The Aesthetics and Politics of Film

William Harris: Response to Munich; Oldboy; The Constant Gardner

2006-04-13T17:27:00.000-04:00

“MUNICH”
Directed By Steven Spielberg
Tony Kusnar / Eric Roth
Based on the Book “Vengeance” written by George Jonas

The movie was inspired by a tragic historical event in Munich, Germany during 1972 Olympic games. During these games, 11 Israeli “Jewish” Athletes were taken hostage and murdered by Palestinian Arabs.

In this somewhat Comparative Political Study we find the Political Culture between these two countries have long been a serious issue between, race, ethnicity, and religion. This mostly entails the issue of property rights, or the rights and power in control of the “promise land”.

As with any nation, the primary concern is the Public Safety, or at least the sense of it. In any nation around the world we might entertain the notion that the “Household” is the most fundamental institution, next to marriage. Theoretically when we find safety at home, we might hope to start building strong individuals, who build strong families, who build strong nations, etc. With large functioning populations being the essential element in building nations, we can understand the importance of maintaining an equilibrium or balance in peace for the greater good of the nation.

The idea here with the movie MUNICH is when countries run up against each other with political conflict we find the media getting involved and possible exploitation of information that can be manipulated into a propaganda spin that could get out of control and hurt not your own country but possible some one else’s country. So these big responsibilities fall into the hands of a powerful minority class that are swift in eradicating such problems and with the least amount of attention. Only supplying the money, otherwise not affiliated with and such covert, or terrorist organization. The idea is to fulfill vengeance without affecting the primary functions of these nations safety and economic stability by unwanted publicity towards such acts.

It is here that can start to see and understand the function of these somewhat terrorist type of activities as an organic continuous cycle of death, power shifts, and payoffs that start to make one question; what a person or country is willing to sacrifice, to maintain the power and dignity of a country. The movie dives into one possible scenario of what happened during the period following this widely publicized political event. The group of assassins worked secretly outside of the laws of the land, or country. The countries plan was to denounce any involvement and keep it a complete covert operation that allows this previously mentioned balance to occur naturally. This balance starts beyond the boundaries of personal rights. It surpasses any restraints of bureaucracy. But does start to mirror things that might be considered branches of organized governments. This area located out in the perimeter of what we might consider the normal Government relations of Checks and balances.

With Limited Government power in many countries and their presence only wanting to mirror the idea of being there for the greater good of the people. These covert unsanctioned operations can easily be taken to have a Necessary and proper cause, justified by the Machiavellian ideology, or “the end justifies the means”. The character Ephram in the movie, played by Geoffrey Rush, is working for the Israeli intelligence organization “Mossad” who organizes a team of assassins that are relieved of their official duty and require them to sign away any involvement with their government and any future retirement benefits. In return for following orders put forth they would receive funds for functioning during the operation and unofficial retirement payment of a job well finished.

What the main character soon finds out is that through this system the world is a scary place and all that was important was to return home to his wife and newborn child. His identity started to disrupt because of starting to understand both sides of the struggle and realizing this form of management of conflict would never be settled through assassinations. He decides that his safe place was going to be New York and that his previous home was of no true help or safe place that he wanted to be a part of. I hope that these countries can some day create politics that will represent the true voice of the people and that terrorists organizations will be resolved with the voice they might create through some for of civil disobedience.

OLDBOY
Film Response

This groovy Asian Action / Thriller “Flick”, showing elements of “Film Noir”style in the avant-garde Genre form leaves me to understand why Quentin Tarentino gave his seal of approval for it. As with most cutting-edge, experimental type films you see the use of many new editing techniques, plot continuity irregularities, ambiguous moral characters, along with finding difficulty with drawing the line between dreams, reality, and overall meaning of the story.

Story duration actually ties all the way back to when Dae-Su was in high school where he started a rumor that led to a series of event unknown until the end of the movie. The plot duration was around 15 years and one week, including a couple of flash backs that allow him to piece together this puzzle that has caused him to be imprisoned for 15 years. The 15-year imprisonment relationship was summarized through many tricks, or conventions, of the editing and camera world, such as showing Major political events occurring on the television, his implied frequency of hair growth and hair cuts, a couple attempts on his life from different frustrations, and a journal he starts and ends with a complete volume before being released. The scene only took but a few minutes but it felt like we all were in there with him for those 15 years. Most of the screen duration occurred with a summary of the 5 day seek of vengeance, or possibly truth???

In the beginning, “real time” was thrown upon us with the “Cliff hanger” effect and left us with the question, what the hell? Somebody was getting ready to die fast! Time, this appears as a major frequent theme, from this point mentioned above through the opening credits of OLDBOY rotating like a clock, many clocks superimposed with-in dissolving cuts throughout the film. Through one of the early plot satellites we new early on that Dae-su likes playing games because of his friend saying, “are you playing games again” while looking for him when he exists the phone booth, and noticing his disappearance. Here the camera takes omniscience overhead position. From this position we achieve a major event hub by seeing that the game has begun and the symbolic “X” marks the spot and we have direction because of the symbolic “arrow” painted on the road, and we know by immediate montage of stop watches that there is a time limit. Another frequent element of juxtaposition is the fact of being in very high places or very low places. It moves him from opening scene of being in control, to be a beast eating food from the floor. Another pattern of comparative symbolism is with the use of ties representing dog leashes made very clear in the opening scene, because of a dog in the arm. All the ties represent dog leashes or the control on others, or the control needed on oneself. It’s a matter of maturity.

I want to back up bit and continue to focus on this beginning area of the film. The drunk tank or room in particular. Here we not only get to see this Dae-Su not only show us his immaturity, but his lack of respect for anyone but himself and his mental confusion in general. In this early sequence we can get a lot out of whom we are dealing with. The cinema photographer opens with a nice ridiculous close-up of Dae-su. Seeing him up-close and personal and then crosscutting wide-shots together, on the bench, showing this outer and inner differences that the movie will continue to work with. This montage of cross-cutting combined with many jump cuts allows you to feel the inner workings of his mind and inspires some anticipation that hopefully he gets some help, or just maybe that we think this character is going no where fast. With this juxtaposition we really wonder if he will actually keep up with this imposed “time limit” that we are frequently reminded of.

“Hello Sweet Girl, it’s daddy, daddy’s got you present and I’ll be there to GIVE IT TO YOU, baby!” An early plot foreshadowing of things to cum, literally! The way that the film is cut, I feel, that we are led to believe that Dae-Su is the man that was dropped from the building, when we later find out that that person was actually himself. This I feel is the theme or man against himself. And man not listening to him self but just continuously talking about himself. Once he told his story on the rooftop, he was finished with any other whining beast – or heart. I believe that Dae-su the businessman is being split into two parts in the beginning and even split more as the writing continues from what was originally a mythological “wild man” archetype character that has been broken down into smaller complex characters that interact around him. The “Wildman” and the characters in the film represent the parts of ones proper inner workings from going from immature to mature adult man. These complex individual characters working within the film represent the workings of viewers subconscious The characters are trying to help Dae-su but he is a man who has not reached maturity in the traditional sense and will not be mature until he embraces his true nature, which is both good and bad. Since he was not willing to put a leash on this proverbial “wild man” then someone else was going to do it for him. A character in his deep dark subconscious, something kept alive by the heart. Woo- Jinn mentions that he has a bad heart and that he had asked, Dr. Hopkins – (an English surname; meaning derived from the dim.) To install a remote control to stop his pass maker from functioning upon request. Matters of the heart, the proverbial heart, are usually a dark place, a place we might sometimes wish we could shut off. Woo-Jin is establishing his function of the conscious. He has locked Dae-Su up for 15 years and finally one day released him back on top. Not on the bottom where he had once found him. It’s the heart hoping and helping for the best.

This Avant-garde type movie dealing with all the postmodern twists, the movies form is defying continuity, and erasing the line between dream and reality. We have seen the inner workings of his mind and find it hard to determine whether it was dream or reality. We never really left that position the entire movie, this “pure stream of consciousness” literary style equivalent, continues through out. The entire movie is nothing more then this guys conscience being broken up into these “film noir” characters that continue to break him down. Or shrink him into nothing because he has not only created them but also has made thing up his whole life so he could “get along with everyone”, “getting through one day at a time.” but why can’t he get along today?” he asked! Today is the day that he will start from the bottom where the rainwater and darkness, Dae-Su refers to as home, is clouding his every thought. And finally be brought back to the top of the building, sunshine and green grass.

The story is about a man who has lived a life of a businessman, modern day thief, living his life getting along with others and then while drinking this underlying theme starts to come more apparent. This male had yet to mature into a full man. A man who is not only compassionate but also without fear, brave. The plot to me seems to be this battle or this fifteen-year reign of the wild man who had been locked up and is now deciding and exit strategy.

You laugh and the world laughs with you! You weep and you weep alone.

Dae-su asks the question, “if I had been in that prison for fifteen years, would Mi-do love me as much as she does.” The mature man has let the wild man go and know that he can call on his help whenever he needs it.

At the end of the movie you here Dae-su narrative after the ….”This is what’s happened to me up till now. Thank you, for listening to a terrible story all the way through till the end. I hope that you can understand that the reason that I cant talk to you in person is because I have know tongue” His subconscious, or “wild man” talking deep within his mind.

The hypnotist makes a clear statement at the end that I believe to be an underplaying conclusion. She says, “to be HONEST, I have NO reason to help YOU!” “ But there was something that you wrote here that was touching. Even though I’m no better than a beast…don’t I have the right to live? My question is doesn’t the wild man have a right to live and doesn’t everyone have a right to live and to make mistakes. We should not let ourselves be shrunken and diluted through lies…. And like in this movie by chance he was able to reverse the damage through hypnosis. As she says, “the hypnosis can possibly distort your memories”. This would have the same effects of lies, rumors, etc…

He is now at the edge of the forest in the pure snow symbolic of innocence and cleansing…he is through talking too much. He still wants to go with the hypnosis that will send his anger and Wildman back to the forest. He could never handle that challenge to set it free and call upon him whenever needed but harbored him for ever-much like the Asian culture in general have an tradition of carrying grudge.

The hypnotist starts the transformation by saying look at the tree- the tree becomes the rock pillar in Woo-Jin penthouse. This shows the symbolism of Woo-Jins’ layer as the forest and he is the “Wild Man” This duality of characters I feel are constantly changing from being one person, to two people with the same problem, ambiguous in there moral standing. I’m not sure if it from the writer showing his talents and covering this old tale of manhood or just my own ignorance not allowing me to see something that is clear.

The frequency of flash backs start increasing as the film nears its end and as the answers come so fast we are overwhelmed not only with what the truth is, but also by how everyone is affected, or by sacrifice not affected, Mi-do. The last sequence upon a snow cap mountain leaves us unsure how much story duration has passed but with the knowledge that Dae-Su and Mi-do has traveled far, he is tired, not talking too much anymore, and ready for a spiritual transformation. A division of his inner self has occurred. He has climbed a great mountain, has great perspective, and has become a mature man. Both crying and laughing with joy of a rebirth after hearing Mi-do tell him that she loves him. This man is now complete, as with the viewer, all the other characters have vanished.

“The Constant Gardner”
Focusing on Cinematography

This non-linear story, duel-narrative, detective puzzle type genre film, takes place on location in the beautiful setting of Nairobi, Africa, with wonderful cinematography. Even though this non-linear style takes away from the verisimilitude of the movie, compared to a linear type, I believe that the overall use of cinematographic properties, Framing, combined with the speed and length of the shots by the Director of photography (DP) does help create the feeling of a dream, adding back the ability to “suspend my disbelief”, and allowing for a wonderful mise-en-scene.

The DP responsibilities are always demanding but were particularly demanding in this film because of the obvious reasons. The main reason, of course, expensive equipment, dry African desert, and dirt, sand, well this terrain leads to a difficult task. The DP I’m sure was relying on his entire photography unit to give 110% whether being the camera operator, clapper/loader, gaffer, best boy, or grip. This team had to be a highly responsive and efficient unit, because of the fact that once the clapperboard falls, and the director says, action! Money is burning fast and a grain of sand better not get in the way.

Cinematographic properties in this film, such as film stock, lighting, and lenses were very important to consider under such harsh conditions. For consideration on film stock, we have to be familiar with the chosen stocks film colorization, even though we might assume that digital colorization technology in post-production can manipulate the final product, and remember that the original shots will represent the final quality of the motion picture. Postproduction technology is essential but not fundamental, also as the old cliché goes during production, “Crap in equals Crap-out”. Other considerations of your film stock will be whether your shooting many day or night shots, and are the temperatures going to be cold or hot? This film being primarily shot during hot days in Africa, we can knowingly say that the film stock choice was zenith to many of the critical production responsibilities and setup. Of course if your using types of digital video cameras you will find these issues less sensitive, but none the less important.

The natural lighting sources in this film was used abundantly, with the help of reflector boards diffusing the light and reducing shadows on the face when it wasn’t necessary, along with filters controlling the quality of light. But this movie did contain many points of artificial lights, especially during the evening and night scenes when they used both focusable spots and floodlights. These spotlights were used wonderfully in one particular scene in the back yard, when the letter is given back. The light source direction produced harsh shadows across the characters face during the moment of him receiving the letter. This gives a great example of how the lighting and acting made of feel his sinister nature, and created one of the most notable mise-en-scenes’ in the film.

With many extreme long shots, pan shots, and aerial-view shots combined with maximum depth of field and widescreen aspect ratio, allowed us to see the enormous scale, vastness, and isolation of Africa as a country. This ratio allows more composition while framing shots during setup. As with almost all movies there was a continuous montage of editing cuts between long shots, medium shot, and close-ups. The many camera techniques used during moments to create a documentary style on the realistic outdoor open shot scenes were done with Steady-cams adjusted to simulated camera movement creating verisimilitude and mise-en-scene

The cinematography in this film was really one of its best qualities. The overall screen duration was to long, the scope came to slowly, and the overall suffering I experienced while the director using “disinformation” as an affect, and literally used the word in the dialogue, was painful. This disinformation of cinematic time became a part of the narrative form. I usually like a non-linear plot order, but this one caused too much pity and sympathy of the main character, and left me feeling deceived, ashamed of myself for judging, and fucking paranoid! But hey, the cinematography was excellent!

Clayton Brown: Response to Iron Jawed Angels

2006-04-11T14:57:00.000-04:00

Iron Jawed Angels is a classic piece of over the top melodrama. Ever conflict is over drawn and exaggerated to get the point more across, just like in the film Crash. I don’t particularly enjoy these movies that go above and beyond in the emotions to try to get through their agenda. Films with a plan and a point they need to get out. One could argue that’s a movie though; that all films big or small comedy or drama are exaggerated and stepped up for effect. That’s fine and understandable but with Iron Jawed Angels I feel I wasn’t given a choice in my belief, while watching it I given one option, join us or be annihilated.

The dialogue tended to lend itself to be a at speech proportions. Every line was a speech. Every sentence could be a quote for the movement. I’m not so sure it was too accurate to the way these women spoke back in their time. We talked about all this in class, how these women are pretty, young and hip. Whether or not they were in real life this allows girls and women today relate to them more and understand them more. Which they do all women should know what it has taken them to get here and how much further they must go.

I don’t know Alice Paul. I’ve never heard of her until I saw this movie. I’d seen the movie before but still had not known who Alice Paul was. She obviously, if this movie is correct, was an enormous influence on the suffragette movement. Now her as a person, and her personal struggles with men and herself, I wouldn’t be able to say. But the writers and Hilary Swank put on a good performance to what they would want her to act like, how they’d WANT her to be.

The cinematography was lacking. I like my movies whether comedy or drama to have perfect camera work. This was a TV movie and I assume it’s a budget issue on getting better Directors of Photography or better equipment or set locations or time but Iron Jawed Angels was deficient. The ending credits where Alice Paul and her sidekick are out in front of their HQ after Tennessee passes the 20th Amendment, and they keep spinning around and around for 10 minutes it felt like. Maybe it doesn’t matter but that scene irked me.

Also the editing that we were talking about in class during the parade scene. How it was shot like a music video. The scene had the song “Everything is Everything” by Lauryn Hill. A very independent woman who put this song on her extremely successful 1998 album “The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill.” This song is very recognizable especially by the target audience of 20-something woman or teenage girls. Again young women need to know who led them out of the kitchen into the workplace and who led them from obscure citizens to active members in our societies processes.

The use of contemporary music in period pieces has always bothered me. Such as The Untouchables uses synthesizers and heavy electronic drumbeats. It was shot in the late 80’s, which coincides with that music taste. Iron Jawed Angels used slight music from their time period but not enough. Ragtime and early Jazz were the music of the day, along with gospel and hymns. Ragtime was used during the shoe-tying scene in the restaurant but the only jazz I can recall was Dizzy Gillespie style, fast paced and sporadic. I forget the name of the form, but that didn’t come about until after World War II. The music was used to reach a certain audience I know, but this goes back to the agenda and my displeasure with it.

The movie was a decent piece of TV production; classic style of a made-for-TV movie. Also, like many other period pieces following a certain person or group through their trials, there was too much info to cover in a two hour film. They could’ve made a two-hour movie just about the workhouse experience. But that’s why it just seems like the WPA funded the movie. I’m all about Women’s rights. I’m all about everyone’s rights, I’m a Libertarian but I also don’t sit well with one-sided views. Even if the other side is the Nazi party, I want to hear it.

Week 12: Films by Women About Women

2006-04-11T09:02:00.000-04:00

Week 11: Films by Women About Women

Something to think about as we watch Iron Jawed Angels. From the website Feministing:

Prank Aims to Stop Women's Suffrage

IN CLASS FILM:

Iron Jawed Angels (Katja von Garnier) 2004: 125 minutes

Alice Paul

We discussed the Seneca Falls 1848 Convention as a landmark event in the women's movement.

Seneca Falls Declaration

I mentioned Ida B. Wells the African American activist in the movie who refuses to get in the back of the parade--for more on this important democratic civil rights activist:

Ida B. Wells

Wikipedia: Ida B. Wells

Think about Ida B. Wells argument in the film and then read this important statement from Black Feminists:

Excerpts from the Combahee River Collective Statement

Other women activists of the time that are not featured in the movie, but are very important to know (they are often ignored because they fought for the rights of workers--something a capitalist society rarely honors). These women were as courageous and passionate as Alice Paul and Lucy Burns (have you heard of them?):

Mother Jones: the Angel of the Mines

Wikipedia: Mother Jones

Emma Goldman

Wikipedia: Emma Goldman

Helen Keller is also mentioned many times during the movie. How many of you knew that Helen Keller was an civil rights activist who was pursued by the FBI?

Helen Keller and the FBI

Helen Keller

I mentioned stereotypes about "feminism" and just wanted to post other opinions on the issue:

North Carolina College Student: Stereotypes About Feminism Are Unfounded and Damaging (also click on the only comment at the end of the essay)

The Guerilla Girls a performative activist group has long been fighting stereotypes of women and for equal representation in the arts (if you have taken an art history class you will understand the disparity between the representation of male and female artists):

University of North Texas website on feminism:

What is Feminism?

Public displays, marches and protests are an effective non-violent method for bringing attention to political issues (that are being ignored by mainstream society):

NOW: History of Marches and Mass Actions

Wikipedia: Social Movements

Wikipedia: Protests

Also check out the imagistic critiques of the conceptual artist Barbara Krueger--who questions how stereotypes and behaviors are reproduced through visual media:

Barbara Krueger

A brief summary of the history of feminism...

First Wave Feminism-

This term refers to the first concerted movement working for the reform of women's social and legal inequalities in the nineteenth century. Although individual feminist such as Mary Wollstonecraft had already argued against the injustices suffered by women, it was not until the 1850's that something like an organized feminist movement evolved in Britain. Its headquarters was at Langham Place in London, where a group of middle-class women, led by Barbara Bodichon (1827-91) and Bessie Rayner Parkes (1829-1925), met to discuss topical issues and publish the English Woman's Journal (1858-64).

The key concerns of First Wave Feminists were education, employment, the marriage laws, and the plight of intelligent middle-class single women. They were not primarily concerned with the problems of working-class women, nor did they necessarily see themselves as feminists in the modern sense (the term was not coined until 1895). First Wave Feminists largely responded to specific injustices they had themselves experienced.

Their major achievements were the opening of higher education for women; reform of the girls' secondary-school system, including participation in formal national examinations: the widening of access to the professions, especially medicine; married women's property rights, recognized in the Married Women's Property Act of 1870; and some improvement in divorced and separated women's child custody rights.

Second Wave Feminism-

The term 'Second Wave' was coined by Marsha Lear, and refers to the increase in feminist activity which occurred in America, Britain, and Europe from the late sixties onwards. In America, second wave feminism rose out of the Civil Rights and anti-war movements in which women, disillusioned with their second-class status even in the activist environment of student politics, began to band together to contend against discrimination. The second wave was concerned with reproductive rights and the fight against sexual and domestic violence.

The tactics employed by Second Wave Feminists varied from highly-published activism, such as the protest against the Miss America beauty contest in 1968, to the establishment of small consciousness-raising groups. However, it was obvious early on that the movement was not a unified one, with differences emerging between black feminism, lesbian feminism, liberal feminism, and social feminism.

Second Wave Feminism in Britain was similarly multiple in focus, although it was based more strongly in working-class socialism, as demonstrated by the strike of women workers at the Ford car plant for equal pay in 1968. The slogan 'the personal is political' sums up the way in which Second Wave Feminism did not just strive to extend the range of social opportunities open to women, but also, through intervention within the spheres of reproduction, sexuality and cultural representation, to change their domestic and private lives. Second Wave Feminism did not just make an impact upon western societies, but has also continued to inspire the struggle for women's rights across the world.

Third Wave Feminism -

Loosely defined movement starting around late 1990’s with texts like Manifesta, Listen Up, To Be Real, and Body Outlaws. Third Wave Feminism, the movement of feminism beyond the sexual revolution of the 1960's, is focused on young women and men perpetuating and improving upon those rights gained in the past. It is hard to define because the Third Wave is characterized by individualism and a lack of desire to conform to a definition. Third Wavers have never lived in a world without the women's movement.

The front page of the Third Wave Foundation web site explains that the organization strives to combat inequalities that [women] face as a result of [their] age, gender, race, sexual orientation, economic status or level of education. By empowering young women, Third Wave is building a lasting foundation for social activism around the country.

Wikipedia: Feminism

Wikipedia: Suffrage Movement

Wikipedia: Alice Paul

Wikipedia: Lucy Burns

Women's History Resources

Homework Reading (The Greenberg and Huttner essays are required, the rest are optional):

Alice Paul Center for Research on Women and Gender

Alice Paul Institute

Greenberg, Robbie (The Cinematographer) The Making of Iron Jawed Angels International Cinematographer's Guild Magazine (2004)

Huttner, Jan Lisa. Women Filmmakers and Women Audiences: Working Together to Improve Options for Everyone Monmouth College (2004)

Links to Books About the Women's Suffrage Movement

SAWNET (Lists and reviews of South Asian women's films and filmmakers)

Sisters in Cinema (A resource guide for and about African American Women filmmakers)

Time Classroom: History Behind Iron Jawed Angels

Votes for Women Timeline Henry Ford Museum

Wikipedia: Iron Jawed Angels

WITASWAN

Women and Film in Europe

Women in Cinema

Women Make Movies (A leading distributor of women's media)

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

Antonia’s Line (Marleen Gorris) 1995: 102 minutes

The Ballad of Little Jo (Maggie Greenwald) 1993: 121 minutes

Bend It Like Beckham (Gurinder Chadha) 2002: 112 minutes

Blackboards (Samira Makhmalbaf) 2000: 85 minutes

Blue Steel (Kathryn Bigelow) 1990: 102 minutes

Charlotte Gray (Gillian Armstrong) 2001: 121 minutes

Eve’s Bayou (Kasi Lemmons) 1997: 109 minutes

Foxfire (Annette Haywood-Carter) 1996: 102 minutes

Girlfight (Karyn Kusama) 2000: 110 minutes

Go Fish (Rose Troche) 1994: 84 minutes

Holy Smoke (Jane Campion) 1999: 115 minutes

I Shot Andy Warhol (Mary Harron) 1996: 103 minutes

The Incredibly True Adventures of Two Girls in Love (Maria Maggenti) 1994: 93 minutes

Mi Vida Loca (Allison Anders) 1993: 92 minutes

Monsoon Wedding (Mira Nair) 2001: 114 minutes

Monster (Patty Jenkins) 2003: 109 minutes

North Country (Niki Caro) 2005: 126 minutes

Orlando (Sally Potter) 1992: 93 minutes

Real Women Have Curves (Patricia Cardoso) 2002: 90 minutes

A Thousand Acres (Jocelyn Moorehouse) 1997: 105 minutes

Whale Rider (Niki Caro) 2002: 101 minutes

Yentl (Barbara Streisand) 1983: 132 minutes

William Harris: Response to Crash

2006-04-08T08:06:00.000-04:00

Whatever their wishes, critics of Paul Haggis’s CRASH (2005) have been drawn into polemical dispute. Of course this will happen when you’re dealing with racial issues. This melodramatic film deals with the issues of racial conflict in America, and appropriately chooses the city of Los Angeles for its “melting pot” setting. Its elegantly woven montage of stories has inspired many different opinions in reference to its importance on social value. The film cleverly exposes many prejudices that are all true to each particular “point of view” presented. Writers favorable to the film have defended it against those who claim it fails to reflect a proper balance with racial issues. This critically acclaimed “ground breaking” movie on racial misunderstandings has surprisingly provoked many negative reviews from the African-American community. Since this film is still rather new I believe it deserves an opened ended exploration, which new and unstudied works invite. I assume, at any rate, that the film will be seen and studied for a long time to come.

The director/writer of this film came up with the idea soon after he and his wife had been car-jacked. This event is reenacted in the movie and is used as a main hub and through-line for the narrative foundation.

What is attempted here is a beginning analysis of Crash, or perhaps several beginnings. I take an obvious point of departure: The indictment of the audience due to flat or round characters in the film-indeed only dealing with a few characters. This is, emphatically, just one approach to the film and not a privileged one. A consideration of these flat and round characters opens up other topics and leads to other analyses, but any approach does this.

To treat these characters as I wish to do it is necessary to say something in advance about the film’s dramaturgy (Art of writing or producing plays) /mise-en-scene, acting style, and use of language. These important topics deserve, needless to say, fuller treatment than my prefatory remarks provide.

The story starts with an automobile accident, which creates the films metaphor, which also leads to the stories first argument, or conflict. And then quickly cuts to a flashback on “yesterday” within minutes of the story, demanding that we reflect, immediately after we were just forced to put our judgment on the other distraught woman in the accident whose yelling. The cross cutting between the lives of major characters creates a nicely woven montage of seemingly unrelated scenarios that once connected by edits create an unusual non-Diegetic third meaning that is felt more then being explicit.

Real life experiences controls our opinions in a way much like the way narrative movie conventions controls our opinions. Of course, the art of movies is a reflection and interpretation on the human experience. Humans are quick to judge what’s laid out in front of them to be seen, or heard. It’s very normal behavior and primitive by nature. I believe the director uses the viewer’s primitive instincts that conjure up past memories of life experiences that demand that he/she, the viewer, connect to the voice of the film.

English novelist and literary theorist E.M. Forster said that there were two kinds of characters: round and flat. The films narrative forces of flat and round characters control the viewer by forcing quick impressions and early judgments on all the major characters. As the story progresses the characters make confessions (develop) about there lives while being led down an unforeseen path of redemption of some form. Afterwards, we find ourselves trying to figure out who were the antagonists and protagonists while feeling guilty for identify with any of the characters, and holding on to an overwhelming sense of confusion even after the resolve.

This feeling, or meaning, seems to be an overall dismissal of any indictment on anyone who might hold themselves or others responsible for racism. The film revolves around the idea that personal prejudices might stem as a communication accident more then something deliberate. Racism is dismissed by the fact that it happens by accident.

Apparently resolution in the film doesn’t seem justified by the black community and is what leads to the many negative reviews. Basically, once the argument is posed on who is the victim…and then a scenario is given that releases this mentioned “wrong doer” from being “indicted” on the charges. The movie leaves us with no one to blame except ourselves, and that’s only by accident…like most people in general, they want someone to blame for their perceived situation. This movie doesn’t give resolve by blaming.

The tagline used for this film is, “You think you know who you are. You have no idea.” And I believe this to be the number one factor in human beings racial conflict. You can’t expect two people to understand one another when they don’t even understand themselves. Individuals are generally full of self-interest, it’s a human characteristic, and it’s not going to change anytime soon.

I used to work in the music business and we had a rule of thumb about music listeners, “People like what they know; but don’t know what they like.” –It means that it’s hard for the average person to acquire any new idea, song, taste, etc… and actually form an opinion that is not completely subjected. I believe people naturally fear what they don’t know. Ironically, Spike Lee recently repeated something similar that Bradford Marsalis told him… “Black folks think they know what they like, but they only like what they know”. Also, the character Qui-Gon-Gin in Star Wars Episode-I said while teaching the young Anakin Skywalker, “Remember young padawan, your perception determines your reality”. What we think is true…usually isn’t the case, any of our perceptions, or truths, are based on misinterpretations.

Popular speaker/writer Stephen Covey says, “Seek first to understand, then to be understood” from his Principles of empathic communication. This movie starts out with a statement of possible understanding, then flashes back 24 hours (the need to reflect), from this point the characters are all trying to be understood, and finally by the end we notice that the balance comes because the characters finally start to try and understand first, then to be understood later. This enlightenment is at both the beginning and the end of the film.

Week 11: Confronting Stereotypes

2006-04-04T22:52:00.000-04:00

Bamboozled (Spike Lee: 2000)

Homework Reading:

Bamboozled: The Official Website

Ebert, Roger. Bamboozled Chicago Sun-Times (October 6, 2000)

Fuchs, Cynthia. Interview with Spike Lee PopMatters (2000)

Harris, Erich Leon. The Demystification of Spike Lee MovieMaker Magazine (March 1997)

Harris, Robert. The Purpose and Method of Satire Virtual Salt (August 20, 1990; Last updated October 24, 2004)

Melodrama (The genre I placed Crash in, as opposed to the satire of Bamboozled)

O'Hehir, Andrew. B A M B O O Z L E D: Spike Lee's explosive, near-masterpiece media satire balances between brilliance and incoherence. Salon (October 6, 2000)

Patterson, Troy. Color Commentary: FX's Creepy New Race-Swap Show Slate (March 8, 2006)

Schoenherr, Steven. Bamboozled Film Notes (History Department of the University of San Diego: October 5, 2000)

Taubin, Amy. Fear of a Black Cinema Sight and Sound (August 2002)

Well, Ron. Bamboozled Film Threat (2000)

Austin Traut: Response to Event Horizon

2006-04-04T12:03:00.000-04:00

Event Horizon

Independent film maker Paul Anderson has provided us with an entrance into true terror and violence with him film, Event Horizon. This futuristic science fiction movie incorporates many elements to give its frightful nature. Editing and cinematography are the main structures used to visualize the horror that’s seen in the movie; including some of the most disturbing sound ever heard in film. With these elements in tact, Anderson shows us what Hell truly is or could be and how it corrupts the human mind.

