Lost Without Longitude. Course Review

 

by Laura Lai/Review 

Here I am interrupting the series of film reviews with a … course review. J I guess it happens when one writes. The thing is that in the process of sharpening my writing techniques for reviews, particularly films – and that is because I did book reviews before when an undergraduate, postgraduate, and Ph.D. student – I came across a course generously provided free of charge by Harvard, and implicitly by its outstanding professors and researchers. 

It is a one-week online course under the coordination of Prof. Alyssa Goodman. I interrupted almost all my thoughts and work to get on board before the course gets archived. The reason I took the decision to enroll in the course PredictionX: Lost Without Longitude is its relevance to a play I am having in mind, which was inspired by a short online course also provided by Harvard: Becomea More Resilient Leader in Turbulent Times (please click here for the course review).

This course is about the art of navigating on the sea, mainly before the era of GPS. The word ‘navigation’ comes from the Latin words ‘navis’ (ship) and ‘agere’ (to drive), meaning ‘navigare’ (to travel in a ship). In general, to navigate means to move from one place to another by a way of an intended course. This implies other concepts, such as position, distance, direction, speed, the margin of error, etc. Therefore, to navigate means to predict when and where someone or something will be at a certain future point.

This course points to the role played by astronomers and clockmakers in accurately assessing this prediction. It is also a course about people who impacted, in a positive way, the long scientific process of getting to an accurate prediction: Eratosthenes of Cyrene, Hipparchus, Nevil Maskeyne, etc.

The course includes also the beautiful story of the clockmaker John Harrison – a simple clockmaker in wood, from Lincolnville village, who in the 1730s traveled to London seeking financement to his ‘sea watch’, and whose reward for his great discovery in settling the longitude was put on hold by Nevil Maskeyne – an outstanding astronomer working on the same longitude issue, but from an astronomical point of view, and who, in the meantime, got to such a social position that he had the power to put on hold Harrison’s discovery based on the argument of replication. I will let you follow the course to discover the way Harrison’s son thought to work things out, and whom exactly he went to see to cancel the order given by Nevil Maskeyne - his father’s competition.

Personally, I do not see any competition between the two. They were two brilliant minds that worked on the same longitude theme, each of them from the point of view of academic and professional competence: Maskeyne as an astronomer, and Harrison as a clockmaker. Although I dislike human shortcomings, I appreciate the great input both brought to the progress of science and the king’s decision.

This course provides concepts, notions, and facts that are fascinating in the ‘pre-writing’ phase when an author is researching its topic. It is scientifically argued that an author usually uses only 30 percent of the research for writing, and 70 percent is left aside. However, the research process before writing gives the author a complete picture of the story it wants to write about. Indeed, there is lots of work behind any piece of writing and only a few authors can live only from book sales – lots of the effort remains non-remunerated. Therefore, it is disappointing when some readers or viewers (depending on the medium) do not consider measuring their words when criticizing. In terms of measurements, the course PredictionX: Lost Without Longitude, suggests nautical miles, fathom, chip logs, etc. J

To sum up, although after the course on Academic and Business Writing, I thought to practice my film reviewing techniques with a series of Alfred Hitchcock movies, I considered it relevant to pause for today, and for this week, and to post another review – a course review, relevant for a piece of writing I am having in mind. I hope to be forgiven. 

I will definitely see you in the next review of Alfred Hitchcock’s movies!

Other links:

Lai, Laura. ‘Shackleton’s Captain – The Famous Antarctic Expedition’. Online Movie. Writing Blog. March 9, 2021. Web. May 30, 2021. https://writingbreaklauralai.blogspot.com/2021/03/film-review-shackletons-captain-famous.html

Old Film (and Book) Review. Hitchcock Series: ‘The Lodger’ (1927)

photo edited by Laura Lai

Laura Lai/Review

Film’s Title: The Lodger

Lead Actors: Daisy (June), the lodger (Ivor Novello), Joe (Malcolm Keen), and the landlady (Marie Ault), the landlady’s husband (Arthur Chesney)

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Based on the novel The Lodger by Marie Belloc Lowndes (1911)

The Lodger is a silent movie thriller that starts with a murder and keeps the audience in suspense with great turns and twists as created by the master of suspense, A. Hitchcock.

