5 Найкращих історичних фільмів, які варто переглянути

Історичне кіно завжди в пошані, це саме той жанр кіноіндустрії, який ніколи не втраїить своєї актуальності. Історичні події, їх герої і наслідки їх дій впливали на хід нашої історії. Кращі історичні фільми розповідають про найбільш яскраві події . Сучасні технології дозволяють знімати захоплюючі картини воєн, показувати видатних полководців і середньовічні замки, відтворити у фільмі всі історично значимі події в подробицях.

1. Гладіатор / Gladiator (2000) Великий генерал Максимус мав стати спадкоємцем цезаря Марка Аврелія. Але рідний син імператора наказує вбити Максимуса. Генералу вдається врятуватися, але доводиться стати спочатку рабом, а потім - гладіатором ...

2. Олександр / Alexander (2004)Літній Птолемей став намісником Єгипту через сорок років після того, як загинув Олександр, який був одним з найближчих соратників Македонського. Він вирішив розповісти і записати історію перемог великого полководця. Військо Александра Великого протягом довгих восьми років рухалося на Схід, до берегів світового Океану. Підкоривши Центральну і Західну Азію, Олександр Македонський першим ступив на цю таємничу і загадкову землю стародавньої Індії. Він мріяв про це ще в дитинстві, слухаючи міфи про подвиги Геракла, Аполлона, і про Трою.

3. Хоробре серце / Braveheart (1995) Приголомшлива історико-патріотична сага про відвагу, честь, прагнення до свободи і, звичайно, зраду і безпринципність - як антиподів християнських цінностей.

4. Троя / Troy (2004) 1193 рік до н.е. Принц Трої Паріс викрав свою кохану Олену у її чоловіка Менелая, що породило початок тривалої кривавої війни між греками і троянцями.

5. Король Артур / King Arthur (2004) Продюсери фільму претендують на історично достовірну версію легенди про короля Артура, нібито натхненну новими археологічними знахідками. Точність цих вимог є предметом обговорення, але фільм представляє Артура як римського офіцера, а не середньовічного лицаря. Фільм був знятий в Англії, Ірландії та Уельсі.

Film Review

1. Read the guidelines for writing a film review and confirm your answers

(adapted from Successful Writing).

A review is a special type of article written for publication in a magazine, newspaper, etc, giving a brief description and evaluation of a film, play, TV/radio programme, etc. It may be formal or semi-formal in style, depending on its intended readership, and is usually written using present tenses.

The structure:

1. an introduction mentions the title, the type of book/play/film/etc, the setting (when/where), the theme, the main characters, etc.;

2. a main body of two or more paragraphs containing the main points ot the plot (without revealing the ending), and evaluating such features as the acting, writing style, direction, characters, etc.; and

3. a conclusion which includes an overall assessment of the work and/or a recommendation, usually with justification.

You may also be asked to give reasons why someone should see the film/play or read the book, how it has influenced you, etc. Note that the number and length of paragraphs varies depending on the topic.

Useful language for writing reviews:

Background: This well-written/informative/ fascinating book ..., The I film/story is set in ..., This original first novel ..., The film/book tells the story ..., of..., This work is based on ..., etc.

General comments: It is rather long/ confusing/slow etc, The cast is excellent/weak ..., The script is dull/clever..., It has a tragic/surprising end ..., It is beautifully written etc.

Main points of plot: The plot focuses on ..., The story begins ..., The plot has an unexpected twist, The film reaches a dramatic climax ..., etc.

Recommendations: Don't miss it, it will change the way you see It is well worth seeing, I wouldn't recommend it because ..., etc.

To begin reviews:

This well-written/informative/fascinating/thought-provoking book is ... The film/book/play/etc is set in .../tells the story of .../is based on ... The film/play stars .../is directed by .../is the sequel to ...

To end reviews:

You should definitely see/read .../Don't miss it/You might enjoy ... All in all, it is well worth seeing/reading, since ... On the whole, I wouldn't recommend it, in view of the fact that... It is a classic of its kind/it is sure to be a hit/best-seller...

