Films are a collaboration of art forms. The plot of the film is easy and engaging to follow. The characters are meant to be relatable as we aspirational. Finally the art forms that are incorporated are able to tie the entire film together. This what makes a film artistic. Unfortunately Tom Tykwer’s Run Lola Run does not make the cut as a successful film due to the fact that it leaves the audience in confusion the characters are underdeveloped, the film is trying too hard to use different art forms that ultimately become a jumbled mess, and the plot doesn’t really make sense if it is just watched from beginning to end. Characters are very important in film, they are what make the movie. Characters t are memorable and enjoyable loathsome and …show more content…
The films were written and directed by one person. The Breakfast Club was written and directed by John Hughes, Pulp Fiction was written and directed by Quentin Tarantino, and Run Lola Run was written and directed by Tom Tykwer. All of these movies have numerous award and have been proclaimed as artistic. However, Run Lola Run for many reasons isn’t very artistic. The movie is like a project done two minutes before it was due. Film critic Roger Ebert states that “The director, a young German named Tom Tykwer, throws every trick in the book at us, and then the book, and then himself.” Ebert is correct in saying this because Tykwer does use all sorts of techniques to keep the audience’s attention only to give the movie an overwhelming feel. Tykwer uses different style or techniques, he neglects pieces of the plot. For example, in the film Tykwer use a zoom in, zoom out technique while Lola is running to show her face as she is running. This goes on far longer than it should. Most directors would use this for maybe a minute of film to show the urgency, but Tykwer uses it to take more time on her running which is essentially pointless. It is like repeating to just take up time. On the other hand Janet Maslin of the New York Times, praises the film claiming, “Mr. Tykwer deliberately blows away all traces of the mundane and the familiar, so that not even the closing credit crawl moves in the expected …show more content…
The plot is what holds everything together. Movies that are award-winning should have a good plot or at the very least a complete plot. New York Magazine reviewer Peter Rainer states, “The story lines all end differently, but they link up with one another; When one twenty minute spree closes out, it restarts …“Rainer says the obvious that the story replays, he also goes to talk about how it is like a video game. What Rainer may think is a great task it has a flaw because the film fails to tell the audience what really happened. The movie Clue although comedy, does tell the audience that this is what happened at the end. With a black screen that says things like, “This is what could happen.” Or “But this is what really happened.” Even if it this is just meant be comical, it still gives the audience an understanding of what is going on in the film. The writers recognized that the audience would like to know what really happened not that the film just restarts. Even video games tell the player what happened before they died and then restart from the check point. Hunter also states in his review, “It’s empty of charm and meaning, but it certainly kills time, for those who wish it dead.” What he means is that this is a pass time thing to watch for background noise because it won’t really make sense if people just watch the film in one sitting because the plot has holes and doesn’t answer all the question. For