            A serial killer was at large even after having committed the seventh victim – all of them blonde women, which, from a scientific viewpoint, was the work of a psychopath that developed a fixation. The murderer was ‘signing’ his murderous acts with the name of ‘The Avenger’ and an upwards triangle. According to police calculations, the following victim should be from a certain area of lodging houses. In one of these houses, lived a young blonde girl named Daisy (June). To this house, a tall man, with his face half-covered – as ‘The Avenger’ was described by a witness after his last victim – asked for accommodation (Ivor Novello). The lodger was carrying a leather bag, he was wealthy enough to pay the rent in advance, and he was having a map on which it was marked all the places where the murderer made his victims – altogether a triangle-perimeter on the map of London. Following a series of coincidental events, the lodger almost got annihilated by the masses – wrongly annihilated by the masses constantly reading in the Evening Standard about The Avenger’s victims. 

It is in this scene that Alfred Hitchcock is caught on camera, as an actor – a lovely and original idea. Nowadays, I think that Quentin Tarantino sometimes does that, too: being both the director and the actor. But there may be others I am not aware of just as a cinema movie consumer. 

            I remember that during my Drama Writing course in 2019, we got to the topic of book adaptations for screen and/or for the stage. Our drama writing tutor at Oxford asked us about a book that we would adapt, for which medium, and the way we would do that. I answered that I would adapt Romeo and Juliette by W. Shakespeare for several reasons: remembering Shakespeare, for the fun of updating the topic and pacing it in the present, for the challenge of the medium change adaptation (text written for the stage but adapted for the screen), and for the even greater challenge of transforming a tragedy into a comedy. Just that I would call it Roman and Julie, and the way I described how I envisioned my adaptation was just an allusion to Shakespeare's play. The tutor found my creative idea lovely and asked me if I saw the movie Romeo and Juliette directed by Baz Luhrman. I was just about to reply ‘I’ve seen the movie Romeo and Juliette with Leonardo di Caprio’, but I checked on the Internet and I learned that we were referring to the same movie - just to see the difference between the way a professional asks a question about a movie ('by Baz Luhrman') and the way a cinema consumer would answer ('with di Caprio'). J My drama writing tutor, Nicholas McInerny directed a series called The Rainbow Dads and got the Silver Award at the British Community Radio Awards 2020. 

In the movie The Lodger there are particularly three scenes on which I would like to pause, because they made quite an impression on me, from either an artistic or a technical point of view – both stressing Hitchcock’s film genius.

First, from an artistic point of view, to have a lamp as a leitmotif of a movie whose subtitle is A story of London Fog is an absolutely brilliant idea! Brilliant! Second, from a technical point of view,  and related to the idea of searching for a serial killer in a London fog, I want to point to the scene when the camera shoots the back of a police car with two windows through which one could see the driver and the agent sitting next to the driver, both dressed in black. The way the car swings creates the artistic impression of two eyes looking left and right. And that I also found absolutely brilliant as an idea. The third scene I would like to mention is one of the mobs wanting to annihilate the lodger, who was stuck in a fence because of his handcuffs. The moment he is brought down from the fence, with Daisy crying over his wounded and bleeding body was, from my point of view, an allusion to the biblical story of Jesus' crucifixion.

After having read the book The Lodger by Marie Belloc Lowndes I am persuaded by the biblical allusion to this scene because in the book the lodger is described as a gentleman who the moment he arrived in this house seeking accommodation, he also asked for a Bible. He was also quoting from the Bible. I find it fabulous the way Hitchcock transposed on screen this information from the book. However, I think that the use of the Bible in the book and referring to the lodger was intentionally used to raise questions about the true character of this lodger - to be or not to be the serial killer. The reason why I believe so is that there is an old saying that says that the devil can also quote very well from the Bible. Therefore, the fact that this lodger asked for a Bible does not say anything about his innocence because he could be that evil-spirited serial killer having a Bible and even knowing quotes from it. 

            This book that inspired Hitchcock for the screen is structured into twenty-seven chapters. The landlady and her husband are, actually, the Buntings and Daisy is Mr. Bunting’s daughter from a first marriage. Daisy is described as having ‘always lived a simple, quiet life in the little country town…’ while in Hitchcock’s movie, she’s a mannequin having periodically a show – an idea that is more attractive for cinema. However, in adapting the book for the screen, Hitchcock kept many elements from the book, including the description of the lodger (Sleuth, in the book) who was ‘dark, sensitive, hatchet-shaped face’ wearing a black leather bag that was kept closed in a ‘chiffonnier’.

