GOOD FILMS VS. BAD FILMS. HOW DO WE TELL THIS DIFFERENCE?

By Magdalena Markiewicz, NYC

It frequently happens that spring break makes people do nothing but sit in front of TV which, in fact, is teeming with dull sitcoms and reality shows. I did experience that last week when my mood was overcome by laziness which forced to kill the time in the evening through watching everything that was on television. At that time I started to think of films I consider the best and the worst, and why I placed them into these two extreme categories. Was it because of plot, characters, main themes or maybe setting? At first glance all of these are essential and have a great influence on the whole of a film. Nevertheless, the more I was thinking about that, the less I knew. As far as I remember, I used to dislike black-and-white films which seemed too monotonous, lifeless and unimaginative. What is more, I had the impression that all old movies possessed some specific features which made them look so similar. In addition to this, I tended to associate these films with certain funny scenes repeated over and over again. For instance, the main character is driving a car (it is obviously is shot in a studio) turning the steering wheel energetically from left to right and glancing constantly in the rear-view mirror. I had had such an image about black-and-white movies in my head until I watched Casablanca for the first time. Nevertheless, are contemporary films really so interesting, exciting and colorful?

I have always wondered what made people love Casablanca so much. According to Umberto Eco (1994: 260), ‘the question is a legitimate one…Casablanca is a very mediocre film. It is a comic strip, a hotch-potch, low on psychological credibility, and with little continuity in its effects’. If I had heard this comment a few years ago, I would have been completely discouraged to watch the movie. “A hotch-potch”…What does it mean? I solved the mystery as soon as I saw Casablanca. Indeed, this old film is brimming with everything: love, intrigue, suspense, drama, gambling, smoking, drinking, money…Perhaps such kind of mixture can attract people of different likings; everybody may find something interesting in the movie. Casablanca is not deprived of an excellent cast (Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman and Claude Rains), however, is it the real source of admiration? It took me a few years to understand and answer this question, although I could not make myself to like the movie at the beginning. Now, it seems to me that the popularity of the film is connected with its exceptional atmosphere, place and time. Furthermore, there is a beautiful and affecting romance, some war-time intrigue, and last but not least, a memorable screenplay. Yes, Casablanca contains unforgettable scenes and quotes. I still remember one moment when the Germans start singing ‘Watch on the Rhine’, and Laszlo orders the band to play ‘La Marseillaise’, and then the crowd at Rick’s drowns out the Germans. I also bear one dialog in my mind: ‘You played it for her, you can play it for me. Play it!’, Rick said / ‘Play it, Sam. Play ‘As Time Goes By’, Ilsa adds. This short conversation impressed me somehow, and even now, I can see Ingrid Bergman saying that. In spite of all these uplifting aspects, there is one more crucial theme in the film – the Second World War – the most important event in the whole human history that we cannot compare to any other conflict. Due to the fact that Casablanca was made in 1942 is not meaningless; it was the hardest time for mankind and that is why it so noteworthy. For the previous generations the movie functioned as a mirror reflecting the tragedy and pain of the war. For us it is a reliable piece of history which will not make us forget about the past.

War is also the question in Braveheart (1995), the story of a Scottish rebel, William Wallace, who led an uprising against the cruel English ruler, Edward the Langshanks, in order to set Scotland free. Despite the fact that the battle against England is the leading motif and the fighting scenes look extremely realistic, these characteristics were not the only reason for bringing tears to people’s eyes. Obviously, the bloody and violent battle clips are remarkable, yet, these are not the main cause for winning Oscar for the best film and director. ‘It’s an ambitious film, big on simple emotions like love, patriotism and treachery, and avoids the travelogue style of so many historical swashbucklers’ (Ebert 1995). Indeed, feelings play a key role in Braveheart; the film is very powerful, emotional and deeply affects audiences. One of the most poignant moments can be seen at the very end when Wallace’s body is stretched on the rack and he slowly dies yelling “freedom!” at the same time. The movie, however, is full of such scenes which make people shed tears. Apart from this, the film has many other features which make it so genuine – the soundtrack. From the opening track, the listener understands that Horner has tried to produce a romantic, melancholy, and mysterious atmosphere. Then the mystic sound of the bagpipe is heard, and at this point, anyone with a true soul begins to break down. It is very rare that music can really touch the soul. Surely, this soundtrack can. Even though the film has so many virtues, it is not deprived of some vices. Some critics state that Braveheart is teeming with historical inaccuracies. For instance, Wallace was never interested in freedom from English rule for Scotland; he was interested in Scottish rule for himself. It seems that the reviewers reproach Mel Gibson, the director, for his lack of Scottish history knowledge. Ebert opposes such judgments explaining that:

‘Gibson is not filming history here, but myth. William Wallace may have been a real person, but "Braveheart" owes more to Prince Valiant, Rob Roy and Mad Max. Once we understand that this is not a solemn historical reconstruction (and that happens pretty fast), we accept dialogue that might otherwise have an uncannily modern tone…’ (1995).

The film is seen as very powerful, moving, violent and exceptional by millions of people. The plot, acting and music delight everybody. Do we need, then, more proofs to believe that Braveheart is one of the best films ever? I suppose it is not necessary.

Speaking of the difference between good and bad films, I must take into account documentaries. As far as I am concerned, this type of movie was not my favorite on the grounds that it usually presented apparently monotonous political, social, or historical subjects. Clearly, I was wrong. Documentary films can be extremely informative, influential and true because these do not tell lies but show the world as it is. There are no breathtaking special effects or soundtracks. Moreover, it frequently happens that the quality of such broadcasts is low and we may not derive any pleasure from watching them; yet, a documentary still has its virtues. Why? There are many movies of this kind which have made a big impact of my life. One of them is Super Size Me by Morgan Spurlock. The filmmaker described his crazy idea of taking on a 30-day diet of nothing but McDonald’s. The man, however, did not want to go to war with McDonald’s, but he tried to draw people’s attention to the biggest health problem in the United States. ‘I wanted to illustrate dramatically what is happening in America. The fast-food culture has utterly changed how we eat and, more important, how much we eat. It has helped make us fatter – especially children – and sicker. I wanted to see (and show) what it would do to my body’ (Spurlock 2004: 104). Super Size Me revealed the painful truth about the human way of life which has become extremely destructive. It also motivated people to overcome the manipulation of corporations such as McDonald’s and start to educate themselves. Spurlock’s film made most of us aware of such a negative impact and resisted the temptation to buy those large fries and Coke, otherwise we would lose control over our life.

To my way of thinking, it is difficult to say what the difference between good and bad movie is, owing to the fact that any clarification would be too subjective. Sometimes it is a matter of characters, setting or main themes. It also happens we do not like a film, however, we are not able to explain why. Unfortunately, it is impossible to create some general rules according to which we could analyze particular aspects of a film, and state whether it is excellent or not. Naturally, we can listen to other people’s opinions and compare them with ours, yet, does a constant depending on somebody’s comments make sense? Instead of trying to see your friend’s point of view, you should stop for a while and think of your own emotions and feelings about Casablanca or Super Size Me which may turn out completely different from his. Apart from this, such a pondering gives you a chance to get know something new about yourself, even if it takes some time…

References
Eco, U. 1994, The Hollywood Sign, Macmillan, Boston
Spurlock, M. ‘The Dumbest Diet Ever’, Men’s Health, June 2004
Rogerebert.com, Movie Reviews 2006, ‘Braveheart’. Retrieved 4 Jan. 2006 from
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19950524/REVIEWS/505240301/1023