Throughout the entire film, editing is best seen through Anderson’s use of fade-ins, fade-outs, and flash images. What makes these shots horrific though, is the cinematography and sound incorporated into the scenes. Right from the beginning the viewer is placed inside the ghostly Event Horizon which is under a deep freeze. Slowly moving through the ship, one is able to notice all the debris floating around with no sign of life anywhere. With a gradual buildup of what can only be described as disturbed screaming and eerie music, the camera slowly focuses on a floating body, and then zooms in fast and close to an image of a mutilated face. The uses of flash images are also used early in the film when Weir (Sam Neill) has a dream of his deceased wife Claire. Flashing through different parts of the ship, the viewer becomes aware that Weir is alone in being awake during this time. Sound isn’t readily used until Claire startles him from behind and opens her eyes (which are missing). This intense buildup, along with flashes of Weir in his dream and in real life, is able to show what horror is already residing inside of his mind. These types of scenes continue through the movie, such as the scene with flashes of mutilated bodies spread across the walls of the main chamber, fade in towards the mutilated floating body, Justin having a seizure, Weir inside the circuit board room, Peters’ image of her own death right before it happens, and Miller getting a taste of what’s to come for himself from Weir, and his ship.

Another thing that Anderson did well was distinguishing what scenes were taking place in zero gravity, and ones that occurred in atmosphere. A scene in which the gravity drive sent out a shock wave, crippling the Leis and Clark was a good example. The camera shot would alternate from real-time to slow motion as the scene alternated from the Event Horizon (no gravity) to the Lewis and Clark (with gravity).

Probably the defining moments that gave this film an obvious horror depiction were the images of Hell, accompanied by the grotesque screaming and disturbing sounds; as well as the frightful recording of a previous crew member. Though this recording doesn’t necessarily aid the movie as far as editing goes, it still has a participation in expressing how horrible the idea of Hell really is before any images are shown in the film. Ultimately the scenes from Hell are done in with shaky camera motions and flash film photography. Accompanied by violent screams, these scenes are easily the scariest of the movie, and give its horrific quality.

Overall, this film is not one of the best in the editing column of film categories; though it does use certain techniques that make this film suspenseful, thriller-like, and of course horrific. Fade-ins, fade-outs, slow motion, and flash photography were all used dependently with cinematography and sound to create a horror story that stuck in my mind, if not in others. As one character put it, “Save yourself, from Hell.”

Ben Jacobs: Response to Fight Club

2006-04-04T12:00:00.000-04:00

The cinematic thrill ride of Fight Club (David Fincher), from the newly popular psychological thriller aptly named “mind fucks” achieve most of their effectiveness through the editing process. James Haygood, the film editor for Fight Club, pulls out all the stops for maximum effect in this movie.

As the movie starts the camera moment is moving in reverse through a man’s head, and up the barrel of gun. The shot then comes into focus with Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) holding a pistol in the mouth of our narrator who remains nameless for most of the film, this tactic is use several times in the film as a diagnostic tool to explain certain things to the audience rather than just verbally expressing them through the narrator. For instance as the narrator tells us how the police think his apartment exploded by the camera following his voice to the stove as he says “the pilot light went out releasing gas that filled the apartment.” The camera then moves to the back of the refrigerator as he tells us “…then the refrigerator’s compressor clicked on,” we see the spark from the frig, then a long shot of the apartment is show as all the furniture goes up in flames and flies out his apartment window in a terrific slow motion explosion.

Another very interesting scene earlier in the movie is when the narrator is explaining to the audience all of his material possessions as they would appear in the magazine he ordered them from. The shot starts with a nearly empty room and as he describes each piece of furniture it appears in its specific place in the room with tiny white print of its description and price superimposed next to it. Actor Edward Norton (Narrator) was challenged here as his lines had to be read at just the right speed in order to synchronize the picture with sound.

A very spectacular scene in the film is the scene when the narrator is getting his chemical burn. Tyler puts lye on some saliva on the back of the narrator’s hand and it begins to burn him. He then tries to use meditation to take the pain away, then as he closes his eyes we see a clip no more than a second long of a peaceful green forest with birds chirping, but Tyler slaps him to bring him back. The Narrator then says that is trying not to think of the words searing or flesh. As he says the word searing, another very short clip is inserted of flames burning, and as he says the word flesh, a clip of a dictionary page turned to the word flesh is shown, and then we are taken back to the scene with the narrator. This rapid fire of short clips gives the impression of panic and the intensity of the pain the narrator is feeling.

In the fight scene between the Narrator and Angelface (Jared Leto) an editing technique is used as the Narrator is brutally beating Angelface rather than show the actual beating, the surrounding crowd is shown. By showing the reaction shots of the crowd we can see the true horror and brutality they are watching. We also realize that they are in disbelief that the creator of the rules would break one of them. After all the shots of the crowd and the upward facing shot of the Narrator beating Angelface, only then do we see the carnage of the beating. Angelface no longer has the face of an angel an the narrator says a line that tops of this scene, “…I felt like destroying something beautiful.”

A very unique scene that I don’t think has ever done before is the “sport fucking” scene. It has Marla Singer (Helena Bonham Carter) astride Tyler, and this is a freeze frame while the sound continues, but rather than staying in one position it begins to revolve around her while she stays is the same freeze position, so that it becomes a 3-Deminsional freeze frame. It is also out of focus so the audiences knows what is happening in the scene but aren’t quite sure about the surroundings of Marla.

Toward the end of the movie as the Narrator is chasing after Tyler, the editor uses several jump cuts from one city to the next or one airport to the next. This is designed to speed up the narration of the scene to show the character going the many cities in about two minutes time. We also can feel the Narrators chaotic desperation in his quest to find Tyler, who has vanished.

P.S. I was very careful not to spoil the main part of the movie because I don’t believe this should be done in any circumstance and I also what anyone who hasn’t see this movie to go see it because it is Terrifically Magnificent for its genre.

Patrick Camp: Response to The Passion

2006-04-04T11:40:00.000-04:00

A celebrity thanks god for winning an Oscar and everyone applauds, why wouldn't they. I mean can't, in all honesty, god be anything you want.

God could be a giant over bearing force in the sky, a menagerie of 33 million beings, or even a small rock in your front yard. Most of society have no problem with mentioning "god".

However, mention an obscure carpenter's name who was born around 5 or 6 B.C. and you've just become narrow minded, pushy and religious. This man's name was Yeshua in the Hebrew tongue in our own, Jesus.

I remember the events surrounding The Passion of the Christ, a very controversial film by Mel Gibson centering on the last few hours of Jesus' life. I was working at a Regal Entertainment Group at the time.

One of my jobs the night before Passion was released was security for a couple of churches who rented out theaters for a special screening of the film.

The main reason I can remember this film so much is not the vast number of people who kept coming to see it, nor was it those who left the theater in tears, but the stir the movie caused from it's release onwards.

Something that the main stream American audience is not accustomed to is hearing a foreign dialogue in a movie and having the read subtitles.

Mr. Gibson was going to solve half of this issue by not putting the dialogue in English, but opting to not have any subtitles what so ever.

His plan was to let the actor's performance speak for itself. He changed his mind shortly after a pre-screening, but still kept the original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic dialogue. This was an incredible move one Mr. Gibson's part. I personally have seen many movies on the life of Jesus, however, this one stood out hugely in it's dialogue.

Hearing the actors speak my own language was, I confess, easier and let me concentrate more on the visuals off the back. But it still lacked something and felt like a movie, not an experience. The Passion was an experience, hearing the actual words that would've been spoken at that time really brought me into the movie. I became a part of it's world.

The characters (though once living) came to life on screen. And, after many viewings I was able to concentrate more on the visuals.

A visual aspect that did cause even more controversy was the graphic nature of the Passion. The film begins with Jesus praying in the garden of Gethsemane, literally sweating blood. But the two scenes that drove this nation almost in half were the scourging and the crucifixion scenes. Gibson researched the art of Roman torture and execution as have I (though not as much as the former) and his portrayal of Christ's torture and death where, if anything, played down a little.

The Roman's perfected torture and means of execution, and it was well documented that many who were slated for the cross did not make it past the scourging (if they were to be scourged, for some weren?t). I say this because many people complained about how graphic Gibson's portrayal was. Remember, he wanted to make an accurate portrayal of Christ's last hours. This caused so much trouble that Gibson lost all financial contributors and had to finance the movie himself. Yet
despite perseverance he made it.

Reading about Roman torture techniques is one thing, but actually seeing it re-created in a film something else entirely. Many called Passion a "snuff" film for doing this, while many others had their faith deepened from witnessing what actually would've happened. From a personal perspective actually seeing those events portray really brought the film to life even more.

Speaking of deeper faith, though, many of the actors involved who were not Christian accepted the faith after witnessing many supernatural events on set.

The only thing I can say in closing is that I find it interesting that many would ban a movie like The Passion of the Christ and see no problem with allowing young children to be exposed to guns, sex, violence, and horribly foul language. I guess there was something worse in their minds about that film.

Writing About Film, Pt. 2

2006-04-04T11:03:00.000-04:00

Film has been called "the most hybrid of art forms" at least in part because it is simultaneously a medium of time and space. Many of the terms and ways of thinking that you use in writing about literature, however, can apply as well to writing about film.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it is possible, try to see the film you will be analyzing more than once, preferably on a VCR that will allow you to freeze individual frames. If you can only view the film in a theater, prepare for the experience by thinking about some of the points listed below; immediately after watching the movie, take notes on as many details as you can remember.

As in writing about literature, generate a manageable topic (one that is not too broad), considering perhaps what is most striking, unusual or effective about the film. Analyze key sequences as they apply to your thesis, developing and supporting an argument.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some Questions to Consider When Writing About Film

What is the relationship between the film and its title? Is the title ironic? Does it provide a clue to the "meaning" of the film?

How is the plot constructed? Is it based on causality, or is it episodic? Can you detect a pattern of repetition or contrast? Is there a vividly marked turning point or climax?

What is the relation between story-time and discourse (film)-time? Are the events presented chronologically? What functions do any flashbacks or foreshadowings fulfill? How does the time sequence contribute to mood (suspenseful, satiric, etc.)?

Do the main characters develop during the course of the film? What are their traits and how are they conveyed? (You might look at names, speech, actions, costumes, makeup and narration.) Is behavior motivated, consistent? Are the characters "realistic" or caricatured?

What is the function of the setting and decor (location, sets, props, costumes)? How do they contribute to the mood of the film?

How do the point of view (omniscient, limited, reliable, consistent) and the cinematic/visual style complement each other?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cinematic Elements to "Read" in a Film

Camera movement (tracking, panning), camera angle, camera distance (far shot, medium shot, closeup).

"Photography" (lenses, deep focus, filters, film speed, intentional under- or over- exposure).

Lighting (artificial or natural, intensity, direction).

Framing/composition (shape of objects in the shot and their relation to each other and to the frame). Is emotional distance between characters expressed through composition?

Sound track (voice-over, noise, music).

Editing/montage (length of shots, rhythm, relationship of one shot to the next).

Transitions (dissolve, fade in/out, iris in/out, wipe).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just as a screenplay goes through several rewrites, the draft of your essay needs to go through several revisions. What editing is to film, revising is to writing. Remember that Charlie Chaplin's shooting ratio was 100:1; in other words, in the edited versions of his films, he used only one per cent of the footage he had shot.
(Much of the above information adapted from The Elements of Writing about Literature and Film by McMahan, Funk, and Day.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Useful Sources on Film and Writing
Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1978.

Corrigan, Timothy. A Short Guide to Writing about Film. Glenview: Scott, Foresman, 1989.

Jorgens, J. Jack. Shakespeare on Film. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1977.

Kawin, Bruce F. How Movies Work. New York: Macmillan, 1987.

McMahan, Elizabeth, Robert Funk and Susan Day. The Elements of Writing about Literature and Film. New York: Macmillan, 1988.

Mast, Gerald. Film Cinema Movie. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1977.

Mast, Gerald, and Marshall Cohen, eds. Film Theory and Criticism. New York: Oxford UP, 1985.

Mandy Margolen: Response to Crash

2006-04-04T10:24:00.000-04:00

What is a racist? I thought I knew what the definition of a racist was before I watched this movie. I also thought I could recognize what racism was because I have always correlated racism with hate. After seeing Paul Haggis’s film Crash, I have had many conversation with friends, read many articles and reviews, and watched one eye-opening episode of Oprah and at the end of the day, there are two things that are constant when it comes to racism: ignorance and fear. Paul Haggis’s film brings to light many taboo topics that our country faces in a 24-hour snapshot of a group of strangers that all live in L.A. More often than not, when racism is discussed in schools or in casual conversations, it is a topic that people relate to in the "black" and "white". Haggis’s film recognizes that the United States is a melting pot of cultures and links together many scenarios that involve inter-racial and intra-racial issues.

There are several elements in this film that aided Haggis in creating a unique film that stretches beyond the 113 minutes seen on screen. The characterization of each role felt real because each character had faults, but they also had some redeeming qualities about them. Haggis also used minimal sound, which for me aided in the seriousness of the film’s subject matter. He also started the film almost at the end, which drew me into the film. I wanted to know what had evolved to bring the story to that particular point. But the most fascinating element of the film was the "crashes" that linked people (story lines) together and the profounding knowledge that we have a direct effect on the lives of people we may never even know.

In the movie Crash, Haggis takes us on a self-evaluating adventure through the lives of some very diverse characters. The characters "crash" into each other making an impact that alters them, some in a good way and some in a bad way. The close-ups Haggis uses in the film allow you to actually feel the wheels working in the minds of the characters. Though all the characters had their own "crash" moments, some moments had a greater impact on me than others. There were events that transpired that illustrated for me that racism is fostered by ignorance and fear.

When Anthony (Ludacris) attempts to carjack Cameron’s (Terrence Howard) SUV, they are involved in an altercation with the police in which Cameron basically is taking the heat for what Anthony had done. When Cameron gets back in the SUV he looks at Anthony and says, "You embarrass me, you embarrass yourself." In that moment you see in Anthony’s face that Cameron is right. Anthony not only hears the words he feels the words. This was a prime illustration in that what we do can have a negative impact on others of our own race and cause people to judge a race by the actions of an individual in that race. In the events that involve Sgt. Ryan (Matt Dillon) and Christine (Thandie Newton), you are disgusted by Ryan’s behavior when he sexually assaults her in an anything but routine traffic stop. The assault really had nothing to do with her except that it was being done to her, his frustrations was with the HMO lady in regards to his father. He needed to feel like he had some power left. For some reason we think we have to push someone else down to raise ourselves to where we want to be. Later on in the film we see Sgt. Ryan almost redeem himself when he saves Christine from her overturned car that is about to be engulfed in flames. Without any hesitation at all he saves her almost at the expensive of his own life. Showing again that he had nothing against her personally except for what she represented to him at a particular moment in time. When she looks back at him as she is being walked to safety by other cops, you see some amount of forgiveness on her face. Maybe she saw to how she took her own aggression out on someone that had nothing to do with her except being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Another great example of the human race was placed in the character of Jean, played by Sandra Bullock. Here is a woman carjacked by members of one race and then having her locks replaced by a member of another race. Anger consumes this character. Should she be angry with Anthony and his friend for jacking her car? Hell yes. But her anger surpasses all that when she then stereotypes the locksmith for his Latino heritage and his tattoos and belittles her Latino caregiver for dishes in the washer. Jean is angry at everyone, at the world. And if the world were all white, it wouldn’t affect her at all. She would still harbor an incredible amount of anger. When Jean falls down the steps and her "friend of 10 years" can’t come help her she turns to the only person who can help her, her caregiver. Isn’t it ironic that within loneliness we see the raw truth about ourselves?

Paul Haggis’s Crash is one of the most thought provoking movies I have ever seen in that it has generated so much conversation and enlightenment on a subject that is usually avoided. You have to commend anyone who takes a sensitive subject like race and racism and makes it everyone’s problem. We all have racist tendencies when it comes to those who are different than us and if we can’t acknowledge that, we will never be able to embrace each other for our differences and our similarities. People generally fear what is different to them and our ignorance of other races and cultures make us vulnerable to those fears. Crash demands you to examine yourself, your beliefs, your actions, and most of all leads you to think about making some changes on how we treat each other. You do not have to know someone to have a negative impact on his or her life. You also do not have to know someone to have a positive impact on his or her life.

Elizabeth Givens: Response to Crash

2006-04-04T10:21:00.000-04:00

The movie Crash was so overwhelmed with racial slurs and discrimination. It was almost too much to take, but then again so is the reality of the truth behind it. Even though this is just a movie, it is also a harsh truth of what really is today. The beginning credits are dark and blurred and the film begins the day before the beginning. It opens to the scene of a car accident where we see that the victims are attacking each other with stereotypical remarks. The Spanish detective is mocking the Asian woman’s speech and goes on to bash her ethnicity. It’s night time and the shots are dark, filled with rare lighting which creates a dark mood. This sets the mood for the entire film.

The film introduces many different characters of different cultures, but they are similar in the fact that they are all affected by racism. These characters are a Spanish detective and an African American detective, a Persian store owner and his family, two Caucasian cops, a Caucasian district attorney and his wife, two African American “thugs” that tend to steal everything, a Mexican locksmith, an Asian civilian, and an African American movie star and his vulnerable wife.

The dialogue in the film is of all kinds, considering that the characters are all of different cultures. The dialogue is direct. The characters are either talking about racism or they are partaking in racial slurring. The characters talk about themselves as being victims of racism and how they often lose their dignity because of it.

The film is about racism and all the affects that it holds on everyone. In one scene, a white cop discriminates two black civilians, while molesting the wife while he is “searching” her for weapons. In another scene, two African American males hold up a white couple, being the district attorney and his wife, because they seemed to be “scared” of them and they steal their car. Back at home, the police are searching for the car, and the wife demands to her husband that she wants the locks to be changed again because the locksmith appears to be a “Mexican gang member”.

In the film, people are often mistaken for being of a different ethnicity than what they really are. There is a consistency of racial misplacement, which only enrages some people take to on revenge. The Spanish detective is mistaken for being Mexican, and the Persian store owner is mistaken for being an “Arabian“. The racism is everywhere, on the streets, at home, at work, etc, and hate crimes are being committed everywhere.

The movie takes a turn, and there’s a sort of Karma happening. Bad things are happening to the racists individuals and they appear to start learning there lesson. The Caucasian police officer saves the African American that he had molested from a burning car. And then the movie star husband realizes that he can’t have his dignity taken away and he calls home to tell his wife that he loves her after the argument that they had previously had. The District attorney’s wife falls down the stairs and finds that only her Mexican housekeeper is the only one there for her. The Persian goes after the Spanish locksmith thinking that he is the reason for his store being broken into. He goes to the locksmith’s home with a gun and tries to shoot him, but his daughter runs out and jumps into her father’s arms right when the Persian man pulls the trigger. After thinking that he has killed a little girl, he panics, and then they both realize that the bullet never touched them. Back at the store, he confesses to his daughter that he was saved by an angel, and the daughter then realizes that the bullets that they had bought were blanks.

Then comes the other Caucasian cop, who knows that he is not a racist. He pursues the African American movie star that is on a chase from the police, and when he gets to him, he lets him go with a warning, because he feels guilty for what his partner had done a few nights before. On the way home from work that night, the cop picks up one of the “thugs” and offers him a ride home. The guy whom he had picked up was laughing because the same Saint that appeared on the officer’s dashboard is the same Saint that he carries in his pocket, and when he reaches into his pocket to show him, the officer thinks that he is pulling out his gun. The police officer then shoots the guy and then realizes that he was pulling out the Saint figurine, and that he had committed a hate crime.

The other “thug” is shown riding the city bus, in which he had previously looked down upon because he believed that the windows were so large so that everyone could see the less fortunate that are forced to ride it. He stops the bus to get out and steal the van of a Cambodian man whom he had run over while stealing the district attorney’s car the night before. He takes the van to his buddy at the body shop only to find that there were a few Cambodian families locked in the back of the van. The guy at the body shop offers him $500 for the families and the van, but he refuses and takes them to what appears to be some sort of Cambodian neighborhood and lets them out. He finally does something good. This is where the film ends and we see that these individuals are finally figuring out who they really are and what they are capable of.

The cinematography is amazingly accurate in portraying the acting as well as the underlined message of how racism should be stopped. There are a lot of jump cuts, but they are well put together and make it easy to follow the different storylines. All the shots are in clear focus, and contain that “shaky” feel that makes it seem so real. A lot of the shots are done during the nighttime, in which the lighting creates this dramatic sense. I noticed that the use of chiaroscuro was prominent in these shots where there is a lot of light and dark.

In some of the scenes, the creepy beats, soulful music, and cultural music also add to the dramatic feel of the film. Other sounds included the effects of people punching, guns firing, and cars colliding. Some of these scenes were so powerful and dramatic themselves, that I did not even notice any background noise; while in other scenes, the music seemed imperative to the film and the mood.

The film in itself is a racial crash.

Aimee Hayden Keller: Response to Crash

2006-04-04T10:17:00.000-04:00

Paul Haggis’s 2005 film “Crash” bravely tackles a theme of race and bigotry in post 9/11 Los Angeles. As sensitive of an issue racial intolerance remains in the United States following the heated racial discrimination of Arabic peoples in the United States surrounding the terrorist attacks in the nation just four years earlier, Haggis’ film dares to confront ugly bigotry before an emotionally volatile audience. Haggis uses the motif of a “crash” seen literally in several vehicle collisions, as well as various social interactions between characters of opposing races to depict the often negative and hurtful social clashes among various races and ethnicities present in the United States.

Haggis offers a number of light weight examples of racial intolerance, such as a female that mocks an Asian woman who mispronounces “r” phonemes for “l” sounds in her speech, such as in her pronunciation of the word “brakes” for “blakes.” So too, in the last scene of the film, a black woman criticizes a Chinese man, yelling at him that he needs to speak “American”. Haggis also provides a great many examples of racial discrimination and hatred that greatly confronts the audience, forcing viewers to squirm in their seats and questions their own subconscious prejudices and discriminatory views. One such example is when two black characters acknowledge how they are looked upon by white people as dangerous or untrustworthy simply because of their skin color, identified through subtle interactions such as when a white woman intentionally clings to her husband’s arm in passing the two black men. Another instance of racial discrimination enacted by a character of white race upon a minority is when a white female pays to have her locks professionally changed, and then insists on having the same locks changed again the next morning because she judges the appearance of the Latino male locksmith to be dangerous and untrustworthy with a copy of her new house key.

Interestingly, Haggis depicts each character at different points in his film as both a scornful bigot as well as a hero seeking to level the playing field of racial inequality. An Iranian man is depicted at the beginning of the film being harshly discriminated against and insulted by a salesmen for not speaking fluent English and is accused of being an Arabic terrorists. Such discrimination is also later exhibited toward this man when his own small shop is burglarized and spray-painted with racially insulting graffiti. After playing the victim of racial discrimination through much of the film, the Iranian man eventually elicits violence towards the Latino locksmith character in the film, believing possibly through his own prejudice of appearance that the Latino man broke into his store and stole his money. It may also be interpreted that through the discrimination the Iranian man faced in being disrespected and cheated by other businessmen, his adopted belief that everyone was out to cheat and disrespect him influenced him to suspect foul play from the Latino locksmith and lash out violently at him. Another character is depicted as experiencing a transformation in the film from being a racist cop to a selfless hero who puts his life on the line to save an African American woman. What makes his contrast of actions so interesting is that he initially demeans and then later acts as a hero to the same African American woman. As an antagonist, the cop was initially cast pulling over the vehicle of an African American couple without cause and proceeded to humiliate and browbeat the couple by patting them down for weapons. Through this condescending act, the cop added further torment by purposely slipping his hands inside the top of the woman’s dress to palm her breasts and up underneath her dress to touch and further violate her, all while the African American husband was forced to watch and not act out against such a terrorizing act for fear of being arrested. Throughout the movie the white cop displays additional prejudice and rude behavior towards black people, but it is not until near the end of the film does the man reencounter the black woman that he so horribly mistreated. In being called out on the job to aid victims of a car accident, he found this woman to the point of near suffocation strapped into her badly wrecked car. When he went to unbuckle her seatbelt to help her out of her vehicle that was in danger of exploding, the woman recognized who he was and out of her traumatic experience that he was responsible for, she screamed for her life for him to get away from her and to not touch her. There was a great look of shock in his eyes and for the first time he realized what a horrible prejudice he had acted upon. Because of his cruel act, he had lost the trust of the civilian he was trying to save and created for himself a very difficult situation in trying to rescue the woman before the eventual explosion of the car could take both of their lives. After convincing the woman that he wasn’t going to hurt her, did pull her out of the car in the nick of time. As the woman was helped towards a medic, the cop continued to stare out at her as she walked away, in shock at the unraveling of events, and understanding the full consequence of his prejudice towards black people and seemed to experience remorse for his cruel actions only a day earlier towards that woman.

Ultimately, through these crashes of social exchanges between people of different races, Haggis was attempting to point out the latent fears and prejudices between various races among the country, possibly to point out how such prejudices arise out of misunderstandings between races and a fear of that with which we are less familiar. Maybe Haggis sought to bring to the attention of his audience the possibility that like his characters, we too may find ourselves playing out the roles of bigot or activist of equality through the different “crashes” of races that we experience in our lives. This film should rouse the generation of the future to acknowledge the racism that separates out country and to stamp out the latent prejudices that lie within us all if we hope to flourish in one of the most racially and culturally diverse countries in the world.

Austin Traut: Response to Full Metal Jacket

2006-03-30T09:18:00.000-05:00

Many consider this film to be the finest of the Stanley Kubrick collection. Split into two parts, the viewer is witnessed to the harshness of boot camp, and the brutal reality of war. Throughout the movie, Kubrick utilizes methods of “dark comedy” in the dialogue of many characters as way for the audience to sympathize with them more. Lee Ermey’s character provides some brilliant dual emotional effects on the audience by having both a strong sense of brutality to the recruits, as well as providing rather distasteful comedic lines. The comic relief of the first half from the drill sergeant and the marching songs fades away when the recruits are put into the war scene of Vietnam.

Private Pyle becomes the focal point in the first half of the movie. An overweight recruit who can’t seem to do anything right becomes very sympathetic to the audience. This half displays the use of Kubrick’s dark comedy with the drill instructors uncanny use of dialogue. "Are you quitting on me? Well, are you? Then quit, you slimy fucking walrus-looking piece of shit. Get the fuck off of my obstacle. Get the fuck down off of my obstacle. Now. Move it. I'm going to rip your balls off, so you cannot contaminate the rest of the world. I will motivate you, Private Pyle, if it short-dicks every cannibal on the Congo.” These types of phrases are used throughout the first half and are easily seen as providing harsh motivation and comedic inferences. Reality of the dehumanizing effect boot camp has on recruits can be seen when Private Pyle develops an “intimate” relationship with his rifle. Named Charlene, it becomes the only thing he can think about. Bitterness and human indecency inevitably lead to Pyle’s end. With a sinister smile of evil, which is only characteristic Kubrick style films, is shown on the private’s face as he’s loading his rifle with, “7.62 Full Metal Jacket.” After killing the drill sergeant and himself, any comedic moment in the film is dissolved away and the audience becomes very sympathetic to the brutal truth of warfare. This effect on the audience only increases in magnitude with the second half of the film staged in Vietnam.

The Vietnam War is unanimously considered the most brutal war in history. The only thing that seems to be on anyone’s mind at one time is how many Vietnamese can I kill? The brutality of the marines is best witnessed during the scene inside the helicopter with a marine shooting any Vietnamese person he sees, rather it be men, women, or children. The focus during this part of the movie is set on Joker, who is a field correspondent for Stars and Stripes. He makes attempts of retaining his humanity by keeping an optimistic viewpoint and a comedic mindset on the war as a whole. The dehumanizing effect of war inflicts him just as it has many other marines when his friends start to be killed off one by one. The sniper scene explicitly shows the harsh nature of war, as well as cultures. The marines see the Vietnamese as a type of ‘vermin’ that needs to be eradicated. Even from a standpoint on Vietnam’s side of the war, any type of sympathetic wartime values are disintegrated with the slow slaughter of two marines. Once the sniper has been taken out, the marines think of it as a prize kill (trophy-like), rather than viewing her as being a suffering human whom is also a woman. The thought of “mercy or murder” plays into Joker’s mind when he comes to the conclusion that this person shouldn’t be left to suffer. This scene culminates the overall theme of how dehumanizing war can really be. The comedic effect tries to be revived with the singing of the Mickey Mouse theme, but to no avail because the audience has already seen too much in the film.

Both satire and panegyric ideals can be readily identified in this film. The first half is seen as rather satirical in the character of Private Pyle. He was never able to conform to the boot camp situations because of his personal appearance and sympathetic mind. Being in a “world of shit”, Pyle did the only thing he could to free his mind from war… suicide. Animal Mother would be the best example of a panegyric character that is always covered head to toe in ammo and never fails to have a harsh mindset on warfare. “What do I think about the U.S. involvement in the war? We should win it.” His fearlessness and gung-ho persona gives him an appraisal for conforming to wartime. This film has been considered by many to be the greatest war movie ever made along side Apocalypse Now; and rightfully so with its dark comedy and brutal depictions of war on the mind and body.

Cheryl Rogers: Response to Capote

2006-03-30T08:30:00.000-05:00

When I went to see Capote I had no clue what the film was about. It is embarrassing to admit, but I had no prior knowledge about the film or the central character Truman Capote. I had built up in my head that it was a mobster film; I had confused Capote with Al Capone. I thought I was going to see a fast paced shoot’em up type of film but was delightfully surprised to see that this film didn’t fit into that category. Instead the film was rather the opposite in that it was very subtle, very melodic yet extremely haunting. It’s one of those films you see and you think about for days afterwards. It’s a story about ambition, and the dark side of a man that was well known for being quite the opposite. Through Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s brilliant portrayal I was introduced to Truman Capote. I went in not knowing anything about Capote but throughout the film I wanted to know more. Not only did I want to know more about Capote but I also became interested in learning more about Perry Smith and the relationship that developed between the two of them. What was it that brought the two together?

I became infatuated by all the characters. There were so many different aspects of the story taking place; so many lives were affected by this one tragic event. There are several significant characters in the film but the relationship between Capote and Perry Smith; the two central characters are what drive the story. After watching the film I went home and researched Capote and Smith on the internet. I wasn’t and still am not completely clear on why Capote was so drawn to Smith. I found that Smith and Capote had similar backgrounds. Capote’s parents had divorced when he was four and he was sent to Alabama to live with his mother’s relatives. At age 9 he moved to New York to live with his mom and her second husband who eventually adopted Capote.

Smith lived through several forms of abuse. His father was never around and his mother was an alcoholic, he had a brother and a sister who both committed suicide. Smith lived most of his life in an orphanage. Smith’s first arrest took place when he was only 8 years old. I suppose that all the demons Smith had faced caused him to commit such a heinous crime. He was struggling throughout much of his life; he had no love, no emotional attachment to anyone. Capote too had demons that he was dealing with outside his public image. I think that through Smith he was forced to face these demons, forced to face himself. Capote tells Smith during one of the visits to the prison that they are really not that different, that he too was repeatedly abandoned as a child. He explained how his mom would lock him in a hotel room alone while she would leave and “take up with another man she had met.”

I was a little disappointed with certain parts of this film in particular when Capote went to visit Perry in jail and he started to talk about that night and what happened. He still never answered why. In Cold Blood was the title given to the book, which given Perry’s account of that night it appears to be exactly what it was, but I become confused when I think back to the part when Perry threw a fit when he found out the title of the book. It seemed at that point that there was a “reason,” some sort of motive behind their actions. And when he finally tells Capote about that night we see that the two men were in search of money. They had been told that the Clutter’s had $10,000 dollars, which they never found. They only ended up finding between $40-$50 dollars. When Smith gives his account of that night we see that he truly is a messed up individual who had searched for acceptance and fulfillment throughout his life but shamefully came face to face with his demons. He realized that he really was the kind of person that would kill a nice, gentle man and his family.

