A Review of Vertigo – Blog 18

When we first began the movie, I didn’t have high expectations. My dad at home has many Alfred Hitchcock movies, and whenever he got me to watch one, I always thought they were drawn out and boring. Then again, that was when I was younger, but even so I still went in not expecting much. I though that it was just gonna be another convoluted and boring 2 hours, but I can safely say that that wasn’t the case. It may be because my brain has had time to develop and understand a film like this, as the last time I watched a Hitchcock movie was at least 10 years ago, but my initial impression of the film was very good. I was immediately drawn into the story from the beginning, when they showed the source of Scottie’s vertigo, and the way Hitchcock portrayed vertigo was really inventive, considering this movie was made in the 1950’s. The actors’ acting ability wasn’t cringey, which usually pulls me out of the movie and distracts me, but thankfully that wasn’t the case. In fact, I thought the actors and actresses handled the plot very well, considering how unusual it can be considered to be. I liked a lot of things about it, as said, and I actually have a hard time trying to find out what I don’t like about it. I guess I could say that I don’t enjoy the beginning and how slow it takes to get moving, but that is really the only thing. I’m sure if I think long enough and examine the film closer I can find more things I don’t like, but now isn’t the time for that, as we have a film critique to write. If I had to change the fil to fit more for modern audiences, I probably would make the film easier to follow. It may sound bad, but the way I see it, today’s audiences definitely don’t care about intricancies like they did in the past. Many audiences today only care about being told the story easily and and a way that will entertain them. That would be the only thing I would do to suit modern audiences. 

Music with Fixed Rhythms and Patterns of Myself – Blog 17

As similar to the other works in this type of literature, my initial reaction to this work was despair and confusion. I think many of my classmates will say the same thing, including my table members. However, also similar to how the other works went, over time I slowly began to understand what was going on, even if what I thought was going on was wildly wrong, which we will see proven when my group presents our section of the poem. Speaking of our group’s section, our initial thoughts, surprisingly, didn’t seem that negative. I didn’t hear any immediate complaints, and for the most part, we generally understood the text we were given. However, as I said before, we understood it in our own way, which could be laughably bad compared to the actual meaning, which I’m sure will get a few laughs from McGarry once we present. It seems to be a common similarity between Transcendentalist writers that their works are often confusing in nature to read and interpret. I’m not sure what Whitman’s writing style was before he adopted his Trascendentalist beliefs, but as with the other writers, his word choice and way of describing and explaining things confusing to me. It takes time for me to fullt understand what he is trying to say, most often only after a brief explaination from McGarry. I believe the most important lines in my section are the ones about grass. Not surprisingly, those lines make up the entirety of the section. Therefore, what I am trying to say is, my entire section is important. All jokes aside, I would say the most important lines in my section are the ones comparing the different generations to the grass, and saying that they have their own effect on them. They are important to conveying meaning to the section because they are the basis of Whitman’s whole way of describing things. As said before, the theme of grass is used numerous other times in the poem, and not just in this particular section. The main difficulties I’m having with the work is trying to interpret the meaning behind his words, sometimes to no avail. Though, with time, I’m sure that my tablemates and I will somewhat decipher what Whitman has to say within these words.