            This book from 1911 uses the French word ‘chiffonnier’ that was used in English at the beginning of the XXth century, and that is no anymore mentioned in the English dictionary. In French, it means a piece of furniture that is relatively high, not too large, and that, usually, has drawers. It is in this kind of piece of furniture that the lodger was having his bag closed both in the book and in the movie. Furthermore, Hitchcock used the idea of a serial killer, ‘the avenger’ signature with the triangle sign as in the book, and the Evening Standard. But contrary to the book, he built a love story between the lodger and Daisy – a love story that only Hitchcock could envision taking shape during a chess game. A very original idea within this movie context! Maybe the most original and the most intriguing was the back story Hitchcock created for the lodger’s character: ‘the avenger’ as being ‘the revenger.’ I will let you discover why I believe so. 

Enjoy the movie!

P.S.: See you in the next review of Hitchcock’s movies!  

  #filmreview, #oldfilmreview, #bookreview, #writing, #Hitchcock, #amblogging                                               

Old Film Review. Hitchcock Series: ‘The Pleasure Garden’ (1925)

photo edited by Laura Lai

by Laura Lai/Review 

Film’s Title: The Pleasure Garden

Lead Actors: Patsy (Virginia Valli), Jill (Carmelita Geraghty), Levet (Miles Mander), Hugh (John  Stewart)

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Based on the novel The Pleasure Garden by Oliver Sandys

 

The Pleasure Garden is the first movie directed by Alfred Hitchcock. It is a silent movie and, theoretically, a black-and-white one, but this link provides a kind of tinted version of it.

            This movie is the story of a woman and of a man searching for and finding each other. Hugh (John Stewart) was initially the fiancé of Jill (Carmelita Geraghty) – a popular cabaret dancer. Jill’s friend, Patsy (Virginia Valli), rushed into marriage to Levet (Miles Mander) a work colleague of Hugh that she met through Jill and Hugh. Both men were detached by the company to an overseas plantation for a period of two years. It is during this time that Hugh read in the newspaper that Jill would marry somebody else and Patsy – making all the effort to come to this plantation – discovered that Levet was not the man she thought she married.

From an artistic point of view, Hitchcock chose to unfold the plot with both indoor and outdoor scenes – he found great spots to film both the plantation and the honeymoon of Patsy and Levet to Italy, without actually having traveled there. Furthermore, he made an interesting choice of characters when deciding on Virginia Valli and Carmelita Geraghty for the roles of Patsy and Jill, because these two friends look alike, but they have opposite behaviors, mentalities, and, consequently, opposite choices they make for life.

From a technical point of view, the movie is silent but appropriate music (composed and performed by Lee Erwin) accompanies the viewers all along the movie. Hitchcock succeeded in his first movie to catch on camera man's hypocrisy - on the one side, the desire in men’s eyes as spectators to this cabaret and, on the other side, men's arrogance toward women: 

‘Folks, I have a great artist here, who has never been on stage in her life but is sure she can show us how to dance’ – a humiliating line addressed to Patsy who was looking for a job at the cabaret where Jill was working. 

And speaking of lines, there is an original point to be stressed here. The slides with the characters’ lines that are typically for a silent movie were added an originality note by Alfred Hitchcock. Those at the beginning of the movie that introduces the characters, they also introduce the actor performing that role – which is something I have never seen in any other silent movie. 

My favorite scene is from the end of this 1-hour movie when Hugh is ‘brought in’ to save Patsy from the madness of her husband – an original way to bring in an ill man! In terms of characters, my favorite is Cuddle, the dog living with Patsy. For this role of the most intelligent of all characters, Hitchcock chose a lovely and playful stray dog. So playful that it also chewed cables in the last scene - a fun and brilliant choice made by the film director.

Enjoy the movie!

P.S.: See you in the next film review of this Hitchcock series! J

 #filmreview, #oldfilmreview, #writing, #Hitchcock, #amblogging       

Old Film Review: The 39 Steps. Hitchcock’s Film Genius

photo edited by Laura Lai

by Laura Lai/Review 

This film review was my final assignment for the course ‘Academic and Business Writing’ (University of California, Berkeley) provided by edX on its educational platform. It’s with great pleasure that I did my final assignment by watching the movie and reading the book that inspired it. It’s with this course that I deepened my writing technique to review movies. And, now, it’s time to keep on practicing this writing genre. Therefore, with the movie, The 39 Steps starts a series of Alfred Hitchcock’s movies that I’ll review in this Writing Blog. You’re all welcome to read them, comment, and watch the movies! J

Film’s Title:     The 39 Steps (1935)

Lead Actors:     Robert Donat (Richard Hannay) and Madeleine Carroll (Pamela)

Other Actors:  Lucie Mannheim (Annabella Smith), Mr. Memory (Wylie Watson) and Godfred Tearle (Prof. Jordan)

Director:         Alfred Hitchcock

Genre:             Thriller

Based on the novel The Thirty-Nine Steps (1915) by John Buchan

The film The 39 Steps is a fascinating black-and-white spy thriller directed by the film master of suspense and of psychoanalysis Alfred Hitchcock.