The film Capote is not about the two guys who committed these brutal murders, but about Truman, his life, the choices he made, and his involvement with these men, one of them in particular, Perry Smith, whom he became emotionally attached to. During the film Capote’s friend Harper Lee asked him if he had fallen in love with Smith, he says he doesn’t know how to answer that. Then he explains, what I feel is the whole point of the movie, “It’s as if Perry and I grew up in the same house, one day he stood up and went out the back door while I went out the front door.” He felt that he and Perry had come from the same background but Perry instead of making the right choices, chose to let his past get the better of him and eventually released the demons that plagued him for so long. While Capote chose to bury the demons deep down and chose to live his life vicariously through his facades.

Cheryl Rogers: Response to Crash

2006-03-30T07:16:00.000-05:00

I saw Crash the week before it was released for rental. I work at a video rental store; the owner likes for us to view the films so we can answer any questions the customer may have about them. The repetitive question that they always want to know is, “have you seen this movie, is it any good?” I wasn’t sure how to answer that question when they asked about Crash. I was afraid to comment; race is a serious subject that many people don’t take lightly. But that is exactly what I told them; although very controversial and disturbing, I found Crash to be a remarkable film. I really enjoyed every aspect of the film. I almost feel guilty for taking such satisfaction in a film that is so dark, and so terribly sad. It’s one of those films that will haunt you for days after; one that urges you to really think. I started to pay more attention to things happening around me. Things that I chose to ignore before. I believe that was the intent of the director. He wanted people to take a step back and examine their own lives, how they deal with race.

To my astonishment it was nominated for a best picture Oscar. I was much more taken a back when it won. Although it was well deserved, it broke the traditional pattern that seemed to take place in the Oscars. I think much of America thought the obvious winner was Brokeback Mountain, given all the attention that the film was getting from the critics. For once it seems that the Academy got it right.

I felt ashamed after watching it because unfortunately the world is full of racism. Whether we realize it or not we all encounter some form of racial discrimination during our everyday lives. It really made me think. It caused me to evaluate myself, and the stereotypes that I have had against people that aren’t like me. I started to think about things that I myself have done that could be construed as a form of racism. When you commit an act, or throw a racial slur, you don’t think about the affect that it may have on the individual. Crash gives you a glimpse into several different people with various racial, ethnic and economic backgrounds and shows you how they interact with one another. We see the ramifications of racism on these eight individuals.

The film did a superb job portraying the stereotypes that have been placed on people from different races. Society has conditioned us on how we are to think about people of a different race. I have actually known a few people who resemble Anthony’s character; who walk around talking about how wrong the world has done him as a black man in a white society. I have to admit that some of the stories seemed a little over the top, but unfortunately these things do occur. Everyday someone gets killed due to the color of their skin or ethnic group that they belong to.

Race is a disturbing, poignant topic that many choose to ignore. L.A. is not the only place that it occurs. Racism takes place on every continent on Earth. We can pretend that we don’t see it, that it doesn’t happen but that doesn’t make it go away. Crash forces us to deal with the reality of race and its implications on society. Are we really so simple minded that we only see people for their outer appearance? Can our society ever learn to not pass judgment on others due to race, ethnicity, economic class or gender?

Kathy Archer: Response to Crash

2006-03-30T07:09:00.000-05:00

Set in Los Angeles, California, winter and Christmas during the next twenty-four hours a couple of people will have their lives changed. Crash by Paul Haggis is a film that is challenging to the racial conflicts in America. This movie challenges everyone in the audience to question their own true prejudices. I can say with ease that this movie, I did not like. Any movie that is set around race and or racism really irritates me. The film is honest about racism, but it was not my cup of tea.

Paul directs this movie very well, and his characters are very well thought out. I wish that I could have connected more with these characters, but at times, the characters seemed forced. Case in point, when Terrence Howard (who played Cameron), told another black person to "act more black," seriously. In any black community and for that matter any black person talking to another black person would have used the “N” word to let that person know where he was coming from and to “check” the other black person. If Paul would have made Terrance more ethic, I might have gotten into his character. I understand that Terrance was playing a director, but being a high-class director, did not take away his blackness. Sandra Bullock (who plays Jean) to me was just a crazy rich white woman, who was in the closet about her racism, and that differs how from the real world? For me the best characters were Luda (who played Anthony), Larnez Tate (who played Peter), and Matt Dillion (who played Officer Ryan). They were the only true characters in the movie. Two car-jackers and a LAPD racist police officer, again how is that different from real life. The acting itself was very good by all of the actors. The movie lets all of its characters (which there are a lot-I did not even mention half of them) meet within the twenty-four hours for some intense but to me long scenes. Paul expands on each of the characters and gives each one a chance to change. Not every character takes the bait, but by the end of the film, they have had a life-changing event that has changed them. Paul has thought these characters out so well, that each of them have a “soul.” He gives them a human existence that shows emotions that of crying, laughing, fear, smiles, hugging, and kissing. This gave the film life. I did like the way that Paul shot the movie. With the close-ups on each of the characters, a person could feel that human existence and the intenseness that the character was going though.& nbsp;

Crash was a decent movie (I still do not like it). I have to say that to me anyone could have made this movie. A movie about a bunch of characters that are stubborn and ignorant. In today’s society, this movie shows the honest of racism. Everyone has some racial bone in their body, and if they say they do not, they are lying. Paul‘s film was a good effort to bring to the for front of racism. I am so tried of the stereotypes in America today, and Paul made sure that we saw most of them. The car-jackers being blac k, why did he not make one white and one black? “Why they got to be black folks?” Like white people never car-jack. This is a reason that racial films frustrate me so. I have yet to see a film on reverse racism or on racism period, that depicts what “really” is going on in America. Yes, blacks steal, but so does every race. When one is hit with hard times or just bad luck, one will do a lot to protect what is his. I do not know who said, “Never judge a book by its cover,” but it makes sense. Paul did a good job with that thought. Moreover, that thought I have to say made me think about my prejudices.

Director David Lynch's New Transcendental Meditation Schools

2006-03-28T09:35:00.000-05:00

To those of you who signed up for enlightenment and peace,

Here are excerpts from some of the letters I’ve received from students we met on our college campus tours:

“I want peace in my life. I want control. I want to learn from my mistakes. I want to calm my life down. I am so ready to become myself. I want to rid myself of fear, and do the things that make me happy. I want to grow and live life. I am interested in Transcendental Meditation; I want to learn the correct method. My soul and creativity are in need. I appreciate what you are doing.”

“You say that you have a way to world peace. Whether or not I truly believe that, I want it too badly to pass up the opportunity.”

“Two of my friends practice Transcendental Meditation, and I see how positively it affects their lives. I can't help but want the same effects for myself: calm, a sense of peace with oneself, joy.”

“I do think that surface differences are a manifestation of a single underlying reality, and I feel a profound need to experience that reality—to tap into the source: my own, and that of all things. Transcendental Meditation, I believe, is the means to do so.”

“For a long time, I've sensed a deeper reality that I have yet to access. My gut tells me that TM holds many answers for me.”

“When you talked about your experience with meditation and how it has changed your life, I heard something that really interested me and seemed like it could help. I want to learn how to do Transcendental Meditation to improve my brain function, energy levels, anxiety levels, clarity, and overall outlook on life.”

“I have never questioned the benefits of meditation, and now, I want to unlock them for myself.”

It’s encouraging to see how many sincere seekers of wisdom and peace are out there. It’s my desire to bring the benefits of meditation to as many students as we can.

We are working to raise the money for more scholarships for students who visited us on our tour of campuses on the West Coast and who want to learn the Transcendental Meditation technique.

Who will be the first students to learn in each university? I think it should be decided on strong desire to start. If you would email me a letter telling me of your desire to begin diving within and experiencing that ocean of bliss consciousness, it would be very helpful. Please state what city and school you are writing from.

If you are able to start the Transcendental Meditation technique now without a scholarship I would encourage it — perhaps you are financially able to do so. Or if you’re not a student and not eligible for a scholarship but you want to learn Transcendental Meditation, you can take advantage of a new long-term, low-interest loan option that any TM teacher can tell you about.

Whether you require a scholarship or not, I would encourage you to contact a qualified teacher of Maharishi’s Transcendental Meditation and attend a free introductory lecture to learn more about this powerful technique and to have your questions answered. If you haven’t already done so, you may also enjoy the online videocast of “Consciousness, Creativity and the Brain” on our Foundation website.

Meanwhile, we all at the David Lynch Foundation are still highly motivated to raise enough money to bring Transcendental Meditation to all of you.

I’ll write again soon.

All the best to all of you,

David

Clayton Brown: Response to Jarhead

2006-03-28T09:29:00.000-05:00

Jarhead reminded me a lot of the past two years of my life. Anthony Swofford spent over 6 months in the Saudi and Kuwaiti desert. I was in Kuwait for three months and Iraq for another 10 months. Now I wasn’t a Marine in the first Gulf War but I have a
different or a closer perspective on the subject than most do. Swofford was going into the Middle East being told about how ruthless and unrelenting Saddam is and how his army is the 5th largest in the world, the chemical weapons and the human rights. He was told all of this to make him harder to make him a better Marine. But while all the diplomatic channels were being exhausted the Marines were sitting in Saudi Arabia with their thumb in their butts not really knowing what’s going on. Especially being a grunt at a company level you have no idea what is going on anywhere. You don’t see the news or talk to family back home all the time; even more so in this war. Nowadays we’ve been in the Middle East for so long we have communications systems set up with the Internet and phone lines etc. So being cutoff from the outside world and only knowing what your superiors tell you can lead your
mind astray. It can lead you to snap.

Now my first reaction to Swofford’s melodrama was, “Come on give me a break you’re not even in a real war over there you’re just hanging out in the desert!” But then I realized it wasn’t just hanging out in the desert to them. To them it was a war that they had no idea how long it was going to be or how far it was going to take them. They didn’t know if Saddam was going to attack with anthrax the next morning. So
they were scared and the fact that they didn’t believe totally in what they were fighting for really added to the stress. Just like I wouldn’t want somebody to assume too much about my life in Iraq or to pass judgment on my experience by how they saw it on the news.

When Swofford was in Kuwait I was seven or eight years old playing with Lincoln Logs in Scott County. So I feel I don’t know if I have the right perspective to pass judgment on his experience.

Each character is more or less a cliché’, a military cliché. From Jamie Foxx as the hardcore hoorah Marine Staff Sergeant to Jake Gyllenhaal as the disillusioned rebel of the platoon. They are all stereotypes. But being in the military I know they are true representations. Every platoon has that guy who questions all the authority and plants seeds of rebellion. Every platoon has the guy who is weaker; more scared a little dorky, like Fitch in the movie. Every platoon has the Non-Commissioned Officer who is so gung ho about the military and killing you can barely stand him.

The movie was filmed in the Imperial Valley in California with a few other desert scenes shot in Mexico and a soundstage in Universal Studios. It’s not hard to do but they go the look right. I’m all too familiar with Kuwait’s terrain. Kuwait is God’s asshole as we used to say this movie portrays it very well.

Dialogue was a little worn. They are Marines though. Marines aren’t the most elegant people when it comes to the spoken word. It was true to its origin and that’s all you can hope for.

The movie alludes to so much going on now and the release of the movie and the book came at a great time. The Saudi royal family and that oil was the real reason they were in the dessert. Just the fact the movie came out in the middle of a war in the same place, really gave audiences a connection. Especially for me, I could relate
to this film more than any other I’ve ever seen other than maybe Dazed and Confused. It hit home with me in what I’ve done and what I will have to do again.

Daniel Mandel-Anthony: Response to Capote

2006-03-28T09:22:00.000-05:00

The movie Capote, which was nominated for several Oscars and won best actor for Phillip Seymour Hoffman, is a fantastic piece of work. In Capote, Truman Capote, already a famous writer at the time the movie is set, investigates a set of cold-blooded murders he reads of in a newspaper. The murder is set in a small Kansas town. The movie focuses less on the killers, the killed, the town’s reaction, or anything else for that matter, and more on Truman Capote. The way Truman Capote investigated these murders in pursuit of a story for his novel devastated Capote, emotionally and psychologically. At first, Capote tells a policeman involved in the investigation that he doesn’t care whether or not they catch the killers. Capote’s first angle is the effect the murders had on the town’s people. When the killers are caught, however, Capote sings a different tune. Truman Capote identifies with the killer Perry Smith, more than anyone else in his life. "It's like Perry and I grew up in the same house, and one day he went out the back door and I went out the front," he tells Harper Lee. The connection they share does not stop Capote from ruthlessly manipulating him to get the killer’s whole story. This movie shows how art is not only created, but also creates. While Capote is writing his non-fiction novel, the non-fiction novel is writing, or rewriting him.

William Wordsworth said that to be a good writer, you must be a good person. Well, as Truman Capote becomes more and more adept and proficient with words while writing In Cold Blood, he also loses more and more of himself to inhumanity. He becomes a worse person. He makes instruments out of people. He observes people as objectively as a reporter (he says he took a test that showed he remembered something like 90 percent of all conversations he hears) and he uses people as means to completing his book. Capote uses hot and cold temperaments, changes quick as lightning in a masterful manipulation of Perry Smith. The one thing Smith refused to tell Capote was one of the most important details: why he killed the family. Capote manipulates other people at other times in the film, but none are quite as striking or disquieting as this one.

Capote’s ego dominates the world he lives in. It’s the reason he uses people to further his own end, it’s the plant he waters in place of his morality. When his friend Harper Lee publishes her famous book “To Kill a Mockingbird,” and is at the premeire to its feature film, Capote sits in the corner, alone in the bar, steeped in his own depression and ego and mutters an aside to himself of “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “I don’t know what the big deal is.”

One of the most disturbing elements of the film, Capote, is how rock bottom his morality has hit by the end. The way Capote needs the two killers to die, simply so he can have a good ending to his book, shows exactly how changed Truman Capote is. Capote supports the criminals by financing them with lawyers and appeals until he gets what he wants. Once Capote pumps the whole story from the murderers, he drops the financing without excuse. When he could finance another appeal, he doesn’t. Capote needs an execution in his book.

Capote offers, through fantastic acting and script, an in-depth character study, showing what happens to a man who drops his notions of morality for his ego, and suffers for it. “In Cold Blood,” was the last book Capote ever finished, and it aided him to his own finish.

Daniel Mandel-Anthony: Response to Jarhead

2006-03-28T09:18:00.000-05:00

Daniel Mandel-Anthony
Jarhead

The movie Jarhead is a compelling look at the experiences of a young marine in the first Iraq war. The first part of the movie is about his training and abuse he goes through in boot camp. The second part is about his experience in overseas in the desert. It is strange for a war movie to be like this, it doesn’t even seem like a war movie. Jarhead follows the character not the war. The war is going on elsewhere, above them. Foot soldiers have been replaced by jet fighters, snipers by air strikes. The marines are trained to perfection, but don’t even fire their guns until the war is over and they fire into air. Jarhead is a different kind of war movie, a kind that builds and builds the suspense, but never releases it. The characters in the movie are as frustrated by this as we are.

His sniper partner, who uses binoculars to spot the targets while Swofford aims and shoots (or at least, that’s what would have happened if they had shot anyone), is Swofford’s best friend in the army. Troy, as he is called, and Swofford are in a classic, complicated predicament. Troy is an ex-convict and is soon to be kicked out of the marines.

Jarhead doesn’t give the audience or the characters in the film a release point. The movie Saving Private Ryan starts with a bang and a battle, it grabs you and never lets go. You never quite recover from the first scene of Saving Private Ryan. You might say that while Saving Private Ryan has lots of release of tension, Jarhead doesn’t release practically any. You see this when Swofford almost shoots his fellow marine for getting him demoted, you see this when Troy explodes at the army officer “just let us take the shot!”

Some find it frustrating, endlessly expecting action, but the drama that came from that unfulfilled expectation was infinitely more interesting to me than action. I looked forward to the action like everyone else. I wanted Swofford to take that shot. When he had the general in his scopes and his finger on the trigger I was all ears and all eyes. But when no action came, I wasn’t much disappointed, the characters kept me interested.

The deferred action gives the audience more of a chance to identify with the characters. Let me examine some of the characters.

Swofford is not an ordinary protagonist, and especially not an ordinary war movie protagonist. First of all, he is not a willing warrior, no John Wayne here, no superman. After a newspaper reporter asks Swofford for the reason he joined the marines, he turns to her and tells her "I'm 20 years old, and I was dumb enough to sign a contract." Swofford is not the center of the action, in fact, there is no action.

Swofford was still shook up by the war, however. “All wars are different. All wars are the same,” he tells us. Even though he didn’t want to be there, even though he never fired his gun, even though his war lasted "Four days, four hours, one minute. That was my war," Swofford still feels the weight of his rifle in his hands, still feels the desert sun on his back.

His sniper partner, who uses binoculars to spot the targets while Swofford aims and shoots (or at least, that’s what would have happened if they had shot anyone), is Swofford’s best friend in the army. Troy, as he is called, is in a sadly ironic situation. Troy is an ex con who lied on his application for the marines. He has been deemed too immoral for the marines, the ironic thing is that he is one of the noblest characters in the movies. While all the other marines want to watch one marine’s wife cheat on him on tape, Troy is disgusted with them and makes them turn off the tape. Troy wants desperately, perhaps more desperately than most to shoot an enemy. It’s through him that we identify with most through our frustration.
Jarhead is a different kind of war movie, its deferred action, its non heroes, its main character who “got lost on the way to college.” Jarhead doesn’t give us anyone to really look up to, like most war movies. Jarhead instead gives us people to identify with.

Clayton Brown: Response to Crash

2006-03-28T09:10:00.000-05:00

Race in America is a sensitive subject. One we don’t like to talk about. The movie Crash brings race out front and center. The movie is set in Los Angeles where it follows a dozen or so characters through two in which their lives intertwine. This movie is trying to make a bold point about race and our views towards it. Through its dialogue and characterization we are shown that that there are many things that divide us but so many more that bring us together.

The discourse is turned up a notch to emphasize the movie’s theme. Practically every other line in the film sounds like propaganda or rhetoric. Racial conspiracies, stereotypes, and theories abound with every character. From Sandra Bullock’s bitch of a housewife who is a closet racist until she has her car violently stolen which opens her up to being one of the angriest female characters I’ve ever seen on film. To the rapper Ludacris, who plays the black youth who stole Sandra Bullock’s car, never stops with his theories on race between black and whites in LA and the United States. Theories on why we have public buses with huge windows and why hip-hop music isn’t a form of black expression but white oppression. All of the characters end up saying things to strangers that I have never heard anybody with half a brain say to another human being.

Every character is played out to be a racist at one point or another, or at least get frustrated with a person of another race and their inability to understand one another. Some are more violent than others. The Hispanic locksmith seems to be the most sympathetic yet he still gets aggravated with an Iranian shopkeeper who accuses him of trying to cheat him. In the end the shopkeeper’s store is vandalized, an event that would’ve been avoided had he listened to the locksmith.

The director uses many close-ups through the movie to emphasize an actor’s plight with racism. It really brings to attention how the character feels, their expressions of doubt and sorrow. This stellar cast and superb acting allow the director to use close ups to show emotion as opposed to dialogue, which there is already too much of.

More than half the movie is shot at night. City lights make up much of the background. The movie is set near Christmas time, so the weather is cold, and there are many Christmas lights out even so the colors don’t come through as you might think. It’s not washed out; there is just a sort of grey tint.

The music is low, almost eerie. Synthesizers and piano coupled with or sometimes alone, is an Arabic woman singing, almost operatic. It’s very solemn. With some excellent climactic spikes, which were used very well to emphasize the anguish, there could’ve been less use of a synthesizer and more piano.

Crash was an excellent after school special chopping us down at the legs showing us how were are so different and the bigotry and prejudice in our society but then bringing us back up by showing how alike we are. How hatred gets us nowhere and how we should celebrate the differences rather than admonish them.

V for Vendetta (James McTeigue: 2006)

2006-03-27T12:19:00.000-05:00

This new Hollywood film, V for Vendetta, has a strong political undertone so I will accept an extra credit response to it.

Week 10: The Politics of the 2006 Oscar's Best Picture Winner--Crash (Paul Haggis, 2005)

2006-03-26T09:04:00.000-05:00

Remember, class is canceled on thursday because I will be in Chicago for a conference.

The only film you are required to watch and that you can write a response on this week is Crash.

Required Homework Readings:

Chang, Jeff and Sylvia Chan. Can Whit Hollywood Get Race Right? AlterNet (July 19, 2005)

Ebert, Roger. In Defense of the Year's Worst Movie Chicago Sun-Times (January 8, 2006)

... The Fury of the Crash-lash Chicago Sun-Times (March 6, 2006)

Laurier, Joanne. The Essential Things Go Unexplained World Socialist Web Site (May 28, 2005)

Nowlan, Bob. BASIC INTRODUCTION TO KEY CONCEPTS: FILM AND CULTURE University of Wisconsin--Eau Claire (September 21, 2001)

---. INTRODUCTION TO READING FILMS CRITICALLY AS "SOCIAL TEXTS": MAKING SENSE OF FILMS IN RELATION TO SOCIAL CONTEXTS University of Wisconsin--Eau Claire (April 1, 2003)

Philips, Craig. Crashing Crash: Considering the Screenplay Filmshi (March 1, 2006)

Smith, Derik. Investigating the Crash Scene The Black Commentator #175 (March 16, 2005)

Five Basic Criteria For Writing an ENG 281 Research Paper

2006-03-25T15:05:00.000-05:00

Five Basic Criteria for a Research Paper

1. Concept addresses the strength and clarity of the paper overall. Is the paper's topic clearly laid out? Have you introduced your reader to the questions about that topic that the paper is trying to answer? Are your answers to those questions also clear? Is the argument that drives the paper worth making, or does it seem simplistic? (That is, are you arguing that the sky is blue, or that water is wet?)

2. Analysis addresses how well you've developed and supported your paper. Does the paper make the reader feel that you really know your topic and your sources? Have you followed your analysis of the topic as far as it could go, or have you left your reader saying, "Well, that's true, but what about this?" Have you shown your readers how you arrived at your position, or have you simply told them? Are your assertions backed up with references (in the form of quotes, paraphrases or summaries) to your sources? When you quote a source, do you then interpret the quotation -- or do you leave it sitting there, hoping it will speak for itself?

3. Structure addresses how well you've led the reader through your paper. Does your paper follow a clear and logical progression from idea to idea? Have you prepared your reader early in the paper for the arguments you are going to make? Do you make logical transitions from idea to idea, or do your peer reviewers often ask you, "How did you get from this paragraph to THIS paragraph?" Does your paper address all the issues you bring up in its introduction? Does your paper conclude, or does it just stop?

4. Style addresses how the paper sounds. Does the paper's introduction really introduce the paper, or does it just spin its wheels? Do parts of the paper strike the reader as superfluous, as "dead wood?" Does the paper often rely on the passive voice? Does the paper use the right words at the right time, or does it seem "thesaurusized?" Does the paper seem wordy, or its tone overly weighty, to its readers?

5. Presentation and Documentation (P&D) addresses how the paper looks and reads. Does the paper exhibit consistent grammatical or mechanical mistakes (i.e., sentence fragments, clumsy syntax, shifts in tense, incorrect punctuation or spelling)? Are your readers stopped by sentences they either don't understand or have to spend time figuring out? Are your sources clearly and accurately documented in both the footnotes and the bibliography? Does the paper make the reader feel that you are paying attention to details, or that you've rushed to print without reading the paper yourself?

How To Write a Critical Response to Film (especially in our Politics of Film section)

2006-03-23T07:57:00.000-05:00

Some insights into writing critical responses to films:

Robert C. Thomas: How to Write a Critical Response Paper Excellent introduction to writing a short response to a film (and other texts)--be warned though that the student essay example at the end involves frank discussions of sexual activity in the movie Crush

Reader Response Essays Instructions for writing about literature, but the same thought can be applied to films.

Herman Rapaport: How to Write an Essay

Example of a Student Response to City of God

Stephen Greenblatt "On Culture"--questions to ask of a work of literature to understand its cultural meanings, equally applies to the cultural analysis of film

Bluegrass Film Society, Feb 21st: Whale Rider (Niki Caro: New Zealand, 2002)

2006-03-21T12:19:00.000-05:00

(Extra Credit Response Opportunity)

Whale Rider

and through the rest of the semester any film that plays at The Kentucky Theater (I usually post the schedules for their films on Bluegrass Film Society)

Ashley Bowman: Response to The Passenger

2006-03-21T08:46:00.000-05:00

(Caution--Plot revealed)

Ashley Bowman
ENG 281; T-TH 2:00
The Passenger

I think it is great when the Kentucky Theatre offers different types of films and titles that you may never heard of before. So when looking at options for the week of spring break, a random first Jack Nicholson flick sounded like something that I could even make my boyfriend take me to see. Though campus seemed kind of empty, anyone in Lexington was downtown that Sunday night seeing movies as well. The theatre was pretty crowded for the Passenger, though most people were there to see the new release, Capote. Though Nicholson played a role unlike most we are familiar seeing him play, we were both entertained by The Passenger and were kept interested by the intense characters with little or no dialogue. Unlike other movies, you had to be listening and paying attention to the detail of the film; the narrative had to be thought out and the actors gave hardly any clues to how the story would end.

The film starts with Nicholson driving this old, large Land Rover through the rural areas of Africa. His huge vehicle, along with his plaid button up shirt which he had tied up, sunglasses, and sweating looking of anxiety introduce us to Nicholson’s character that we later learn is John Locke, the English journalist. As he drives around in the hot African sun, going from place to place and person to person, it is uncertain what he is in search of but it obviously stressing him out. I sat wondering who would be considered his ‘passenger’ as a little boy rides with him into the desert and then tells him to stop until he picks up the trail of another African man. This point is played over and over through the beginning scenes of the film; he goes on and on and gets nowhere. His car gets stuck in the sand and the man is too tired and strained from traveling to go any further for the day, he sinks into the sand after trying to dig and screams.

Once he goes back to the hotel, we start to learn about and hear more from the character himself. He goes into his room and turns on the water, which you can tell from the owners of the hotel, can be easily wasted; but he will not shower without soap and lets it run. He goes into a neighboring room where we see his subjective point of view of a dead man laying face down on the bed. After going through his things and taking his shirt, we learn that he knew this man and though there is hardly any nondiegetic sounds, especially no music throughout the film, we start to hear a recording of the two men talking as we watch John Locke take time to swap the pictures of the dead man and his own passport and then physically move the body from one bedroom to the other. At the end of the tape the man, who simply says he is in business, though it is pointed out that he seems to peaceful for a harsh businessman, realizes that John had been recording their conversation. It then ends at the same time that John is done gluing his new identity and then we get a close-up shot of his recorder stopping. John plays it cool and calm as men from Africa come to collect the body of John Locke and make arrangements for burial.

The film is done with continuity editing with a couple of flashbacks that Rachel Locke experiences and watching the videos of her husband’s interviews after she believes him to be dead. This film wasn’t done on a set or in a trailer; the shots are done on location at places all over the world. Lots of long shots are used to show the places the characters travel to and capture the whole atmosphere and scenery. Like when John is in the desert, though it is unsure what he is in search of at that point, the long shot helps to show him and how small he and his truck are in relation to the enormous desert and swallowing amounts of sand. When he is in another country, Barcelona or Yugoslavia I think, the roads are so small that his truck can hardly fit through them and hit the sides of the wall when the couple opens their doors. Shots like these show how foreign John was with his American ideals and need for his large truck.

Once he has turned in his life for the other man’s, a woman frequents the screen and has been seen by John in different countries as he travels looking for answers, she sits and reads. Following her takes us to lots of beautiful buildings and places, since she is studying architecture. I spent time wondering if she had any connection to the dead man’s life and his appointment book with woman’s names on the meeting times but like other things, these names are never given meaning. By the end of the film, Jack Nicholson’s character, John, though he’s traded in his identity so that he doesn’t have to live up to himself anymore has now found a sense of freedom and individuality in his travel and in this other woman. Like her, he lets his hair be wild, shirt loosened and unbuttoned and goes where the wind takes them. He talks and smiles more, seems more refreshed, like he is unburdened. But every life has problems, and taking someone's may not have been so good of an idea because now he must do this man's work and pay his consequences. Meanwhile the girl helps him escape from his old friends and wife and tells him that she will never give up when it comes to the dead man’s appointments. They know he is a gun runner; the excitement is what fuels them it is just that they may not understand the dangers of what they were actually taken part of. By going to the appointed meeting places was only setting them up for his death, the gun runner was a bad man but his life was excitement.

He knows the heat is on from his wife and the other gun men and tries to separate from the woman but she follows him to the same hotel. From his direct point of view we watch him open the window, and hear as he relaxes on the bed. Then there is a long tracking shot where the camera moves from the interior of the hotel room, through the bars of the window we watch the girl, a dog and another man sitting in front of the shot, then the gun men ride up in the car and walk over to the side of the room and out of view. The camera shows all of the people and their reactions in the courtyard, and then returns to the room after John has been killed. Once again, all that can be heard is nondiegetic sounds like the dog barking outside and the wind blowing or people’s chatter. When John Locke’s wife arrives, she doesn’t even recognize or call out like she knows him, like he wished or maybe because his face was taken with the bullet, there are no more close up shots to let us know. Another part of the movie that kept us asking why?

Michael Benton: Response to Jarhead

2006-03-14T17:32:00.000-05:00

(My original response on seeing the film on opening day)

I went to see Jarhead on friday afternoon after reading the recent Harper's magazine profile essay on the film and the problems associated with anti-war films. I first became familiar with Swofford's memoirs about his service in the first Iraq War primarily because of Swofford's legendary party-session with University of Kentucky grad-students after a Lexington reading.

The setting:

I showed up at the 3:20 pm showing at the Regal theater (a typical shopping area multiplex). Arriving somewhat early, there were only two other people in the screening area and I thought that this might be a typical early-friday screening (the last afternoon showing we had experienced was The Constant Gardener which had only six people in the audience).

Slowly groups of 2-4 people filed into the theater until there was about 20+ people. At about 10 minutes before the showing three groups of 12+ people showed up, obviously, from overheard conversation and their collective-huddling, they were the local fraternities come to check out the latest war film.

The audience was easily 90% male and, as my companion noted, the testosterone blanketed the theater. One could sense that they were there for some action and some butt-kicking. In my imagination I heard them rallying the guys to go see the film: "Enough of the daily reports of violence and death in the current Iraq-war, lets go see a film about the one where we kicked some serious ass!"

The film (general comments because I don't want to ruin the plot):

This film is going to produce extreme reactions. It will be one of those polarizing films that will be an ideological litmus-test of the people who watch it (like Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing) because it doesn't make an explicit stand either way on this war, or war in general. It simply presents Swofford's personal story of training to be a Marine scout and his experiences in the first Gulf War.

A lot of commentary I have seen is that this film (and Swofford's book) is anti-military. I don't see it... yes it exposes the cruelties of collective male-bonding that is centered around the hatred of an "enemy-other," but is that really shocking to anyone? It portrays the insanity and dehumanization of contemporary warfare in which buttons are pushed and hundreds of people are immediately incinerated/blown-up, but is this unrealistic? It depicts the trauma experienced by those who serve in the military, but one only has to read studies of post-traumatic syndrome all the way back to WWI to realize this reality.

What I think is disturbing about this film for many of the people attacking it is that it de-mythologizes the glorification of personal combat--the individualistic hero-figure who rises above even the scewed-up absurdity of the military situation, bringing order to the madness. In this film there are no heroes. Even Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket, perceived as anti-war films, allow us points of identification and characters we can "root" for in their quest to make sense of the insanity of war. In Jarhead, there are no places we can rest, we are kept disturbed, we are uneasy, we really don't know what is going on, perhaps the military terminology best suited to the atmosphere of the film is FUBAR.

