Authenticity of La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc & Alexander Nevsky

I thought the authenticity of both La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc and Alexander Nevsky were both very historically authentic. After watching both of these movies, I thought that they have done the best job of seeming real to me.

Both movies start off with facts about either the time that the events of the movie were in, or, like in La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc, show an actual artifact from the trial of Joan of Arc. Right away in both cases, we are given information that is in attempt to make us believe that these movies are depicting actual events.

Throughout both of these movies we are also shown things that helped contribute to my belief in the authenticity of these movies. During La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc, the men of the trial seem to treat her negatively and are shown to not respect Joan too much. I believe that this is exactly like what it was because of the threat that these people felt from Joan. It makes sense to me that these people wanted nothing to do with Joan because of her beliefs and actions.

In Alexander Nevsky, there are many cases during the movie where we see “knights” riding around on horses carrying heavy armor and weapons. We also see creations of large castles or buildings that look to be medieval. During the battle scene, the two sides that are fighting charge at each other on horses or on feet and attempt to hit each other with their weapons. This is probably pretty accurate to how battles went back then because of the lack of technology to develop different means for violence.

I think as time goes on with this class, the movies are going to become more and more historically authentic just because of the amount of technology that each new movie will have.

Robin’s Hood

As we were watching The Adventures of Robin Hood as a class one aspect of the movie caught my mind within the first part of the movie and extended throughout the film.  I thought that it was pretty powerful that the community and neighborhood that Robin Hood was a part of was so close with Robin Hood and close with all of the others in the community.  Everyone worked together closely for one common goal to end the film.  Robin Hood was obviously the leader of the community and the others completely supported him as he was trying to win over Maid Marian.  I believe that this was a good sense as to what things were like back in that day.  As we talked about in class, Robin Hood was a legend; however the aspects throughout the film are authentic.  I believe that when this story line took place there wasn’t any drama within the countries or communities.  Throughout the movie you see the whole community hiding in trees and attacking others entering their territory.  I also believe that this ties into the term we talked about in class, nationalism.  This term comes up throughout the whole film with Robin Hood’s territory and Sir Guy of Gisbourne.

I thought it was cool and interesting to see how nonchalant Robin Hood was throughout the whole film.  He showed a lot of confidence in every scene as if he knew that he was going to get Maid Marian the whole time.  I would have thought that Robin Hood would have seemed scared during the scene of his hanging.  The hanging scene really showed that Robin Hood knew that his other community members were going to protect him and get him out of the hanging.  The film overall was great and showed many different symbols as Robin Hood stole Maid Marian from Sir Guy of Gisbourne.    RobinHood_zpswomnl7dt

The Crusades (1935) v. The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)

Like many of you in this class I have not had the opportunity to view these two films beforehand, so I was not entirely sure what to expect after seeing these titles on our syllabus. But wow! These films did not disappoint! Whether it was the iconic, swashbuckling sword fight on the stairs from The Adventures of Robin Hood or the idealized medieval romanticism between King Richard and Berengaria from The Crusades; these scenes and storylines became the foundation for what we, as an audience, tend to expect from our medieval movies and maybe even our real lives.

One connection that I feel is necessary to mention is how each of these films portrays love and romance. With DeMille’s The Crusades, we are introduced to this brash young Richard, full of swagger and pride, willing to take on any challenge. Well, of course not when it comes to marrying a princess from France. Richard decides to use the Crusades as a loophole to get out of his arranged marriage to Alice, and along the way ends up having to get married to another princess in order to feed his many soldiers; enter Berengaria. Berengaria and Richard do not have the necessarily ideal wedding (I mean you kind of need the groom to be present to show a sign of good faith), which begins their rocky relationship. It would take many nights and even the threat of Richard losing his crown, for them both to realize just how much they love each other. Now if we look into the relationship between Maid Marian and Robin of Loxsley in The Adventures of Robin Hood we can see very similar instances. These two meet as the ever confident Robin Hood breaches Nottingham Castle to warn Prince John of his fate if he does not use the tax money to bring back King Richard, whom was captured and being held for a ransom. Immediately, it is obvious that Marian feels herself superior to Robin based on the class relations between Norman and Saxon at the time, however Robin’s wit and sassiness in return to the maiden’s insults is also revealed much to the surprise of Prince John. As Guy of Gisbourne is escorting Marian through Sherwood, they are ambushed by Robin Hood and his band of merry men. After some more back and forth, Robin persuades Marian to follow him, along the way he shows her the results of the violence and heavy taxation forced upon the Saxons as well as the good he is truly doing. It is in this instance Marian begins to fall for Robin, and it would be her love that saves his life following his arrest. Of course this love is reciprocated when Robin returns to Nottingham Castle to save her life from Guy.

