I’m not quite sure what to think of Benh Zeitlin’s Glory at Sea. From the beginning, I was intrigued by the metaphor that Zeitlin established with the underwater figures and death. He built this incredibly interesting world, with odd people who clung to bizarre objects which gave his world character and visual interest. From the bed in the tree to the make-shift carts, everything felt realistically cobbled together. However, the narrative was a tad too ambiguous for me. The narrator explains that one man has been sent back from the sea. While I was interested in his story, the filmmaker seemed somewhat uninterested in telling it. It was interesting to see how the people of this destroyed city reacted to his attempt to build the boat, but we never really learned anything about him. There was a conflict between the reverend and the the mysterious stranger, but it was not clear what that was. He simply seemed upset that everyone was leaving church, and was lonely. Everything in this film was abstract, but it wasn’t abstract enough. It felt like it was trying to setup concrete plot points only to dust over them with abstract thoughts and ideas. There were too many questions, ones that really didn’t even have an abstract answer. I really did like the idea of these people trying to triumphantly reunite with their lost ones (the end sequence was beautiful). On a technical level, the short film had many strengths. I really enjoyed this very visual and tactile world that was established, and the shaky handheld work was very tastefully done (mostly). The destruction of the boat was incredibly beautiful and kinesthetic (the camera being bolted to the debris and the shaky camera work to enhance the chaos). However, there were quite a few things that pulled me out of the experience. Their were a few moments of jarring audio (between cuts and different audio levels and qualities) and more than a few moments of “shaky” acting (the pastor, a few of the extras). In addition, there were some shots that felt like they would have been very effective shots if they were static (like the boy and the mysterious man walking down the beach) but instead were too shaky. Overall, this film felt a bit too ambitious. I had quite a few questions for the plot’s narrative, but I still enjoyed the style of the film and some of the themes it tried to explore.
Glory at Sea by Benh Zeitlin was a very interesting short film. It was a tad confusing at some points, but it had a lot of different aspects that I enjoyed. For example, I liked how the short film started and ended the same way. I personally did not understand what was going on at the beginning or the end when everybody was under water, but the concept in itself is what I enjoyed. Another aspect of the short film that I enjoyed was how when the boat was being built, the crew building it slowly strengthened in numbers. I like how it started off with just the guy and the little boy, and progressed all the way to the Reverend helping out. I thought it was a nice touch when the Reverend contributed to big cross to the boat. I was pretty confused about the plot the majority of the time. The concept of the plot was difficult to grasp in my opinion. I didn't really understand the whole concept of the body washing up on shore, and then the guy attempting to build a boat to go back out. However, being from Florida, I really enjoyed the setting in which it was filmed. I love boats and I love the ocean so the surrounding scenery was something that I enjoyed. Overall, the film was definitely different and it was a tad confusing but I did enjoy it.
The short film “Glory at Sea” is a powerful thematic, mythic narrative detailing the loss after hurricane Katrina. It parallels ancient myths about walking into hell and retrieving loved ones. The fact that the loved ones were under the sea, and raised from their perdition by their family was very powerful to me. I think it symbolizes the grief process: once everyone’s stuff sank underwater, they found peace. This symbolizes letting go, and even though everyone is reunited with their loved ones in the end, this is not natural. Almost every aspect of the film was symbolic and not realistic, but I loved it. I do not often see a film like this, but I enjoy them immensely. The sound was good, and the scoring was superb. The cinematography was a bit repetitive and sub-par, but the overall film look was grungy and fitting. Overall, though, I really enjoyed this piece. It might have been my favorite all year.
I think that overall I liked Glory At Sea. There were some confusing points for me I'll admit, and I wasn't always sure where the narrative was leading me. However, I found it visually appealing and was interested enough in the story to want to keep paying attention. I especially enjoyed the underwater shots. I'm used to seeing stuff like that in big movies, but thinking about all the time and planning that went into it makes me appreciate it even more. It was a good way to keep the story moving, and I liked the parallels they made between the myths about retrieving dead loved ones and going on the journey on the boat. It wasn't my favorite narrative and I'll admit that I found it a tad lengthy, but overall it wasn't bad.
What I liked about Glory At Sea was how deep it delved into an idea that our country tried to grasp for years, and on some levels, still tries to grasp. What happened in the wake of Hurricane Katrina was a stunning reminder to our country about the fragile nature of life. This short film took that simple idea and made it complex. I was figuring out the entire time how to connect the overarching story to the idea that death happens, and how do we deal with that. I genuinely enjoyed the exercise my brain had when I watched this short film, because it's not every day that you get to see a film like this. I'm not sure if it was Corrao or another teacher in TCF, but someone once told me that the audience isn't dumb, and to leave some things left to the imagination to figure out. Some of my favorite movies of all time, like The Social Network or Up In The Air, have basic fronts that can appeal to all audiences. A story with a main character, a conflict, and plot. But the films that make you work things out as you are moving along are, in my mind, the most entertaining. I appreciated the aesthetics of this film as well. It made perfect sense to use shaky cam to make the chaos of the situations shown to be palpable. Watching dramatic scenes on a still camera is powerful, but adding a bit of uneasiness in the camera makes it feel more personal and upfront with the drama. Overall, I enjoyed this short film, and I can see how this is considered to be a culmination of everything we have learned over the course of the semester in this class.