The audience afterwards:

As we walked out you could sense the frustration of the bands of fraternity-boys who had sought the glories of represented warfare. They complained loudly that the film lacked the spectacle they had come to experience. I wondered, how many of these boys, from their fraternity-association and position of privilege in our society, would ever have to worry about serving in the military. Why, if they were so lucky to escape this service, unlike their less-fortunate peers in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the world, was it so necessary for them to feel a part of the rituals of war, even if it was through the spectacle of a Hollywood film. As we walked out many of them were on phones planning the night's parties, their frustration so evident, I wondered how it would manifest in the night to come.

The Kentucky Theater: 3/10/ - 3/16

2006-03-13T14:31:00.000-05:00

(All of these films are extra credit opportunities for this week)

Here`s the schedule for the upcoming week of 3/10-16:

(2nd week!) NIGHT WATCH (R)
Fri. 3/10 - 5:25; 7:35; 9:45; 12 midnite
Sat. 3/11 - 1:00; 3:15; 5:25; 7:35; 9:45; 12 midnite
Sun. 3/12 - 1:00; 3:15; 5:25; 7:35; 9:45
Mon. thru Thurs. 3/13-16 - 5:25; 7:35; 9:45

Academy Award Winner; Best Actor! CAPOTE (R) -- Ends Sunday!!
starring Philip Seymour Hoffman
Fri. 3/10 - 7:25
Sat. & Sun. 3/11-12 - 1:40; 7:25

New Print! Michelangelo Antonioni\'s THE PASSENGER (PG-13) -- Ends Sunday!!
starring Jack Nicholson and Maria Schneider
Fri. thru Sun. 3/10-12 - 5:00; 9:40

MIRRORMASK (PG-13)
Fri. & Sat. 3/10-11 at Midnite

WAGING A LIVING (NR)
Tue. 3/14 - 3:00; 5:30; 7:15

Double Digit Tuition Increase for KCTCS College Students

2006-03-13T12:45:00.000-05:00

11% increase in tuition proposed
3/10/2006 Business First Louisville

The board of regents of the Kentucky Community and Technical College System voted today to recommend an in-state tuition rate increase of 11 percent for the 2006-2007 academic year.

That would boost the rate per credit hour (including fees) to $109 from $98.

The board said the increase is needed to continue to meet mandates under the 1997 Post-secondary Education Improvement Act, and noted that according to a new set of benchmark states that was established by the Council on Post-Secondary Education, the Kentucky system ranks 18th out of 20 in public funding. The ranking, it added, indicates a $79 million gap in state appropriation relative to other states.

The board also recommended a $131 per credit hour tuition rate for out-of-state students from contiguous counties, and a $327 per credit hour rate for all other out-of-state students.

The statewide system consists of 16 colleges and 65 campuses.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006-07 tuition for KCTCS rises - Board approves 11% boost for in-state students
Writer: Art Jester
3/11/2006 Lexington Herald-Leader

VERSAILLES - In-state students will pay 11.2 percent more to attend Kentucky's community and technical colleges in the fall.

Tuition per credit hour for in-state students will be $109 in 2006-07, up from $98 in the current academic year.
The average student in the Kentucky Community and Technical College System takes 12 or 13 credit hours, said Ken Walker, KCTCS vice president for finance, facilities and human resources.

KCTCS has 81,082 in-state students out of a total enrollment of 84,931.

The KCTCS Board of Regents approved the increase yesterday in a meeting at KCTCS headquarters in Versailles.

Under reciprocal agreements with five states, KCTCS also charges in-state tuition at some of its community and technical colleges for students from some counties in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Tennessee and West Virginia. There are currently 2,219 students in this category.

There will be bigger increases for out-of-state students not covered by reciprocal agreements:

* Out-of-state students from counties contiguous to Kentucky will pay $131 per credit hour in 2006-2007, up from the current $118.

* All other out-of-state students will pay $327 per credit hour next academic year, in contrast with $294 this year.

The board's vice chairman, Joe Wise of Louisville, cast the only dissenting vote on the tuition increase.

Wise said he voted "no" to "send a message to our legislators" that they need to appropriate more money for KCTCS and the state universities so they can avoid double-digit increases in tuition.

Christine Buckner, a student regent from Gateway Community and Technical College in Northern Kentucky, agreed with Wise, saying, "Somewhere, it has got to stop."

Students see that higher tuition pays for faculty and staff raises, she said, but some students question whether more tuition improves the quality of what they get in the classrooms.

"We all wish we didn't have to do this," said KCTCS board chairman Richard Bean of Louisville. "The reason we have to do it is, the state does not want to fund higher education."

"I hope there's a hue and cry not only from KCTCS students" but also from students at the state universities, Bean said.

Financial aid is provided to 52,000 KCTCS students of 71,000 who are eligible, Walker said. The average amount of financial aid is $2,085.

KCTCS in-state students experienced a 6.5 percent tuition increase for 2005-2006.

Last week, the University of Kentucky approved a 12 percent tuition increase for in-state entering freshmen and sophomores.

The University of Louisville is considering raising in-state tuition by 13 percent

WEEK 9: Politics and Film

2006-03-11T19:17:00.000-05:00

REMEMBER THAT WE ARE NO LONGER DOING THE SHORT RESPONSES--FOR THOSE THAT HAVE ALREADY DONE SHORT RESPONSES--EVERY TWO COMPLETED WILL COUNT TOWARD YOUR REQUIRED TEN LONG CRITICAL RESPONSES

WEEK 9: Politics and Film

Required Homework Readings:

Alder, A. Jay. "The Altered State of War: Heaven, Hell, and the Structure of the Combat Film." Bright Lights Film Journal #45 (August 2004)

D'Arcy, David. "The War, The Book, and the Movie: An Interview with Anthony Swofford." Green Cine

Dunnigan, Brian. Making Visible: Reflections on Politics and Film

Definition of "Cultural Hegemony"

Ideology

Nowlan, Bob. BASIC INTRODUCTION TO KEY CONCEPTS: FILM AND CULTURE University of Wisconsin--Eau Claire (September 21, 2001)

Philips, Craig. The Fractured State of the Middle East: Jarhead, Paradise Now, and Turtles Can Fly Filmshi (November 4, 2005)

Weschler, Lawrence. "Valykries Over Iraq: The Trouble with War Movies." Harper's Magazine (November 2005): 65-77.

IN CLASS FILM:

Jarhead (Sam Mendes) 2005:

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

Apocalypse Now (Francis Ford Coppola) 1979/Director’s Cut 2001: 153/202 minutes

Ararat (Atom Egoyan) 2002:115 minutes

The Assassination of Richard Nixon (Niels Mueller) 2004: 95 minutes

Battle of Algiers (Gillo Pontecorvo) 1965: 117 minutes

Bread and Roses (Ken Loach) 2000: 110 minutes

Carandiru (Hector Babenco) 2003: 145 minutes

Dark Blue (Ron Shelton) 2002: 118 minutes

Dirty Pretty Things (Stephen Frears) 2002: 97 minutes

Embedded (Tim Robbins) 2005: 97 minutes

The Experiment (Oliver Hirschbiegel) 2001; 119 minutes

Focus (Neal Slavin) 2001: 107 minutes

Full Metal Jacket (Stanley Kubrick) 1987: 116 minutes

Good Night and Good Luck (George Clooney) 2005: 93 minutes

Herod’s Law (Luis Estrada) 1999: 120 minutes

Hotel Rwanda (Terry George) 2004: 121 minutes

Human Resources (Laurent Cantet) 1999: 100 minutes

Instinct (Jon Turtletaub) 1999: 126 minutes

John Q (Nick Cassavettes) 2002: 116 minutes

The Laramie Project (Moises Kaufman) 2002: 97 minutes

The Magdalene Sisters (Peter Mullan) 2002: 119 minutes

Moolaadé (Ousmane Sembene) 2004: 124 minutes

Osama (Siddiq Barmak) 2003: 83 minutes

The Passion of the Christ (Mel Gibson) 2004: 127 minutes

Platoon (Oliver Stone) 1986: 120 minutes

Rabbit Proof Fence (Philip Noyce) 2002: 94 minutes

Shattered Glass (Billy Ray) 2003: 95 minutes

Silver City (John Sayles) 2004: 128 minutes

Three Kings (David O’ Russell) 1999: 114 minutes

Time of Favor (Joseph Cedar) 2000: 102 minutes

To End All Wars (David L. Cunningham) 2001: 117 minutes

Traffic (Steven Soderbergh) 2000: 147 minutes

Vera Drake (Mike Leigh) 2004: 125 minutes

Veronica Guerin (Joel Schumacher) 2003: 98 minutes

The Kentucky Theatre: The Passenger

2006-03-10T09:11:00.000-05:00

Extra Credit Opportunity--I think this is a great opportunity for film students--if you go to this film and write a 2+ page critical response that demonstrates your knowledge of film aesthetics (what we learned in the first half of the semester), I will give you five points on your mid-term score.
--------------------------------------------------

(Announcement courtesy of Rob Sica We have been waiting for this for a long time--I will be there!)

For three days only – 3/10-3/12 – the Kentucky Theatre is screening the restored version of Michelangelo Antonioni’s little-seen 1975 film The Passenger starring Jack Nicholson and Maria Schneider (“Last Tango in Paris”). Nicholson has for many years jealously protected the distribution rights to the film for a proper release. Don Delillo presented it at last year’s Telluride Film Festival. It ends with a famous seven minute-long tracking shot which required a crane because the camera moves from the interior of a hotel room, through the bars of a window, meanders in a courtyard, and returns to the room.

Though Antonioni’s influence is scarcely discernable in American films (Todd Haynes’ “Safe," Eric Mendelsohn’s “Judy Berlin,” and Jon Jost's films are notable exceptions), his influence pervades the work of many leading contemporary international film-makers -- such as Wong Kar Wai (Hong Kong), Tsai Ming Liang (Taiwan), Bruno Dumont (France), Lucretia Martel (Argentina), Jia Zhanke (China), Michael Haneke (Austria), Abbas Kiarostami (Iran), Hong Sang-soo (Korea), Nuri Ceylan (Turkey), and Carlos Reygadas (Mexico).

My hope is that if enough folks show up to see this film, it might encourage the Kentucky Theatre to be more ambitious in its selection of international fare.

The Winning Choices for the ENG 281 Oscar Predictions

2006-03-09T08:15:00.000-05:00

Best Film: Crash

Best Director: Ang Lee (Brokeback Mountain)

Best Actress: Reese Witherspoon (Walk the Line)

Best Actor: Philip Seymour Hoffman (Capote)

Best Supporting Actress: Rachel Weisz (The Constant Gardener)

Best Supporting Actor: George Clooney (Syriana)

William Harris: Response to Amelie

2006-03-07T10:49:00.000-05:00

Critical Response
“AMELIE”
Focusing on
EDITING
Written by Guillaume Laurant
Directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet

The narrative art of movies has a “language” that consists of coordinating a series of edits into a continuous whole, which creates the unity that we feel through two types of editing conventions that consists of a continuity style and/or discontinuity style. While watching a film many editing conventions are of such technique that we usually become unaware of it occurring due to smooth cuts, splicing, or edits. This brings together all the shots while choosing between all the good (selects) and bad takes. Amelies’ unity is created through a classic linear continuity editing style, while using some flash-forwards and flashbacks. The editors responsibilities in controlling these conventions of editing become essential for creating the film’s meaning during post-production; and ultimately leading to the films final print and overall success.

Amelie is the most popular French movie worldwide. Amelie is a subtitled film and is largely told through an omniscient fairytale narrator. This narration accents its linear narrative style allowing for maintainable attention on plot and story. With much of the viewers’ brainpower still available to focus on mise-en-scene we take notice to and become overwhelmed with the films artistic expression of rich textures of colors, moods, and rhythms.

Early in this film the narrator describes a large list of characters though great obsessive-compulsive detail. The editor uses plot summarizing techniques, which manipulates footage and allows for short screen duration. These spatial cut, or edits, bring us together with the past and present of who and what Amelies character has been exposed to during her life. We start to understand quickly how she became this sweet sentimental introvert, and why fear early on drove her to become this person; the belief in her new camera was causal in producing tragedies on others. She began letting her actions become freer throughout the film by not only helping others, but ultimately by helping herself. Through helping other she begins to help herself by denouncing fear as a controlling aspect of her life. Through being sensitive to the desires of others whom surrounded her, she became sensitive to her own desires and fears, creating a sense of wholeness and fulfillment for both parties.

The idea of Editing, of course, begins in the postproduction stage and ends with the finished film. Jean-Pierre Jeunet is a real “hands on” kind of director and has every shot down on a storyboard before and any of the principal photography begins. This allows for an efficient production schedule and really helps out the actual editing of the film in the post-production process because most of the shots are already named and numbered for a finished continuity right from the beginning. In many movies the ratio between unused and used footage can be as high as ten to one, meaning that for every minute you see on screen, ten minutes has been discarded. With Jean-Pierre Jeunet pre-production focus and control on details allows for amazing film masterpieces to come together precisely with an ease that would overwhelm most other directors in this industry. Apparently Jeunet had been working on the story of Amelie twenty-five years previous to the start of principal photography, which gives us a great understanding and appreciation for his films popularity and artistic success.

In the Film industry, editor Ken Dancyger distinguishes between technique, the craft, and the art of editing and says, “The art of editing occurs when the combining of the two or more shots takes meaning to the next level—excitement, insight, shock, or the epiphany of discovery”. The kulshov effect is one of the many ways that the cinema fools the eyes by drawing on the rapid juxtaposition of shot to create an association in the viewers mind. This illusion takes the stimulation, of the actor, and cross cuts the image with something else that develops different meanings needed by the storyteller, or editor, while the actor really doesn't’t necessarily ever have to change his expression. We see this phenomenon often within the movie Amelie. Amelie (Audrey Poulain) has very little change through out the film with her expressions, which is common with introverted characters, but we get our meaning more from the edited juxtapositions of her point of view combined with other extreme characters in the movie.

The scope, or microscope, of this film revolves around the subconscious, how it remains a mystery to most, and how its one of the most controlling elements within all humans. A fragmented identity within all of us is a continuous theme within this film. There is a character in the film that originally leads us to believe that people not only tear their photos up, but also tears up there inner identities, and leads to denial, memory loss, procrastinate. The characters are left with broken identities without any hope. Amelie finds Nino Quincampoix (Mathieu Kassovitz) book that has all the photos he had found on the floor, covered up, and of course puns are intended! This man puts the images back together to create, a possible identity, but something interesting and artful. Amelie apparently finds purpose within her deeds maintaining a common idea that humans are mostly purpose manufacturers. This idea combined with broken identities is where the story lays; Fix the identity, and purpose is created and happiness blossoms??? This is almost the same work as an editor? As the editor takes the chosen shots or take “selects” (Broken shots/identity) and creates his montage of sequences. The slow disclosure in this film was the primary fact the man, or identity of the man, who repeatedly took his picture and tore it up, was not the person they thought it was, someone-torn, but just the guy who works on the machines. This idea show that many beliefs about ourselves are more than likely untrue…especially in regards to the negative ideas we have about ourselves, the subconscious is a powerful thing. Editing is a powerful thing!

I can’t remember if there was any split-screen edits but there was another in-camera variation on the spit-screen, in which we see a frames within a frame. Example is when the painter is watching videos on his television being of a Diegetic framed element within the nondiegetic framed shot. An interesting very popular montage of playing with the idea of time, or summarizing it, is when Amelies going through the city in fast motion, increasing plot duration, and allowing us to know that much time is passing in her quest to find the guy who previously owned a little toy box that eventually allows her to pursue a series of good deeds. I could continue but with all things considered this movie has an excellent final print and worth a viewing.

Week 7: Editing

2006-02-26T08:37:00.000-05:00

WEEK 7: Editing

IN CLASS FILM:

Amelie (Jean-Pierre Jeunet) 2001: 122 minutes

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick) 1968: 148 minutes

Black Hawk Down (Ridley Scott) 2001: 144 minutes

Cold Mountain (Anthony Minghella) 2003: 152 minutes

Cries and Whispers (Ingmar Bergman) 1972: 106 minutes

Dust to Glory (Dana Brown) 2005: 97 minutes

Fight Club (David Fincher) 1999: 139 minutes

Gangs of New York (Martin Scorsese) 2002: 160 minutes

Gosford Park (Robert Altman) 2001: 137 minutes

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (Guy Ritchie) 1998: 105 minutes

Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino) 1994: 168 minutes

Raising Arizona (The Coen Brothers) 1987: 94 minutes

Requiem For a Dream (Darren Aronofsky) 2000: 102 minutes

Riding Giants (Stacy Peralta) 2004:105 minutes

Run Lola Run (Tom Tykwer) 1998: 80 minutes

Rushmore (Wes Anderson) 1998: 93 minutes

Saving Private Ryan (Steven Spielberg) 1998: 170 minutes

The Shining (Stanley Kubrick) 1980: 146 minutes

Silence of the Lambs (Jonathan Demme) 1991: 118 minutes

Snatch (Guy Ritchie) 2000: 102 minutes

The Wild Bunch (Sam Peckinpah) 1969: 134 minutes

Woodstock (Michael Wadleigh) 1970: 184 minutes

Green Cine: Archive of Criticism on Terrence Malick's New World

2006-02-25T10:42:00.000-05:00

(You can go see this film and write a response at any time--it will count as one of your long responses)

Green Cine Archive of Criticism on Terrence Malick's New World:

See What the Fuss Is All About

Austin Traut; Sound Analysis of The Shining

2006-02-24T02:31:00.000-05:00

Austin Traut
2-22-06
Sound Analysis

The Shining

One of the great film directors/writers, being Stanley Kubrick, adapted Stephen King’s novel, The Shining, to perfection. Immediately from the opening scene I was drawn into the film with its eerie musical score and gloomy scenery. Easily identifiable as the driving force for the film, the musical score leaves an imprint on the film of a diehard classic horror movie. Another sound element that enhances the horrific nature of the film is the characters’ voices; mainly being that of Jack Nicholson as well as the ominous tone of voices in the characters’ head (shining).

The film’s musical score is the element which gives each scene its own personality. The opening scene with Jack driving to his interview at the Overlook hotel is backed by the ominous and eerie music to give the viewer a sense of impending doom or unpleasantness amongst the hotel. Danny, who is Jack’s son, has this ability which allows him to see into the future and is told by a little voice inside his head (Tony) about what could happen while him and his family stay at the hotel for the winter. One scene that stood out rather early in the film is when Danny is in the gaming room and he notices two twins appear. The music is that of the eerie feeling and gives a sense of the hotel being ‘alive.’ After about a month of staying at the hotel, all the characters seem to be settled in to the environment. Another scene that is captured a few times in the film is when Danny drives his big wheel around the hotel. While there is no music being played during these scenes, this makes the viewer question oneself if something is going to pop out just around the corner. An awesome depiction of doom is presented in the film once Danny turns one corner and runs into the two twin phantoms. Danny begins having quick flashes of then being murdered with an axe and this gives the viewer an even greater since of something bad will happen in the hotel. Finally, another excellent use of music in the film is the ball room scene. Upon entering this area of the hotel, Jack is taken back in time to the 20’s and is unable to resist his feeling of de ja vu , as well as his temptation to consume alcohol. All of this just greatly enhances Jack’s feeling of cabin fever living in the hotel.

Jack Nicholson is a classic display of Kubrick style acting. Jack peering out the window, with his head turned down and his eyes looking at the top of his head, this image of him is nothing but horrific. From this glossy-eyed look, one can only assume the dangers and terror burning inside Jack’s head. A scene that shows his internal struggle is when Jack experiences a nightmare while sitting at his typewriter. His screams are that of great horror and fear. The rage that’s been building inside Jack would soon be released because his ability to fight it is dwindling away rapidly. His disdain for his wife leads to his evil mind taking over, allowing phantoms that ‘live’ in the hotel to bring out the worst in him. From a viewer’s standpoint, another scene that drives fear is when Jack investigates room 237. The continual heart beat could be interpreted as the heart beat of the hotel. Danny knows its alive and hell bent on destroying the mind of Jack as scenes flash from Danny being in a state of terror, and Jack seeing a naked woman in the bathtub. From here Jack becomes corrupted by the phantoms in the hotel and is more or less forced to carry out the duty of killing his family.

In my opinion, the most horrific scene in the film begins with Danny writing “REDRUM” on the door. Wendy is awoken by a screeching noise coming from Danny screaming ‘redrum.’ Immediately following this, the viewer hears the pounding of Jack’s axe on the door. Characterization, cinematography, and sound all gives this scene a sense of nothing but fear and terrifies the viewer in thinking this is the end for Jack’s family. Jack’s insanity is also accompanied by his spirited tone of voice when breaking down the doors. Camera angles are used extremely well in this scene by following the axe to every hit it brings to the door. Also Wendy’s fear is explicitly depicted when the axe finally breaks through and the only objects in the shot are the axe and Wendy’s terrified person.

Of all the horror movies made, I feel this scene is one the best at showing true terror and fear. Jack Nicholson is amazing at portraying insanity with his body language and best of all, his voice. Throughout the movie, the musical score contained that eerie and ominous feeling of something bad could or will happen. Leading in to this notion of fear was the ever constant heart beat. This was used as a sort of transition in the music from being eerie and gloomful, to being nothing but terror. Finally, the ending of the movie couldn’t have been done better, with Jack left lost in the maze screaming for Wendy and Danny so he could finish the job, but never getting the opportunity to as he becomes frozen in the snow with that same glossy-eyed look on his face.

William Harris: Response on The Exorcist

2006-02-23T18:13:00.000-05:00

WILLIAM R HARRIS
ENG281 LOOKING AT MOVIES

Thursday

6:30-9:15

Teacher: Mr. Michael Benton

Critical Response
“THE EXORCIST”
1973
Focusing on
SOUND
Directed by William Friedkin
Written by William Peter Blatty

The scope of this movie consists of an ancient superstition, regarding an ultimate evil that opposes good, which can possess a human being while giving that person supernatural characteristics of bodily contortions, multi timbre voicing, an ability to defy gravity, use telepathy, and forms of telekinetic activity. This evil that has possession of a 13-year-old girl can only be removed through the act of an “Exorcism”. These Exorcisms are most notably performed by an Exorcist Priest by the Rules of the Catholic Church, and apparently not practiced anymore. And if it is, then it is overall kept in the background, much like a “Dirty Secret”.

This movies mise-en-scene relies heavily on the physical and perceptual characteristics of the Soundtrack- The Pitch/frequency, loudness/amplitude, and quality/harmonic constitution. The complex Diegetic and non-Diegetic sound designs help create the verisimilitude of realism that is as unnatural and disturbing as one might think it would be during an assault on our senses while experiencing a real life exorcism; but could some of these complex created sound designs represent a reflection of sounds or feelings we find only in our deepest darkest dreams, or some form of natural rhythm to our psyche? And like a painter inspired by the dream world that creates an image that we might identify with; the master sound designer goal is to create or replicate sound interpretations that reflect emotional states of our dream world, or collective subconscious.

What ever the case is…it’s beyond the scope of this paper! With out a doubt the damn movie is scary-as-hell, even if you’re not watching the cinematography from frame to frame. There is a “deep focus” on sounds that demand to be anything but normal, both onscreen and off-screen. The postproduction sound montage of asynchronous overlapping or multi-layered voicing (representing both internal and external sound), reverse language, and muffled dialogue; consists of an overall an ambiguous nature, while maintaining a high quality of texture.

Some examples of the use Diegetic sounds within the montage help create an awareness of both the spatial and the temporal dimensions of the shot; and where the sounds emanate off-screen during sequences consisting of both the mothers curiosity about the noises in the attic, and the distant sounds that emanate from young girls space, demands and guides our attention. While not actually having to be in the room with her we still have a sense of the characters relative position. As the frames take us closer to the door we hear what lurks beyond and this awareness of sound allows for a nice continuity of edits and shot between rooms. We know that the evil is isolated within the young girl, and her room; but do find ourselves a little misdirected at times by the sounds emanating from the unnerving dark attic, which many can identify as being a little creepy.

The sources of Diegetic, onscreen, synchronous sounds, during production of the outdoor scenes reflect the sound technology level during the early 70’s, especially while listening to the ambient sound recordings poor quality. Notice that during those scenes the any of the traffic and back ground noises are actual, and not artificially placed, which doesn’t allow for a deep focus, but only a narrow shallow control of sound that loses part of the verisimilitude by today’s standards. During the 1970’s technological sound advances allowed films to start a trend of focusing on the overall use of sound as a narrative tool. Before the 1970’s it wasn’t cost efficient to create the level of sound quality found in say, “Citizen Kane”. But as an early 70’s example THE Exorcist demonstrates the power of sound with new technology.

The film consists of dialogue only with no narration. The non-Diegetic off-screen music is dark and dramatic. Silence sees to be used mostly around the troubled priest. From my point of view I found this film the most disturbing film I’ve ever seen in regards to the unnatural that still actually creates a realism, that seems to real!

Jeffrey Blevins: The House of Flying Daggers

2006-02-23T18:05:00.000-05:00

Jeffrey Blevins

Molecular interaction can be one of the most complex things which is graspable by the human mind. The only thing which is more complicated would be, theoretically, infinity. An infinite universe is a concept which is most probably impossible, yet within imagination it takes on a value, which while noticeable (we can perceive it) is completely undecipherable. Our minds, while extremely agile and prehensile, cannot even begin to make sense out of something which is so large, that it might as well be nothing. Molecules and atoms, however, are much nicer. Theoretically an atom can only be so small, and theoretically one day we’re going to find the smallest piece of matter possible, this is graspable. The idea produces quantifiable and manageable results, while at the same time maintaining the integrity of its own system.

I would say that, in this way, House of Flying Daggers is just short of ungraspable. The director has such a love for, and attention to, detail that we almost get swept away and put off by the overused and over-savory colors. Every leaf becomes a molecule and every scene therefore becomes barely decipherable. We feel like scientists or photographers, watching a planned experiment through neutron microscopes and massive magnifying glasses. Out of a choice of two nothings, infinity or zero, which both produce undefined data and behave strangely under fraction bars and radicals, the director chose zero, or close to it. And the important thing to notice hear, as I’ve said, is that zero is so close to infinity that there might as well be no difference. Over attention to detail, while it functions well within a quantifiable system (plot, landscape, characters) is just shy of being chaos and utter madness beyond anything that we could ever, ever, make sense of.

A scene might be set up like this. A far off shot, perhaps a slight pan to the left or right, very indistinct. Three levels, background, a mid-ground, and a foreground. The background is usually a sheet of steely clouds or a very fake looking blue. Our mid-ground is a forest, and since this film takes place in autumn (coincidentally), it gives our director the excuse to make every single tree a different color, which also all look fake. It looks so fake, in fact, that it probably turns out that its real and this is so mind blowing that its riveting. Every leaf, in this sort of landscape, seems important. In fact when you look at something like this, like a great work of art, the most important thing is often what you see first, which is why artists use focal points. This mid-ground is what you see first, but the director gives us nothing to focus on; instead we have a wall of overly colored trees, and not only that all of the trees have the same color value. Our eyes want to watch every tree at once. The yellows are competing with the reds and at the same time every little leaf makes us want to cry.

The foreground depends on the distance of the camera. At the end fight scene the director edits in some very fake snow (because it is coincidentally autumn) . Like every leaf, every flake jumps out at us and we over-analyze. The ground, while it is white now, still, somehow, possesses qualities of color, shadows and dips. Or perhaps the absence of shadow, which can be even more startling. And in a coup de grace, we even get a scene where there are both multicolored Dr.
Seuss trees, snowflakes galore, a very detailed field, and a sky which is both fake blue and spotted with fake steely clouds. Gee wiz.

Sounds are composed of molecules. A sound wave is created by the waves emitted from our vocal cords hitting air molecules in succession. These molecules bump into the next molecules which bump into the next which eventually thump around on our ear drums. If visually this film was over-done, audibly it was a masterpiece. Our director was the picture of subtlety. The flish of the arrows, the swish of the swords, I can’t even remember the music. What was important here was the simple molecules. The drip drops of sound that our director weaved in. These sounds inspire one to onomatopoeia. They are so perfect for the characters that they almost begin to work with the scenes. They undercut and, unfortunately, exemplify how lacking the scenes really are for imagination.

The highlight of the film, sound, begins to also open doors up into the characters’ personalities. That’s a topic for a different paper though.

Elizabeth Givens: Response to The Exorcist

2006-02-20T23:31:00.000-05:00

The Exorcist
Elizabeth Givens

In the beginning of the film there is a bit of foreshadowing. We begin with Father Merrin, who is in Iraq, and here a few strange things happen. There is a scene where the wild dogs are fighting and then the scene where he has his confrontation with the statue of Pazuzu. These things allow us to feel that something bad will happen. The film then jumps to the beginning of our story.

It takes place in Washington D.C. where we meet all of the characters. Regan is a normal twelve year old girl who lives with her mother, a famous actress, and her father who is away on business. Regan’s favorite toy is her Ouija board, and this game has introduced her to a new friend by the name of Captain Howdy. This hints that the movie will cover the supernatural. Regan begins hearing strange noises, talking obscenely, and experiencing tantrums and seizures. Then, she gets worse, and ends up killing her baby sister. After strange changes in Regan’s personality appear as odd, her mother has lots of doctors check her out, and the final doctor insists that she seek someone to perform an exorcism. This is when Father Karras is introduced. Father Karras is a priest who has just lost his mother, and is doubting his faith. He is also a psychiatrist who has knowledge of exorcisms, but has never performed one. After he is asked to help the little girl, he turns to his superior and they call upon Father Merrin to perform the exorcism.

When watching this film, I noticed the sounds as being key to the film. The sounds help to make the movie more suspenseful and horrifying. The sounds in the film are intensified due to the fact that there is little background noise. Every small noise is prominent and almost makes you feel anxious and uneasy. Inside their home, things are quiet. You can hear the sounds of tea cups clanking together and the metal spoons hitting against the cups only make you more nervous. Something bad could happen at any moment. Inside their home, you can hear everything; footsteps seems louder than they really are, and the sound of furniture moving across the wood floors is kind of creepy. Every sound seems so sensitive. When we are subjected to Regan when she is possessed, the noises that she makes are unforgettable. Her voice is demonic and deep almost like an old man. The sound of her vomit appears more sick than it should be, because you can hear every splash and splatter. All of these sounds make the movie more disturbing and horrifying. And when she makes her head turn, you can focus in on every crackling sound that her neck is making. After she has defeated Father Merrin, and Father Karras runs into the room, there is a focus shot on the holy water that is now dripping onto the floor. In this scene you can actually hear the water, drip fpr drip.

And towards the end of the film, we are introduced to some other sounds that create intensity. When something bad is about to happen, we hear these short orchestrated instrumental sound clips, like a loud piano key being played over and over. The keys pound as the story leads up to something horrible happening. And after everything is over and the possession is rid of thanks to Father Karras, the last scene, to me, was extremely odd by being somewhat perfect. It was if nothing had ever happened. They are leaving the empty house and the day is bright, birds are chirping, dogs are barking, there is the sound of kids playing, and the sound of cars going by. And I see a symbolism as they drive away and leave this white house behind them. Everything will be fine.

Daniel Kaplan: Response to The Exorcist

2006-02-20T12:01:00.000-05:00

Daniel Kaplan

The Exorcist

The Exorcist, undoubtedly the scariest movie of all time. Even though The Exorcist was first introduced to the public in 1973, it still scares people to this
day. The Exorcist is a riveting tale based on true events about a girl possessed by a demon, and the struggles of her mom and the church to rid her body of this demon.

