Gratuitous Excess: "The Great Gatsby"

   Baz Luhrmann is the latest director to take on the challenge of
bringing the American classic to the silver screen.  His
interpretation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel “The Great Gatsby”
turns a few swanky parties in the midst of wealthy Long Island towns
into a scene of chaos.
   The film is a flashback for Nick Caraway (Tobey Maguire).  He sits in
a sanatorium, reflecting on his summer in 1922 where he rented a
cottage in West Egg.  His neighbor, the notorious Jay Gatsby (Leonardo
DiCaprio), was known for throwing parties and not showing up to them.
After attending one of them out of sheer curiosity, Caraway gets
thrown into the world of chaotic excess and the secret-keeper to a
timeless love affair.  Caraway weaves together a memoir of his months
there, with Gatsby’s elusive nature as his focal point.
   Leonardo DiCaprio plays an awkward Jay Gatsby.  He is the ideal
pretty-boy Gatsby, who attempts to keep his cool and plays down his
wealth even though it’s impossible to ignore.  I couldn’t help but
laugh at how socially incompetent he was out and about, yet somehow
was able to brim with confidence with his “reassuring smile.”
Juxtaposing him with Maguire as his only friend was a good choice on
the director’s part. Casting overall wasn’t too bad.  Carey Mulligan
plays the airy Daisy Buchanan, a young woman torn between Gatsby and
her husband, Tom (Joel Edgerton).  The cast, however seemed as drawn
out as Caraway did in the sanatorium at some points.  The passion is
subtle, which doesn’t represent the beautiful words of Fitzgerald.
As every director has their own artistic licensing to put into a film,
Luhrmann left out some things.  First, Jordan Baker (played by
Elizabeth Debecki-Caraway’s love interest) didn’t play as big as a
role in the film as she did in the book.  Luhrmann also fails to show
their relationship as well.  Daisy Buchanan also was blonde in the
film, as she is a brunette in the novel.
Second, when we meet Jay Gatsby, the book depicts it as an
anti-climactic moment, as Caraway stumbles upon him by happenstance at
one of his parties.  Here, we met Jay Gatsby at one of the final
crescendos of “Rhapsody in Blue,” as confetti flew through the air,
fireworks boomed and he raised his glass in triumph.  Fitzgerald made
it seem like anyone could be Gatsby with how he introduces him.
Lurhmann glorifies Gatsby as soon as he takes over the silver screen.
He matches the rumors and build-up we see with an immense grandeur, as
oppose to in the novel.  Gatsby subtly slips into the crowd to meet
Caraway, highlighting the elusiveness of his character as oppose to
turning him into the big deal he really isn’t.
The film ended with Gatsby’s death and left out a good portion of the
last chapter of Fitzgerald’s book.  Once Gatsby dies, so does the
film.  We see no after-math for Caraway as his summer ends.
As Gatsby tells Caraway about his life whilst driving in his yellow
convertible, he speeds and races his way from West Egg to New York.
This was effective cinematographically speaking, as Gatsby’s life
takes twists and turns unexpectedly, from his younger days up to what
we see before us.
   Filmed in Real D 3D, audience members are able to hover above the
bustling New York City, and swoop down and around the luxurious Long
Island estates.  Luhrmann wanted to pull his viewers even more into
the scenes unfolding in front of them.  This was rather effective,
since there was so much going on.  Too much, actually.
   The party scenes depicted in “Gatsby” did a fine job of showing all
the spending the wealthy would do during the Roaring Twenties.  Here,
the excessive suddenly becomes too excessive.  The parties Gatsby
threw in this interpretation became almost too much.  They seem
exaggeratory, even for one of the wealthiest men on Long Island.
The scenes unfolded, showing a world beyond my wildest dreams.  They
were pretty satisfactory, and indeed a valiant effort to make up for
what was missing from to book.  Butlers were fishing martini glasses
out from the pool, women were dressed to the nines doing the
Charleston, and confetti flew in the air like a rainstorm.  What a few
opulent 1920’s parties should be are turned into endless nights of
chaos.  But then again, Gatsby led a life that was anything but
mundane.
   Overall, I commend Luhrmann for his interpretation.  It was a bold
move, mixing in so many anachronistic aspects such as his soundtrack.
I wasn’t surprised, as Jay-Z was the executive producer of the film.
Caraway says in the film “you can’t change the past.”  However,
Luhrmann tries to with the rap music and excessive beats.  I may be no
historian, but I am pretty sure that big band jazz was the thing in
the 1920’s.  Some jazzy tunes had been slipped into the film,
including Cole Porter’s “Let’s Misbehave and Gershwin’s “Rhapsody in
Blue,” which fit the era perfectly.  As far as Jay Z’s music choices
go, they just don’t fit in.
   The underlying theme of the 1920’s excessive nature consumes the film
overall.  It is pretty effective, but it becomes a distraction.  Even
though with an obscenely flexible budget making the opulent jazzy
parties come alive from Fitzgerald’s pages was accomplished in such a
flashy way, it takes away from what Fitzgerald really wrote.  “The
Great Gatsby” is the quintessential American Dream novel, and all the
glamour and glitz in this modernistic interpretation takes away from
what it is meant to be-a tale of hope, passion and repeating past.
   My rating? C+

