Puzzle

After rewatching the final scene in class today, I saw the jigsaw puzzle as a metaphor for interpreting Kane's life. Thompson, or whoever the guy is that's trying to figure out the meaning behind Rosebud, says something like "Rosebud is just a missing piece in a jigsaw puzzle." Before Kane dies, Susan keeps playing with jigsaw puzzles. This would be the equivalent of evaluating Kane's life and she understands that Kane lacks the ability to genuinely love, something he was deprived of when he was young after being taken away from his mother, and leaves him alone in his alienated castle. Love from a parent is primitive social need. Thompson's comment on Rosebud shows the difficulty or rather the impossibility of interpreting one's life. The missing piece is not the sled, it's Kane himself. Because Kane is the only one aware of Rosebud and he is the only one who can gather a simple interpretation of his life.

Kane

I thought the scene where Kane is releasing his anger out on the room and its furniture was a good example of the dualistic nature of being both powerful and powerless. He looks like King Kong. He is portrayed by the camera as a giant but looks weak and old in the way he walks. He looks like a dumb, drunk giant about to collapse at any moment. He is breaking everything because he just lost his wife, Singer. I think Singer resembles Kane's mother here in her departure from Kane. Kane loses love. He realizes the meaning, or lack there, of the material world and sees that he cannot buy his love just like he cannot buy his mother back or Rosebud.
Now that we know that Rosebud is the sled. I recall the scene where Mr. Bernstein is speaking about Kane's past and says, "A man remembers a lot of things you wouldn't think he'd remember." He then talks about how he remembers some random girl he saw once. This is a clear indication to how little Rosebud means to everyone besides Kane. I see what Mr. Bennett means by watching the film multiple times. There's definitely more connections you can make by rewatching it.

Citizen Kane

So far our themes are:
1.) Alienation- The "No Tresspassing" sign, the private aspect of his life, they say that many years of his life are covered.
2.) Loss of Innocence- I'm unsure on this as of now but Kane is accused to be a fascist.
3.) Materialism- The movie so far shows the vast wealth of Kane initially that eventually plunders and disappears with his death. You can't keep your money when your dead. The only thing that remains is his name.
4.) Power- I don't know yet, but Kane loses his power with his death.
5.) It's too early in the movie to say this but I think another theme could possibly be the power of media. The newspapers and media are a major control over the opinion of the people. When Kane is running for governor, a rival newspaper publishes something about one of his affairs.

Discursive Discussion

Ultra-humanization vs. De-humanization
There are many examples of de-humanization throughout the film. Well there should be considering both the novel and film have anti-war messages. For that very reason, I find it unlikely that the author or director intentionally included examples of ultra-humanization. I believe that when they are viewed upon in short-term, they may appear to be ultra-humanizing but they are actually longer extensions of de-humanization. For example and clarification, Paul serves in the army for many years and has feelings and experiences in the war that he never would have experienced back at home. But if you long at the long-term effects, Paul has been destroyed by the war, and eventually killed. So even if he returned home, he'd never have been able to live peacefully and endure the psychological traumas of war. The critic must remember that Paul is one of the many young men who were teenagers still in their adolescence, who had to join the war and were changed greatly. I'll argue with Mr.Bennett and say that anything resembling ultra-humanization in this movie is actually the illusion of pro-war. Recalling the intentions of both the author and director, I find it unlikely that ultra-humanization exists, and if there is, then it wasn't intended for that reason. Props to Mr. Bennett for trying to invent his own little concept though.

And about American actors playing German soldiers in World War II. I personally think that would be genius on the part of the director or whoever makes the decision. If the idea is that German soldiers were not all Nazis and were in fact normal soldiers like any other. What better way to convey this message to an American audience then to use American actors? Americans would be able to sympathize and relate much better to other Americans than to Germans, considering most of us think they're all Nazis. Plus, the movie would probably generate a much greater revenue if in English rather than German. Americans don't want to go read subtitles and listen to the strong German language.

Making Sense of the Doors and Windows

Ok, so I'm starting to put the pieces of the puzzle together. The camera angles, the windows, the doors closing, it's all making SOME sense to me. So far today, we've seen the man walk to the large window at the hospital and either pass out or die and we've seen the door close on Paul, although it did open up again later on. My interpretation of the man walking to the window is that the man is looking out onto the world that he is about to leave because he is now free and ready for the next life, if that makes sense. Then, Mr. Bennett pointed out the fact that the door closed on Paul and kind of gave it away, suggesting that Paul is doomed. Maybe this means that Paul will die physically or maybe it means that Paul will die inside. We've already seen the awkward behavior of Paul back in his hometown. At this point, even if the war ends, it seems as though Paul has given up on his hopes and dreams, and cannot revert back to civilian life. It's one of those psychological traumas of war. So even if Paul is to return home, he will never be able to live his life normally after being removed for so long. War is haunting.

