Film-Watching and Concentration

Over my life of watching films, I've noticed how hard it can be at times to concentrate for prolonged

periods on any given movie.  The task of watching with undivided attention for an hour and a half to two to even three hours can be a daunting job.  As a film scholar and writer this can be troubling, knowing that I am expected to be good at watching films, always capturing every detail and passing story element and registering them in my consciousness and memory for later analysis.  I don't always manage to live up to this requirement and I assume I'm not the only one.

Film-watching that takes the most effort is when you have the type of film that depends on extensive use of intricate dialogue.  Whole scenes may pass by in which the viewer could potentially miss huge plot elements or story clues because of spoken words that fly by quite quickly.  Improvements in sound in films over the years have improved this.  Classic movies of the early to mid-twentieth century can be especially hard to comprehend because of technically inferior sound recording in comparison to today's cinema.  This, obviously wasn't a problem with silent movies in the first few decades of film's emergence when the image was the sole recipient of one's attention.  This, perhaps, is why many early critics lamented the death of silent cinema as an ending of a means of expression that typified the essence of the visual medium.  But, others have argued that with the coming of sound, film became more true to life and a solid reflection of everyday existence.

Film watching requires effort and concentration.  Fortunately, there are ways to improve one's level of concentration what will in turn improve one's film comprehension ability.  Meditation and mindfulness are practices that have been known to improve one's concentration and awareness of the present moment.  They involve the practicing of moment to moment awareness in a way that brings clarity and contentment.  Meditation is a discipline that must be continued over a period of time to bring benefit to an individual.  Meditation and mindfulness can be a tool in the aspiring film critic's arsenal to improve his or her level of concentration and comprehension of any given film-watching experience.

If one has trouble with dialogue-comprehension, one option for a viewer if watching at home is to activate the subtitle feature.  Subtitles, however can take concentration away from the visual element of the film to focus solely on the dialogue.  Subtitles are always a requirement for foreign films in which the spoken language is unknown to the viewer.

Another thing that helps is repeated viewings.  Some films only require one viewing to fully comprehend.  These are probably quite shallow, simple films.  The films that are worth critical analysis are often films that require many viewings.  Such films offer new insights and revelations with each subsequent viewing and can be very rewarding to analyze. 

In the end, the main way to become a skilled, efficient film viewer is to watch more films.  Watching films, like making them or writing about them, is an art itself and has to be developed over time if one wants to gain insight and rewards from it.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015, dir. J.J. Abrams)

After the disappointment of Episodes I-III, I was anxious to see if Episode VII would dispel the slightly bitter taste left after those early twenty first century installments.  After reading some early reviews (minus the spoilers) that lauded this film as a return to the spirit of the originals, I was looking forward to seeing this J.J. Abrams-directed space-opera.  It definitely lives up to the hype: it is spell-binding at times, with action sequences that rival anything in the series and enough self-reflexive, Star Wars historical lore to please any super-geek-fan of Star Wars and Sci-Fi in general.

Spotlight (2015, dir. Thomas McCarthy)

In one of the most intriguing and revealing scenes in Thomas McCarthy's brilliant new film "Spotlight", journalist Sasha Pfeiffer (Rachel McAdams) visits a former Catholic priest who has allegedly molested boys in his past.  When she questions him about the accusations, he doesn't deny it.  Interestingly and horrifyingly, he even justifies his actions and says that his sexual violations were not harmful, that they were even A-OK.  This exchange in the film highlights the very nature of the disease that "Spotlight" deals with:  the unassuming, nonchalant nature that underlies Catholicism's cover-up, denial and dealings with the terrible things that have gone on for decades, perhaps centuries and the lack of insight that the priests themselves have about the nature of their own misdeeds.

"Spotlight" is a riveting, audacious look at the 2001-2002, Boston Globe expose on the perpetration of child molestation by members of the Catholic Clergy in Boston, Massachusetts.  In exposing the facts, the crack team of journalists, a facet of the Globe known as "Spotlight", pushed the ignorance and denial of the higher-ups in the Catholic Church to the forefront of the nation's view and, in so doing, made similar corruption reveal itself in the entire world.

The "Spotlight" team is lead by Walter "Robby" Robinson (Michael Keaton).  His journalist team consists of Michael Rezendes (Mark Ruffalo), Pfeiffer, and Matt Carroll (Brian d'Arcy James).  Higher-ups at the Globe are played by Liev Schreiber and John Slattery.  There are many more members of the stellar cast and they all do a fantastic job.

This is one of the best films on journalism there is.  It surpasses even "All the President's Men".  It is thrilling to watch from beginning to end and always holds your attention.  The excitement is maintained by the impeccable screenplay.  There is never a false moment and the trajectory of the entire investigation is always clear and concise.  Through the editing and pacing, you get a real sense of the tiring, compulsive search for information and leads that the journalists go through.  The threat of deadlines loom, and the race against time is palpable.

This is the best film I've seen yet this year.  It is an unforgettable, lively drama that will stay with you.

On the Waterfront (1954, dir. Elia Kazan)

What a powerful, gritty, and visceral film this is.  In response to his critics who denounced him for naming names before the HUAC in 1952, Elia Kazan answered with "On the Waterfront".  It is a reaction to the corruption found within unions, particularly dockworkers' unions and champions its protagonist, Terry Malloy (Marlon Brando), a former prize-fighter who stands up against all the treachery and testifies against the wayward union boss, Johnny Friendly (Lee J. Cobb). 

Murder for being a rat is the name of the game.  The film opens with the murder of young Joey Boyle by the mob.  Terry feels guilty because he lured the youngster into the trap, unaware that it would lead to his death.  Boyle's sister is Edie (Eva Marie Saint) who is drawn to Terry despite the complications that arise from his past associations.

The acting is incredible.  Brando is at the top of his game as the conflicted Malloy, whose throttled compassion and anger is always on the verge of exploding.  The whole cast is top notch:  Karl Malden as the priest, Father Berry; Rod Steiger as Charley, Terry's brother and henchman to Johnny; and Marie Saint are all impeccable.   So are the many other supporting players in this lifelike film.

One of the most famous and powerful scenes takes place between the brothers, Terry and Charley.  Terry laments over the past and the fact that he "could have been a contender" as a boxer.  It is a heart-breaking exchange and highlights the tenuous bond between all siblings and the loyalties at stake in the world of organized crime.

This is a film that contains real soul and character.  In its true-to-life depiction of life on the streets and docks of 1950's New Jersey, it paints a picture of a specific time and place that is both compelling and beautiful to behold.