Iron Man 3 Review

            May third was the premiere for the final movie in the “Iron Man” saga.  Action-packed, this movie quenched the thirst of more Tony Stark for many Iron Man fans.  For the die-hard fans of Stan Lee’s comic book character, the third film was a much-needed follow-up to the disappointment of Iron Man 2.  It could have been better as far as a film goes.  However, as far as a superhero film goes, “Iron Man 3” met the unwritten code of what a superhero movie should have-lots of action, a damsel in distress, and a villain with a kick-ass evil scheme.

            Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow return, as Tony Stark and Pepper Potts.  New actors join the cast such as Ben Kingsley, who plays the Osama Bin Laden-esque villain, the Mandarin, along with Guy Pearce as Aldrich Killian, a brilliant man looking to seduce Potts by means of his technological breakthrough. 

            “Iron Man 3” focuses on Stark’s relationship with Potts throughout the movie more than either of the other films have. It is clear that Stark loves Potts more than anything, but his obsession with his suits and technology create a barrier for him to show his true passion for the most important person to him. 

            Outside the walls of their California home, the Mandarin threatens society as he has built up a new army of super-humans.  He terrorizes everyone, adding more on the agenda for Stark as he sorts out the world and his world. 

The amount of explosions and action sequences will keep audience members on the watch, as everything flies through the air.  I was particularly impressed with the special effects in a few scenes.  The juxtaposition of the story and the strokes of excitement was excellent, not too much of either one. 

Tony Stark’s ego managed to fill the movie throughout, as the brilliant tinkerer uses the power of money to do what he wants.  His sarcastic wit makes us think Tony Stark is selfish, but you cannot help but love him.  The focus on Tony Stark is drawn from the first half of “Iron Man,” as though to probe further into Stark.  Audience members learn more about him, and the back story of a superhero is one of the most important things about them.  At one point, he loses everything.  His home, his girl, his technology and even his Iron Man suit; all gone.  The struggle is real for Stark, as his cleverness becomes the ultimate superpower. 

We even get a chance to study Stark on a more personal level as film-goers.  The silver screen becomes the fishbowl of Tony Stark’s crumbling world.  Looking in, we get to see him attempt to piece back together various aspects of his life that make him Tony Stark. 

            As far as I’m concerned, nothing compares with the first Iron Man movie.  The second one was a great disappointment.  “Iron Man 3” had just enough in it to make it a substantial follow-up to its predecessor.  Director Shane Black reflects on the how-to’s of the final film in a trilogy.  "Truthfully, the way to go about doing a part 3, if you’re ever in that position, as I’m lucky enough to be, is to find a way that the first two weren’t done yet. You have to find a way to make sure that the story that’s emerging is still ongoing and, by the time you’ve finished three, will be something resembling the culmination of a trilogy.”  He says, “It’s about, 'How has the story not yet been completely told?,' and I think we’re getting there. I think we’ve really found ways to make this feel organic and new, based on what’s come before, and that’s what I’m happy about."