Girls and War

I think I have a bad memory for little things like what I ate for breakfast or which part of the film we watched on Tuesday. but, I do remember the situation with the 3 French girls and the 4 German guys(Sucks for the fourth guy, whoever it'll be). I don't know about you guys, but if I were in war with no members of the opposite sex ever around, It would be more painful for me than being tortured in battle. Heck, I don't even think I'd survive an all boys school(although I have survived Tech), much less war. I went to football camp for only 5 days and I was suffering terribly. No wonder the Japanese military set up a system of comfort women in World War II. Now, I'm neither displaying support nor justifying the event, but just understanding one of the reasons for having comfort women. I'm glad that the men have an opportunity to get war off there minds, although it is really impossible. By the way, did anyone else notice that the scene, where the two men(perhaps one is Paul) are looking at the poster of the beautiful girl, is filmed through a mirror. At first, it annoyed me, but then I tried to understand why the director chose to film from that angle. Why not just show the scene directly through the lens at a normal angle? I can't tell yet if there is significance to the director's choice, which I truly hope for, or if it just has the illusion of a master plan. Maybe the mirror is reflecting upon their past. I really don't know.

Kantorek

The scene where Kantorek visits the trenches and is ridiculed and forced to fight on the battlefield by his former students might be one of my favorite scenes so far. I always wondered how it was that the soldiers always died so easily and generals and those of higher rank lived battle after battle. Kantorek's apprehension and cowardice on the battlefield reminded me of a quote I've heard before somewhere...Something like:

When the rich wage war, it's the poor who die.

Politicians put men on the field, with a remote, if any at all, care for soldier's lives. Maybe politicians should be the ones fighting each other.

I remember earlier in the movie the men were discussing the reason they were at war. None of them actually understood why they were killing the men across the field or suffering painful atrocities, whether mental or physical. I recall the conversation... take note the words are not anywhere near verbatim because this is just from memory...

Why are we at war?
Because our country hates France.
So you're trying to tell me that a mountain in Germany hates a field somewhere in France?
No, because our people hate the French.
No, I don't hate the French.
Neither do I.

OK, that was definitely not word for word. But the idea is there. Not a single one of the German soldiers has feelings of animosity towards the French.

On a personal note, I always thought about how I would never join the army because I am afraid to die or my life is too valuable and I have bigger aspirations in life. War honestly seems stupid though. Of course I could think of exceptions like the American Revolution. But even with that war, what made the colonists think that they deserved the rights to self-government or no taxation without representation. How about being a little grateful instead of saying, "NO taxes, it's not like you've given us economic opportunities we never would've had in England, or providing us with a haven of religious toleration." If I were the British, I'd easily be aggravated. And then look at current events. I don't see how we are protecting our country... from terrorists? It only takes 1 to kill many. Maybe war is just a natural part of human mentality. Maybe I'm anti-war or something, but the principles just seem messed up and the necessity seems to be absent. Maybe Remarque felt the same way and decided his book needed to be published so that people would see it from his perspective. If so, Milestone did a good job of carrying the original message and perspective over into motion picture.

Quick side note: What do you think the doors and windows thing is accomplishing? For me it's the director's alternative of panning because the people continue moving from one side of our view to the other. I don't think it's limiting our view but instead just a stylish director's tool.

All Along the Western Front

While I'd prefer to read the book to get the true meaning and feeling intended by d. Lewis Milestone, the movie seems to do a good job in portraying the different scenarios in war. Honestly, well... obviously, if I were just watching this movie alone, I wouldn't be able to interpret the movie the same way we do in class. Surprisingly, though, All Along the Western Front is a somewhat entertaining movie, which is so surprising because I didn't think that I, a twenty first century teenager, would be able to appreciate a black and white movie from the 1930s. Anyway, I actually found it humorous how each man was fascinated by their new pair of leather boots and ended up dying or stopping a bullet. I understand the whole idea of how the men get killed but the boots live on, but what happens when the boots tear? I believe there is a beginning and an end to everything besides, perhaps,the supernatural. THE BOOTS WILL DIE.