schweblog

In order to satisfy the fine arts requirement for my degree, I’m taking an introduction to film class. While not particularly difficult, it’s forcing me to sit down and finally watch the movies that I’m frequently being told that I should have seen a long time ago. Last week I had the chance to finally watch the great American classic, “Singin’ in the Rain.”

Many have hailed this as the definitive masterpiece of American film; some have called it the best movie ever made. I don’t think I’d go that far, but I can recognize this film for what it is: a truly classic musical that highlights many aspects of film that have been lost with the ages. Contemporary film, which I’m finding to be more of the same over and over again, could take a couple of cues from “Singin’ in the Rain.”

Almost immediately evident in the film, although virtually unnoticeable unless pointed out, is the lack of “cuts” in the film. Nowadays, few films go for more than a minute without a cut to another angle of the same scene. This is particularly apparent in action films like the Matrix series, where the camera position is shifted abruptly every few seconds, presumably with the intent of making the scene feel more frantic.

Watching Gene Kelly in “Singin’ in the Rain” makes you realize just how much unenhanced, normal people are capable of in just one take. Although the camera remains mobile throughout the movie(usually in order to keep Kelly on screen), there are few cuts in scenes–even fewer in “action” sequences (usually musical numbers). Kelly and his co-stars do entire dance numbers–filled with a remarkable level of ability and athleticism–in one scene with no cuts. It’s a remarkable showcase of human ability that illustrates a spectacular level of talent. And more producers would do well to remember this technique, whether it’s in dance numbers or fight scenes.

More importantly, it seems as if contemporary film has forgotten what the medium started as: a mode of escapism. As such, “Singin’ in the Rain” serves to remind us–as it should modern-day producers and directors–that having characters jump into highly unlikely routines displaying unrealistic amounts of happiness can actually be fun to watch. Most would scoff at such an idea, as it places actors “out of character” in an unrealistic fashion. Regardless, it’s enjoyable to watch…besides, total reality of character seems like a silly goal in light the completely unrealistic action that takes place in most Hollywood films today.

When I finished with the film, I walked out of the room feeling both happy and sad. I was a tad upset because I had simply shrugged off the film in the past and ended up missing out on an inspiring, delightful movie that really entertained me–something that most modern films are wont to do (”Amelie” and “The Royal Tennenbaums” being exceptions). On the other hand, I felt genuinely happy. Throughout the film I could feel myself smiling–literally smiling–at the action taking place on screen. The movie made me feel good…something that seems to be lacking in nearly every movie I’ve seen for the past several years.

“Singin’ in the Rain” ultimately reminded me that there can be good–even great–films out there that need not employ erratic plot devices, absurd amounts of special effects, or strange supernatural themes to be enjoyable. It’s OK to watch a movie with the expectation of just feeling good and having fun. I don’t need an overlying moral lesson, heavily symbolic and mind-blowingly epic, to satisfy me. All it really takes is a talented, innovative person and a simple storyline to make a movie that will entertain audiences for years to come.