Although “Iron Man 3” seemingly offers a lot of closure, it isn’t the end for Robert Downey Jr. as this superhero.  He will reprise this role once more in the next “Avengers” film, and there is indeed a chance that an “Iron Man 4” could be right around the corner!  So go see “Iron Man 3,” as it is the first of many this summer, cram-packed with sequels. 

Great Gatsby 2013: What to Expect

                Baz Luhrmann is at it again-remaking a film that was perfectly fine to begin with.  Notorious for his disgraceful modernized versions of “Moulin Rouge” and “Romeo and Juliet”, the director has now made his own film adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel “The Great Gatsby.”  A timeless love story that captures the American dream glorified during the Roaring Twenties, “Gatsby” has had two films already made based on it.  One in 1974 starring Robert Redford, Sam Waterson, and Mia Farrow, and another in 2000 with Mia Sorvino, Toby Stephens, and Paul Rudd as Nick Carraway. 

                Both were fair remakes, however neither were perfect.  Nuances from the novel were overlooked.  For example, the director’s choice in the past has often been to make Daisy Buchanan, Gatsby’s love interest, a blonde.  Nowhere in the novel has it been mentioned that she is blonde.  In fact, she is a brunette! Her personality dictates this stereotype, and every director wants it to be known that in comparison to Jordan, she is the dumb woman of the story.  Something else that the directors have changed is

In honor of the new film coming out shortly, let’s take a look at the significant aspects of it, pre-evaluating how high expectations the teasers have fostered may not be met.  

                The casting for the 2013 adaptation is pretty spot-on with how I would envision with contemporary actors and actresses.  Leonardo DiCaprio takes on the titular role of Jay Gatsby.  His charm and versatility as an actor gives him great potential to be the mysterious Gatsby we all know and love.  The existential Nick Carraway is portrayed by Tobey Maguire.  A fitting choice, considering he has been typecast as quiet and awkward in the past, making an ideal narrator.  Carey Mulligan will be Daisy Buchanan.  She is an ideal choice for the role, as she follows the blonde-Daisy trend.  Other actors chosen include Ilsa Fischer as Myrtle, Joel Edgerton as Tom Buchanan, Elizabeth Debecki as Jordan Baker.  With an ensemble cast, it is the perfect recipe for cinematic success.   

                From what the trailers have shown us, the director wants to emphasize excess in the film.  The 1920’s was a time of buying on margin; the Stock Market was booming and people were spending more than ever.  Upon being interviewed about his interpretation, he said that he wanted to comment on society’s irresponsibility and the wealthy lifestyle many people achieved in the Roaring Twenties.  If anything, Luhrmann didn’t disappoint here.  

The parties being thrown are ridiculous.  The size of the houses is incredulous.  They are filled with butlers, swimming pools, confetti and more food and drink than one can fathom.  In Fitzgerald’s novel, Carraway vividly describes the parties Jay Gatsby would throw.  His name indeed does “sound like money.”  They were filled with fresh food, hundreds of butlers, large bands and interesting people from all over.

I also got the overwhelming feeling of passion from the trailer.  Aside from the American Dream, another motif from Fitzgerald’s novel was time lost.  Gatsby’s success and overwhelming existence is all efforts from Daisy Buchanan to fall back in love with him.  However, it is often difficult to turn back the clock and relive the past.  What’s done is done.  The embodiment of Gatsby is an elusive one, but this is the most important aspect for a successful adaptation here. 

                The soundtrack is the textbook definition of an anachronism.  If you watched the trailers from the film in mute, the visual aspect alone is breathtaking.  Excess is the name of the game, with parties rekindling the essence of a swanky shindig from decades ago.  Once you add in the music talents of Beyonce, Florence + The Machine, and Lana Del Ray, you lose all hope for 1920’s jazz music that would juxtapose with the spirit of the times.  We should have seen this coming, considering Jay-Z co-produced the soundtrack for the movie. 

Upon seeing the initial trailer in May 2012, I wasn’t thrilled with the contemporary music playing in the background.  I assumed it was a work in progress.  However, upon the release of the official music, I am sad to say it isn’t reminiscent of the glamorous jazz of Artie Shaw and Benny Goodman.  Anyone who was expecting something similar to “The Aviator” or “Public Enemies” soundtrack will be greatly disappointed. 

