With its stellar screenplay and marvelous musical score, Damian Chazelle’s La La Land had
easily become a box-office hit with a total of $446.1 as its worldwide earnings. I could totally understand
its fame and success though. The film was an epitome of art itself—a safe haven for avant-gardes and
those who enjoy the culture.
Aesthetic Aspect
The aesthetics presented on the film is something which cannot be dissected into individual parts.
Prior to what I have mentioned in the introduction, La La Land was art itself as a whole. Putting it into a
narrative would be a less thrilling way of describing the movie instead of witnessing its spectacle by
one’s very own eyes. Nevertheless, the aesthetics of the film were easily achieved because its theme
revolved around art and beauty itself. Instead of dialogues running the course of the whole story, the
progression was showcased through performance and musical scenes. It was crazy how one cut
covered an entire scene where the characters started having romantic feelings for each other. Aside
from the progression, the mentions of notable figures as well as works from art history had made the film
more connected with its theme. The references mentioned in the movie paid respect and regards to art
culture. Moreover, the visuals of the film were really magnificent. Aside from the splendid camera work
and editing, the whole backdrop itself was created beautifully and artistically. Likewise, the soundtrack is
also something worth mentioning. One performance doesn’t exactly end after its cut but instead, viewers
could find themselves singing along to the same tune but with a different context after some time in the
movie. It was all connected and sewn cleverly. Chazelle was able to create such a fine piece of art not
limited to a painting or song, but a well-structured film which combines the elements of art altogether.
Technical Aspect
Production Elements
As a student yet still learning about how a production is made, I honestly cannot be a good
critique in terms of this subcategory. Though, I could tell that the good quality of the film is
impossible to achieve without the mastery among these elements. The desired aesthetics pushed
through because of the splendid effort and work exerted during the production. The shots/angles
were nicely performed, even the pans and tilts of the camera showed off a nice transition. It was
really smooth. Also, the lighting was not all over the place and it was utilized well in creating a
certain mood per scene. It wasn’t exactly a spotlight but it felt that way. It was able to highlight the
emotions of the character despite being a minor but very crucial factor. In terms of the sound and
music, I couldn’t really say anything because the whole film was a musical. Its backbone was its
sound and music. Therefore, the director surely had made sure that no errors were to be found
within this aspect. I could it feel it though. The instrumentals had its own life and story to tell, the
voices of the characters even spiced it up. As per the visual and special effects, I could say that
the film nailed this one. The backdrops were made intricately and very complementary to the film.
Every scene established a connection with one another because of the way the backdrop as well
as the music were constructed. I just had a little issue for the special effects though. I’m not sure
if it was the goal of the director but some scenes looked very unrealistic and unnatural. It wasn’t
badly unsightly but it just bothered me a little bit. Specifically, I’m referring to the “Planetarium
Scene.” Well, because the movie revolves around the exploration of art, I’d just like think it was on
purpose in order to trigger an impressionist vibe. Last but not the least, the editing of the film also
was absolutely well-done. The scenes all progressed and cut at a very nice timing, not leaving
