Film Review of Blow Up

Jillian Ramirez

February 23, 2010

COM 232 Tom Hammond

MWF 10 a.m.

Film Review of Blow Up

Blow Up, by Michelangelo Antonioni, was made in 1966 and portrays the time period of “swinging London” in the 60’s. The main character is a highly sought after photographer, David Hemmings, who uncovers evidence that a murder might have taken place while he was taking pictures in the park one day. He blows up the negatives and uncovers images in the picture that look like a body laying in the grass and a gun being held up. Are they real or not? After he goes to check if the body is real or not, which is it, all of his evidence is gone the next day when he returns to his home. Was everything real? Was there a real murder? Why did the woman in the park want the negatives so bad then? This film maintains a mystifying feeling that is unquestionably from the film’s ongoing air of powerful mystery from Mr. Antonioni’s view.

Thomas’s, the photographer, world is surrounded by music, fashion, marijuana, and easy sex. His life has no challenges and it bores him until one day his own photographs awaken him. I believed he was so aroused by his own photographs that this is why he did not go to the police right away. He is so mystified that he actually took those photos and uncovered something in them. He was so interested because this was not in his usually boring day of photographing models. He wanted to examine them thoroughly and solve this him self. The realities of the photographs, after they were blown-up, were not rational or sensible. For the most part we see what sees what Antonioni wants us to see and what the photographer wants to believe he sees in the pictures. Garry Collins mentions, in his review of Blow Up, that the mimes at the end of movie shadow this. “…the mimes at the end of Blow-Up believe they are witnesses to a tennis ball being tossed in the air”(http://www.noripcord.com/reviews/film/blow-up). The mimes see what they want and there for believe it to be.

An important moment in the movie I believe is when the photographer thinks he sees the woman from the park on the street looking into a window and then all off the sudden she disappears. Was she really there or was he just imagining it? “He does not find her, as she seemingly ‘vanishes,’ literally, as people often do in film — which makes us question our lead character’s trustworthiness in interpreting reality,” Dan Schneider said in his review of Blow Up. (http://www.altfg.com/blog/film-reviews/blowup-michelangelo-antonioni/). A big suggestion of the movie seemed to be about interpretation of reality and illusion. “…Thomas is unquestionably a central figure in this matter, since his perception of reality is mostly filtered through the lenses of his camera. His photographs depict a staged reality, whether it is via models posing in modish attire or elderly men at the dosshouse,” (Garry Collins).

Another big part of the movie is at the very end after the photographer throws the tennis ball back to the mimes and the camera follows the imaginary ball over the fence. Because he retrieves the ball back to the mimes, this indicated that he bought into their world. “… To the point that, after he does, we now even hear a real tennis match going on. Interestingly, we hear this, even though we never heard a gunshot in the park, another clue that reality can be skewed,” (Dan Schneider).

Thomas vanishes just before the film ends, like the woman from the park did when he saw her on the street, and possible the dead body. This leads me to my conclusion that you cannot believe everything you see. Our eyes play tricks on us all the time. Whether it is there or not, it is our perception that leads us to a conclusion we believe or are led to. I concur with Tom Hammond that Antonioni should have obscured the blown up pictures a bit more to make the audience think about what they are looking it. It was too direct and distinct in what Antonioni wanted you to see. From what I have read this movie was very controversial when it came out and I still believe it to be that way today. The scenes were developed just right with a perfect color arrangement for the time period; it helps the viewer’s feel the individuality of the mod world the characters live in. Furthermore, I agree with Bosley Crowther of the New York Times movie review that, “…the performing is excellent.” (http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=EE05E7DF1739E361BC4152DFB467838D679EDE)