                Marketing for this film has gone through the roof.  Various companies have set up fashion lines inspired by the film.  Brooks Brothers launched a line April 15 of clothes, accessories and shoes for men.  What is interesting about this line is that Brooks Brothers was around during the 1920’s, and was one of the go-to stores for men of the time.  Fashion Weekly Magazine states that these styles  “weren't simply based on 1920s style: the new duds were designed based on the brand's actual archives.”  What can be seen in the windows in their boutiques is legit as it gets, since the movie offers the same style. 

On April 17^, Tiffany and Co launched a jewelry line in collaboration with Lurhmann and costume designer Catherine Martin.  The collection comprises 7 pieces: a brooch, a headpiece (both reportedly based on archival Tiffany designs), a necklace, and four different rings, including one in platinum with a 5.25-carat diamond, priced at $875,000; quite the price to pay to charade as a 1920’s fashionista.  Kudos to Luhrmann for the costume’s authenticity.  At least the actors will be costumed to perfection with all their flapper flare. 

                The opening film at the Cannes Film Festival, and premiering for the rest of the world May tenth, we can only hope for the best out of the latest adaptation of the classic novel.  Hopefully anachronisms don’t turn what could be a great film into another disappointment on Luhrmann’s behalf.  If done write, adaptations can be amazing.

                Don’t let this discourage you from seeing the film, reader.  I do have every intention of seeing the film dressed as a flapper.  Each director has their own opportunity to tell Ftzgerald’s story through their own eyes.  Luhrmann’s interpretation hopefully still captures the essence of recreating the past, while adding his own touches.  A quasi-modernization of a classic is a tedious task, and his track record has proven him unsuccessful thus far.  “Gatsby” just might be his green light across the water.     

Good Vibe Films

The message that lives between the scripted words is the most valuable thing one can take away from a film.  It can lift you up to new heights.  With the stressful final weeks of the semester, an excellent and easy escapism to ease one’s mind would be to watch a good-vibe generating film.  A can-do attitude is generated and you’ll feel invincible soon enough.

Here are some spirit-lifting films to get you through research paper season. 

Silver Linings Playbook.  The most recent of the films listed, “Silver Lining Playbook” made waves during Awards Show Season.  Based on Matthew Quick’s novel of the same name, I immediately felt inspired after seeing it.  It has a positive message overall.  After seeing Cooper and Lawrence’s characters overcome woes beyond the norm, you find that no matter how hopeless you find life, “if you stay positive you have a shot at a silver lining. 

Crazy, Stupid Love.  This film has become my go-to romantic-comedy.  Starring Steve Carrell, Julianne Moore, Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone, “Crazy Stupid Love” is Shakespearean in nature.  It is filled with misinterpretations, miscommunications.  It starts out with Emily (Moore) asking Cal (Carrell) for a divorce because she had an affair, and Cal’s whole world gets thrown into disarray until Gosling offers him a chance to rediscover who he is.  Everyone falls for the wrong person.  You laugh, you cry, you root for Steve Carrell and then wish him hell.  But like all Shakespearean plays, this movie leaves you reminded that love perseveres all. 

Julie & Julia.  What could be more adorable than a movie with Amy Adams AND Meryl Streep?  “Julie & Julia” is a duo-biopic about two extraordinary women-Julia Child and Julia Powell.  Based on Powell’s novel of the same name, the film follows the titular characters as they break through the mold of normal and become something more than what they are.  Powell (Adams) is looking to become something beyond a temp worker in post 9/11 New York.  She embarks on a mission to cook every meal in a cookbook penned by Child (Streep), who faced obstacles as a woman chef in 1950’s France.  Filled with its quirks, you will feel inspired by what they have done and will probably go make yourself a fancy French meal as the credits roll. 

Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.  A classic John Hughes film (and what I think is his best), “FBDO” stars Matthew Broderick, Alan Ruck and Mia Sara.  If you went through high school without seeing this film, you have missed out, reader.  Not a line is wasted, and the message is timeless.  Like the typical teenager looking for a personal day to get away from academic pressures, Bueller feigns illness.  With his best friend and girl by his side, he embarks on an unforgettable romp through Chicago.  The message of the film is to live life to its fullest and not to let it pass by; “if you don’t stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.”