In an opening scene with very little dialogue, the story is set in a way no other movie has. As the editor made cuts the sound is very different. You actually hear the next scene before you see it visually. Before we actually see welders working, we hear them thru ought the scene before. It’s a very interesting technique, but I’m not sure if it was done on purpose or not.

I believe one of the strongest scenes in the movie happens in the beginning. We see Father Maron going back to the dig site, to confront an ancient enemy. We
then become aware of the demon Pizzuzu. In a shot where it shows the Father and a statue of the demon face to face, symbolically represents the upcoming face off between good and evil. We hear dogs barking in the background, which represent chaos, and the sound of what feels like nails on a chalkboard. This scene is very important to the film, and is a great way to introduce the demon we will later see. As this scene ends in a shot of the sundown, it dissolves to present day Georgetown.

The first scene in which the main characters of the movie are introduced is a scene in which the mother is working on a movie script late at night and hears a
noise coming from the attic. She checks on her little girl only to find her sleeping peacefully. Again sound plays a big part in this scene as well. The sound coming from the attic is overshadowing the rest of the sound in the shot, which makes it sound louder than it really is, and is meant to scare you.

When the theme song is introduced is another great scene. It is an idyllic scene in which the mother walks home from her movie set on a beautiful fall afternoon. Although the scene is very calm, and the mother is peacefully walking, the theme song in the background makes it a very dark scene. This makes for a great contrast and again proves just how scary this film really is, when it can be so beautiful and scary at the same time. I believe this scene is for people watching the movie for a second or third time. When you hear this theme music for the first time it reminds you of the upcoming scenes.

A very interesting sound effect used in the movie is the dialogue of the possessed little girl. A very scary voice is dubbed over the little girl’s to represent the demon talking. You know that you’re looking at the demon when you hear this voice, which speaks in Latin, and various characters that have died in the film. Many voices come out of the little girl portrait many different personalities. The dub is very well done, and portraits the demon very well.

One of the most compelling battle scenes that anyone can witness, is the one in which the two priests take on the possessed little girl. A very scary yet religious scene, with one of the most powerful phrases used in a film. The priests repeatedly say “The Power of Christ Compels You.” At first the movie portraits evil winning, but both of the priests sacrifice their lives to save the little girl.

This movie is very well done, from the opening scene to the end; we see this battle between good and evil.

In the end good wins as it always does, but the scares that it leaves behind are deep. When we usually see evil like this we see it in ancient times, or in such
places as Salem or Transylvania, but not this movie. This movie is set in Georgetown in 1973, proving that evil can come at any time and anywhere. For this reason The Exorcist has been deemed the scariest movie of all time.

Patrick Camp: Response to Apocalypse Now

2006-02-20T11:40:00.000-05:00

Patrick Camp
T&R @ 3:30
Apocalypse Now begins with a simple narration by Capt. Willard (Martin Sheen) that is accompanied by "The End" by The Doors. This is a very interesting beginning because normally we find a movie start off with some opening credits, where as this film takes a different route. It's also a little ironic in that the songs is talking about the end of a story when ours is just beginning, however you can also take it in a way that it's the end of Capt. Willard's story/journey.

In his narration he is going over his thoughts about the Vietnam war, while getting horribly drunk. He talks about how even though he left Vietnam, it will never truly be over for him. We also begin to hear the sound of a helicopter, which turns out to be just a ceiling fan. This brings the audience into Capt. Willard's madness, how he is still in the war. The sound of the helicopter is accompanied by a super imposed montage of war scenes, one of which includes a large explosion in a jungle with no sound, almost as if these are the memories he is going over.

After this sequence there aren't very many scenes that include an off screen source of music, other than some transition scenes. Much of this films aspect really bring the viewer into it's world. The lighting is very natural, relying heavily on ambient light and the creation of natural shadows. The sound is a very natural part of Apocalypse Now as well. Most of the sounds or dialogue that you hear
come from onscreen and very story related. Other than the transition music I spoke of earlier there is very little sound to bring you out of it's world.

We do hear much off screen narration, though, by Capt. Willard's character. Sometimes as a story driving narrator and other times just hearing his thoughts on the matter. Doing this, we really get a feel for his psyche and gain an insight on the actions he takes at the end of the film.

Apocalypse Now is based on the novel Heart of Darkness and that is really what we see through out the film. One of my favorite parts is when Lt Cmdr. Kilgore (The irony is not lost on his name) orders for "The Flight of the Valkyries" played while he took his troops on a mission to slaughter some Vietnamese, just so he could go surfing.

While the premise for that scene is very chaotic and horrible to some the music that plays from Kilgore's chopper during the attack brings it all together almost in a ballet. From the explosions to the surf in the background, the onscreen music really pulled it all together to help create a deeper dimension to this film.

Another interesting use of onscreen music is during one of the scenes on the Chief's boat when we hear the song "Satisfaction" by The Who play on their radio. All of the crew is dancing around having a good time (while possibly surrounded by the enemy) and Capt. Willard is sitting contemplating his situation. We can understand that most of these soldiers are here to just fight the war, and they've seen nothing compared to what Capt. Willard, who is an assassin by the way, has
seen. At hearing this song though and seeing his face, we are brought back to his earlier speech about not being happy outside of the war, that the war never left him.

The ambient sounds that are evident through out the film bring the viewer in deeper as well. Instead of a soundtrack playing; we are served footsteps, waves crashing and bullets ricocheting everywhere. As stated before the only time we have an off screen source of music that really deviates from the film is during some transition scenes. When Capt. Willard is traveling back to Vietnam, during some of the more peaceful boat rides for example.

Even the last words spoken, are of Marlon Brando's character Colonel Kurtz, from an off screen narration. Two words. "The horror"..the horror. The picture fades to black, and our story finally comes to it's end.

Our Little World: The First Annual Lexington Peace Fair (May 20, 2006)

2006-02-17T23:22:00.000-05:00

(Let me know if you are interested in participating or if you need more info.)

Our Little World: The First Annual Lexington Peace Fair
May 20, 2006 from 11:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m.
The Red Mile, Lexington, Kentucky

Mission statement: We are seeking to model a joyful alternative to exploitation, corporatization, and consumerism. For our festival, we will bring together the global with the local through music, art, locally grown food, workshops, and the raising of awareness of the peaceful possibilities for a socially, ecologically, and economically sustainable future.

Sponsors: Bluegrass Community and Technical College’s Peace and Justice Coalition and Office of Multicultural Affairs, Central Kentucky Council for Peace and Justice, Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, and Community Farm Alliance

Description: Movement toward positive peace – or Earth Democracy – is the goal of our project. The “our” is Bluegrass Community and Technical College’s Peace and Justice Coalition, a student organization that has been very active since the fall of 2002. This organization has conducted a number of fundraisers to benefit other organizations (both local and global) that are doing good works. We host a speaker series every semester, as well as occasional teach-ins and other events. We have earned a good reputation at our college and in the peace/environmental community for promoting peace, social justice, and ecological sustainability.

Americans have never really known positive peace. We have either been at war, or we have been involved in the build-up for war. Because of how deeply war and the threat of war have penetrated our economy and our psyche, we think that many people are not able to conceptualize what it would really mean to live in an era of positive peace – or earth democracy. Our project is aimed at helping our citizens see the possibilities.

The aspects of our event are:

· Local food: Kentucky currently has the fourth most farms of any state but the number of farms is likely to decline as the tobacco quotas are now a thing of the past. Kentucky has an excellent environment for food production, however, and we need to better support our local farmers and farm economy. We will host a mini-farmers’ markets as well as have local vendors selling prepared local foods. We are working to avoid paper/plastic waste by using durable dishes and having dishwashing facilities.

· Local music: Kentucky is noted for its music and for its musicians. A student member, who is a musician herself (she recently received funding from the Commonwealth of Kentucky to pursue her art) will be arranging for the performances. The beauty of Kentucky music will be showcased alongside regional and global music.

· Outreach/publicity: A Kentucky artist has designed a logo for the event. Union-made T-shirts will be printed with the poster design. The logo will be integrated into all publicity for the event. A succinct publication will be produced (for distribution at the event), with the names, contact information, and brief descriptions of participants in the festival.

· Local art: We will highlight local artists and their artwork (including painting, sculpture, pottery-making and other art forms) at the event. The art will be drawn primarily from students at the University of Kentucky, with anticipated participation from other area colleges. We hope to create a “peace wall,” with pictures, biographies and other information about people who have advanced the cause of peace.

· Fair trade and socially responsible goods: Organizations such as PeaceCraft (a Berea, Kentucky company that sells fair trade items) will participate. We hope to have a local bookseller, a local/organic foods store, and other ecologically/socially responsible businesses participate.

· Workshops and educational/informational booths: In addition to the music stage, there will be an area for workshops. The workshop topics will include: the peaceful practice of yoga, sustainable living, preserving the Kentucky environment while saving energy, living a fair trade life, moving away from consumerism, composting, growing a vegetable garden, eating local and organic foods on a budget, installing a solar hot water heater. A variety of socially and ecologically-oriented non-profit organizations will be asked to set up booths, with practical information about creating a climate conducive to positive peace.

· Children for Peace: We are inviting K-12 students to answer the following question: How can you spread peace from your backyard to our little world? Under the major headings of PeaceExpressions and PeaceFutures, students will be encouraged to write an essay, poem, play, or song; make a drawing or use other media; or do some sort of science project. The entries will be due the week before the event and will be displayed at the festival. Children will have an opportunity to perform their plays or read their essays/poems to an audience.

· Getting there: We will work with local organizations to encourage people to come to the event via bicycle, or by walking.

We envision a day of fun and possibilities, where attendees will begin to see the myriad opportunities for living sanely and well in a future of our choosing. We hope that this event will become an annual one, with more and more people being exposed to – and adopting – new ways of living. We hope to play a role in reducing Lexington’s ecological footprint.

Week 6: Sound

2006-02-17T16:19:00.000-05:00

WEEK 6: Sound

Homework reading: Chapter 7 in Lookin at Movies

You might be interested in the journal Film Sound

IN CLASS FILM:

The Exorcist (William Friedkin) 1973/2000 (Director’s cut): 133 minutes

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

Apocalypse Now (Francis Ford Coppola) 1979: 153 minutes

Blazing Saddles (Mel Brooks) 1974: 93 minutes

Bride & Prejudice (Gurinder Chadha) 2004: 107 minutes

Committee (Peter Sykes) 1968: 58 minutes

Days of Heaven (Terrence Malick) 1978: 95 minutes

Do the Right Thing (Spike Lee) 1989: 120 minutes

Fight Club (David Fincher) 1999: 139 minutes

House of Flying Daggers (Yimou Zhang) 2004: 119 minutes

Jaws (Steven Spielberg) 1975: 124 minutes

Magnolia (Paul Thomas Anderson) 1999: 188 minutes

Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (Peter Weir) 2003: 138 minutes

Midnight Cowboy (John Schlesinger) 1969: 113 minutes

Monsoon Wedding (Mira Nair) 2001: 114 minutes

Platoon (Oliver Stone) 1986: 120 minutes

Raging Bull (Martin Scorsese) 1980: 129 minutes

Romeo + Juliet (Baz Luhrmann) 1996: 120 minutes

Star Wars (George Lucas) 1977: 121 minutes

Wong Kar Wai: 2046

2006-02-13T16:54:00.000-05:00

I am offering this as an extra credit opportunity--in other wrods you can write a response to it and still write another one for this week.

(Courtesy of Rob)

Michael,

It might be worth mentioning to your blog readers that -- by, obviously, some wonderfully bizarre mistake that will undoubtedly last no longer than a single week -- the Carmike 10 is apparently showing 2046, Wong Kar Wai's latest film (which is about the closest this town has come to showing a first-class international film in quite a while!).

Best, ~Rob
--------------------------------------------------------------------

They are probably testing the market, please, please, if you are going to see a film this weekend demonstrate that we want films like this (I include, of course, The Kentucky Theater's offerings)... from what I have heard though this is a uniquely visual film that would be best seen on the big screen.

Michael

Week 5: The Role of the Actor in Filmmaking

2006-02-12T21:59:00.000-05:00

Match Point is playing at the Kentucky Theater.

Homework Reading:

Ch 5: Acting in Looking at Movies

WEEK 5: The Role of the Actor in Filmmaking

IN CLASS FILM:

Tuesday/Thursday Class:

Piano (Jane Campion) 1993: 121 minutes (Holly Hunter)

Thursday Night Class:

The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson) 2001: 109 minutes (Ensemble)

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

Adaptation (Spike Jonze) 2002: 114 minutes (Nicholas Cage--Two Characters)

American Beauty (Sam Mendes) 1999: 122 minutes (Ensemble)

Badlands (Terrence Malick) 1973: 95 minutes (Martin Sheen/Sissy Spacek)

The Big Lebowski (The Coen Brothers) 1998: 117 minutes (Ensemble)

Boogie Nights (Paul Thomas Anderson) 1997: 156 minutes (Ensemble)

Boys Don’t Cry (Kimberly Peirce) 1999: 118 minutes (Hillary Swank)

Boyz n the Hood (John Singleton) 1991: 107 minutes (Ensemble)

Breaking the Waves (Lars von Triers) 1996: 153 minutes (Emily Watson)

Cast Away (Steven Spielberg) 2000: 143 minutes (Tom Hanks)

The Color Purple (Steven Spielberg) 1985: 154 minutes (Ensemble)

The Cuckoo (Aleksandr Rogozhkin) 2002: 99 minutes (Ensemble)

Dead Man Walking (Tim Robbins) 1995: 122 minutes (Sean Penn)

Dead Ringers (David Cronenberg) 1988: 115 minutes (Jeremy Irons--two characters)

Dog Day Afternoon (Sydney Lumet) 1975: 124 minutes (Al Pacino)

Do the Right Thing (Spike Lee) 1989: 120 minutes (Ensemble)

Edward Scissorhands (Tim Burton) 1990: 105 minutes (Johnny Depp)

Ed Wood (Tim Burton) 1994: 127 minutes (Johnny Depp/Ensemble)

The Elephant Man (David Lynch) 1980: 124 minutes (John Hurt)

Fargo (The Coen Brothers) 1996: 98 minutes (Ensemble)

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (Terry Gilliam) 1998: 118 minutes (Johnny Depp/Benicio Del Toro)

Forrest Gump (Robert Zemeckis) 1994: 142 minutes (Tom Hanks)

Gandhi (Richard Attenborough) 1982: 188 minutes (Ben Kingsley)

Gosford Park (Robert Altman) 2001: 137 minutes (Ensemble)

Happiness (Todd Solondz) 1998: 134 minutes (Ensemble)

I Heart Huckabees (David O. Russell) 2004: 106 minutes (Ensemble)

Leaving Las Vegas (Mike Figgis) 1995: 111 minutes (Nicholas Cage)

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (Wes Anderson) 2004: 119 minutes (Ensemble)

The Lonely Passion of Judith Hearne (Jack Clayton) 1987: 110 minutes (Maggie Smith)

Magnolia (Paul Thomas Anderson) 1999: 188 minutes (Ensemble)

Malcolm X (Spike Lee) 1992: 202 minutes (Denzel Washington)

The Man Who Wasn’t There (The Coen Brothers) 2001: 116 minutes (Billy Bob Thornton)

Match Point (Woody Allen) 2005: 124 minutes (Ensemble)

Midnight Cowboy (John Schlesinger) 1969: 113 minutes (Dustin Hoffman/Jon Voight)

Million Dollar Baby (Clint Eastwood) 2004: 132 minutes (Hillary Swank/Clint Eastwood/Danny Glover)

Millions (Danny Boyle) 2004: 98 minutes (Ensemble)

Monsoon Wedding (Mira Nair) 2001: 114 minutes (Ensemble)

Monster Ball (Marc Forster) 2001: 112 minutes (Halle Berry/Billy Bob Thornton)

Mystic River (Clint Eastwood) 2003: 137 minutes (Sean Penn/Tim Robbins)

Napoleon Dynamite (Jared Hess) 2004: 86 minutes (Ensemble)

O Brother, Where Art Thou (The Coen Brothers) 2000: 106 minutes (Ensemble)

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (Milos Forman) 1975: 133 minutes (Jack Nicholson/Louise Fletcher)

Piano (Jane Campion) 1993: 121 minutes (Holly Hunter)

The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie (Ronald Neame) 1969: 116 minutes (Maggie Smith)

Raging Bull (Martin Scorsese) 1980: 129 minutes (Robert DeNiro/Joe Pesci)

Raising Arizona (The Coen Brothers) 1987: 94 minutes (Nicholas Cage)

Requiem for a Dream (Darren Aronofsky) 2000: 102 minutes (Ensemble)

Rumble in the Bronx (Stanley Tong) 1996: 91 minutes (Jackie Chan--martial art/action acting)

The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson) 2001: 109 minutes (Ensemble)

Rushmore (Wes Anderson) 1998: 93 minutes (Ensemble)

Sexy Beast (Jonathan Glazer) 2000: 89 minutes (Ben Kingsley)

Silence of the Lambs (Jonathan Demme) 1991: 118 minutes (Jodie Foster/Anthony Hopkins)

Slam (Marc Levin) 1998: 100 minutes (Saul Williams)

Sling Blade (Billy Bob Thornton) 1996: 135 minutes (Billy Bob Thornton/Lukas Black)

Sophie’s Choice (Alan J. Pakula) 1982: 150 minutes (Meryl Streep)

Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese) 1976: 113 minutes (Robert De Niro)

Traffic (Steven Soderbergh) 2000: 142 minutes (Ensemble)

Trainspotting (Danny Boyle) 1996: 94 minutes (Ensemble)

Transamerica (Duncan Tucker) 2005: 103 minutes (Felicity Huffman)

Austin Traut's Oscar Picks

2006-02-12T07:03:00.000-05:00

From: Austin Traut, Tues/Thurs 330-445

Best Picture: Brokeback Mountain
Best Actor: Heath Ledger
Best Actress: Reese Witherspoon
Best Director: Ang Lee
Best Supporting Actor: Matt Dillon
Best Supporting Actress: Rachel Weisz

Darbyshire Scholarship

2006-02-12T07:02:00.000-05:00

KENTUCKY CAREER DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION
DARBYSHIRE SCHOLARSHIP

The Darbyshire Scholarship was established in 1993 by the Kentucky Career Development Association to honor David Darbyshire, a counselor and financial aide officer who lost his life in a tragic accident. This is a $500 scholarship award for the Fall 2006 semester to be applied toward tuition costs. The recipient of the award must meet the following criteria: enrolled at a KCTCS College in a career or technical program (AAS Degree or Diploma – not AA Degree or AS Degree), completed at least 25 credit hours at a KCTCS College by the end of the Spring 2006 semester, minimum 3.0 cumulative GPA, and proven unmet financial need verified by the financial aid office at the KCTCS College.
This scholarship application packet must be submitted by Friday, March 31st, 2006 to Beverly Martin, KCDA Secretary & Treasurer, Big Sandy Community and Technical College, One Bert Combs Drive, Prestonsburg, KY 41653 or fax to 1-606-886-6943.

SCHOLARSHIP APPLICATION PACKET must include the following from the student:
_____ Completed Scholarship Application
_____ Unofficial transcript of all college classes (both KCTCS college and other colleges)
_____ One Reference Letter from Advisor or Faculty Member to verify enrollment in a career or technical program and anticipated graduation date
_____ One Reference Letter from another Faculty Member
_____ Short Essay (up to 250 words) which includes student’s career plan, financial situation, family situation, and work situation

Student’s Name:_____________________________ Student (PeopleSoft) ID #:__________________

Address:_________________________________________ Home Phone #:_____________________

City:____________________________________________ School Phone #:____________________

State & Zip Code:__________________________________

College Attending:____________________________________

Program / Major:______________________________________

* By signing below, I give permission for KCDA to access my academic and financial aid information at any KCTCS College:

Student’s Signature:_________________________________ Date:____________________

To be completed by the financial aide office at your KCTCS college:

• Amount of total financial aid (PELL, CAP, FSEOG Grants, etc.) this student will receive for the Fall 2006 semester:_________________________
• Amount of other scholarship awards (KEES, institutional and external) and third party payments (Voc. Rehab, WIA, TAA, etc.) this student will receive:______________________
• Amount of unmet financial need for this student for Fall 2006 semester:___________________

Signature of financial aide officer at the college:__________________________ Date:________

Brittany Bennett: Se7en

2006-02-09T14:49:00.000-05:00

Brittany Bennett
English 281- TH
The Cinematography of Se7en

The movie Se7en (1995) is a very complex and suspenseful film to watch. The film is based around two homicide police detectives investigating gruesome murders that all connect to the seven deadly sins: gluttony, greed, sloth, lust, pride, envy, and wrath. Se7en breaks away from other suspense-mysteries in that you know that there are for sure seven deaths, but only five of the sins are acted upon which leaves the viewer wondering how the film will portray the last two.

This movie was filmed with, I think, the intention to make the viewer feel like they are part of the homicide detective team led by William Somerset (Morgan Freeman) and David Mills (Brad Pitt). In one particular scene Mills and Somerset are driving in their police car; Somerset is driving and Mills is in the passenger seat. The camera was placed in the back seat in the middle like you were sitting there and a part of the conversation. In my opinion it makes the viewer more eager to find out who did it, because the way the cameras are used makes you feel more involved. I also noticed that in many scenes of the movie, the camera is positioned low so that it looks up at the actor. I’m not exactly sure why the film’s cinematographer, Darius Khondji, chose to shoot it this way but for some reason it works and it’s used quite frequently throughout the film.

Another scene that comes to mind is towards the end of the movie when Mills and Somerset are driving John Doe to the deserted (it’s literally in a desert) location where the supposed last two bodies are. Mills and John Doe are in a heated discussion and when the camera is focused upon John Doe, the bars from the patrol car are shown in front of his face. But the thing about this is that both if his eyes and his mouth are almost flawlessly shown with no cage bar in front of them. I think this is sort of saying that even though there are bars between them, John Doe is still going to get to Mills in the end and in a way, win.

Three of the five murder scenes were shot in dark rooms with little or no light shining through from windows. These were the gluttony, sloth, and lust scenes. The other two murder scenes, pride and greed, were shot in bright rooms with many windows, white walls, ect. I think they were shot like this to sort of associate the sins with social class. The very obese man, the drug-dealer, and the hooker were all killed in rooms that are dark and dreary therefore reflecting their sins and perhaps hiding them from the outside because they are shameful and embarrassing lifestyles to live. The lawyer and the beautiful girl were killed in the environment they were more accustomed to, because they flaunted their sins proudly to the outside world.

Perhaps one of the greatest crime thrillers of all time, Se7en never fails to catch my attention each and every time I watch it. I still get chills on my arms when I see the perfect expression on Morgan Freeman’s face when he opens the box that was delivered to their location promptly at 7:00pm. Does John Doe win in the end by getting the best of Mills or is Mills the hero by eventually committing a deadly sin (wrath) to avenge his newly deceased wife and their unborn child (the child he didn’t even know he had)? I can never decide.

Christina Hudson: The Constant Gardener

2006-02-09T14:38:00.000-05:00

Christina Hudson: Response to The Constant Gardener

The most notable and striking qualities of this film lies in the effects of color and lighting. The initial scenes depict bright light and a correlating suggestion of scorching heat. The African scenery is vibrant and obscure and even suffocating in its crowded streets which are alight with bold, contrasting colors that fill the shots with a fitting sense of activity and chaos. The many flashbacks Justin experiences of Tessa, after he learns of her death, are flooded with light and offer audience members a look at the pure, albeit enigmatic, love that the couple share. In contrast, the scenes in which Justin appears alone and in England depict a sullen and confining feeling which is heavily accentuated with many varying grey or dull shades used for the sets.

In my opinion, the appearance of greenery was well-constructed, The subtle suggestion used to attach Tessa's mysterious but beautiful life are initiated early and used frequently, thereby creating a familiarity and a physical reminder of the liveliness of Tessa, as well as her various types of separation from Justin. Quite obviously, Justin is in a world apart from that of the plants he devotes so much of his time into nurturing. Similarly, Tessa creates a wide rift in her relationship with Justin and ultimately departs from his physical world.
Justin's initial acceptance of her death further attaches the viewer's mind to Tessa as the formerly living embodiment of Justin's plants; he destroys one of the buds.

Africa seems, at first, a place of friendly, happy individuals whose hearts are as free and vibrant as the clothing upon their bodies. However, as the many layers of the conspiracy are peeled away and physically realized on screen, Africa's colors seem a pitiful charade to the helpless nature of many suffering and destitute people. "Survival of the fittest" seems the adopted motto donned by the British officials who hypocritically dub their victims as dark and barbaric.

Because the cameras used to shoot the scenes of the movie are hand-held, the feelings of both trust and conspiracy are allotted a heightened sense of realism.
The touching scenes of Tessa in Africa seem very believable in their documentary-like style and provide not only the characters but also the story a more life-like appeal. On the other hand, the surveillance and voyeurism are also given more depth because of the varying shots used for many of the scenes. The camera directs different qualities of attention towards the characters Justin and Tessa, often looking in on Justin from afar or framing him with the background in order to direct attention to his feelings of isolation from his wife. Tessa is made to seem more vulnerable and mysterious through some of the shots which place her leaning against a door frame for support or hiding her face behind such obstructions.

Up until the point where many mysterious shrouds are lifted from Tessa, it is nearly impossible to associate with her, rather than Justin, despite her obviously good intentions. Justin seems cheated out of his potential time with Tessa and is hopelessly frustrated with the lack of intimacy between them, despite her pregnancy with their child. He seems nothing less than a devoted husband and her elusive, time-consuming work and suspicious behavior creates a barrier between the audience members and Tessa, alleviated only by the gradual revelations the plot offers through Justin's perseverance to find the cause and reason behind his wife's untimely and gruesome death.

The sound or, more accurately, lack thereof, in the scene demonstrating Justin's demise was very clever. I think it fair to say that the expectancy to hear the gunshots which ended Justin's life was immense and the effect of cutting to a scene of birds flying away created an artist and unusual dimension to the ending.
Despite the sadness and despair associated with the loss of Justin, the manner in which the director chose to depict the scene created a contrasting pull of emotion; the viewers are happy that Justin is allowed, once more, to be with Tessa, whose efforts he finally and fully comprehends.

I found this film extremely enticing and very surprising. The effect of true surprise adds to the quality of the movie and keeps viewers intrigued and even desperate to learn more, much as one reading a suspenseful mystery novel might anticipate the next turn of a page.

Cheryl Rogers: Se7en

2006-02-09T14:30:00.000-05:00

Response to Se7en
Cheryl Rogers

As I scrolled through this week’s film choices I stumbled upon the movie Se7en. I had seen the movie during its theatrical release and while I thought it to be a great film I didn’t remember anything being distinctive or memorable about its cinematography. So I chose to take another look at it. What I found is that Se7en is a unique, visual masterpiece. Not because of its use of colors or artistic landscapes but rather being quite the opposite. The whole movie is shot in dark, grayish tones with low contrast until the end where we see the sun for the first time. Then I started to wonder if maybe that was the intent of the Director.

The whole movie is about sin and all that is wrong in this world. What better way to represent that than darkness. Throughout most of the movie it is rainy, gloomy, dark and depressing. The city adds to this portrayal of despair with all the dingy rooftops and dirty streets. All of this plays into the fact that we live in a horrible world filled with envy, sloth, gluttony, wrath, pride, lust, and greed. We really get a sense of just how dark and demented life truly is. We are taken in by the dark and twisted soul of all human kind.

Throughout the film the killer John Doe is toying with Mills and Somerset, the two detectives in charge of the investigation. He leaves them clues that only lead to more questions than answers. There’s a part in the film when the detectives seemingly stumble on to the serial killer at the steps of one of the crime scenes but it is so dark that we are fail to see the person. We later find out that he was in fact the killer.

The lights at the crime scenes are very dim and the detectives still have to use their flashlights. For example when they go into the gluttony victim’s apartment and even though there is a lamp turned on in the background they still have to use their flashlights. The lighting at the killer’s apartment was almost non-existent. We see darkness and the color red from a huge cross that illuminates over his bed. While still searching through his things Detective Mills finds pictures of the victims, and as he flashes his light upon them it starts to act up and go dim. We see a bit more light when the detectives are away from the crime scenes. For instance when Somerset arrives for dinner at Mills apartment and his wife opens the door; his apartment is full of lamp light.

The darkness technique works to set the mood of the movie. From the beginning you are uncertain about what is going on. You’re kept in the dark, so to speak, about who or why, not knowing anymore than the detectives. With each death you became more and more baffled. But as the story unfolds and all questions are answered during the movies climactic end you sense that this is what was intended. During the film at one of the crime scenes the detectives find a note stating “Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light,” which is a glimpse by the killer of the things to come. He’s basically telling the detectives and the viewers that we will eventually have all the questions answered. At the conclusion of the movie when Doe has been caught and we feel we have all the answers, he leads them to a desolate field, where ironically the rain has stopped and the sun is shining. Here he puts to rest all questions and finishes his deed of ridding the world of its darkness by completing the final two sins.

Mandy Margolen's Oscar Picks

2006-02-07T14:42:00.000-05:00

My Oscar picks are:

Best Picture: Brokeback Mountain
Best Actor: Philip Seymour Hoffman for Capote
Best Actress: Reese Witherspoon for Walk the Line
Best Director: Ang Lee for Brokeback Mountain
Best Supporting Actor: William Hurt for A History of Violence
Best Supporting Actress: Rachel Weisz for The Constant Gardner

What is Essential in Your Textbook Readings?

2006-02-07T14:14:00.000-05:00

I felt this was an important question so I'm going to reproduce it for everyone.

Mandy asked:

What exactly are we suppose to be focusing on in the reading assignments? I know that the terminology is important but what about dates and specific people? What about film examples in the textbook? Any guidance would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

My answer:

The terminology is the key ... also use the questions at the end of the chapters to assess your understanding of the chapter.

Its good that you are exposed to the different people and films, but it is too much for you to remember for a test (so I wouldn't expect you to memorize those materials).

Always feel free to ask questions if you are having difficulties with any of the terminology.

Michael

ENG 281 Oscar's Contest

2006-02-07T08:50:00.000-05:00

In one of my two classes we were talking about the Oscars and I gave a challenge for everyone. Choose the Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actress, and Best Supporting Actor. Send your choices to me to be posted on this site. Then if you successfully choose all of them correctly I will count it as one of your responses (its a lot more difficult than it sounds)

Feel free to explain your choices if you are so inclined...

WEEK 4: Cinematography

2006-02-04T12:09:00.000-05:00

Homework: Read Ch. 4 in your textbook

Ghost Dog is available at the circulation desk of the library under our class name; Munich and New World are playing in theaters.

If you are ever confused about which film you might want to watch--leave a message in the comments telling me what you are looking for and I will try to direct you accordingly.

Likewise, remember, if you have questions about your readings, you can also ask questions here...