Though these love stories are not entirely the same, I feel that it shows a different side to the stories we get from the newer adaptations. For starters, both relationships do not begin with “love at first sight” as so many other romanticized classics do; no, rather these relationships begin with very differing views from each individual. Whether it is the God loving Berengaria and the initially self-centered Richard the Lionheart or the upper-class socialite Maid Marian and the representative of the oppressed Robin of Loxsley, these examples tell the audience the importance of understanding one another when it comes to romance. This idea of true love is possible through mutual work and understanding.

What Hollywood History is about!

When I signed up for this class I was thinking that we were just going to be watching a lot of popular Hollywood films that had to do with history, Robin hood, 300, Saving Private Ryan. I did not think we were going to be looking into the changes of film itself. I did not think we were going to start watching films that were made in 1928 without sound. I had actually never heard of a silence film before this class. It makes this class even more interesting because not only are you learning about some historical topics that you have never learned about like, Alexander Nevsky. You also get into things about film that you have never thought about either, the lighting on Joan of Arc in La Passion de Jeanne d”Arc. 

Going forward in this class I am hoping that with the continuation of the special effects in the films to get better, the fight scenes in Alexander Nevsky were very comical and definitely need some work. Another thing I noticed about early films is that there is about zero blood. The only blood that I can remember is in La Passion de Jeanne d”Arc. Then I was even more surprised to hear that the blood in that movie was from an actual arm. It is crazy to think about the advances in technology in about 100 years, especially when it comes to movie technology and the ability to put in special effects. Also, going forward with this class I am hoping to learn more about some events and people that I did not know much about in the first place, or did not know anything about at all.

With all of this being said, the first week of Hollywood History was a very eye opening experience and I am looking forward to continuing seeing the evolution of movies and acting, as well as learning more about people and events in history.

The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) vs. Robin Hood (2010)

Before this class, I hadn’t seen neither The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) nor Robin Hood (2010).  I did not have any specific expectations before watching these movies other than expecting to enjoy the newer version of the movie better.  To my surprise, I did not like the newer version better for a few reasons.  One, I personally enjoyed the outlaw version of Robin Hood depicted in the 1938 version more than a simple fighter depicted in the 2010 version.  Two, the Maid Marian who was a part of the royal family in the 1938 version added more to the story line than the Maid Marian who was simply a widow in the 2010 version. And three, the gang of men that Robin Hood had with him in the 1938 version seemed to add to the legend of Robin Hood more than the army buddies he had in the 2010 version.

In the 1938 version, Robin Hood was clearly a wanted man who stole from the rich and gave to the poor.  Generally when one thinks of Robin Hood, this is the man that he or she thinks of.  The Robin Hood in the 2010 movie was an expert archer who eventually won the heart of Maid Marian as well, however for the majority of the movie he was fighting for England as part of an army.  After the war with France was over, only then did he turn into a sort of outlaw figure.  The 1938 version gave more of what I assume most expect to get in a movie about Robin Hood.

robin-hood-2010-20100510111544165-3205725_320w

Maid Marian in the 1938 edition of Robin Hood was part of the royal family.  She observed Robin Hood throughout the movie, eventually seeing the good he is doing, and falling in love with him.  This added more tension between Prince John and Robin Hood which, in my opinion, added more to the plot.  In the 2010 movie, Maid Marian was simply the wife to a knight who was killed in battle.  Robin Hood comes to her and saves her land and her lifestyle, again, causing Maid Marian to fall in love with him.  In this movie, Maid Marian wasn’t exactly crucial to the story line but was there and added a little to the story line, however not as much.

Finally, in both movies Robin Hood had a gang of men with him.  In the first movie, they were outlaw type men like Robin Hood who agreed to help him fight against Prince John’s tyranny.  In the second movie, they were simply men he was fighting along side within the army.  The group of men in the 1938 edition added more camaraderie because they seemed more united than simply being in the same army like the 2010 version.  That camaraderie, to me, added to the legend that is Robin Hood.mos2

Both movies depicted an interesting version of Robin Hood.  The 1938 movie was a depiction of the outlaw Robin Hood who stole away Maid Marian among other things from the royal family with the help of his outlaw brothers.  The 2010 movie was a depiction of Robin Hood fighting for England before he became an outlaw.  Neither are right nor wrong and both provide the viewer and interesting take on the legendary Robin Hood.  However in my opinion, the Robin Hood in the 1938 version is the Robin Hood that the audience generally expects and the Robin Hood that fulfills the legend.

Joan of Arc (1948) as My Double Feature Film

When watching the Joan of Arc film from 1948 as one of my double feature films, there were a large variety of differences that were evident from the 1920s film that was watched in class.  These differences not only changed the perception and format of the film, but also opened the film to a larger audience.