Wolf of Wall Street Book Review

           Imagine a life working on Wall Street for an investment firm making millions faster than you can say “stock broker” and spending it just as quickly without a care in the world, knowing you’ll make more in due time.  Thus begins the autobiographical novel “The Wolf of Wall Street” by Jordan Belfort.  Belfort is a Long Island stockbroker who gets caught up in the world of power and greed.  The opulent life he lives with his trophy wife in his lavish mansion an hour outside the city soon falls to pieces ultimately due to corruption.  The film adaptation will be released in November, however the novel is a page-turner and we can only hope that the movie does Belfort’s tale justice.

            Belfort’s tale begins with his rise to power from day one at the Stratton Oakmont investment firm, and takes us through how the world of stockbrokers functions.  Hotel bills by the hundreds of thousands of dollars, hookers and private jet planes to anywhere in the world are just mundane aspects of the Wall Street lifestyle.  With a life full of scandal, drugs and wealth, Belfort could use his monetary power to make people do what he wanted when he wanted and evade anything that comes his way.    However, even someone as sly as a wolf can’t get his way out of everything. 

            Reading “The Wolf of Wall Street” was quite the experience.  Belfort’s descriptions of everything-from the boardroom’s everyday atmosphere to what his home is like with his beautiful wife (whom he refers to as the Duchess)-are beyond fathomable.  Lunches at restaurants where the bill for a few people run into thousands of dollars to wristwatches that cost millions are part of everyday life for Belfort.  He had such an obscene amount of money and was able to do whatever he wanted with it.  I was astounded by everything he did and how carelessly he would go through money.  And if the way he lived wasn’t crazy enough, his drug addiction was ridiculous.  He goes into detail with how many pills he would take of certain drugs, and what lengths he would go to just to make sure he wouldn’t go through withdrawal.

            Lord Acton one said, “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”  Jordan Belfort’s life can justify Lord Acton, as he goes from partying all the time to doing time.  In the midst of a ruined marriage, a drug addiction and a pump-and-dump scheme, Belfort’s wild life leads him into federal crime and debts off the charts. 

            Martin Scorsese took on the challenge of making Belfort’s autobiography a movie, starring Leonardo DiCaprio as the scrupulous stockbroker along with Matthew McConaughey, Jonah Hill and Julie Andrews.  I anticipate seeing the outcome, as I didn’t want to put the book down.  I recommend “The Wolf of Wall Street” for anyone who wants a first-hand account of the criminal side of Wall Street, along with those looking for a good read.  His tale epitomizes the highest highs and lowest lows you can go through in his position; everything is beyond excess in a way no one could make up.  I was immediately captivated and couldn’t put his book down.  “The Wolf of Wall Street” has definitely become one of my favorite books.

 

"Oz" was Great AND Powerful

This winter was the release of Disney’s latest film “Oz the Great and Powerful.”  Based off of L. Frank Baum’s “Oz” series and as the prequel to the 1939 “The Wizard of Oz,” this film further explores the fantasy Land of Oz.  Audience members get to see how expansive it really is, as “Oz” is a feast for the eyes.  It awakened aesthetic appreciation I didn’t know I had. 

Director Sam Raimi takes on this heavily weighted project.  Previously the director of the Spiderman movies and many action TV series such as “Spartacus,” Raimi takes on a big task of reviving a classic while adding some distinct flare to it. 

Upon seeing the trailer for this film last fall, I was reluctant to express my excitement.  I grew up with “The Wizard of Oz” and I was nervous that the 2013 predecessor to the movie almost seventy-five years older than it was going to be a massive train wreck.  However, I was delightfully surprised to find that this film was not a disappointment. 

The film starts out with opening credits reminiscent of a nickelodeon from the 1930’s in sepia (very similar to its predecessor “The Wizard of Oz”), as it takes place in 1905 Kansas.  Oscar “Oz” Diggs (James Franco) is a small-town magician, looking to make it big with his sleight of hand tricks and prestidigitation.  His petty attempts to achieve fame and build up a fortune knock him down constantly.  His partner (Zach Braff) Frank loses faith as him as his ethics weaken and he slowly becomes nothing. 