WEEK 4: Cinematography

IN CLASS FILM:

The Constant Gardener (Fernando Meirelles) 2005: 129 minutes

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick) 1968: 148 minutes

The Addiction (Abel Ferrara) 1995: 82 minutes

American Beauty (Sam Mendes) 1999: 122 minutes

Barry Lyndon (Stanley Kubrick) 1975: 184 minutes

Birdy (Alan Parker) 1984: 120 minutes

Blade Runner (Ridley Scott) 1982/1999 (Director’s Cut): 117 minutes

Chinatown (Roman Polanski) 1974: 131 minutes

Cries and Whispers (Ingmar Bergman) 1972: 106 minutes

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Ang Lee) 2000: 120 minutes

Days of Heaven (Terrence Malick) 1978: 95 minutes

Do the Right Thing (Spike Lee) 1989: 120 minutes

Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai (Jim Jarmusch) 1999: 116 minutes

The Graduate (Mike Nichols) 1967: 105 minutes

Jarhead (Sam Mendes) 2005: 123 minutes

Kundun (Martin Scorsese) 1997: 134 minutes

The Last Emperor (Bernardo Bertolucci) 1987: 160 minutes

Legends of the Fall (Edward Zwick) 1994: 133 minutes

The Man Who Wasn’t There (The Coen Brothers) 2001: 116 minutes

Millions (Danny Boyle) 2004: 98 minutes

Mulholland Drive (David Lynch) 2001: 147 minutes

Munich (Steven Spielberg) 2005: 164 minutes

The New World (Terrence Malick) 2005: 135 minutes

Pi: Faith in Chaos (Darren Aronofsky) 1998: 84 minutes

Rabbit Proof Fence (Philip Noyce) 2002: 94 minutes

Raging Bull (Martin Scorsese) 1980: 129 minutes

Requiem for a Dream (Darren Aronofsky) 2000: 102 minutes

A River Runs Through It (Robert Redford) 1993: 123 minutes

Road to Perdition (Sam Mendes) 2002: 117 minutes

Rumble Fish (Francis Ford Coppola) 1983: 94 minutes

Seabiscuit (Gary Ross) 2003: 141 minutes

The Shining (Stanley Kubrick) 1980: 146 minutes

Se7en (David Fincher) 1995: 127 minutes

Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese) 1976: 113 minutes

The Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick) 1998: 170 minutes

Traffic (Steven Soderbergh) 2000: 147 minutes

A Very Long Engagement (Jean-Pierre Jeunet) 2004: 133 minutes

Jeffrey Blevins Oscar Picks

2006-02-04T08:51:00.000-05:00

best picture - Brokeback Mountain
best actor - Philip Seymour Hoffman (but maybe Heath Ledger)
best actress - Felicity Huffman
supporting actor - Paul Giamatti
Supporting actress - Michelle Williams (I wish it was Amy Adams but I
dont think its going to be)
director - Ang Lee

Audrey Hurley: The Mise-en-scene of Sleepy Hollow

2006-02-03T16:56:00.000-05:00

Audrey Hurley

The Mise-en-scene of Sleepy Hollow

Sleepy Hollow (1999) is a depiction of late eighteenth century events in Northern New England based on the written work by Washington Irving. The well known children’s story has been portrayed in many different ways by various artists, television shows, and even Walt Disney. The legend never seemed quite so plausible and lifelike as in Tim Burton’s film starring Johnny Depp as Ichabod Crane.

Tim Burton has what seems a passion for “the dark and the scary”. He captures very well the mood of fear and the foreboding in many of his films. The director’s name seems to run synonymous with the term “gothic” through his works such as Edward Scissorhands, The Nightmare Before Christmas (wrote, not directed), Beetlejuice, Batman, The Corpse Bride, ect…Burton’s ideal of fantasy and horror has done much to shape the general public’s view of horror and the environment from which it is created. He masterfully accomplishes this creation in Sleepy Hollow using many different elements.

Much was done in the organization, that is the composition, of this film. The framing throughout this film changes from allowing to see vast views of landscapes and cities to extreme close-ups to where just above an actors shoulders is present. The greatest depiction of kinesis throughout the frames is that of the rides of the headless horseman and his victims.

There was obviously an enormous amount of effort and work done in the design of this film. As in most historical films costumes, hairstyles, as well as settings and props were of great priority. Burton’s film put the viewer into the small town of Sleepy Hollow and into the late seventeen hundreds. This is established through these elements of design. Costumes, especially those of the female characters were primarily elaborate with rich fabrics and lace; not something someone would expect to see on all of the women of the town everyday. The weather is the greatest example of how an atmosphere of eeriness was always on the town. The use of grey and dark skies, fog, no sunlight, ect… all created and set the tone for the movie. This, when writing, is called pathetic fallacy where weather (or any inanimate object) depicts mood and emotion. Even the blood was elaborate, always being extremely thick like it had coagulated; a sign of death. There was a large amount of blood used throughout the movie and it at times would squirt unnaturally and forcefully out of bodies, even trees. While some of the design elements were not completely historically accurate, it more so allowed the town itself to seem somewhat real but a fantasy in itself. The over dramatized weather, extremely elaborate costumes, and use of blood brought the viewer into the legend rather than make the legend seem historically true.

Color plays a very important role in this film. There is the grey and dreary skies of the outside compared to the warm and inviting colors of the party Ichabod finds when first arriving in town. Red is another color portrayed throughout the film to have significance. Blood by obvious example as well as the cardinal and clothing worn. The headless horseman dons an outfit of all black with a cape as well as Ichabod’s father; an evil man who murdered his wife through religious conviction. These two (the horseman and Ichabod’s father) seem to have the same form as young Ichabod views his father walking away. The color used in Ichabod’s dreams about his mother are also quite different from his present situation. His dreams contain whimsical pastels, vibrant blue (his mother’s dress), and an orchard of pink weeping cherry blossom trees. The church is a pure and unnatural white, almost blinding to the eyes only in contrast to view the room behind the pulpit a dark and ominous grey filled with methods of torture and Ichabod’s dead mother. Ichabod, himself, wears black maybe indicating his seriousness or as a sign of his mourning and his nightmares.

The film Sleepy Hollow also had elements within it that can be considered symbolic or have a higher meaning. Magistrate Phillips’s talisman of protection ( an “ankh” the Egyptian symbol of life) does little or better yet nothing to save his life. The Bible seen throughout the movie also portrays an image of heaviness and overbearing in nature due to it’s size and bulk. On contrast, Katrina’s book of spirituality and spells is small, bright blue in color, and able to be held close to the heart (saving Ichabod’s life by stopping a bullet). Even nature and the dead trees seem to further show the lack of life and luster the town holds and how death has overcome it. Throughout the film are sinister looking jack-o-laterns again a depiction of evil.

The film, Sleepy Hollow, while based on the classic legend, deviates from the original story. The storyline portrayed contains many concepts and themes such as greed, revenge, the question of spirituality, and love. Tim Burton has created a fantasy world yet again in Sleepy Hollow. He captures the sense of evil and eeriness accompanied with a story such as this through having a consistent mise-en-scene using all of the elements of design.

Daniel Mandel-Anthony: Chinatown

2006-02-03T16:44:00.000-05:00

Daniel Mandel-Anthony
Chinatown

Chinatown sets you up. At first you think it’s going to be a good, if somewhat expected film noir mystery, but the movie goes in a different direction, not an entirely different direction, just sufficiently different that it becomes a great film. Chinatown is a mystery of sorts, but the point of the movie isn’t the mystery, as we see in the end. The cinematography is flawless in the film; it gives a firm sense of reality. The movie Chinatown is a perfect example of its own Chinatown metaphor. Throughout the movie we aren’t sure who’s good and who’s bad.

One of the first things I noticed about this movie that was strange, that deviated from the norm, was its use of the water company with power and corruption. When you think “power,” and “money,” water isn’t the first thing that springs to mind, which is not say that was invalid, just that was unexpected. The movie, in several places, hoodwinks your expectations. One of the key characters is a beautiful woman who walks into Jack Nicholson’s, private eye office, dressed up and acting as we would expect a woman in private eye movies to be dressed up. She is sexy and mysterious. But later in the movie we find that she is actually a dynamic character, not just a typecast, and we see the reasons behind her earlier actions. Mrs. Mullray is just trying to save her daughter\sister (yeah, incest) from her rapist father (don’t read that if you haven’t seen this movie). Mrs. Mullray’s father is also an interesting character. He is a gentle old man, who seems genuinely concerned for others’ wellbeing. This makes him all the scarier, since on the inside he is the most evil and powerful person in the film.

Throughout the movie, there are very few, perhaps three or four, allusions to Chinatown. In a bit of foreshadowing, Jack Nicholson says that in Chinatown, he was trying to save someone and actually ended up making sure she was killed. This is the essence of “Chinatown.” In Chinatown, says Jack, as a policeman the policy was to do as little as possible. The policemen just didn’t get involved. Chinatown is a metaphor. It represents a situation in which you can’t tell who the good guy is and who the bad guy is. In Chinatown, since everyone spoke different dialects, if you got involved you might end up helping the robber or apprehending him. Once I realized this I looked back on the movie and saw how it fit. In Chinatown, Jack is constantly going back and forth between who he thinks is the bad guy and who the good guy. It’s interesting to note that Chinatown isn’t just a metaphor. When I watched an interview with the writer on the special features, he said that a cop formerly stationed in Chinatown actually gave him the idea.

The film has a sense of reality to it. Every scene has space to breathe. Jack Nicholson annoying a secretary by simply waiting in the office leisurely walking around and asking her questions until she finally gets him what he wants is one example. The cinematography is also wonderful. All the shots are aesthetically pleasing and some really convey a meaning. The shots of the vast expanse of dry riverbed is one of the more obvious examples here, because the movie is driven by water and lack of water. In this movie, water is powerful; it holds sway over the lives of all the Californians. The movie has almost no music to speak of. Not even mood music. 98 percent of the film is music-less. The two parts of the movie that I remember having music are the opening credits and, more importantly, the end scene. Right after the movie’s climax, the music starts… haunting, mysterious sounding music, with more than a fair touch of sorrow in its notes.

What is the point of the story though? In the end, we are faced with the futility of Jack’s actions… he tried to save this woman as hard as he could, and in the end he only ended up making sure of her death. In the end the good guy fails and is utterly defeated, the bad guy remains all powerful and gets his daughter back (which may sound good if you haven’t seen the movie, but believe me, it’s not) In the end we are faced with the horror that is Chinatown and will continue being Chinatown. Chinatown allowed Jack to try his darndest to do the right things- help the right people, bring down the wrong people, etc. - but the confusion that is Chinatown took all of Jack’s good intentions and made them help the wrong people. In the end of the movie, Jack walks away, with the advice “Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown.”

Brian Nichols: Romeo + Juliet

2006-02-03T16:41:00.000-05:00

Brian Nichols
Romeo + Juliet

This adaptation of William Shakespeare’s classic love story Romeo and Juliet was very interesting. With the setting taking place during a time period closer to our own, I found this film was able to pull off changing certain aspects of the film to fit into our present day world, while still keeping the story integrally the same.

Obviously the dialogue in the movie was spoken differently than most modern movies; in old English of Shakespeare’s time. To keep the movie closer to the original work the choice to keep the same type of language (as well as much of the original text) I feel added to the substance of the movie. It took a few minutes to acclimate to the language, but as Buz states in his commentary, he tried to help the audience adjust by doing the prologue two different times at the beginning. The first was a newscast, followed by the use of large letter text with shots of the movie. I found this was helpful, especially the latter by showing the audience what the text was trying to say through the use of snippets from the plot.

The movie began setting up the characters right away. The gas station scene opens by setting up the two enemies the Capulets and Montagues. This scene demonstrates that the two sides hate each other by showing the audience that simply coming in contact with each other causes a problem. A few of the characters, especially Tibalt, are specifically characterized. For example, Tibalt is shown to be the rough, rowdy, and a “bad boy” who is very aggressive. This is how he is throughout the movie, and the first scene sets it up. After this scene, Romeo is shown by himself at the beach while his father and mother are wandering where he is and what he is doing. This scene shows the rebellion of Romeo from the battling that the rest of the family does with the Capulets, foreshadowing a forbidden relationship with Juliet. The audience relative to all of this sees the setup for the ‘lover boy’ persona

Color was used throughout the movie. From the guns and cars to the church, the movie had this bright and colorful aura about it. The guns were decked out with shiny silver and gold, with custom painted handles. This was to adapt the original swords to a weapon more conducive to the modern setting. Their cars and clothes were all bright, alluding to the power and wealth of each of the families. Historically bright colors such as purple were a sign of wealth.

The use of light was very evident after watching the commentary. Many day scenes were shot at night. For example, the first scene with Juliet and her mother in which they were preparing for a party was set in the morning but shot at night. Artificial lights were used to make it appear as a bright and beautiful morning, and this is seamless to the audience.

The choir was used a few times throughout the film. They served two purposes: first they were part of the setting of the church and secondly offered a musical background for the scene. Their songs replaced what could have otherwise been a symphony or other composition. This is a use of the choir that I have seen in other movies before. I like the use of a choir in this manner, as I feel it adds to the audience’s experience by adding realism to the scene.

I would classify this film as an action-romance flick. The obvious romance plot is there with Romeo and Juliet’s struggle to be with one another. Mixed in with this is the battle between the families in which people die. The action is limited, but is integral to the plot of the film. Without the violence, Mercutio would not have been killed by Tibalt, which would not have led to the murder of Tibalt by Romeo, which then would not have lead to the banishment of Romeo. Finally without the banishment of Romeo, the love act of killing themselves would not have happened between Romeo and Juliet.

I really liked this adaptation of the play. I thought the directors and script writers changed just enough of the film to make it fit into our time period, while staying true to the original play pretty well. I would really like to see other Shakespearean plays such as Oedipus done in this manner.

Cheryl Rogers: Baz Luhrmann's Romeo and Juliet

2006-02-03T16:36:00.000-05:00

Cheryl Rogers
T/R 3:30-4:45
Response to William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet

I had always found Shakespeare difficult to relate to, not only because of the difference in the language that he uses, but also because of the settings and other aesthetic differences between the world that he lived in and or wrote about and that of our modern world. Director, Baz Luhrmann’s innovative vision makes Shakespeare more accessible to modern audiences; with a style more reminiscent of Quentin Tarantino than William Shakespeare he ingeniously transforms the classic tragedy, Romeo and Juliet, into a contemporary, vibrant work of art (and violence) in his film adaptation, William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.

Luhrmann’s version uses the authentic text as its dialogue and remains loyal to the story, symbolism, and meaning of Shakespeare’s original work. The story is virtually unchanged. The streets and citizens of Verona are caught in middle of the violent, nonsensical feud between the noble Montague and Capulet families. Romeo, the hopelessly romantic son of Montague, pines for the woman he loves, Rosaline, who does not return his love. Persuaded by his cousin, Benvolio, Romeo decides to attend a masquerade party at the Capulet mansion. Once there Romeo sees Juliet, Capulet’s daughter, and instantly forgets Rosaline and becomes entranced with Juliet. Romeo talks to Juliet and the two instantly fall in love, they even kiss without knowing one another’s name. Tybalt, Juliet’s cousin, who had recently quarreled with Benvolio, recognizes Romeo and becomes outraged at the presence of the Montague. After learning that their new loves were the offspring of their families’ enemy, Romeo and Juliet decide that their love means more to them than the feud of their fathers and secretly marry. Tybalt seeks out Romeo to challenge him to a duel, Mercutio, Romeo’s best friend stands in for Romeo after he declines Tybalt’s invitation. Tybalt slays Mercutio and in his rage Romeo then kills Tybalt. Romeo is then banished from Verona. Juliet decides to leave Verona and run away with Romeo, but in order to do that she fakes her death before her impending nuptials to her father’s friend Paris. Romeo, not knowing Juliet’s plans, hears of her death goes to her crypt with a vile of poison and takes his own life. Juliet then awakes and seeing Romeo dead, then takes her own life. The bitter rivals finally end their feud, but at the cost of the lives of their beloved children.

While Luhrmann updates the setting, using a modern day Verona Beach, California as his backdrop this instantly give us a familiar place that we can visualize and it instantly creates realness to the story. We feel like this is taking place in the same world and time that we live in. Then he substitutes items used in the original work for items that they most closely resemble from our times. He uses cars in place of horses, guns instead of swords or daggers. The prologue is delivered from a T.V. news anchor reporting the tragic deaths of Romeo and Juliet as part of the local 6 o’clock news show. He cleverly substitutes LSD for the fairy that brings dreams “Queen Mab” that Mercutio speaks of before the Montague faction crashes the Capulet masquerade party. All of these modern devices add to the subterfuge and convinces the audience even further that the story is something that they can correlate to their modern world. The music used throughout the film is made up almost entirely of popular music from artists that were at their peaks at the time of the films release. This again allows the audience to relate to this story on a very personal level; the songs in the film are likely to be playing on any radio station that they tune in after watching the film. I feel that Luhrmann’s greatest departure to the story, and the biggest influence on the audience was in his style and use of cinematography. These aesthetic and stylistic changes are what truly allowed the new generation, Luhrmann’s target audience, to better relate to, understand, and most importantly visualize the story. The scene that stands out the most to me is the opening sequence. A brawl breaks out between the followers of the Montagues and Capulets at a gas station. It starts ridiculously enough with taunting and banter back and forth between the lower level followers of both sides, they draw their guns or, “swords”. Benvolio enters and draws his weapon trying to keep the peace and stop the fighting, but is embroiled when the rash Capulet, Tybalt dramatically arrives on the scene with no interest in peace and a gunfight ensues between the two sides. While Shakespeare used this scene to show the audience how deep and serious the rift between the Montagues and Capulets was, Luhrmann uses it, not only for that purpose, but also to draw his audience in to the film as a modern work. This scene is very similar to several scenes from Quentin Tarantino’s films Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and even scenes from Tarantino’s screenplays, True Romance and story for Natural Born Killers.

As I watched the film I kept thinking how similar this film was to Quentin Tarantino’s films which were criticized for the amount of violence that they contained. We all know that Shakespeare has been adorned the master of capturing the most intricate parts of the human condition. I think Luhrmann directed this film almost emulating Tarantino’s style, intentionally or unintentionally, and to show that violence, tragedy and art are not new ideas, or things that should be shunned in filmmaking. It is a part of human life no matter when we live.

Christina Hudson: Elizabeth

2006-02-03T16:02:00.000-05:00

Christina Hudson: Response to Elizabeth

Though the main themes behind the plot and story are predominantly predetermined (and therefore are incorporated in the closed style of filmmaking), this movie still manages to capture an essence of mystery and intrigue as the endless bouts of conspiracy are portrayed through a film meant to represent a part of history. I think the prospect of adequately portraying historical facts while simultaneously
incorporating scenes which will capture the interest of the audience to be very overwhelming. In general, though I find history generally rather dull (save for
certain time periods), this film really did hold my interest throughout its entirety. Though it is impossible to know every event exactly as it occurred,
Elizabeth seems to generate a plausible rendition of this historic family with a strong theme of conspiracy.

Throughout the film, it is easy to notice the voyeuristic style of the camera angles and shots, as well as the roles of the other characters in the movie. Initially, the camera shots portray a vast expansiveness of the castle and rooms in order to
generate a drowning effect on the audience members, who are meant to empathize with Elizabeth. The foreground is accentuated, while Elizabeth is shown from a distance, further demonstrating her slight stature in the court during the beginning. She seems insignificant, but for her title, and alone in a court of gossiping and conspiring wolves who would have her killed from the start of the film and continuously work towards that goal in miscellaneous ways. Because of this, the effect given by the intrusive shots during even her most private and intimate moments
generates the feeling of being overwhelmed, which is much the same as Elizabeth's portrayal of emotions during her inheritance of the throne and her hardships
as queen.

Another important avenue of mise-en-scéne in this film is the wide array of costumes used. The clothing styles Elizabeth wears in the beginning of the film, as a princess, seem less frilly and unrestricted, whereas, in comparison, her attire as a queen becomes confining and stiff and also bears several more accessories and hairstyles than her casual and carefree mannerisms of her past had allowed. With
increasing frequency, her hairstyles, too, lack the freedom of her youth and become more restraining andelaborate. I particularly found the poisoned dress incident intriguing, because I remember a similar scene in the story of Medea, in which she sent a poisoned dress to her replacement, Glauce. This is just another incidence of conspiracy against Elizabeth.

Various effects of the lighting seem to generate emotion similar to the capacity of the camera angles, for they avidly encompass and express feelings of hopelessness and uncertainty while Elizabeth is imprisoned, and feelings of gloom, sickness, and death in Queen Mary's chambers and throne room. Even the raiment is of darker hues and depressing shades - the effects of which are further solidified by the makeup
artist's choice of colors for the characters. Mary's pale and sickly appearance is greatly contrasted by the youthful vigor and overall glow of Elizabeth, who is thus ironically portrayed as pure and admirable, despite the feelings of those against her religion.

Shadows and darkness are frequently used to enshroud the enigmatic qualities of the court and its various sets of social systems, whereas light and vibrant colors are used in reference to Elizabeth's first scenes.

Later in the film, light accepts a slightly different role. The darkness serves as a beacon used by the director to point out shady characters or involvements and plots, whereas happier scenes are represented again with more color and light. I noticed particularly that the darkness of the film begins to encompass more and more scenes as Elizabeth's realizes the degree of deceitfulness being played about and
upon her. An increasing number of scenes seem shot during overcast weather to add a further dimension of darkness to some of the scenes, or during the late evening to employ mystery and uncertainty. In all, each of the measures used to generate the mood for the film play their own important roles and would be much less evident on their own. Together, the use of mise-en-scéne in this movie generates a wide array of effects and emotions.

Mandy Margolen: On the Costumes in Elizabeth

2006-02-03T15:31:00.000-05:00

Mandy Margolen
ENG 281 Thurs. 6:30-9:15 pm
Response to Elizabeth

The film Elizabeth, directed by Shekhar Kapur is a beautiful biographical narrative about a young Elizabeth faced with the overwhelming task of becoming Queen during great opposition. Kapur’s film was a tribute to a great figure and her complex life. The film highlighted the complexities of her life through an entanglement of issues such as love and loneliness, religious woes (Catholic vs. Protestants), and most intimately, the transformation of Elizabeth from the individual she was to the institution she became. More fantastic than the story itself was the way Kapur expressed her life and the issues surrounding her life through unique costumes and makeup, powerful dialogue from well defined characters, and picturesque backdrops and sets that transported us to England, 1554.

I have never seen a movie where costuming played such a significant role as it did in Elizabeth, especially in Elizabeth’s transformation. For instance, at the beginning of the film, Elizabeth wore a lovely yet plain dress of green and pales and a necklace of pearls. When she is taking to the tower and interrogated she is wearing a pale cream dress with no color and her necklace bears a cross. When she hears the bells announcing the death of Queen Mary she is in a more fanciful dress but lacks color. Her status in England has changed and so has Elizabeth, but at this time we can’t imagine how much. When she becomes Queen, her gowns become regal and are of intense jewel tone colors (mostly deep red) expressing the intensity of her situation and status. The costumes being in parallel with Elizabeth’s struggles continue to the very end when she is all glowing in a silver metallic gown in which the bright light makes her almost blinding. She has become as statuesque as any human could be on earth. You can also see the transformation through her personal appearance. In the beginning of the film she has a natural beauty about her with her natural complexion and unstyled hair, when she becomes queen, her hair becomes styled and makeup matures her, and at the end of the film, she sheds her locks. In this scene, as the cutting occurs, flashes of the past run on the screen (and in her mind) showing us what she letting go of, what had brought her to this place in her life, what would not influence her any longer. You see her grasp some of the fallen hair as if she was feeling the past just one more time. Then she faces the camera resembling nothing of what she used to be.

The powerful dialogue among some fantastically well-defined characters was also a crucial element in this film. The two characters (in my opinion) that brought the most to the screen were Elizabeth and Sir Francis Walsingham. These two characters (and actors) were so intriguing. The relationship these two characters developed was one that I wanted more of. I wasn’t sure of Walsingham at first. He was a mysterious figure usually on the edge of things. He rarely spoke and when he did it was like he spoke in proverbs. I almost did not trust him. The defining scene for me in regards to Walsingham was when Elizabeth ran into the room where her father’s portrait stood. She was worrisome about her decision to attack Scotland. Walsingham came in and just stood there. She asked him how dare he come into her presence and he replied that it was his job to protect her for everything…and that was exactly what he was doing, protecting her from herself. I also enjoyed the humor of Elizabeth in very stressful situations, such as when she was addressing the bishops. It humanized her. There were countless examples of great characterization throughout the film that added layers to the story line, however, there was one character I thought odd and that was Duc d’Anjou. He wasn’t significant to me in regards to this film.

Set design and backdrops were phenomenal in this film. The scale of the buildings put into perspective the power of the monarch. The crosses formed by stones in the wall, which many scenes were viewed through, expressed the influence that religion had in those times. Everything was viewed through a religious perspective. Kapur also used unique subtleties to instill certain thoughts. In the scene where Walsingham kills the young boy that threatened his life with a sharp object, you see Walsingham place the object on the window seal after he slashes the boy’s throat. It is crossed shaped. I was totally amazed how Kapur brought you into this film as if you were taken part in the events.

I absolutely loved this movie, in fact I rented it over the weekend and watch it two more times. I was fascinated by Kapur’s expressionism in the film. Each character in this film enriched the story on a more personal level and the dialogue just drew you into each conversation. But the most impressive nuance about this film was the costumes. Spectacular!! I could have watched the movie just for the gowns alone.

Aimée Hayden Keller: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

2006-02-03T15:25:00.000-05:00

Aimée Hayden Keller
Eng 281 6:30 – 9:15

Written by renowned screenplay writer, Charlie Kaufman, the film Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind lives up to expectations of a Kaufman script being highly creative and filled with bizarre twists. Equally exciting and noteworthy in this film is director Michel Gondry’s skillful use of camera work and special effects to create very innovative scene footage and unique points of view.

The story captures an underlying question of whether it is better to throw out unpleasant memories with yesterday’s garbage in order to live a life of bliss through ignorance, or if retaining such painful experiences may actually prove beneficial in shaping one’s future. The main character, Joel Barrish undergoes a painful break up with the love of his life, Clementine Trajensky, only to find out that she has had all memories of their history together erased through an unorthodox method of technotherapy in order to spare her the pain of remembering their relationship. In response, Joel also decides to have his memories of Clementine erased. Once having committed to the procedure, Joel is realizes in his unconscious state that he does not actually wish to lose all memory of his experiences with Clementine, and struggles through the majority of the film trying to hold on to such memories to prevent them from being erased.

Gondry’s approach to filming this conflict within the mind of the main character is highly innovative throughout the film, initially in creating the point of view of Joel realizing that the process of memory erasure has begun and his mind is playing tricks on him. Gondry shoots Joel standing in the examining room looking back on the proceedings earlier in the day, in which Gondry pieces together clips of Joel being examined, and another juxtaposing clip of Joel watching himself being examined. To Joel’s own surprise of his mind playing tricks on him, he states, “Why am I standing here and…Oh my God! De ja vu! De ja vu! I’m in my head already aren’t I?” Gondry, enhances the viewers perception of Joel’s unconscious reality throughout the film through various filming and editing techniques, such as the occasional use of a red light to illuminate Joel’s frozen visage like a in a deer in the headlights, blurring of images, blacking out or shadowing of part of the screen and illuminating other parts of the screen with harsh light. So too, Gondry depicts dreamlike passages within the main character’s head through alterations of characters’ voices, such as adding echoes, changes in tonality and mimicry of robotic like voices, as well as deliberate mismatches of words with characters mouth movements.

As Joel’s memories are electronically isolated and deleted, Gondry portrays him as semi-conscious, in which he is subtly aware of the conversation of the two technicians present with him. Gondry eerily depicts scenes in which the main character’s memories are bombarded with bits of conversation of the technicians, initially creating a sense of paranoia, and later acting as a present reminder to Joel that his memories are under attack by strangers that he is unable to defend himself against in his comatose like state. Due to the fact that Joel took strong sleeping pills prior to the procedure at hand, Joel is depicted as being somewhat trapped in his own body, unable to awaken and stop the memory erasing procedure from continuing.

Gondry uses special effects to depict memory erasure by abruptly editing figures and objects in scenes abruptly out of the setting, as if being zapped from the screen. Gondry depicts buildings falling apart or disintegrating, and a fence rapidly disappearing piece by piece behind Joel and Clementine to seek to outrun the advancing presence of memory degradation. In addition to technical editing effects, Gondry is very innovative and resourceful in shooting the appearance of Clementine disappearing in one room of a scene and then reappearing in the next room, as if she is being slowly erased out of the such memories. Rather than creating such effects through computer editing or animation, Gondry actually employs the use of trap doors in the set or directs characters to run behind and around the camera as it spins around a room to shoot the character in a different set of clothing to depict the appearance of a different memory or sequence in a particular memory.

The directing and filming of this movie reveals Michel Gondry to be a talented artist with a skillful eye and very original motivations in creating each scene. The film Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind will be remembered as exciting, innovative and ground breaking for its time.

William Harris: Response to City of God

2006-02-03T15:21:00.000-05:00

William R Harris

“CITY OF GOD”
2002: 130 mins.
Fernando Meirelles / Katia Lund

The filmmakers in this movie have created a wonderful piece of art. The Mise-En-Scene created such an emotional response for me that it was as if I truly stepped into this Brazilian ghetto myself. If you want a film that creates certain realism, practically a third world environment of survival and crime, then this could be the film for you.

What we see and hear throughout this filmsettings expose us to life in the “Ghetto”. The interior shots are all very small and cramped making your perception of personal space disappear. Even the exterior settings appear cramped while pushing us forward into a life that becomes a continuous dash through a maze of small alleys, road, and pathways between neighborhood shacks that are confusing and always giving you the sense that you are lost, or could get lost very quickly This closed in feeling continuously stays with you the viewer and the characters throughout the film.

Some poetic symbolism used almost right from the beginning is a very ugly black man who yells out and directs children to run and capture a CHICKEN that has escaped from certain depth. This chicken, while being chased, follows the paths and mannerisms of all the characters that “Come After”, or introduced later in the story. This chicken race for survival is the fundamental unity that and creates the coherence that these people are running around like a bunch of animals killing each other. It's a struggle for power, survival for the fittest, and the most violent.

Through out this film we see many types of movement within the convention of OPEN frame techniques, characters coming in and out of frame, cameramen wearing types of steady-cam devices, excellent acting continuity, combined with many fast past action montages. These techniques help create the exhilaration, and the verisimilitude. We believe everything we are seeing, because it now fills like we are running and hanging out right beside them.

Creating realistic memorable characters by allowing each to tell their own story when the time right, to tell it! You may get introduced to someone, but they remain a mystery until their back-story is told helping to full fill the unity, coherence, and again order. The director opens a proverbial “window” into this world, you better be ready to hold on to your seat, be glad that your only seeing this as “guests” of the director, and your not really there.

Any production designer organizes the narrative through design. I enjoyed the emphasis of color changes between the two time periods of either the 1960’s or the 1970’s. The continuity of costumes, makeup, and hairstyles were believable. The exterior lighting shots were mostly natural light and reflector boards. These exterior daytime shots, which is when most of the crime is happening, are the norm for the movie style, maybe a “Anti-Film Noir” style that creates the idea that not only you can see this but everybody can see this going on around them. These guys are so scary that they don’t need to be hid with dark shadows. Actually The main trend of dark violent scenes start when Li –Dice, the antagonist, is waiting outside of a hotel while his brothers go in a do Simi non-violent robbery. Once they actually speed away in a stolen car after they here a gun shot, Li-dice goes in without anyone ever finding out and begins a murder spree that follows him not only that night at hotel, but through the rest of his life summarized by a series of jump-cut editing conventions, following one murder after another same position, but different setting. Most of this mans killing was done at night, showing the magnitude of his violence and hatred within himself. An interesting juxtaposition between these exterior and interior lighting shot was that almost always the inside of the houses were darker then the outside. The true “on location” setting and use of real inhabitants of this “ghetto” creates verisimilitude that forms a relationship and design with the narrative in a way that nothing else could.

