There are many
different criteria that are used to judge a film only one of which is the
accuracy and believability if the characters.
Although the characters are not always considered the most important,
often considered lesser than costumes and sets, they are what let the audience
truly understand the message of the film.
I will argue that Quo Vardis
is one of the best films of its kind due to its portrayal of its complex and
differing cast of characters. Characters
that are highlighted through: genuine audience connection, character
development, and the humanistic portrayal of characters seen in the film.
One of the
highlights of Quo Vadis is the depth of the connection we, the audience, feel
to the storyline and to the suffering of the characters. The audience is fully invested with the
protagonists, so much so that there is genuine emotion expressed when a
character is in trouble or in danger. To us, the audience, Marcus and Lygia are
as real as we are and we cringe at the horrors they experience. This genuine connection is due to the fact
that Marcus and Lygia operate as people not as characters. They are not perfect and they don’t always
make the right decisions, thus we are able to see some of our selves in all of
the characters.
Another vital part
of the characters is the fact that they do not start out perfect. They change and grow throughout the
film. That way we see them earn their happy
ending as opposed to them being granted one.
The humanistic
portrayal of the characters influences many areas of the production including
the acting. In Quo Vadis the stilted
manner of acting seen in silent movies is almost completely gone. What remains is acting that we can connect
with and characters that are human to us not alien.
Although many
characters are well crafted that is not to say they all are for instance Poppea
is far less than human. She in fact does
seem alien and strange to us. After all
not every character can be well portrayed otherwise who would we have to
compare the well crafted to?
Hey Jenny! I haven't really thought about this and I really like the points you've made so far. I also thought it was interesting how as a viewer I was also connected to characters like Nero (a villain) who is very human. He is a bad guy but is developed and interesting to watch (as well as being portrayed by a very good actor) and so as an audience I feel we are also invested in him.
ReplyDeleteI really like your argument! I also feel it would add to your paper how even some of the secondary/minor characters are portrayed realistically and further connects us to the film.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your claim that we as spectators feel connected to the characters in "Quo Vadis". What I wish you'd show me, though, is _how_, the movie achieves that we feel so close to Marcus Vinicius and Lygia, especially since Marcus acts, at the beginning, not very likable at all.
ReplyDeleteI also wish you would allow your own, very eloquent voice come through more. I was hoping you'd write a film review, i.e., an opinion piece, not an "Academic Essay". Yes, I do still want you to back up your opinions with evidence from the movie. But there is no need for lengthy introductions or stilted-sounding phrases like "the humanistic portrayal of characters." I really don't even know what that means. You may start like this, for example, "Of all the toga movies we have watched so far, "Quo Vadis" is one of my personal favorites because of (point 1), (point 2), (point 3)." Or: "'Quo Vadis' is a wonderful movie because it does a particularly good job ..."