To explain the plot:

The plot revolves around .../involves ...focuses on .../has an unexpected twist. The story begins with .../unfolds/reaches a dramatic climax when ...

Evaluating various features:

The play/film/series has a strong/star-studded/mediocre cast.

The acting is moving/powerful/excellent/weak/disappointing/unconvincing.

The plot is gripping/dramatic/fascinating/suspense-filled/fast-moving/far-fetched/predictable/

confusing/dull/unimaginative.

The script/dialogue is touching/witty/hilarious/boring/mundane. It is beautifully/brilliantly/sensitively written/directed.

2. Discuss what information should go under each heading of the outline for a film review.

1. General characteristics

2. The message and the story line

3. Individual performance, portrayal of characters, acting

4. Direction and photography

5. Sound effects

6. General impressions and conclusions

3. Read the following excerpts from film reviews and fill in the gaps using words from the list below (adapted from Successful Writing).

action character climax

heroine interval lines

masterpiece opening plot

readable rehearsal soundtrack

stunts themes thriller

A On its 1)_________ night, Tom Watt's new production was a disappointment. The poor performance in the first act may have been due to the lack of 2)_________ as many in the cast seemed ill-prepared, uneasy in their roles and unsure of their 3)________. After the 4)_________, the second half was a great improvement.

B This star-studded, electrifying remake of an old favourite has impressive and dangerous 1)__________ spectacular special effects and an original 2)____________ by one of the hottest current rock bands. The best 3)___________ movie of the year.

Don't miss it!

Background

type of film

setting - where

setting - when

theme

adaptation from novel/play

original screenplay/script

Main Body

details of plot

ending of film

main character

other characters

comments on acting

Conclusion

positive comments by critic negative comments by critic recommendation

filmed in studio/on location music/soundtrack main actor/actress name of director name of producer supporting cast

comments on directing comments on plot comments on characters other comments

Film Review

F. Scott Fitzgerald did more for Hollywood than it has done for him. So what of this 3D fourth screen version of The Great Gatsby? It is, you might say, a story of three eggs. The mysterious central character is the self-made Jay Gatsby, a millionaire bootlegger who in the summer of 1922 lives at West Egg, the township outside Manhattan on Long Island Sound where the nouveaux riches have built their mansions. Across the bay at East Egg are the grand houses of the old-money people, among them the rich, brutal, Ivy League philistine Tom Buchanan, husband of the southern belle Daisy, whom Gatsby courted as an officer and temporary gentleman in the first world war. After losing her to Buchanan because he was penniless, he now seeks to recapture her. The third egg is Baz Luhrmann's curate's egg of a film, good and bad in parts, but mainly a misconceived venture. Luhrmann is a cheerful vulgarian and his movie suggestive of Proust directed by Michael Winner.

The film's principal figure is not Gatsby but Nick Carraway, a classic unreliable narrator, aged 30 in that summer of 1922, a midwesterner educated at Yale alongside Tom Buchanan and Daisy's second cousin. Nick has taken a cottage next door to Gatsby's mansion while he attempts to establish himself as a stockbroker, and Gatsby uses him as a way of re-engaging with Daisy. Everything we know is mediated by Carraway, and Luhrmann and his co-writer Craig Pearce have had the dubious idea of having Carraway tell the story from a sanatorium as a form of therapy on the advice of a psychiatrist.

He's being treated for alcoholism as Fitzgerald was to be, and significantly the date is 29 December 1929. Words float in the air around the befuddled Nick as he works on his book, and lines from the novel are actually written on the camera lens.

If this wasn't bad enough, Tobey Maguire is miscast or misdirected, playing Nick as gauche, uncomfortable, unsophisticated, childlike – less an involved observer than an intruder. This is a film that tramples on Fitzgerald's exquisite prose, turning the oblique into the crude, the suggestively symbolic into the declaratively monumental, the abstract into the flatly real. It's a pared-down novel where the use of "unrestfully" instead of "restlessly" is important, and where Carraway can speak of Jordan "changing the subject with an urban distaste for the concrete".