Most of the conflict themes in this film are never really resolved, except maybe the character “Rocket” who we know from the beginning that he wants to be a photographer, and he finally becomes one by documenting everything he witnesses. He narrates and helps us keep up and understand the story as it unwinds. But as for the other conflicts we see meaning through a Design cycle of violence being breed within the children and molded at such a young age that we soon realize that this cycle breed’s contempt. As soon as any older powerful people are killed off, the young are ready to inherit their fortune and power, in a place that virtually has no connection to the modern world, which is just as violent, but masked so the work force/labor can be used for the professional power of the world. This movie show me that the leadership in that country is so underdeveloped that they can’t even create job and literacy programs to keep these people in routine and occupied with things that make them forget about frivolous conflicts that would be meaningless to us, but to them their reputation and honor was all they had. The good common people live in places that are not looking at the future, but looking to survival day.

Meagan Brock: Response to Elizabeth

2006-02-02T12:24:00.000-05:00

Meagan Brock
Eng 281 Thursday Night

Often, when studying or reading about different times in history, we find ourselves imagining what it must have really been like in that time period. In the movie ELIZABETH, we are really taken back into a period of time, and the camera, costumes, and props all work together to really paint a picture into an intriguing period of time.
In the execution scene in the beginning of the movie, the way the movie is filmed, you really feel like you are in the room with the prisoners, having their heads shaved by the guard with a blunt knife. Chills are going down your spine while the prisoners are lead to the stake to be burned, and they are crying out to God to make them burn faster.
In Queen Mary’s chambers, everything looks so dark and cold. The furniture looked hard and uncomfortable, and the people were all dressed in black. The atmosphere was suffocating, and it was very clear how crazy Mary was.
One of the first things that jumps out when Elizabeth is introduced is how much more colorful her atmosphere is than Mary’s. She is in a field with her maids, all of them dancing and clothed in pretty colorful dresses. Elizabeth comes off as a sexy and flirtatious young woman.
One of the things to keep in mind while watching this movie, is how hard it was to find loyal friends. In the beginning of the movie, right before Elizabeth is arrested, there is a shot of a young woman running very fast towards Elizabeth, and she is running out of breath, obviously she has wasted no time in getting to Elizabeth. She is trying to warn her that men are coming for her. I thought this was a very thoughtful shot, because it showed sacrifice and loyalty in a very uncommon form.
When Elizabeth first gets news that she is Queen, the screen whites out. This could signify to the audience that her life is about to change, it won’t ever be the same. It is most dramatic and effective the first time it is used, but the white out effect is used in a few other stages of Elizabeth’s rule, to signify a drastic change in her life.
Architecture is huge in the film, and is presented in a way that the people look so tiny in comparison to the walls they live in. This is important to this particular story because these people, in real life must have felt very much like chess pieces. Many of their worlds changed daily, and any of their lives could be taken away at any moment. Also, the walls were so dark and damp looking, the prison almost unbearable, and the palace was not much more comfortable looking than the prison. It looked like a lonely place to live, which made the story even more tragic, because the characters were already lonely enough.
Many of the scenes started with the camera looking into a room through a window, doorway, or carving in a wall. This was very effective, because it gave a “spy” sense to the scene. Conspiracies were every where, and it was hard to know who to trust and who was paying who for what information. The way the movie was filmed really gave off that impression, and gives the audience a very realistic feel for what it may have felt like to live in the castle, or be one of the characters. It also made the danger of being on the throne much more real.
One thing about costumes that were used to show status and character, were colors. Purple and gold are often thought of as royal colors, and the young duke, who was very childish and arrogant, was often wearing rich velvety purples. The Spanish and French ambassadors were always in black, to set them apart, but also to single them out as foreigners and people of higher status, because they often were wearing velvet, and other rich materials.
Elizabeth’s costumes were absolutely amazing. As the film moves on, we really can see, just by her clothes and how she wears her hair change as her character does. In the beginning she is wearing bright colors, and low cut dresses. Her hair is worn long and free. As she learns that she has to rule as a man would, and forget her heart’s desires and passions as a woman, she begins to dress in more deep greens and reds. Her dresses become more conservative and high cut, even covering up her collar bone. In some scenes she wears a tailored jacket over her dresses. Often when she wears the jackets, she is having a meeting with the men about war or religion. The jacket comes across as her own little prop to make her feel like she is coming across as more tough or intimidating. In the very last scene she wears a dress that is so big and high cut that you cannot even see the woman underneath. Her hair is cut off, and she has a head cover and crown on. Instead of a woman on the throne, you see only a strong ruler in an elaborate costume. Her costumes alone could have told the story of a young, passionate woman, lost in a world of danger and confinement to become a sexless, powerful leader.

2006 Tuition Hearing

2006-01-31T17:03:00.000-05:00

STUDENTS, FACULTY & STAFF

You are invited to attend the Kentucky Community & Technical College System

2006 Tuition Hearing

Monday, February 6

9:30 a.m.

Lobby of the AT Building

Cooper Campus

We want your comments regarding KCTCS tuition.

Jeff Blevins: Response to Chinatown

2006-01-31T06:12:00.000-05:00

Jeff Blevins
TR 3:30 – 4:45 Chinatown
Mysteries of this sort are hard to find anymore, their
messages are far from fleeting and their magnificence is hardly
forgotten, mainly because mainstream filmmaking has taken this genre
to a whole new level. With films like Mullholland Drive and Donnie
Darko we get a truly film mystery, in which characters and settings
are often twisted with respect to time and place, this is done in ways
that are only achievable in the cinema. These classic mysteries have a
certain appeal after watching one too many mind mysteries and
Chinatown was like a breath of fresh air. Watching this film was a lot
like watching poetry because the movie was very visual, elements of
fantasy were even used to portray some of the outlying lands of Los
Angeles. Jack Nicholson is constantly running into figures on
horseback and strange new characters. In this way the film was sort of
made into a character driven visual production with the characters
built just like the scenes, top down. Most of the perfectly framed
scenes were spread across the entire color palette and almost
exclusively swept from light to dark. An example would be a shot which
was half sky half land.
The technique of filming reminded me of Spike Lee’s Do The
Right Thing which filtered an orange tint to the day time shots,
creating a sultry and dirty mental image of intense heat, which both
oppresses you and draws you in. The drought is what this film is
centered around, the mystery unfolds around some sort of scheme to dry
up the farms and then buy back the dead land and then irrigate it. We
meet several suspects including a Mr. Mullray, who is quickly killed
off. His suspicious yet helpful wife (we’ll come back to her). Mrs.
Mullray’s father and, as it turns out, lover. We meet high ups in the
water company, police officers, ranchers on the dry land.
The movie is called Chinatown. But really, the simple
dichotomy which that title points out is not the only separation here.
There is, seemingly three planes of existence: Chinatown (a place to
be escaped from), the city (Los Angeles; a place to be escaped to),
and the ranches (the inescapable). One thing you notice about these
three places is that they aren’t that different, they all affect one
another and push an pull. They’re like electrons sharing the same
nucleus. And a key thing to understand is that Chinatown and the city
are one and the same. What difference does it make if youre “stopping
Chinese from pissing in the laundry” or stopping irrigation water from
escaping to save a drought. You experience similar stresses, you get
just as dirty either way and the only glory, as with everything in
life, is human glory. And that’s just not something that this film
seems to think is worth fighting for.
This film is ironic and satirical. It has much to say about
governmental corruption as well as the everyday lives of Americans.
What are we doing running around snooping after people’s broken
marriages. As Nicholson says “let sleeping dogs lie.” We don’t have
any real purpose here and we’re all just flirting with all too complex
mysteries. And often these mysteries can be summed up in a joke. And
even more often our mysteries have surprise endings which destroy all
pretensions of magic which we have fabricated. At the end Mrs. Mullray
spews the beans about her affair with her father and we’re all
flabbergasted. What happened to all of these complex weavings we all
just struggled with? Where did all the red herrings go? This absurd
twist expounds upon us that our soap opera lives are as worthless as
the most deaf dumb and blind rancher and the dirtiest part of
Chinatown.

Also there are other ways to read into this film. We could
ignore how silly the whole thing is and take with us a heartfelt
feeling of gratitude for not being alive in Chinatown. We could also,
those of us who have seen a really scummy Chinatown whose walls should
always stay silent, say something about the message being about how
nice Chinatown really is, but that is ignorant of the ending. There
are also some easy comparisons to Faulkner and Twain to point out. The
recurrence of the retarded characters is especially significant. As
far as Mise-en-scene goes we definitely were transported to the 20s or
whenever this was supposed to be set. I believed it. But this film
echoes for all time periods and is much more of an outcry than
anything. It is a response to Watergate first and foremost. And if not
Watergate then to some other scandal. It is about putridity and how
we’ve become infested with it. It’s also about how we’ve grown snotty
and devisive in our tact and the push pull is much more of a push now.
This echoes and stinks of things like white flight. It tells us a lot
of hard to swallow truths about ourselves and the places we live.
Chinatwon, as a mystery of such magnitude, destroys our own mysteries.
Chinatown’s mystery is also so petty it points out our own pettiness.
Chinatown really draws back the curtain and lets us see inside our own
souls.

Thinking and Writing Critically About Films

2006-01-27T11:26:00.000-05:00

Some things to think about in regards to the films you watch:

1) Are the characters consistent throughout the film? In other words, do they stay true to the way in which they are set up by the author/s? Are the characters solidly drawn by the writer, or are they shallow and incomplete? Are they concrete in the sense we are sure about their moral stance, or, are they ambiguous, leaving us guessing about their motivations/actions?

2) Does the main character/s change in the cinematic narrative? Are these changes important? What is the meaning of these changes?

3) Is the film true to life as you perceive it? Or, is it fantasy that speaks to other truths? Or is it unrealistic and unconvincing as a narrative (whether intended as realism or fantasy)? Is the film realistic with fantastical eruptions? Is it fantasy so realistic that you feel as if you are truly experiencing the film?

4) Is the cinematographic technique unique? Does it fit the story? How does it detract-from or enhance the narrative power of the film? How is the story framed--what are some of the unique shots and what do they communicate about the state of the situation or the experience of the characters?

5) Is the film a coherent whole with a unique vision? Is it fragmented and confusing? Does the film challenge us to make our own sense out of it? Is it simplistic and leading?

6) Do you perceive philosophical or spirtual meanings in the film?

7) Is there an important historical context for the film? Is it explicitly or implicitly referenced in the film? Does the film follow traditional understandings of this history or does it challenge mainstream understandings of the historical context for the film?

8) Had you heard of this film before you saw it? What were your sources for information about the film? How did this shape or alter your experience of the film?

9) What was the environment in which you viewed the film? Were you alone in front of your TV? Where you in a crowded theater with a group of friends? With an attractive lover that heightened your physical state? Did the environment and audience heighten (or distract-from) or alter your experience of the film?

10) What are the explicit meanings of the film? Speeches or dialogue of main characters--written text that appears in the film--titles in the film--the title of the film--and so on...

11) What are the implicit meanings of the film? How does color or sound communicate emotion or mood? What symbols reoccur throughout the film and what are the possible meaning/s of these symbols? What is the significance of the "roses" in American Beauty? Why does the film Traffic use three distinct color schemes to portray the three main narratives? In The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou what is the significance of the minor character's constant singing of David Bowie songs in Portugese?

12) Is there any foreshadowing of later events in the film? Would the viewer benefit from repeated viewings of the film? Is the story linear or nonlinear--why? how does it effect the experience of watching the film?

13) Are there recognizable stereotypes present in the film? Are they negative or positive? Are they played for laughs or used to advance a serious critique (or both)? Are the stereotypes insulting and perhaps used unreflectively by the filmmakers? Is the film consciously challenging commonly held stereotypes?

14) Is there a narrator? What role does the narrator play? Is the narrator a trustworthy guide?

15) How is sex(uality) used in the film? Is it explicit, corny, obvious, subtle, vulgar, raunchy, funny, romantic...? What is the importance of any romantic/sexual attractions?

16) What is the mood of the film? Is it romantic, pessimistic, dark-but-hopeful, damning, dismissive, satirical, and so on...

17) What cultures are portrayed in the film? How are these cultures portrayed?

18) What is the political message of the film? Does it celebrate individualism or look to people coming together to make a difference? Does it critique or reinforce any gender, ethnic, or class stereotypes? Does it present a romanticized version of historical events? Does it challenge traditional understandings of history or society?

19) What is the source text for the film? Do you have any knowledge of this source text and does it influence your understanding of the film?

20) Are the costumes realistic? Are they effective in bringing to life the time of the story?

21) How does the setting for the film influence the mood or atmosphere of the film?

22) If this is an older film--are there characters/events in the film that you believe you perceive differently than people may have when it was first released?

23) Do you have a unique perspective that might cause you to perceive the film differently than others do? What is that perspective and how does it alter your perception of the film?

24) What fantasies does the film embody? This is different from straight-out "fantasy"--this is our own socially interpellated fantasies that we unconsciously hold and that film calls out to it in order to pull us into its constructed world. Are these fantasies problematic? (ex. the notion that women like the prostitute in Pretty Woman just need a good man to rescue them from their lives, or a film like Fight Club that feeds into a masculine form of aggression as a useful problem solving method--one could say that ultimately Pretty Woman supports the fantasy, while Fight Club condemns the male fantasy of agression)

25) How might one's gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality, political persuasion, or, their application of a theoretical/critical approach, influence their interpretation of the film? Explain?

WEEK 3 Outside Viewing Options: Mise-en-scene and Design

2006-01-27T05:12:00.000-05:00

Homework Reading: 3rd Chapter in your textbook

WEEK 3: Mise-en-scene and Design

IN CLASS FILM:

Elizabeth (Shekhar Kapur) 1998: 124 minutes

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

American Beauty (Sam Mendes) 1999: 122 minutes

Barry Lyndon (Stanley Kubrick) 1975: 184 minutes

Being John Malkovich (Spike Jonze) 1999: 112 minutes

Brazil (Director’s Cut: Terry Gilliam) 1985: 142 minutes

Chinatown (Roman Polanski) 1974: 131 minutes

City of God (Fernando Meirelles and Katia Lund) 2002: 130 minutes

City of Lost Children (Mark Care and Jean-Pierre Jeunet) 1995: 112 minutes

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Ang Lee) 2000: 120 minutes

Cube (Vincenzo Natali) 1997: 90 minutes

Days of Heaven (Terrence Malick) 1978: 95 minutes

Dogville (Lars Von Triers) 2003: 178 minutes

Donnie Darko (The Director’s Cut: Richard Kelly) 2001: 133 minutes

The Elephant Man (David Lynch) 1980: 124 minutes

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Mike Gondry) 2004: 108 minutes

Eyes Wide Shut (Stanley Kubrick) 1999: 159 minutes

Frida (Julie Taymor) 2002: 123 minutes

Hamlet (Michael Almereyda) 2000: 112 minutes

Happiness (Todd Solondz) 1998: 134 minutes

Kundun (Martin Scorsese) 1997: 134 minutes

The Last Emperor (Bernardo Bertolucci) 1987: 160 minutes

Millions (Danny Boyle) 2004: 98 minutes

Moulin Rouge (Baz Luhrmann) 2001: 127 minutes

Mulholland Drive (David Lynch) 2001: 147 minutes

The Portrait of a Lady (Jane Campion) 1996: 142 minutes

Romeo + Juliet (Baz Luhrmann) 1996: 120 minutes

Rushmore (Wes Anderson) 1998: 93 minutes

The Shining (Stanley Kubrick) 1980: 146 minutes

Sleepy Hollow (Tim Burton) 1999: 105 minutes

Titus (Julie Taymor) 1999: 162 minutes

Ben Jacobs: Response to Oldboy

2006-01-26T17:37:00.000-05:00

Oldboy: from the seeds of the Count of Monte Cristo

Ben Jacobs

The Count of Monte Cristo is one of the greatest revenge and redemption stories of all time. Several adaptations have been made of the classic story. One of the most intriguing being, Oldboy (Chan Wook-Park), a modern day Korean adaptation.

In the Count of Monte Cristo the main character Edmond Dantes is imprisoned but doesn’t know why. In Oldboy Oh Dae-su, the main character, has also been thrown into a makeshift prison, a cheap hotel room, unaware as to why he has been incarcerated. They both develop plans for revenge very quickly.

While in prison, Dantes acquires the company of a priest trying to tunnel his way out of the prison. The Priest, a former soldier in Napoleon’s army and a highly educated man, helps Dantes find out why he has been put in prison and by whom. He also teaches him to read and write, and about economics, physics, and mathematics, but most importantly to fight using swords and knives.

Oh Dae-su, not as fortunate to have any company, his only source of knowledge is a television. While not as informative as the priest, it still helps him discover the reasons of his imprisonment via news reports about his dead wife, who they say Oh Dae-su murdered. Like Dantes, Dae-su trains for combat by fighting an outline of a man drawn on the wall.

In the two films both directors use peculiar methods to past the long prison years along, which can obviously not be shown in a two-hour movie. The director of The Count of Monte Cristo, Kevin Reynolds’ method used was for every year gone by Dantes would receive a series of lashings on the anniversary of his incarceration. In Oldboy, director Chan Wook-Parks’ time manipulation device is not necessarily an annual event, like in The Count of Monte Cristo, but as Dae-su is given sleeping gas and passes out the screen fades out and when it reappears time has been fast forwarded a bit.

As the two men get out of prison (Dae-su is released and Dantes escapes), right around fifteen years has past, they are both are so bent on revenge that they are metaphorically still in prison, but now it is more of an emotional prison. The two directors again apply devices to show this without saying it out right. In Oldboy, Dae-su never cuts or changes the hairstyle that his captors had given him while he was gassed; he also never wears any other clothes besides the suit they gave him on his release day. In The Count of Monte Cristo, Dantes is unable to stop sleeping on the hard floor, which he did every night for fifteen years.

The similarity, which I thought stood out more than the others, is that both men in the stories are completely unaware of the existence of their own children, of whom they known through interpersonal relationships. In The Count of Monte Cristo, Dantes befriends a young Fifteen-year-old boy, who he believes is the son of the man who falsely imprisoned him to marry his fiancé. He later finds out that this is his son conceived with his fiancé just before he was sent to prison. In Oldboy, Dae-su falls in love with a Fifteen-year-old girl he meets in a sushi restaurant. He finds out later that it is actually his daughter, which drops heavy emotional distress onto Dae-su. Both men find out the true identities of their children in the climaxes of the stories and neither wanted to continue with their plans for revenge at that point.

Oldboy may not be an exact replica of The Count of Monte Cristo, but no one can deny the similarities of the two characters’ story arcs. Two men falsely imprisoned for fifteen years, seek revenge against their captor using the aid of their children who they don’t know exist, but after their identities are revealed only the thought of their children being hurt is strong enough to deter their “steamroller” mentalities towards revenge.

P.S. A side thought I had involving Oldboy’s structure only. As the film opens we see Dae-su holding a man off the edge of a building by nothing but his tie, and the same scene later as a flashback catches up to the storyline. Then toward the end of the film we see a scene/shot of Dae-su’s captor holding his sister in the same position a third time, only this time he is holding her by the arm. This might be interpreted to say that his captor is in an emotion prison as well as Dae-su. An interesting thought I felt should be addressed.

William Harris: Response to Oldboy

2006-01-26T14:31:00.000-05:00

William Harris
English 281 6:30 Thursday
January 25, 2006
OLDBOY Film Response

This groovy Asian Action / Thriller “Flick”, showing elements of “Film Noir”style in the avant-garde Genre form leaves me to understand why Quentin Tarentino gave his seal of approval for it. As with most cutting-edge, experimental type films you see the use of many new editing techniques, plot continuity irregularities, ambiguous moral characters, along with finding difficulty with drawing the line between dreams, reality, and overall meaning of the story.

Story duration actually ties all the way back to when Dae-Su was in high school where he started a rumor that led to a series of event unknown until the end of the movie. The plot duration was around 15 years and one week, including a couple of flash backs that allow him to piece together this puzzle that has caused him to be imprisoned for 15 years. The 15-year imprisonment relationship was summarized through many tricks, or conventions, of the editing and camera world, such as showing Major political events occurring on the television, his implied frequency of hair growth and hair cuts, a couple attempts on his life from different frustrations, and a journal he starts and ends with a complete volume before being released. The scene only took but a few minutes but it felt like we all were in there with him for those 15 years. Most of the screen duration occurred with a summary of the 5 day seek of vengeance, or possibly truth???

In the beginning, “real time” was thrown upon us with the “Cliff hanger” effect and left us with the question, what the hell? Somebody was getting ready to die fast! Time, this appears as a major frequent theme, from this point mentioned above through the opening credits of OLDBOY rotating like a clock, many clocks superimposed with-in dissolving cuts throughout the film. Through one of the early plot satellites we new early on that Dae-su likes playing games because of his friend saying, “are you playing games again” while looking for him when he exists the phone booth, and noticing his disappearance. Here the camera takes omniscience overhead position. From this position we achieve a major event hub by seeing that the game has begun and the symbolic “X” marks the spot and we have direction because of the symbolic “arrow” painted on the road, and we know by immediate montage of stop watches that there is a time limit. Another frequent element of juxtaposition is the fact of being in very high places or very low places. It moves him from opening scene of being in control, to be a beast eating food from the floor. Another pattern of comparative symbolism is with the use of ties representing dog leashes made very clear in the opening scene, because of a dog in the arm. All the ties represent dog leashes or the control on others, or the control needed on oneself. It’s a matter of maturity.

I want to back up bit and continue to focus on this beginning area of the film. The drunk tank or room in particular. Here we not only get to see this Dae-Su not only show us his immaturity, but his lack of respect for anyone but himself and his mental confusion in general. In this early sequence we can get a lot out of whom we are dealing with. The cinema photographer opens with a nice ridiculous close-up of Dae-su. Seeing him up-close and personal and then crosscutting wide-shots together, on the bench, showing this outer and inner differences that the movie will continue to work with. This montage of cross-cutting combined with many jump cuts allows you to feel the inner workings of his mind and inspires some anticipation that hopefully he gets some help, or just maybe that we think this character is going no where fast. With this juxtaposition we really wonder if he will actually keep up with this imposed “time limit” that we are frequently reminded of.

“Hello Sweet Girl, it’s daddy, daddy’s got you present and I’ll be there to GIVE IT TO YOU, baby!” An early plot foreshadowing of things to cum, literally! The way that the film is cut, I feel, that we are led to believe that Dae-Su is the man that was dropped from the building, when we later find out that that person was actually himself. This I feel is the theme or man against himself. And man not listening to him self but just continuously talking about himself. Once he told his story on the rooftop, he was finished with any other whining beast – or heart. I believe that Dae-su the businessman is being split into two parts in the beginning and even split more as the writing continues from what was originally a mythological “wild man” archetype character that has been broken down into smaller complex characters that interact around him. The “Wildman” and the characters in the film represent the parts of ones proper inner workings from going from immature to mature adult man. These complex individual characters working within the film represent the workings of viewers subconscious The characters are trying to help Dae-su but he is a man who has not reached maturity in the traditional sense and will not be mature until he embraces his true nature, which is both good and bad. Since he was not willing to put a leash on this proverbial “wild man” then someone else was going to do it for him. A character in his deep dark subconscious, something kept alive by the heart. Woo- Jinn mentions that he has a bad heart and that he had asked, Dr. Hopkins – (an English surname; meaning derived from the dim.) To install a remote control to stop his pass maker from functioning upon request. Matters of the heart, the proverbial heart, are usually a dark place, a place we might sometimes wish we could shut off. Woo-Jin is establishing his function of the conscious. He has locked Dae-Su up for 15 years and finally one day released him back on top. Not on the bottom where he had once found him. It’s the heart hoping and helping for the best.

This Avant-garde type movie dealing with all the postmodern twists, the movies form is defying continuity, and erasing the line between dream and reality. We have seen the inner workings of his mind and find it hard to determine whether it was dream or reality. We never really left that position the entire movie, this “pure stream of consciousness” literary style equivalent, continues through out. The entire movie is nothing more then this guys conscience being broken up into these “film noir” characters that continue to break him down. Or shrink him into nothing because he has not only created them but also has made thing up his whole life so he could “get along with everyone”, “getting through one day at a time.” but why can’t he get along today?” he asked! Today is the day that he will start from the bottom where the rainwater and darkness, Dae-Su refers to as home, is clouding his every thought. And finally be brought back to the top of the building, sunshine and green grass.

The story is about a man who has lived a life of a businessman, modern day thief, living his life getting along with others and then while drinking this underlying theme starts to come more apparent. This male had yet to mature into a full man. A man who is not only compassionate but also without fear, brave. The plot to me seems to be this battle or this fifteen-year reign of the wild man who had been locked up and is now deciding and exit strategy.

You laugh and the world laughs with you! You weep and you weep alone.

Dae-su asks the question, “if I had been in that prison for fifteen years, would Mi-do love me as much as she does.” The mature man has let the wild man go and know that he can call on his help whenever he needs it.

At the end of the movie you here Dae-su narrative after the ….”This is what’s happened to me up till now. Thank you, for listening to a terrible story all the way through till the end. I hope that you can understand that the reason that I cant talk to you in person is because I have know tongue” His subconscious, or “wild man” talking deep within his mind.

The hypnotist makes a clear statement at the end that I believe to be an underplaying conclusion. She says, “to be HONEST, I have NO reason to help YOU!” “ But there was something that you wrote here that was touching. Even though I’m no better than a beast…don’t I have the right to live? My question is doesn’t the wild man have a right to live and doesn’t everyone have a right to live and to make mistakes. We should not let ourselves be shrunken and diluted through lies…. And like in this movie by chance he was able to reverse the damage through hypnosis. As she says, “the hypnosis can possibly distort your memories”. This would have the same effects of lies, rumors, etc…

He is now at the edge of the forest in the pure snow symbolic of innocence and cleansing…he is through talking too much. He still wants to go with the hypnosis that will send his anger and Wildman back to the forest. He could never handle that challenge to set it free and call upon him whenever needed but harbored him for ever-much like the Asian culture in general have an tradition of carrying grudge.

The hypnotist starts the transformation by saying look at the tree- the tree becomes the rock pillar in Woo-Jin penthouse. This shows the symbolism of Woo-Jins’ layer as the forest and he is the “Wild Man” This duality of characters I feel are constantly changing from being one person, to two people with the same problem, ambiguous in there moral standing. I’m not sure if it from the writer showing his talents and covering this old tale of manhood or just my own ignorance not allowing me to see something that is clear.

The frequency of flash backs start increasing as the film nears its end and as the answers come so fast we are overwhelmed not only with what the truth is, but also by how everyone is affected, or by sacrifice not affected, Mi-do. The last sequence upon a snow cap mountain leaves us unsure how much story duration has passed but with the knowledge that Dae-Su and Mi-do has traveled far, he is tired, not talking too much anymore, and ready for a spiritual transformation. A division of his inner self has occurred. He has climbed a great mountain, has great perspective, and has become a mature man. Both crying and laughing with joy of a rebirth after hearing Mi-do tell him that she loves him. This man is now complete, as with the viewer, all the other characters have vanished.

Elizabeth Givens: Response to the The Pianist

2006-01-26T14:13:00.000-05:00

The Pianist

The Pianist is a courageous and remarkable film. Watching this film alone and in the dark really seemed to set the mood for me. This dark and intense journey left me sitting on the edge of my seat. This being the second time that I watched this film, my reactions and my emotions were just as strong as the first. I even tried to eat lunch, and then found myself quickly losing my appetite as the movie went on. The time of the Nazi’s is very horrific and memorable experience. This story left me feeling once again, outraged and saddened.

The editing process of this movie was incredible. Every little detail of truth and of setting was so seemingly precise. The beginning, set in Warsaw 1939, had a quick black and white introduction of the way life was before the war. The lack of color fit for this documentary style film. Sounds of the piano fill the air as our hopeful main character, Wladyslaw Sapilman, is introduced. Hence, our pianist. And quite abruptly the German force comes into play, with chaos and segregation of the Jewish and the non Jewish. War begins, and with everything in deep focus, the turmoil of our main character’s fight for survival begins.

The setting is extremely dark and solemn, almost immediately as depressing as the storyline. Everything appears black and white, though it is only a bland set of colors chosen for the character’s clothing and the buildings in the background. This lack of color exemplifies the lack of prosperity with the characters, where even daylight seems dark. The only hint of color we see is during the time of the main characters work in the ghetto where he is allowed outside for the first time to purchase food. In the market, “normal” people are walking around purchasing things and the fruit appears enriched with colors of life. Symbolizing the sad truth of the story, the people and the food appear somewhat heavenly.

During these hard times of being beaten for no reason and through physically painful enduring labor, do we notice the real effects of the cinematography. There are many pan shots of the work in the ghetto, and of the buildings in which people are hiding and struggling to live in. And an abundance of reaction shots between almost every character intensifies the emotion that flows within. Making the short and solemn dialogue between each character seem so important and that every word more that they spoke was one more word to hold on to. The intensity of the hand-held shots came when our main character is fighting to live, sneaking from place to place as the shooting and bombing is going on all around him. Every shot seemed to perfect the emotion and timing of this horrible war.

The dialogue was cut short when it came to the end of the film, where our character was alone. Hearing only the sounds of screaming and crying from those being shot down on the streets, to the infamous trains and the sounds of the Germans marching the streets. It begins to echo in our minds as we route him on to get out, find food, be safe, and live free. And finally, we hear the one thing that is symbolic towards all of this hiding and sneaking around, music. Victory music fills the streets as people begin to return home in the honor that the war is over. And once again, our pianist finds himself back behind the piano to create such beautiful music that empowers us all to believe and to hope for the best.

Elizabeth Givens: Response to Blue Velvet

2006-01-26T13:27:00.000-05:00

Blue Velvet

The movie was sick and disturbing in it’s own right, but really good for a murder mystery in the early 80’s. It started out really slow and strange. Jeffery, who is a college student, is in town because his father is in the hospital. After visiting his father one day, he is walking home and finds a human ear on the ground. He takes the ear to the local detective, Mr. Williams. After a short conversation with the detective, Jeffery leaves the house to meet the Detective’s daughter, Sandy, who proceeds to tell him of all of the things that she hears her father discuss in his office downstairs. Sandy tells Jeffery of one of the suspects in the case, Ms. Dorothy Vallens, who is a lounge singer that lives in the neighborhood. Jeffery begins his curiosity of the case, and begins to try to unravel this murder mystery.
Jeffery meets Dorothy later that evening, when she discovers him hiding inside her closet at her apartment. She threatens him with a knife and tells him to take his clothes off. Scared and not knowing if she is capable of murder, he does what she tells him to. After a few moments of small talk and sexual tension, there is a knock at the door, and we meet the bad guy in the movie, Frank Booth. Jeffery hides in the closet and watches as Frank comes in cursing and yelling, demanding dark lighting and booze. He takes a drink of his bourbon and then proceeds to huff on some gas. Once he gets high, he begins to turn into a raving maniac and sexual deviant. He forces Dorothy to have sex with him and while doing so, he is hitting her and telling her not to look at him. When Frank goes for his gas, he turns violently sexual. During the rest of the movie we notice that Frank uses the gas to “fuck everything that he sees” and to create fun with danger. Frank is an interesting character, a bad guy with a sick twist. I wouldn’t expect a twist like this in a film from the early eighties.

Through the movie we see that Frank is a powerful and intimidating man who seems to get people to do whatever he pleases, starting with Dorothy who sings “Blue Velvet” to Frank at the lounge. The song Blue Velvet starts to represent danger and comfort. And the blue velvet dress that Dorothy wears is used in strange ways. First Frank uses the blue velvet to gag Dorothy while he forces sex on her, and then he uses it to caress his face while he is under the gas. And toward the end of the movie, we see Frank use pieces of blue velvet to gag his murder victims as a sort of trademark. But when the song Blue Velvet is being sung by Dorothy it seems to stand for comfort and safety. It takes Frank to an emotional place that is only seen with song.