            The movie starts showing the main protagonist, Richard Hannay (Robert Donat), participating in an interactive musical where a certain Mr. Memory (Wylie Watson) was entertaining the audience by answering questions from memory. At this event, Hannay met Annabella Smith (Lucie Mannheim) that accompanied him to his apartment and told him that she was a spy who worked to save a state secret; she also mentioned that she was followed by other two agents who wanted her dead. Hannay did not believe a word, but the same night she died stabbed in his apartment – a map in her hand – and Hannay was dragged into this spy story. He succeeded in leaving his apartment disguised as a milkman, leaving for Scotland following the map Annabella Smith had in her hand the moment she died, with the police after him for murder. Here starts the amateur spy adventure of a regular citizen engaged in discovering the state secret and in saving it from being discovered by foreign governments – an adventure that keeps the audience in suspense to the very last scene.

From an artistic viewpoint, this plot is fascinating. It keeps the audience hooked, it engages the audience in Hannay’s adventure, and it takes the audience to different places: in a train, in an inn, among sheep, behind a waterfall, then back to the musical where Hannay met Mr. Memory again and where, this time, he asked him what the thirty-nine steps meant. The dialogue is short, dynamic, and funny at times. The characters are greatly introduced. The music accompanies marvelously Hannay’s spy adventure. 

From a technical viewpoint, I want to stress the film genius of Alfred Hitchcock (1899- 1980) that always attracted and fascinated me.

            Firstly, it is Hitchcock’s original idea to present Hannay’s spy adventures – as inspired by John Buchan’s novel – by focusing on the human senses. It is a brilliant idea that converges with the topic of this film, in which Hannay is an amateur relying mainly on his feelings and on luck.

            For example, at the beginning of the movie, the camera stops on the hand of Annabella Smith holding a map (touch sense). On the train, Hannay read in the newspaper that the police were after him, and the camera stops on his eyes (sight). When he reached the inn, the innkeeper tried to hear what his wife was whispering to Hannay, and the camera stops on the innkeeper listening (hearing). Finally, when Hannay reached the house of Prof. Jordan (Godfrey Tearle) – the murderer of Annabella Smith – there was a party, and Hannay tasted the wine (taste sense), but the camera stops on the right hand of Prof. Jordan where a finger was missing, as described by Smith. And the entire movie 'smells' of an international conspiracy (smell sense).

            Secondly, it is about the scene of the meeting between the protagonist (Hannay) and the antagonist (Prof. Jordan) which is a scene of fine psychoanalysis. Such one scene is often met in Hitchcock’s movies.

            For example, the ‘room scene’ starts with Prof. Jordan closing the door twice with a key. Hannay sits, he is trapped. At the line ‘she’s been murdered by a foreign agent’ they both stand – which makes Hannay as an amateur spy equal to the professional spy, Prof. Jordan. When Hannay saw Prof. Jordan missing a finger, he understood that he was the murderer and he stood thinking to escape. Hitchcock used a third character, to suddenly open the door from the outside calling Prof. Jordan – which stresses Hannay’s adventure relying particularly on his luck. Hannay moves slowly to the door, and makes small steps; he is followed by the murderer. They both pause: they sit. Hannay resumes his plan to get closer to the door. The ‘room scene’ ends in suspense.

In conclusion, the film The 39 Steps is a great spy thriller that engages the audience with suspense and fascinates with the psychoanalysis of the characters’ behavior. Its plot is about the involvement of a regular citizen in a dangerous series of adventures. This film succeeds in conveying the message that all regular citizens should put their country’s interests above their own life through an artistically crafted plot and through a brilliant technique that reconfirms Alfred Hitchcock’s film genius.

            This movie was considered by film critics as the best adaptation of the novel The Thirty-Nine Steps by John Buchan (1915). It is the first of a series of five books in which the main protagonist’s adventures entertained the British soldiers fighting in World War I. Hitchcock’s movie kept lots of elements from the book (plot, setting, the milkman, the candidate speech, etc.), and he also used in the movie the black notebook that appears in the book – a codified conspiracy dairy – that proved to be a lifesaver for Richard Hannay. But he left aside conspiracy details (countries, names, assassination dates, etc.). Additionally, he gave a more artistic and musical nuance to the state secret to be saved.

            This is a great movie that I recommend to all ages, at any time during the day or the night! Enjoy it! 

#cwp2x, #edx, #UCB, #oldfilmreview, #filmreview, #Hitchcock