We can see actors transformed to fit completely into the character of a film in which they starred . Some of the transformations are truly amazing , it’s not just the makeup and hair , but also to actual physical changes, such as haircuts , losses or drastic weight gain . In short , being an actor is not a walk , and it’s not just money and fame , we must also make compromises and sometimes change things about their appearance they do not want to ever change . It must be said that some of these actors are really transformed beyond recognition , it will surprise you to find out who they really are few movie characters who may have seen.
Helping a White Man Relearn Joie de Vivre
“Les Intouchables,” having broken box office records in France, arrives in the United States with a faithfully translated title — “The Intouchables” — that is not quite English. American audiences looking for a suitable French name for this ingratiating comedy of cross-racial friendship might settle on “Déjà Vu,” since it is a story we have seen many times before.
Though maybe not quite like this, or at least not in a while. “The Intouchables,” directed by Olivier Nakache and Eric Toledano and based on a true story, is about two men — one rich, uptight and white; the other poor, exuberant and black — who become best pals in spite of their differences.The pallid aristocrat, Philippe (François Cluzet), is paralyzed from the neck down as the result of a hang-gliding accident and lives in a state of opulent ennui attended by a nervous staff and is ignored by his petulant adolescent daughter. He is a difficult boss, and his newest employee, a streetwise hoodlum named Driss (Omar Sy) does not look as though he will last long in the job. Not that Driss has much ambition to play nurse for some grouchy old invalid; he applies for the position only so he can continue to collect government benefits. Moving into Philippe’s mansion, Driss steps away from a background of poverty, family dysfunction and trouble with the police. Under his boss’s stern gaze and imperious tutelage he starts to acquire a work ethic and a sense of discipline. In exchange, he helps Philippe discover his appetite for life and his capacity for joy.
How does Driss do this? In the usual ways. He flirts shamelessly with the boss’s secretary and gives Philippe’s daughter the stern talking-to she needs. He introduces Philippe to the pleasures of marijuana, encourages him to start dating and loosens up a stuffy chamber-music soiree with some funky music.
It is possible to summarize the experience of watching “The Intouchables” in nine words: You will laugh; you will cry; you will cringe. The Intouchables is much more than a buddy movie and American sensitivities to race and culture are just that, American, and don’t necessarily apply to the rest of the world.
The film is also very much about the fact that people deserve to be loved, yes those who are disabled, old, lesbian, gay and so on. In America the only people who deserve to be loved are the surgically enhanced, pouty lipped, botoxed, plastic fantastic monsters to populate our screens. This film is warm, funny and accepting of humanity in all its forms and in all its imperfect beauty.
If we consider the truthfulness adressed to low quality videos, it comes with no surprises that this sort of choice has been widely used for producing several films, particularly the horror ones. Here there are two instances of horror films, both based on the use of low quality tools of filming: “Paranormal Activity 4” and “The fourth kind”.
The first one is the sequel of the “Paranormal Activity” film series and it is obviously a fake documentary, set in November 2011. The plot is about a girl, Alex (Kathryn Newton), obsessed by a supernatural presence, manifested in her house when a new family moved into the neighborhood. The teenager connects the phenomena to a kid who likes to make jokes, but decides to film everything with a camera.
The second one (“The fourth kind”) purports to be based on actual events occurring in Nome, Alaska in 2000, in which psychologist Dr. Abigail Emily “Abbey” Tyler uses hypnosis to uncover memories of alien abduction from her patients, and finds evidence suggesting that she may have been abducted as well. The film has two components: dramatization, in which professional actors portray the individuals involved, and video footage purporting to show the actual victims undergoing hypnosis. (At some points in the film, the “actual” and dramatized footage is presented alongside each other in split-screen.)
“Brian de Palma’s Redacted (2007) explores the ‘truth not truth’ of video and cinematic images. The film’s long opening scene is paradigmatic: the classic cinematic move of a smooth ‘coming down’ from the sky is overlapped by the classic handycam image of the date of the shooting. Following this is a title in a semi-professional graphic, while the colloquial voice-over of a soldier (who is also the film’s protagonist) states that he is the author of the recording itself; after which a highly amateurish tracking shot ends with the protagonists looking collectively into the camera, and finally with a freeze-frame. As a whole, De Palma’s film feels like a mix of reality and fiction: Hollywood DV footage, YouTube clips, wannabe documentaries and parodies of independent cinema. Here, the director of Scarface has captured a phenomenon that has radically changed the aesthetic perception of the cinema viewer, alternating and superimposing classic cinema aesthetics with the booming DIY digital aesthetic. In addition, the film’s subject is the war in Iraq, and this aesthetic seems equal to a situation in which ‘embedded’ journalists give the public the ‘truth’ in ostensibly unofficial shots attained by ‘brave’ reporters risking their lives. Low-resolution images of the Iraq war are usually considered true, especially those taken by mobile phone cameras or otherwise tiny hidden cameras.” Web Aesthetics, p. 162-163.
“We could continue to find a justification for each time a director has decided not to shoot on film, yet it is obvious that these are aesthetic choices that have nothing to do with the finances available to the production.” Web Aesthetics, p. 162.