This first thing to recognize is that this is an Americanized film made through Hollywood that is made in English rather then French.  It was also an earlier film that utilized color which makes it very innovative for the time. These things speak volumes for the technology that was available and the goal of creating this movie and who it is meant to appeal to. This story also begins by being told by a narrator explaining the history of this character.

The movie starts at Joan’s more humble beginning while she was visited through God by hearing voices that allowed her to predict things to French leaders that could not be explained.  This would make her be inspected by several priests and knowledgeable individuals in order to prove that she was not witch.  Although there is only one of these scenes is shown, we are told that she was inspected several times and these scenes are important to the actually history of this story.

Like many Hollywood stories, this film includes several battle scenes that could be considered graphic for the time period.  I found these very interesting because to myself, I did not find these scenes too intense.  Yet, to the audience of the time and compared to other movies, these were very graphic and innovative scene

Finally, I believe it is important to address what the movie made clear that Joan stood for and to address the romanticized burning scene at the very end of the film.  The film acknowledged the fact that Joan was no an actual general or military leader, but rather a symbol used to motivate the individual soldiers.  At the end of the film, as Joan is being burned, this symbol that is Joan never lost her faith and almost smiled to the heavens as she continued to prey to God and the Cameron shifted to the sky.  This made what could of been a very graphic scene into a gentile one.

Can Battles have Humor?

While watching The Adventures of Robin Hood I found myself laughing at parts of the movie most notably when the Friar and Robin Hood meet in the forest. One particular part of the film I also found humorous was the big battle scene at the end of the film. Obviously the focus of this part of the film was the battle between Robin Hood and Gisbourne, but I couldn’t help but notice what Much’s character was doing during this battle.

When we think of battle we think of tension and seriousness, this final battle had these elements but it also had another element that was portrayed; humor. Much is not on the floor like the rest are and the way he gets involved has a humorous element to it. After throwing a table onto someone he is seen hiding above the fight in an upper-part of the ceiling. He hits one of the enemies on the head and they drop to the floor. He then tries to hit someone with head armor on and it fails. He makes a funny facial expression and tries again, this time taking off the armor before striking the enemy in the head. A reason that this could be funny is it is not consistent with the rest of the battle. The rest are seen using swords against one another or throwing arrows, not hiding, striking people one-by-one.

Stooges

I have always been a fan of The Three Stooges, and watching this scene with Much, I couldn’t help but think of them. They are always seen battling with people like in their short “Pop Goes the Easel,” where they are trying to escape the police and end up in an art studio fighting with other students in the studio. Throughout this battle, there are elements of humor as well. The director and producer of the Stooges, Jules White, was always implementing visual and verbal humor to keep audiences entertained (Solomon). This movie also had its verbal humor, and like the Stooges, the film had its visual humor.

The Adventures of Robin Hood. Directed by Michael Curtiz and William Keighley. DVD. 1938. Warner Bros.

Solomon, John. The Complete Three Stooges. C3 Entertainment Inc. 2001.

Photo. The Three Stooges. Fanpop. Townsquare Entertainment. 30. April. 2016.

Open Post: A short Bio of the Actor Errol Leslie Thomson Flynn

Errol Flynn Poster

Errol Flynn, a famous actor who played the role of Robin Hood in the 1938 production The Adventures of Robin Hood as well as many other famous roles lived a very interesting life. He was born in Australia on June 20, 1909. His father was Theodore Flynn, a well-known and respected biologist. His mother was Marrelle Young. Flynn was a trouble maker from early on. He was kicked out of every school he was enrolled in. After determining school was not for him he set out in his late teens to find gold. Instead he ended up working odd jobs that were short lived.

After many short lived jobs Flynn stumbled upon an acting job. He played the role of Fletcher Christian in a film called In the Wake of the Bounty. Flynn’s good looks and athletic ability caught the eye of Warner Brothers. He left for America to continue his film career. He went on to act in numerous films. Some of which are:

 

Murder at Monte Carlo (1935)

The Case of the Curious Bride (1935)
Captain Blood (1935)

The Charge of the Light Brigade (1936)

The Prince and the Pauper (1937)

The Adventures of Robin Hood(1938)

Four’s a Crowd (1938)

Dodge City(1939)

The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex (1939)

Santa Fe Trail (1940)

They Died with Their Boots On(1941)

Thank Your Lucky Stars (1943)

Edge of Darkness (1943)
Uncertain Glory (1944)
Objective, Burma! (1945)
San Antonio (1945)
Istanbul (1957)

 

 

Flynn’s poor lifestyle choices consisted of promiscuous sex, drugs, smoking, and alcohol. He was also often in trouble with the law and it was not uncommon for him to upset the director of whichever film he was working on at the time. It was determined when attempting to enlist in World War II that he suffered from a heart condition. In 1942 he suffered from a mild heart attack while acting in the film Gentleman Jim.  His final years he suffered from severe liver damage and heart issues. He eventually died from a heart attack at the age of 50 on October 14, 1959.  Flynn was a spectacular actor and despite his poor life choices he had an incredibly successful acting career.