The Glory at sea is great movie overall. There are not much conversations in this film. Generally, the people's in face in this short film has shown their emotions. Some people fell happy by sing songs. For example, once the church has been burned, you can see how upset the priests looks like. That Church seems the most important thing in his life. Anther thing I like the film very much is the camera movement. The Camera movement has created an chaos environment and you can feel exactly how the people felt. Through the 25 mins movie, you can see they smile once they find their families. It seems that the purpose to build the boat is find what they lose and what they belong to. The major color temperature in this movie is gray and can gives audience a sense of upset. Overall, it is a great narrative film. Everyone in this film have their own story and perspectives. But they all want to meet their families. That's maybe why they call the movie Glory on sea!!
Glory of the Sea was an interesting and touching narrative. In the beginning, I thought it was a short film about the lives lost in hurricane Katrina. Since, so many lives were lost. It's starts of innocent with the young little girl talking about her helmet she uses is a spaghetti bowl. It makes you sympathize for the characters under the sea, because of her soft and innocent voice. It begins as a sad story about the lives lost but then becomes about how powerful the Grace of God is. Through out the video I was astonished by the various shots taken. I was wondering how the cinematography was accomplished, because it went well with the theme and accomplish to get enough lighting. Overall I loved the film, all these short films I watched through out the semester were truly inspiring.
"Glory at Sea:" by Benh Zeitlin was a very unique film with its story line, but the cinematography was what was so amazing about it. The way the story was told through a lens was magnificent. It was almost as while the story progressed and the group of people worked together the lighting and colors got brighter and more vibrant. Most of the shots were close up on the subjects, which gave the audience the chance to feel the tragedy and drama that was going on in the film. The film was put together so well. The most important aspect of the film though was the audio. Most of the talking that went on in the film was the voice over of the little boy and then music behind him. Without that voice over and music the story would not had felt like it was progressing as much. The film was thought out so well that the way the film was shot, mixed with the audio components, made for a very captivating and dramatic film.
I’m not quite sure what to think of Benh Zeitlin’s Glory at Sea. From the beginning, I was intrigued by the metaphor that Zeitlin established with the underwater figures and death. He built this incredibly interesting world, with odd people who clung to bizarre objects which gave his world character and visual interest. From the bed in the tree to the make-shift carts, everything felt realistically cobbled together. However, the narrative was a tad too ambiguous for me. The narrator explains that one man has been sent back from the sea. While I was interested in his story, the filmmaker seemed somewhat uninterested in telling it. It was interesting to see how the people of this destroyed city reacted to his attempt to build the boat, but we never really learned anything about him. There was a conflict between the reverend and the the mysterious stranger, but it was not clear what that was. He simply seemed upset that everyone was leaving church, and was lonely. Everything in this film was abstract, but it wasn’t abstract enough. It felt like it was trying to setup concrete plot points only to dust over them with abstract thoughts and ideas. There were too many questions, ones that really didn’t even have an abstract answer. I really did like the idea of these people trying to triumphantly reunite with their lost ones (the end sequence was beautiful). On a technical level, the short film had many strengths. I really enjoyed this very visual and tactile world that was established, and the shaky handheld work was very tastefully done (mostly). The destruction of the boat was incredibly beautiful and kinesthetic (the camera being bolted to the debris and the shaky camera work to enhance the chaos). However, there were quite a few things that pulled me out of the experience. Their were a few moments of jarring audio (between cuts and different audio levels and qualities) and more than a few moments of “shaky” acting (the pastor, a few of the extras). In addition, there were some shots that felt like they would have been very effective shots if they were static (like the boy and the mysterious man walking down the beach) but instead were too shaky. Overall, this film felt a bit too ambitious. I had quite a few questions for the plot’s narrative, but I still enjoyed the style of the film and some of the themes it tried to explore.
ReplyDeleteGlory at Sea by Benh Zeitlin was a very interesting short film. It was a tad confusing at some points, but it had a lot of different aspects that I enjoyed. For example, I liked how the short film started and ended the same way. I personally did not understand what was going on at the beginning or the end when everybody was under water, but the concept in itself is what I enjoyed. Another aspect of the short film that I enjoyed was how when the boat was being built, the crew building it slowly strengthened in numbers. I like how it started off with just the guy and the little boy, and progressed all the way to the Reverend helping out. I thought it was a nice touch when the Reverend contributed to big cross to the boat. I was pretty confused about the plot the majority of the time. The concept of the plot was difficult to grasp in my opinion. I didn't really understand the whole concept of the body washing up on shore, and then the guy attempting to build a boat to go back out. However, being from Florida, I really enjoyed the setting in which it was filmed. I love boats and I love the ocean so the surrounding scenery was something that I enjoyed. Overall, the film was definitely different and it was a tad confusing but I did enjoy it.