When a tornado hits the circus, Oz takes flight in a flying air balloon that transports him to a Technicolor wonderland. Literally.  He shortly meets Theodora (Mila Kunis) who informs him that he must be the wizard whose arrival will fulfill the prophesy of killing the bad witch and bring the Land of Oz back to its glory.  Even though Oz doesn’t possess the magic that the people of Oz think he has, he agrees to help in order to become king, once he kills the witch.  Before he knows it, Oz is thrown into a fantasy land where anything is possible, and becomes caught between three feuding sister witches, Theodora, Evanora (Rachel Weisz) and Glinda (Michelle Williams). 

For what it was worth, “Oz” was absolutely spectacular.  The sets Disney used seemed infinite, as the Land of Oz unfolded before me in the theatre.  Nothing pleased me more than watching James Franco fumble through the beautiful Land of Oz for two hours.  It was the perfect combination of the charm from the old film while incorporating the technology of the 21^st century to expand upon everything.  Everywhere in the Land of Oz went in the film had its own style, especially the art-deco Emerald City.   

The costumes were elaborate as well.  Each character had one that reflected their personality, which is important.  If costuming is done wrong, then it is harder to relate to certain characters and understand why they behave in certain ways.  I was most impressed with Williams’ dress, which was simple but beautiful.  Make-up also reflected the personalities of the characters; the darker the eye-shadow, the less you were able to trust the characters for what they were up to. 

Compared to the 1939 film, “Oz” was a lot darker.  Everything wasn’t all singing scarecrows, ruby slippers and talking apple trees.  The special effects used were rather impressive.  Animated creatures were fantastic; the animators who created them were very detail-oriented as everything was so perfect. 

The cinematographic aspects of “Oz” were closely linked to that of “The Wizard of Oz.”  Most significantly, the film goes from a full-screen sepia experience and then turns into a full-screen Technicolor work of art.  The sound effects also shift from a mono-aural to surround sound experience. 

Franco makes it to Oz via tornado, like Dorothy in the 1939 film.  Characters in the Kansas part of the film also do cameos in the Oz portion (for example, Braff and Williams).  Producers snuck in the nuances of the classic characters the Scarecrow, Tin Man and Cowardly Lion.  Glinda does travel by bubbles.  Williams wears a gingham dress in the film, the same pattern as Dorothy does.  Munchkin-Landers do indeed sing and dance (or at least attempt to until James Franco cuts them off).  The evil witches do indeed send flying monkeys upon the people of Oz to unleash havoc beyond what the 1939 film could do effect-wise. 

Most iconic, although it is not mentioned in the film, the characters continually travel along a yellow brick road.  If you pay attention enough to these nuances, you will be able to find them, and potentially more than what I had picked up. 

Due to Warner Brothers Pictures’ rights, Disney was unable to rebirth some of the more iconic aspects of “The Wizard of Oz.”  For instance, no reference or use of the ruby slippers Judy Garland wore is present.  Disney wasn’t able to use the exact shade of green for the witch’s make-up either from the original film.  However, their legal department was able to arrange for a slightly different color to be used called theostein. 

The casting for the film was pretty fair.  James Franco doesn’t take away from the film.  I found it very entertaining seeing him traveling through Oz, and I can’t see any actors playing the role of Oz and doing as good of a job as he did.  Although Robert Downey Jr. and Johnny Depp were both offered the leading role, I think they would have been too old to bring the gentle charm Franco offers.  The supporting actors and actresses were fit for the roles they portrayed.  I was particularly impressed with Mila Kunis, as her presence in the film made her become a more versatile actress in my mind. 

While watching “Oz” I forgot that I was watching a Disney film.  It is far from what I would expect Disney Studios to produce, which was a nice change from what normally comes out of there.  “Oz” takes on a dark, mature persona that will keep audiences captivated. 

Why We Quote Films

             How many times have you stood on your porch and screamed, “I’m the king of the world!” Or wandered around in the dark and uttered “I have a bad feeling about this?”  How about reassuring your mopey best friend that “you aren’t dying; you just can’t think of anything better to do?” Often, we incorporate movie lines into everyday life, keeping the spirit of film alive.   