Information found on: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001224/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

 

Alexander Nevsky (1938) and The Crusades (1935) and Their Modern Political Agendas

The late 1930s was a time of strenuous political ties among much of the western world as Hitler began to gain more power in Germany, thus leaving many neighboring countries, and those far away as well, concerned about what he might do with his newfound power.

The American Hollywood film The Crusades (1935), directed by Cecil B. DeMille, gave a good representation of how much of the United States felt about the growing tension in Europe. While this film, as its title implies, focuses on the third holy war of the medieval era, the message it portrays in its final scenes is one primarily of peace. Toward the end of the film, Berengaria is reflecting on what the Crusades have done to her and to all people involved in it, saying “We’ve been blind. We were proud dearest when we took the cross in our pride, we fought to conquer Jerusalem. We tried to ride through blood to the Holy Place of God. And now… now we suffer” (The Crusades, IMDb). This lament from Berengaria shows how much she regrets even going to war against Saladin and his people because of all the suffering she, her husband King Richard, and the European crusaders have endured. This quite accurately depicts the feelings of America in terms of becoming involved with the conflicts in Europe. The American way, at that point in time, was mainly avoid conflict in order to prevent the suffering and destruction that many European countries saw during World War I.

Russian film director Sergei Eisenstein’s Alexander Nevsky (1938), another film set in the medieval era though this time during the Northern Crusades, also has an underlying message that very closely mirror’s his country’s feelings about the political tensions arising from their western neighbors. This film was produced in an agit-prop style, meaning the Russian government provided the funds to create this movie so that it could be used to “bring the revolution to the masses” (Dixon, Foster, 2013). The message this film portrays is extremely obvious and can even be inferred from only the film’s main musical number “Arise Ye Russian People.” During the Northern Crusades, according to the film, Russia barely hesitated in rallying its citizens to rise against the western invaders, and Nevsky’s success was largely aided by the large amounts of lower class people who joined in the famed Battle on the Ice. Based on the message this movie sends, the Russian government had the complete opposite idea of how to address the rising conflict with Germany. The government with this film tried to lift up the spirits of its people and show that Russia is capable of defeating any enemy if they stand united.

Both of these late 1930s films were produced, whether intentionally or not, to convey to its respective audiences how the country should react should another conflict in Europe come to unfold. However, the messages these films portray are polar opposites from one another, and this also reflects later events that occurred in World War II. When the war began in 1939, Russia became involved from the very beginning. In contrast, the United States was much more hesitant on getting wrapped up in the violence and waited a few years when the Japanese forced their hand to get involved in the war effort against the Germans. These two films did not directly influence these actions during the war, but they did embody the mentality of their countries regarding how to handle conflicts with other religions, countries, and people in general.

 

 

Alexander Nevsky. Directed by Sergei M. Eisenstein and Dmitri Vasilyev. DVD. 1938. Chatsworth: Image Entertainment, 1998.

The Crusades. Directed by Cecil B. DeMille. DVD. 1935. Los Angeles: Universal Studios, 2006.

Dixon, Wheeler Winston, and Gwendolyn Audrey Foster. A Short History of Film. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2013.

The Crusades Berengaria quote taken from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0026249/trivia?tab=qt&ref_=tt_trv_qu

Authenticity of The Adventures of Robin Hood

The first thing I thought about, even before we watched the film in class, was if Robin Hood was real or a fictional character.  In our previous films we have watched the characters and events in time have significant data and credibility that they in deed actually happened in history.  Robin Hood is different in which it does not have as much information about its credibility of being real.

Authenticity as I am going to discuss is based off of my perception of the film and whether or not I think the film seems authentic to in my mind of what the medieval era looked like.   Some things in The Adventures of Robin Hood that I thought were authentic were the castles, such as the one that the Norman Lords stayed in.  Also I thought the attire was appropriate in my opinion for almost every character besides Robin.  I say this because of Robin’s green tights that he wore and how they seemed like a “costume.”

There were a lot more things in this film that I thought were not authentic, which in turn leads to me thinking that this was not an authentic film.  I thought this film was more like a fairy tale rather than an authentic historical movie, especially when you compare them to the other films we have watched in class like Alexander Nevsky and The Crusades.  The bright colors and music in the film made it feel like a fairy tale to me.  My perception of a medieval movie is dark and bland colors along with low pitch or war like music in the background as The Adventures of Robin Hood had the exact opposite.  Another none authentic part in my mind was the overall story.  Someone stealing from the rich and giving to the poor just feels like a fairy tale to me.   Lastly, there was quite a bit of comedy in this movie making it an entertaining film.  It felt like this film did a better job of entertaining, but then lacked on the historical and authentic side of things.