film rather than the tense action packed sequel that we are treated with. Cameron’s film is very special effects heavy, making the most of the technology available to create some of the most frightening creatures seen on film, the aliens as well as the Alien Queen which appears at the climax of the film.

Spielberg’s film on the other hand is a much lighter story. E.T is a film that views other-worldly beings as being friendly and earning for knowledge. The story of E.T is a familiar but memorable one. The film begins on a dark night in the forest when a small alien is accidentally left behind on Earth by his fellow extraterrestrials. What follows is a young boy named Elliot (played by Henry Thomas) befriending the Alien and teaching him the many things Earth has to offer. Soon enough, a friendship begins and the two bond together like no other pair. Although Spielberg’s film isn’t as special effects heavy as Cameron’s film, the effects are there but they’re not as big as the ones in Aliens. What makes Spielberg’s film so charming is that he relies on the characters, the reactions, and the emotions to grab the audience into the film.

Which ultimately leads me to why I feel both movies work in the different contexts that they give. Both films, while different in tone and nature, rely heavily on the actors/actresses to create tension and grab people into the story. That is something I feel both Directors do masterfully despite the different nature of both films.

One of the most common things in human nature is that people love being scared. But what’s even more common is that people love being scared by horror movies. There’s something about that feeling of seeing a teenager being stalked by a serial killer or seeing a normal sane person reaching his insanity.

But out of all of the horror movie directors out there, there are two in particular that I can think of right off the top of my head that have scared audiences the most. Those two directors are Wes Craven & John Carpenter.

Over the course of film history, Directors Wes Craven and John Carpenter have been proclaimed “Masters of Horror” with the both of them making some of the most beloved and acclaimed on horror movies. The two in particular that I’m going to look at are “A Nightmare on Elm Street” and  “The Thing”.

Both of the movies that I’m watching today deal with horror in two different types of situations. John Carpenter’s The Thing deals with Science-Fictional horror whereas Wes Craven’s A Nightmare on Elm Street deals with horror through a psychological standpoint.

The story of The Thing is a simple one. A group of scientists out in the Antarctic uncover an alien species that can’t be seen, but can assimilate anything it comes in contact with. Tension and horror soon spreads as the alien life-form takes on the shape of the scientists. And this is where the true horror of the film comes into focus. What makes this movie so scary is the tension between all of the scientists. You never know who is the alien life-form or who is human. The only time you know when “The Thing” is going to strike is when the alien life-form sheds its disguise and graphically transforms into a monster. But a majority of the time, The Thing doesn’t rely on the supernatural to present the horrific side of the story.

On the other hand, A Nightmare on Elm Street is the exact opposite. The movie about Freddy Krueger, a serial killer who stalks teenagers in their dreams, relies heavily on the supernatural because of the fact that the film strangely blends reality with the dream world. You as a viewer never know what is real and what’s not. But that’s what makes it so scary. Freddy ultimately has the ability to warp your dreams to seem as normal as possible, so you can never tell when he might strike.

But in the end, what ultimately makes both movies scary in their own right is that they both make supernatural things seem real. And that in itself is terrifying.

In the film genre of Comedy, there are many elements of what makes a comedic film hilarious in its own right be it the comedic timing, the actors, or just the writing in general.

For this entry, I decided to compare and contrast two of my favorite Comedy film directors, Mel Brooks & Edgar Wright.

Both directors use the comedic term spoof or parody in their films. Brooks is ultimately more famous to parodying specific movies and books while Wright is more famous for spoofing and poking fun at entire genres of film as a whole.

The two best examples of this from both directors’ work is Young Frankenstien (Brooks) and Shaun of the Dead (Wright).

Brooks’ film Young Frankenstien is a parody/spoof on the classic Universal horror films, particularly the Frankenstein movies of the 1930’s.

Wright’s film Shaun of the Dead is a parody on the Zombie film genre, using pop culture references to movies such as Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead to achieve the amount of laughs it wants to get.

However, the biggest difference is the style of humor coming from the directors. Wright relies heavily on comedic timing between the actors and the writing as well as countless pop culture references to the genres the movie is spoofing. Wright uses these tactics to throw jokes not just in the foreground but also in the background as well. This is what makes Dead worth watching more than once since you’ll notice things you never saw before. But what really makes Dead such a funny movie is the two main characters played by Simon Pegg and Nick Frost.

The chemistry between the two actors paired up with the dialogue written for them by Wright (he also served as the writer for his films), are ultimately what makes Shaun of the Dead such a fun movie to watch.

Brooks style of humor is ultimately a lot more laid back than Wright’s. Brooks’ use of pop culture references along with intellectual and even a bit of sexual humor are the high points of his films. However, Young Frankenstein owes a lot to the performances of Gene Wilder and Marty Feldman.

Both bring their own styles of humor to the plate and high amazing chemistry between each other and much like Wright’s film are what make it even funnier than they already are.

Overall, both directors have their similarities and their differences in the way they get their humor across. Either way though, both directors are very good at getting a laugh out of their audiences.