I find myself quoting movies countless times daily. I’ll admit I go beyond solely that. I’ve ran miles in a garbage bag like Bradley Cooper in “Silver Linings Playbook.” I’ve rocked a Gryffindor scarf and crazy wavy hair like Emma Watson from the Harry Potter films. I own an aviator jacket, scarf and shades similar to the ones Leonardo DiCaprio wears in “the Aviator” so I can charade as Howard Hughes at my leisure. I even carry around a lightsaber in my bag just in case, and enjoy singing and dancing in a rainstorm.  Even when part of a film can be such a nuanced one, using the right one at the right time brings us closer to the silver screen.

Quoting movies are an inside joke between the film and me-rather, the film and the viewer. Anyone who understands the reference or has seen the motion picture is in on it. However, when no one else laughs and I am stuck looking awkward for my allegedly irrelevant commentary, then I’m on my own.

    Comparing film to life has become an enormous aspect of how I approach things.  With every bad scene, there is a new one coming up. However, unlike film, life isn’t scripted. We have to “take life as it comes at us, to make each day count.” so, why do we choose to place someone else’s words into our own moments of victory or moments of pain? Why do we choose to cite something already there instead of making up our own lines to describe our highest highs, and our lowest lows?
    Let’s take a look at the evolution of quoting. In general, it isn’t something new-the first thing that anyone quoted was the Bible. In the fifteenth century, the invention of the printing press caused the literacy rate to skyrocket. Once the majority of people were reading, the Bible was the go-to source to quote. People were able to reassert their religious knowledge.  

Four hundred years later, the radio was invented and radio shows became popular. Programs like “The Shadow” were put on to listen to. Eventually, the line "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?" became submersed into pop culture. By 1933, sixty percent of American households had radios and tuned in weekly to hear their favorite program.   

Quotable quotes from the radio then evolved into television ones. Lines like “what’chu talkin’ ‘bout, Willis?” (from Different Strokes) and “No soup for you!” (from Seinfeld) became fads and are still used today.  

Now, quoting movies is the current thing to do. Lines become trends; they are born from a film and once they reach their height, they either become a lexicon for the average vocabulary, or fade back to the film from whence they came.  

Certain phrases from movies define an event of life or create more meaning to situations we face. For example, if someone says “we’re gonna need a bigger boat,” the reference to “Jaws” is a boating movie icon. Or when you hear “I’m gonna make him an offer he can’t refuse,” “The Godfather” is immediately what comes to mind. Later gangster films use this mentality when telling a story.  John Belushi’s shouting “TOGA! TOGA!” from “National Lampoon’s Animal House” is quite often incorporated into movies about college life. Students even hold toga parties today in their dorms on campuses everywhere. “It’s in the hole!” from Caddyshack has become the lexicon for golf motion pictures. Iconic phrases become the lexicon for a movie  genre.  

Even “to be or not to be” from Hamlet is so often used. The four hundred year old quote is the most famous one of Shakespeare’s, as the matter of action versus inaction can be posed for virtually any situation.  

The reason to why we quote films has actually become an interest for one professor, as he investigated why we quote films. Richard Harris, a psychology professor at Kansas State University has analyzed this. He has done extensive research on young adults’ memories of watching movies. By citing films in everyday life, you can make things more tangible to others. It is similar to telling a joke, even. Harris says “people are doing it to feel good about themselves, to make others laugh, to make themselves laugh.”

"Almost everybody has a very good memory for something," Harris said. Some people are hardwired to remember mathematical equations. Others are best at remembering every country in the world and its capital. If one can pull a line from a staged situation into a real life situation and apply it appropriately, then a film (or a portion of it) has impacted an individual only so much.  

By quoting films, we once more become a part of escapism, which is defined as the avoidance of reality through absorption of the mind in entertainment.   Even though the moment is brief, we are connected to the film and temporarily escape reality through our own words. 

            Only few things can bring people together. Aspects of life such as food, music, books, and now film are the most universal parts of pop culture. Movie quotes unify people, now more than ever. So the next time you say “there’s no place like home” or advise someone to “keep their friends close, but their enemies closer,” you’re keeping alive the trend of quoting iconic movies. Every day, lines like these are becoming increasingly immersed into our culture.