a qwriting.qc.cuny.edu blog

What a character, sometimes I believe that the majority of us are like him. right now we are in a situation where we don’t have security, we don’t know if our parents are going to have any retirement plan for the moment they get old or even if we gonna get anything from the social security, we don’t know was out there for us, if there are  jobs or simply nothing, but debt; and it is very scary to see how history repeats itself.

The Al quadea war is here who knows when its going to end completely and to make things even worse, a lot of people on debt not having where to live because of the foreclosures, some type of health bill approved, but it will begin to work maybe around march of next year. people being laid-off and starving, because there’s no money coming in.

a lot of problems accumulate, then we get into desperation to the point of suicidal thoughts, not matter what type of economic class we are, we get stress and sometimes don’t know what to do.

but like in Umberto, Vittorio De Sica shows us that we are humans that go through a lot of problems and sometimes we can’t solve them or simply we don’t want to solve them, but in some cases love will help us continue. in Umberto’s case love to his dog.

to end this for those who haven’t see the documentaries of Michael Moore I personally will recommend them and then you will be able to see a little more in depth our NEOREALISM.


also watch Maxed Out by James D. Scurlock.

October 20th, 2010 at 12:24 am | Comments & Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

In this film i was happy to hear Spanish… i thought that trend of speaking little words in a movie was around the 1990s. lets remember this movie was made on 1947.

i also like the way Jeff Bailey was narrating the story was easy to follow thru. and the most important how some scenes send images for us to figure out. this is what i love about film. making assumptions on whats going to happen next. we as viewers want to have the answer ahead of time.

for example in the scene where Kathie Moffat escapes from the terrible Whit Sterling and we see her in Mexico all worry and vulnerable. we may think that the poor one had to run away from this evil gambler, even Bailey fell for her charms (in the room.) still we wouldn’t think she was the bad guy in the movie.

Kathie was a nut. she made us believe she was innocent and sweet. but no she was evil, stealer, murder…. gosh the list goes on.

to conclude i liked the introduction of  another language, the way it got us assuming, but i didn’t like Kathie, like one of the students said…  “she never used the money.”  in my opinion why to go through all that struggle of life and death situations if the money was not even used, i would of use it. LOL

October 19th, 2010 at 11:31 pm | Comments & Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

In the film Citizen Kane 1941, I want to concentrate in the psychoanalysis of the main character, Charles Foster Kane. to be more specific  based on The Psychoanalytic Institute affiliated with NYU school of medicine, psychoanalysis means:

“based on the observation that individuals are often unaware of many of the factors that determine their emotions and behavior. These unconscious factors may create unhappiness, sometimes in the form of recognizable symptoms and at other times as troubling personality traits, difficulties in work or in love relationships, or disturbances in mood and self esteem. Because these forces are unconscious, the advice of friends and family, the reading of self help books, or even the most determined efforts of will, often fail to provide relief.”


That being said I started to realize that Charles had many of these problems.

let’s begin with the scene on deep focus were the kid (kane) is playing happily, we see that there is nothing better than playing in the snow, but the problem begins when he is taken away from his parents. his emotions of happiness falls into emotions of anger,  a personality of rebel, egocentric and superiority.

What do you  think as a viewer of this situation? you think he has the right to act this way? do we see the action and the reaction being logical? do you think as he is growing up he notices why he is the way we see him?

My believe to all this is that yes, he might have the right to act like the stubborn guy who wants everything his way to obtain all his goals and dreams accomplished. and yes the action of taking the kid away from the parents has a result of a kid hating the situation even the guy who took him away from the parents. i would be extremely mad. and last but not least Kane is unaware of  his behavior and i came to this conclusion because at the end of the movie he only cares about himself , his empire, and statues, but not for Susan Alexander Kane, not for his best friend not for ex-wife, not even for HIS SON! isn’t that ironic.

Kane was taken away from his family in his childhood and then look he abandoned his own son! this is incredible to me. as my mother says there is always two ways to do things in your life either do the same actions your parents did or not to do them.

In conclusion Mr. attitude Kane is unaware of  his bad behavior towards his friends and family,  he only cared about himself.  Little by little he end up alone, for wanting things his own way…

October 19th, 2010 at 11:12 pm | Comments & Trackbacks (1) | Permalink



September 11th, 2010 at 8:58 pm | Comments & Trackbacks (0) | Permalink