ReplyDeleteThe short film “Glory at Sea” is a powerful thematic, mythic narrative detailing the loss after hurricane Katrina. It parallels ancient myths about walking into hell and retrieving loved ones. The fact that the loved ones were under the sea, and raised from their perdition by their family was very powerful to me. I think it symbolizes the grief process: once everyone’s stuff sank underwater, they found peace. This symbolizes letting go, and even though everyone is reunited with their loved ones in the end, this is not natural. Almost every aspect of the film was symbolic and not realistic, but I loved it. I do not often see a film like this, but I enjoy them immensely. The sound was good, and the scoring was superb. The cinematography was a bit repetitive and sub-par, but the overall film look was grungy and fitting. Overall, though, I really enjoyed this piece. It might have been my favorite all year.
ReplyDeleteI think that overall I liked Glory At Sea. There were some confusing points for me I'll admit, and I wasn't always sure where the narrative was leading me. However, I found it visually appealing and was interested enough in the story to want to keep paying attention. I especially enjoyed the underwater shots. I'm used to seeing stuff like that in big movies, but thinking about all the time and planning that went into it makes me appreciate it even more. It was a good way to keep the story moving, and I liked the parallels they made between the myths about retrieving dead loved ones and going on the journey on the boat. It wasn't my favorite narrative and I'll admit that I found it a tad lengthy, but overall it wasn't bad.
ReplyDeleteWhat I liked about Glory At Sea was how deep it delved into an idea that our country tried to grasp for years, and on some levels, still tries to grasp. What happened in the wake of Hurricane Katrina was a stunning reminder to our country about the fragile nature of life. This short film took that simple idea and made it complex. I was figuring out the entire time how to connect the overarching story to the idea that death happens, and how do we deal with that. I genuinely enjoyed the exercise my brain had when I watched this short film, because it's not every day that you get to see a film like this. I'm not sure if it was Corrao or another teacher in TCF, but someone once told me that the audience isn't dumb, and to leave some things left to the imagination to figure out. Some of my favorite movies of all time, like The Social Network or Up In The Air, have basic fronts that can appeal to all audiences. A story with a main character, a conflict, and plot. But the films that make you work things out as you are moving along are, in my mind, the most entertaining. I appreciated the aesthetics of this film as well. It made perfect sense to use shaky cam to make the chaos of the situations shown to be palpable. Watching dramatic scenes on a still camera is powerful, but adding a bit of uneasiness in the camera makes it feel more personal and upfront with the drama. Overall, I enjoyed this short film, and I can see how this is considered to be a culmination of everything we have learned over the course of the semester in this class.
ReplyDeleteThe Glory at sea is great movie overall. There are not much conversations in this film. Generally, the people's in face in this short film has shown their emotions. Some people fell happy by sing songs. For example, once the church has been burned, you can see how upset the priests looks like. That Church seems the most important thing in his life. Anther thing I like the film very much is the camera movement. The Camera movement has created an chaos environment and you can feel exactly how the people felt. Through the 25 mins movie, you can see they smile once they find their families. It seems that the purpose to build the boat is find what they lose and what they belong to. The major color temperature in this movie is gray and can gives audience a sense of upset. Overall, it is a great narrative film. Everyone in this film have their own story and perspectives. But they all want to meet their families. That's maybe why they call the movie Glory on sea!!
ReplyDeleteGlory of the Sea was an interesting and touching narrative. In the beginning, I thought it was a short film about the lives lost in hurricane Katrina. Since, so many lives were lost. It's starts of innocent with the young little girl talking about her helmet she uses is a spaghetti bowl. It makes you sympathize for the characters under the sea, because of her soft and innocent voice. It begins as a sad story about the lives lost but then becomes about how powerful the Grace of God is. Through out the video I was astonished by the various shots taken. I was wondering how the cinematography was accomplished, because it went well with the theme and accomplish to get enough lighting. Overall I loved the film, all these short films I watched through out the semester were truly inspiring.
ReplyDelete"Glory at Sea:" by Benh Zeitlin was a very unique film with its story line, but the cinematography was what was so amazing about it. The way the story was told through a lens was magnificent. It was almost as while the story progressed and the group of people worked together the lighting and colors got brighter and more vibrant. Most of the shots were close up on the subjects, which gave the audience the chance to feel the tragedy and drama that was going on in the film. The film was put together so well. The most important aspect of the film though was the audio. Most of the talking that went on in the film was the voice over of the little boy and then music behind him. Without that voice over and music the story would not had felt like it was progressing as much. The film was thought out so well that the way the film was shot, mixed with the audio components, made for a very captivating and dramatic film.
ReplyDelete