Leonardo DiCaprio has some of the fresh, furtive charm of the trainee confidence man trying on suave man-of-the-world roles but regularly revealing the inner decency that, despite his criminal activities, transcends this squalid world of the destructive, thoughtless rich. This is what makes Nick recognise Gatsby as the true upholder of the elusive American Dream and worthy of the final and only tribute he addresses to him: "They're a rotten crowd. You're worth the whole damn bunch put together." Carey Mulligan's sad, weak, characterless Daisy is also fairly successful, more affecting I think (and with a subtler touch of the south) than Mia Farrow in Jack Clayton's otherwise better-judged 1974 Gatsby.

Beside these larger blunders of taste and scale, such matters as Nick reading Ulysses while apparently still at Yale and Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue being performed at a Gatsby gathering two years before it was written seem unimportant. But there is one scene that works well, and that's the crucial confrontation between Tom Buchanan and Gatsby in front of Nick, Daisy and Jordan in a suite at the Plaza hotel one hot afternoon. There is tension and depth here. Would that Luhrmann had included the funeral and the meeting between Nick and Gatsby's elderly, working-class father from the book's final. (The Guardian Weekly)

Read this excerpt from a movie review. Underline six more examples using such or so. How does this reviewer feel about the movie?

There was so much hype around this movie before it opened. Unfortunately, it didn't live up to expectations. First of all, the special effects were so distracting that it was hard to focus on the story. And the story was not believable at all. The dialog seemed so forced that this drama sounded more like a comedy. If that wasn't bad enough, then there was the plot: it unfolds in such a confusing series of flashbacks that you can't keep the story straight. I still don't understand it! The worst part, though, is the ending. The movie ends so predictably that you'll wish you had left the theater earlier.

This movie is not a complete disaster, however. The opening scenes are fascinating. The opening is shot in such an interesting way that you'll forget you're watching a movie. And Ella Baker, playing the role of the mother, is phenomenal. She embodies her character with such confidence. Unfortunately, she has so little screen time that we hardly see her.

One recent moviegoer, when asked about this movie, said it for all of us: "I was so disappointed!"

Reading Passage 5

SPEECH PATTERNS

1. If I were asked to cite a single reason, for your pre­eminence, I would point to your creation of a special world.

If you could have shot this in colour, would you have?

I would certainly give you the number of my room if I had one.

I wouldn't have gone, if I hadn't made up my mind.

2. When I was a child, I suffered from almost complete lack of words.

The headmaster showed a considerable lack of cooperation with the governing body.

The plants died for lack of water.

His lack of wit was quite evident.

3. Was it only the accident of the puppet theatre that sent you the way of theatre rather than of books?

It was a foolish rather than a malicious remark.

He relied on his wit rather than his knowledge.

She is ignorant rather than stupid.

4. Do you direct it in your head? — In a way.

Did the play impress you? — In a way.

The work was well done in a way.

He is clever in a way.

5. What I need is to come in contact with others.

What the child needs is punishment.

What the fellow needs is self-respect.

What I need is advice.

6. My impulse has nothing to do with intellect or symbolism.

It has nothing to do with the original plan.

My decision has nothing to do with your explanation.

The answer has nothing to do with the question.

Paraphrase the following sentences using the Speech Patterns:

1. He is not concerned with their accommodation. 2. I think the room was not so cold, it was very damp. 3. The girl said she liked hiking, though she disliked certain things. 4. I can't accept her explanation, but at least I can understand it. 5. I wish you hadn't made an appointment with the lady, but I am not in your place. 6. The girl wasn't plain. She was clumsy. 7. I have no dealings with the papers. 8. He showed that he was unable to find words with which to express his thanks. 9. I think the group requires some extra help. 10. He is a boring person. I don't find him amusing. 11. She has no relationship with the Browns. 12. Everybody knows that she has little wisdom. 13. She requires a good rest. 14. The good-natured March girls managed to lead interesting lives de­spite the family's reduced circumstances. 15. "Tell me all about it, Jo. I must know everything."