Besides the blue velvet, there are other rich colors in the movie that are repeated. When around Dorothy, or when talking of her, there is a repetition of red. The red curtains in her apartment to the red curtains in the diner where Jeffery and Sandy talk about his findings. In the beginning and the end of the film there are shots of flowers in the neighborhood. Yellow flowers that stand for innocence and red flowers that stand for danger. The choice of color in the movie represents things that have or are about to unfold, like the use of dark lighting when Frankie is around. There is also a reoccurrence of a flame being burnt out every time something bad happens, and then the flash of lights burning out when Frankie is finally shot in the end. The symbolism of the flame relates to death.

The film doesn’t have much sound or even music, besides the song “Blue Velvet”. Every scene has perhaps a hint of natural sounds, like birds singing or crickets chirping. And when danger is around, there is no sound, except for the prominent sound of footsteps. The movie depends mostly on the dialogue of the characters to keep the story going. The lack of background noise creates an importance of dialogue between the characters. The characters, mostly Jeffery and his research, tell the story. And the focus of the dialogue alone, keeps the viewer in tuned to what is going on, and really emphasizes that fact that we are finding out these clues along with Jeffery.

And as the story ends with Jeffery standing up to Frank, we can tell how Jeffery’s character has grown throughout the story into a man who has a need to do good and help. Though his motives are unclear to us in the beginning, we learn that perhaps this was Jeffery’s revenge for his father being ill or perhaps something to just cure his boredom.

Brian K. Nichols: Response to City of God

2006-01-26T12:08:00.000-05:00

City of God

The City of God was a very good movie. While it was somewhat difficult to watch it closely because of having to read the sub-titles, after watching it a second time and being able to pay closer attention to the actual film I liked it even more than the first.

The movie begins showing you part of the end. It stops with a close-up of who you discover to be the main character lil Ze. Then it flashes back to when lil Ze was a child known as lil Dice. This sort of time manipulation is employed a couple of times throughout the film, showing flashbacks, and usually involving lil Ze in some fashion. This helps to show the viewer events or details they may not have picked up on their own. For example, when one of the older hood boys is leaving the city he comes across lil Dice whom they thought had been killed in an earlier heist at a hotel. By seeing lil Dice now and all of the money he has stolen, you could assume that lil Dice was the one who shot the patrons at the hotel. The movie however uses a flashback to show you the part of the story it left out before. Besides clarifying a few things, this also helps show you what type of person lil Dice is.

Lighting was used in the movie. Lighting was used to create a dark and scary atmosphere, bringing to life the wild and crazy streets of the City of God. The use of light (or rather limited use) during shots of the streets at night set the atmosphere for what was going on many times, murder and other criminal activities. My contrast, the days in the City of God were bright and sunny, a very different atmosphere than the night setting. One particular scene where lighting was used to the extreme, to create an effect of confusion and tensing was during the scene Benny was shot. In this scene the film has a strobe light going, giving you only flashes of the characters leading up to the final point that Benny was shot. Once the strobe light is turned on the viewer can immediately tell something bad is going to happen, and the lighting effect only adds to this tense buildup of action.

The frequency of the cops coming to the City of God was ever present in the film. I saw this as showing how wild the city was. The cops kept coming, everyone scampered, and the hood boys were frequently ‘shacked’ up with members from the town, and without much question. I related this to the stereotypical US Wild West, where cowboys were out killing each other, and the rangers/bounty hunters would come to round them up, often times being just as corrupt as the cops in this film.

In this movie the characters were more important than what actually happened to them through the plot. However, the events surrounding the characters helped to identify who they were and what the audience should make of them. While similar events could have been employed to create the same sense for the characters, I felt the script was well written to make it apparent what each character was about, specifically with lil Ze and his best friend. These two characters, while best friends and partners in crime, were very different and the plot helped to create this difference. While lil Ze was worried about his criminal empire, his best friend eventually found a woman and wanted to leave his life of crime. This abrupt change caused the audience to feel for both him and lil Ze when he was shot dead during an attempt on lil Ze’s life.

In summation the movie was very well put together, the characters developed well, and a lot of action to go along with a well written story. I would categorize this movie as a crime action film, as it followed the story of the cops and robbers scenario, with a lot of violence thrown in.

Audrey Hurley: Form and Narrative as Seen in The Gangs of New York

2006-01-26T11:52:00.000-05:00

Audrey Hurley
Mr. Benton
ENG 281
26 January 2006
Form and Narrative as Seen in The Gangs of New York

Like most historical epics, The Gangs of New York (Director Martin Scorsese; 2002) deals with the underlying story of tyranny and oppression. More in depth, it focuses on a boy losing his father at a young age and striving to grow into the man his father was. This is an age old motif of the weak and oppressed rising together to conquer those who have mistreated them.

The plot of this story begins with an Irish child being orphaned when his father, the leader against the native oppressors, was killed in a battle between differing gangs of New York. The plot jumps forward sixteen years after this battle upon the return of the now young man to this section of New York city. It follows the dealings and the life of this man as he tries to make a living, find love, and most importantly avenge his father’s death and gather his people. Through the plot line, a glimpse of what life in New York city was like, especially the poorer sections, during the American Civil War.

The plot order is very much chronological. The film does contain multiple flashbacks to the fateful day of the battle that occurred in the beginning of the movie. It provides this use of flashbacks in order of remembering certain characters and comparing them to the present. These reoccurring flashbacks also help to give the viewer a sense of importance about that day and how it affected many lives as well as the outcome of the section of New York known as the “five points”.

For the most part this film contains primarily diegetic elements with only a few exceptions. The nondiegetic elements include the credits, some background music such as the battle scene music, and the dates given between time period changes in the movie. What is interesting though, is that the majority of background music played in scenes is a diegetic element in that there might actually be a woman and a fiddler singing in the streets or various instruments playing and people singing in the pub.

This movie, partly due to it’s length and more importantly due to it’s broad topic in history has a few hubs and many satellites. The most crucial hub to the plot would be the death of Lord Vallon, the protagonist’s father which coincides with the “death” of the gang the “dead rabbits”. This one event changed over sixteen years (implied events) and affected many lives within the plot. Another major hub is that of the protagonist, Amsterdam, gaining the complete trust of the Antagonist, William “the butcher” Cutting, when he saves his life. There is also the betrayal of Amsterdam by his friend Johnny which almost gets him killed by the Butcher. Another hub which allows for the closing of the plot is the death of the Butcher. Some satellites within this film include Johnny befriending Amsterdam, the romantic development between Amsterdam and Jenny, the voting and elections, and well as the events relating to the Civil war such as the conscription riots.

The story duration begins in 1846 and continues until around 1863. There is a very brief glimpse at the end of the film of New York city as it was in 1863 transformed into how it looks in present day real life. The plot duration last for a few hours to one day in 1846 and then picks up in 1862 and continues into 1863. The Gangs of New York has a screen duration of 167 minutes; a fairly long film but none-the-less having a summary relationship between screen duration and story duration.

Suspense is carried throughout this film with the idea of the protagonist living a lie. One wonders when he will reveal his true identity and seek his revenge. The buildup to the battle scenes also creates suspense. The film shows individuals sharpening their weapons and preparing for battle along with loud background music. The Butcher also seems to take his time in deciding the fate of Amsterdam, throwing knives and making a spectacle, after his identity has been revealed. Suspense is also created through the use of slow motion such as in the scene where Bill, the Butcher, get shot as well as some battle scenes.

The most frequent reoccurrence in the plot is that of scenes from the first battle within the films. It shows obvious significance to this day and the events which occurred. There is also repeated scenes of mistreatment and oppression towards the Irish people as well as other immigrants. This allows the viewer to feel the building frustration of the Irish. It is also made a deliberate point in this film to show the corruption within the government during this time and also the voting systems.

The Gangs of New York has many colorful and provocative characters. The protagonist of the film is Amsterdam (Leonardo DeCaprio). His character is one seen from different point of life; as a young boy and as a young adult. He is a round character, being very dynamic, whose character allows the viewer insight into him personality and emotions. Another round, main character is the antagonist Bill “the Butcher” Cutting (Daniel Day-Lewis). This character, although the enemy of the protagonist, has a way of gaining the viewer’s sympathy and at some points support. He is a very complex character who cares greatly for respect and honor . Other main characters within the movie are Jenny Ever Deane (Cameron Diaz) and Johnny but they are more flat characters in nature. There are many minor characters throughout this film including Tweed, Jim, Happy Jack, McGloin, and others.

Because this is a film based on historical events, the setting is extremely important for the plot as well as the validity of the story. The story takes place in New York city, particularly the “Five Points” for the most part during the Civil War. This was a time of great social upheaval and change as well as a time of great violence and corruption. This story tends to focus more on the Irish immigrants and their struggle in America more so than the blacks. The setting of this film allowed it to focus on many political and social topics that are still relevant and can be applied to the present.

The point of view most used in the making of this film was that of the omniscient point of view. Often the camera pans out and allows one to see the greater view of the city and it occupants interacting. There are many shots in the film, however, that are restricted using the character’s line of sight for the viewer’s. This can be seen in Amsterdam viewing the medallion, looking at a newspaper article, spying on Jenny, ect…Times when this point of view was most effective include Jenny choosing a dancing partner through a mirror, Amsterdam seeing a man coming forward to kill Bill, and the scene when Johnny watches, through use of a mirror, Jenny and Amsterdam making love.

The Gangs of New York has proven to be a great historical narrative. While particular factual information is often exaggerated and factitious, the film itself is an effective work in allowing the viewer a glimpse into the rich history of America as well as addressing some cultural and ethical issues.

Mandy Margolen: Response to Oldboy

2006-01-26T09:24:00.000-05:00

Mandy Margolen
Eng 281 Thurs. 6:30p-9:15p
Response to Oldboy

I would like to first start out by stating that Oldboy, by Chan-wook Park was an insane movie. I honestly sat cringed in my chair for about the first thirty minutes or so thinking I’m not going to be able to watch this film. I wondered what I could possible take away from this film. My second reaction was not subtitles! I can honestly say that I have never walked out of a film for any reason but during the viewing of Oldboy I found myself looking for exits. I finally resolved myself to sitting in my chair and I put out complete hope that my initial reactions would be wrong. And of course they were. Oldboy was an amazing film. Park used a multitude of fantastic elements in Oldboy, but the elements that expressed this narrative best for me was his use of depth within each character, his use of duration in regards to both story line and plot, and creative dialogue that at times could completely change your perspective in the film. Oldboy was definitely one of the best suspenseful yet moving films I have ever seen.

Parks’s major characters in the film were Dae-su and Woo-jin. It was amazing to see two characters being expressed so differently but almost at times a refection of each other. Woo-jin was an educated and well-dressed man. He felt starched. He spoke fluently and soft considering the amount of rage he harbored. And though portrayed as a very strong and powerful man, through his health we could see frailty and weakness. Dae-su on the other hand was a mess. He was a drunk with no order in his life. He wasn’t maticulus like Woo-jin. Infact, they were direct opposites which actually was a fortunate thing for the story line in that when Dae-su started changing it seemed as though he was becoming Woo-jin. Another character, though I feel was a minor character in this film, was Mi-do. Her character, though seen a lot in the film, was actually more for moving the plot along. She was a pawn in a game managed by Dae-su and Woo-jin. What she represented (innocence) was more important than who she was (Dae-su daughter). The depth we saw in both Dae-su and Woo-jin creating a lot of confusion in my head. I found my self hating Dae-Su and times and siding with Woo-jin and at other times I felt for Dae-su and was disgusted by Woo-jin.

The matter of "time" was also an important element in this film. The story itself was long (15 years) which passed very quickly in this film through the use of Dae-su’s appearance and also the flipping through the channels of the TV, which actually showed years through the use of worldly events. Time was also crucial to the plot. It actually was all about time. Time was the restraint of the plot, 5 days. And that 5 days seemed to take 15 years. Time was also used in the flashback scene were Dae-su sees (remembers) the event in which the whole plot depends.

Most amazing is this film was the dialogue, which I can’t believe I am saying considering I had to read the dialogue. Park’s use of metaphoric and philosophical quotes within the dialogue completely changed my viewing perspective several times in this film. Such examples as, "Be it a rock or a grain of sand, in water they sink the same." This quotation was my first inkling that Woo-jin’s source of revenge, which was great to him, was nothing more than something forgotten by Dae-su. A more pivotal quote from the movie was when Woo-jin tells Dae-su that he will never find the answer because he is not asking the right questions. Up until these words are said I had been viewing this movie exactly how Dae-su was living it-why was he imprisoned? When Woo-jin states that maybe the more important question should be-why were you set free?- my whole viewing perspective changed. I then realized I had been foreseeing Dae-su fates all wrong.

With amazing characters, fantastic dialogue, and layered plot, Park gave us a wild ride with Oldboy. This was a chaotic movie about revenge from both major characters wrapped around the very sensitive issues of incest and consequence.

Ryan Cunningham: Response to Oldboy

2006-01-26T09:12:00.000-05:00

Oldboy
Ryan Cunningham
ENG 281 T-TH

First off, I would just like to say that I personally thought this movie was brilliant in the perspective of film making and cinematography. If I would have happened to watch Oldboy from the comfort of my own home, in a totally different perspective of enjoyment, I would be turned off by the movie.

The Dialogue of this movie through me off a little bit due to the dubbing and the transition between voices but, for a dubbed movie I thought they did excellent in portraying the sense of emotion and tone in the voices. The emotion in this movie is so intense at all times due to the action packed revenge theme that dubbing had to be on key to hit the audience as the movie did.

At the beginning of this film Odei Su was characterized as somewhat of a
screw-up who got drunk all the time. As the film progressed it displayed the physiological effects of Odei Su changing throughout his time of imprisonment. At one time in the movie Odei Su actually said, “If it wasn’t for this, Meto would not love me like she does”.

The revenged brother was characterized throughout the film as being the arrogant rich mystery man who was somehow benefiting off the torture of Odei Su until his revenge was revealed at the end where your perspective of this guy totally changes to someone who also has a heavy weight on his shoulder. At the same time your thinking this guy is a little psycho.

This film has so many conventions of film editing that at some point you are expecting things like a wipe, fade-in or fade-out and some shots that can throw you off a little. I personally liked the fight scene in the hallway were Odei Su is pictured from the side angle where a wall should be. When Odei Su goes into the comatose after being druged it shows the transition from him turning his head over in the bed to waking up in a suitcase on top of the building.

The editing of this film jumped from one time period to another which can screw with your head and really make you think because you know that they did the jump for a reason you just don’t know what just yet.

Color in a film is so important as it acts as the mood setter in a movie. The color in this particular film was different than any other that I have seen due to the somber colors throughout the film that seem to be dimmed at points in the movie. One scene stands out more than any other which is where the brother is dropping his sister off the bridge and even then with the sun shinning it seemed to be dimmed or faded to a certain degree.

Sound in this movie was very well done due to linking of the scene to a song that portrays the feeling very well, so well at times you don’t even notice the music is there. I really liked the scene where the music stops and the brother hums the tune of the main song in this movie. That particular scene really links the music and the scenes together.

Overall I thought that the subject matter very strange and at first turned me off because I have never seen a movie that hits so deep. I mean it’s a brother who gets his sister pregnant and kills her. Then blames it all on a guy who saw them having sex and started rumors. Very odd but it grabs your attention in a messed up kind of way.

Christina Hudson: Response to Oldboy

2006-01-26T08:51:00.000-05:00

Christina Hudson: Response to Oldboy

Despite the fact that nonlinear films are less and less rare on screen, the movie Oldboy utilizes the effect of surprise in a trick fashion. The audience expects that the initial scene of the film will either be of monumental importance later on, or that it will have been the end of the movie upon later revelation of the plot and duration of the film. In a completely opposite and unrelated scene, the main character, Dae-su Oh, is scene misbehaving and carrying on in a drunken disillusion.

Because he seems to have good intentions, contrary to the effects of his drunkenness, the character is one whose extreme punishment and torturous confinement
seems unreasonable and cruel. However, as time progresses for Dae-su Oh, it becomes evident that his rowdy behavior has caused him to establish more than a few enemies and one is left to wonder, of the long list of people he has wronged, the nature of his crimes against them. Throughout the movie, almost until the end, it is easy to relate to Dae-su Oh's anger and resentment towards his captors until the aspects of his true nature are gradually unravelled.

An almost humorous satellite used throughout Dae-su Oh's confinement is his relationship with his television. He sees the world through it and is almost mentored by it in that he has no other method of interpersonal communication with other human beings; it is his friend, teacher, and lover. He is forced to experience the pain of being able to look but not touch, much as the pain Woo-jin Lee expresses having felt after Dae-su Oh's rumors spread and created the great rift between Lee Soo-ah and her incestuously amorous brother.

Music as well as sound are both avenues used very effectively in this movie. The fact that the intense scenes were accentuated, in contrast, by often soothing melodies of classical genre added to the macabre nature of many of the characters, including Dae-su Oh, since he exacts rather brutal means of revenge on any affiliated with his imprisonment during his search for the mastermind behind his capture and the death of his family. The sounds used for various scenes added to the suspense, as in the scene where Dae-su Oh is nearly strangled to death and a single gunshot releases the muffled effects of the sounds, which are meant to mimic the reality that Dae-su Oh is about to be killed.

Evident throughout the film but unseen until many of the ending scenes is the fact that Woo-jin Lee's torture of Dae-su Oh was actually meant to reflect all of his own torment, particularly such themes as Dae-su Oh's forced role as a nameless fugitive who was blamed for the death of a loved one. Dae-su Oh is lonely, angry and unable to exact any means of revenge upon the warden who, until the end, is much better at
keeping his tongue in check.

In certain instances, Dae-su Oh is even given clues for the reason behind his imprisonment, such as his discovery of the cassette tape damning him to his hotel room-like cell. The audience, if perceptive, could even gather from the very beginning that Dae-su Oh's mouth gets him into trouble frequently. He is, after all, quickly seen as one whose self-control is severely lacking and whose mannerisms are extremely inappropriate.

Many enigmatic sayings are also used throughout the progression of the film and they are not made clear until the end. Dae-su Oh, himself, fails to realize the wisdom of his own words until their use to him later. By using such sayings, the movie forces the audience to brood over possible allocations for the quotes and thereby submerses the viewers on a philosophical level, which is quite different from the
gruesome action scenes and intense love scenes presented. In addition to the philosophical qualities of the movie, I thought the effect of adding a character whose nickname was "Monte Cristo" further exemplified the director's desire that the audience relate to Dae-su Oh's driven urge for revenge.

It is difficult, following the revelations of the characters, to take the side of either party since Dae-su Oh's carelessness with his tongue seems to have been the entire reason for his suffering and Woo-jin Lee's taboo relationship with his sister led him to murder her and cast blame on Dae-su Oh as the scapegoat for his crime.

Dae-su Oh is vengeful and almost animalistic after his fifteen-year imprisonment and seems increasingly lethargic until his discovery that Mi-do, his lover, is actually his daughter. I thought this aspect of the film, while rather like a soap opera, added a the unity and balance that the action scenes lacked. The entire portion relating to the hypnotism seemed rather starkly unrealistic, which I found was disruptive to the rest of the movie because of its effect at reminding everyone that the movie was just that.

Aimee Hayden Keller: Response to Slam

2006-01-26T08:36:00.000-05:00

Aimee Hayden Keller
Eng 281 TR 6:30 – 9:15

The film Slam observes the lives of African Americans in Washington D.C. as a mirror through which to understand the lives of black people across the nation. Slam offers a great contrast between themes of freedom and imprisonment, ultimately questioning what it means to be free. The opening scenes flash back and fourth between African American life on the streets of Washington D.C. and African American life inside the walls of a D.C. prison. The contrast between freedom and imprisonment is initially very literal, observing the simple freedoms enjoyed by African Americans outside the walls of the prison, walking through the streets, or playing basketball, while black men within the walls of the prison, suffer a loss of dignity, and control over their lives. Interestingly, as the film looks to the freedoms and livelihoods of African American children in D.C., the viewer cannot help but wonder if these children also will soon suffer the indignity of imprisonment in the city’s predominantly black prison.

As the film progresses and main character Ray Joshua is imprisoned himself, the viewer is urged to acknowledge the oppressive system which traps African Americans into lives of economic depravity, violence, and inevitable imprisonment. As stated by his public defender when he is arrested for possession of marijuana, “You are the victim of a casualty of war…You’re black. You’re young. You’re from the Southeast. You’re in the inner city. You don’t have a chance.” Ray’s trial brings to the viewer’s attention how the country’s socially and economically oppressive system forces black people to resort to illegal occupations as a means of living. When asked if he is guilty of his crime, Ray states, “I’m just out their survivin’. What can I do?” Upon being incarcerated and pushed amongst the inner prison gang rivalry, Ray reflects on how the system itself is to blame for the predominance of African Americans making up the prison population, recalling in his poetry how the imprisonment of African Americans today within an oppressive system is simply a continuation of imprisonment and enslavement of Africans in the middle passage under the rule of the white man.

Later, when meeting and connecting with character Lauren Bell, the prison literature and poetry teacher, the viewer’s understanding of freedom verses imprisonment is again challenged. Lauren urges the Ray and other inmates to realize that freedom and imprisonment is most truly mental and emotional, and real freedom is inside them, something that can never be truly taken from them.

In the few days that Ray is released from prison to await his hearing, he spends time with Laura and is offered yet another view of freedom and imprisonment. Laura points her finger back at Ray, revealing to him that he, as a drug dealer, was her imprisoner. In explaining that she was a former drug addict, she tells Ray, “I’ve been a slave. Fuck being a prisoner…Who was it that enslaved me, huh?...It was you.” Through this new view of imprisonment, Ray realizes that it African Americans themselves that may also be to blame for their repetitive cycle of oppression, and he, himself must make the effort to change his actions in order to break the cycle.
Ultimately, Lauren urges Ray to not “fall into their game” and seek to run from his sentence, for if he runs from it, he will “just get caught up later.” She urges him to break the oppressive cycle, the game of those in power seeking to control the fate of African Americans, by enduring his sentence and ultimately regaining freedom once his sentence is up, in which he may be wise enough to make life decisions that will offer him real freedom. She explains, “Your freedom is there, it is waiting for you, and believe it or not, it’s waiting for you in the God damn prison.” The movie closes with Ray choosing to accept his sentence, taking responsibility for his actions, and knowing that freedom waits for him.

Jeff Blevins: Response to Miller's Crossing

2006-01-24T15:01:00.000-05:00

Jeff Blevins
ENG281 TR 3:30 – 4:45

Miller’s Crossing is something like an existential Godfather. Of course there is resolution at the end. Leo, our loveable gangster boss, is saved and every thing is righted, but we still get the sense that this cycle is just going to continue and whoever wins out over Leo is also going to have to defend his throne.

When Tommy walks away at the end of the film we know that there can be no true satisfaction. This movie is really about history. The Coen brothers have defined a teleological trend in human actions. The human being desires feudalism. We can see this in our everyday lives as capitalists. Under communist sharing and equality we balk and say hey wait a minute, I want something that no one else can have. A gangster is someone in whom this desire has run wild.

The film, for me, hearkens back to existentialism, yes. But not really Kafkaesque existentialism. More specifically, I see elements from one of the great Japanese existentialists in the film, Natsume Soseki. His novel Kokoro and Miller’s Crossing have the same outlook on their respective societies. Kokoro is set in a time period in Japanese history where great change is occurring. There was, in this time, an intense dichotomy between peasantry and educated youth. There were great movements and struggles as the samurai became, slowly, a dieing breed. These samurai, whose privileges to carry weapons and serve in the military had been revoked, were assigned high ranks in the military and would later be one of the greatest causes for Japanese militarism. New religions were filtering in and the society was becoming many nationalities functioning as one nationality. Miller’s Crossing and Kokoro both call for a return to form.
They both plead the case of samurai and the gangster.

We know this because Leo is the only loveable character in the entire film. Leo is the most sensitive and empathetic person, and really the only good person that we get to know. He isn’t calculating and he isn’t shrewd, but he is bad ass and he is intelligent. Just like Japan’s dead samurai class.

The gangster, in this film, can also be viewed as a tragic hero. Robert Warshow, a famous movie critic of the 40s, once wrote a piece entitled The Gangster as the Tragic Hero. In this piece Warshow showed how the life of the gangster was actually extremely lonely and forlorn. This attitude is summed up by the madness of Leo’s adversary, the over ambitious booze-runner, Casper. One of the best lines of the movie was his: “Where does it all end” and also “Christ, runnin’ things.” The moral of the fable is that the top is a lonely and hard place to be. You become obsessed with maintenance of your position and you slowly lose your cool. Many former gangsters repent their deeds and sins, like Tookie Williams, founder of The Crips. Of course, maybe he was just trying to get off death row.

The Coen brothers piece together these two ideas of the gangster. They show us the figure of Leo who stands for the failure of the true gangster class.
This class didn’t fail from lack of intelligence or planning, but indeed from being overly human and caring. They were too close to their own ideals. The fat, bald, booze-runner is a much more tragic figure. His life and death have all the elements of an Oedipus Rex and this leads to another theme of the film, lack of compassion.

This comes out most notably in the story of Bernard.
Bernard has double crossed Casper and to test Tommy’s loyalty, he has him kill Bernard. Tommy, instead, lets Bernard go in a loving scene full of compassion and pathos. Bernard, instead of skipping town, decides to blackmail Tommy and threatens to make himself seen.

Unless Tommy kills Casper. Later in the story Tommy ruthlessly murders Bernard. Now the Coen brothers aren’t saying that compassion is a bad thing for the human race. They aren’t telling us how they really feel about the world. What they are saying is that, for the gangster, compassion is sadly remiss. This parallels with Leo whom the viewer is led to feel has too large of a heart. Leo, after all, is closely related to Lion, and we all know about lions and their hearts.

Throughout all of these serious meanings and motives, the Coen brothers, in true form, also weave a strong parody. This parody is both of gangster cinema and of society. First and foremost we have the parody of Godfather. In this sense Leo takes on a whole new meaning as the gangster boos who can’t function without help from his friends. Leo is the Godfather who doesn’t know what’s going on and is completely fallible. Every character takes on a kooky second meaning. The societal parody is best demonstrated through the actions of the police and the mayor. The police in this film were completely absurd. Their absurdity is so intense that they seem much worse than the gangsters. The mayor is portrayed as a weak figure that is at the whim of whichever boss is in power at which time.

The Coen brothers say many things with their film. They ask many questions also. They show us how the gangster is both tragic and fallible. They defend the gangster in his true form as exemplifying, simply, our own dreams come to life. They do not blame Leo, but only Casper, whose death is the most tragic and ironic of all. Conversely they ask us why we allow this complex ballet to continue, they offer up no good cop who fights back. Everyone, to them, is corrupted and under a sinister influence. They ask us, if gangsters are so weak and so feudal, why not be feudal in response and overthrow a regime. All it takes is a little will-power.

Cheryl Rogers: Response to Sin City

2006-01-24T12:50:00.000-05:00

(I accepted this during our free week as it is evident she worked to understand the film, but I asked that from now on in the longer responses she develop a more focused essay-style response--Michael)

Cheryl Rogers
T/R 3:30-4:45
Section J001

Frank Miller’s Sin City Film Response

The film Frank Miller's Sin City has a distinct style reminiscent of the film noir genre of the 1940's. As we follow the four main protagonists through Sin City: Josh Hartnett as "The Man", Bruce Willis as "Hartigan", Mickey Roarke as "Marv" and Clive Owen as "Dwight"; each with his own story to tell. One way that the director, Robert Rodriguez, allows us to quickly understand each of these characters is by having each provide a first person narrative throughout their part of the story. By using this style we as the audience are able to get a glimpse inside their thoughts and motivations, we sympathize with these characters and are able to identify them as the "good guys".

The Good Guys
The Man- A hit man. We don't really get to see his motivations in the film we just know that he's getting paid for his work. Maybe he feels that he is able to provide justice in a place where justice hasn't existed for a long time. There is also a sense that he believes he's releasing his victims from their troubled lives in Sin City as well.

Hartigan- A good, old cop. When we first see Hartigan he's a valiant cop trying to save an innocent young girl from becoming the next victim of a sadistic child raping murderer. He saves her from her captor and is about to make sure that Roark Jr. never harms another person, but he's double crossed by his partner. He holds on until back up comes he willingly sacrificing his freedom for the safety of little Nancy Callahan. He's imprisoned and secretly converses with Nancy until one day the Yellow Bastard shows up in his cell. Afraid for Nancy's safety Hartigan confesses to being a child molester and is let out of prison. He tracks down Nancy to make sure that she's okay, until he realizes that he's been set up and has led the Yellow Bastard right to Nancy. Now he'll do whatever it takes to make sure that the Yellow Bastard never hurts anyone ever again and that Nancy is protected, even if that means he must sacrifice himself for her safety once more.

Marv- A big, ugly ex-con. He's been set up to be the fall guy for killing a prostitute named Goldie. Goldie is the only woman Marv has ever loved and he won't just sit by and let the real killer get away with it. As he evades the cops and begins tracking down the culprit he runs into Goldie's twin sister, Wendy. With her help Marv tracks down the sadistic Kevin, who he soon discovers is just a pawn of Cardinal Roark. Together Cardinal Roark and Kevin have been killing prostitutes and cannibalizing them to grow closer to God. Marv does avenge Goldie's death and willingly pays for it with his own life in the electric chair.

Dwight- A murderer with a new face. He is very protective of his women, first convincing Jackie Boy to take his party somewhere away from his girlfriend, Shellie's apartment. Then he follows Jackie to Old Town to make sure that he doesn't hurt anyone else. After the prostitutes that run Old Town mistakenly murder a cop (Jackie Boy) Dwight will do whatever he must to protect the women of Old Town who are now in danger of losing their rights to rule themselves.

The Women-
Goldie, Nancy, Gail, Lucille, Wendy, Shellie. All of the women in Sin City are tough because they have to be. However, they are all protected or avenged by their male counterparts; Nancy by Hartigan; Goldie, Wendy, and Lucille by Marv; Shellie, Gail and the rest of the prostitutes by Dwight.

The Bad Guys-
Cardinal Roark, Senator Roark, Roark Jr/The Yellow Bastard, Jackie Boy. All are corrupted by money and/or power and will use their formidable power and influence to allow and/or partake in the evil, sadistic behavior that is condoned because of them in Sin City.

The topic of the film is that the justice system in Sin City is dysfunctional. It has been corrupted by individuals who were corrupted by money and power. There is no real justice because the villains are people who have money and hold traditionally respectable positions; clergy, politicians, policemen. They have used their positions of power and influence to influence the system to their favor until the entire system has been turned upside down. The "good guys" who are traditionally people that we would not think very highly of; hit men, ex-cons, and murderers, have to seek retribution by becoming outlaws and vigilantes. In Sin City the "good guys" are considered outlaws and the "bad guys" are considered to be upstanding, respectable men. The subject matter is very intense and disturbing. Likewise, the actions of the “good guys” are equally disturbing and violent, but their actions are heroic because they are protecting and avenging the weak in the darkness of Sin City.

I think there are a lot of elements in our own society present in Sin City. Especially the corruption of our justice system by people of wealth and influence to manipulate the system so that they receive more favorable verdicts, or lighter sentences all because of who they are and how much money they have.

Oldboy

2006-01-19T22:38:00.000-05:00

The Structure of Oldboy

IndieWire Reviews of Oldboy

WEEK 2: Form and Narrative

2006-01-19T08:18:00.000-05:00

Week 2: Form and Narrative

Reading assignment is chapter 2 of the textbook.

IN CLASS FILM:

Oldboy (Chan Wook-Park) 2003: 120 minutes

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

American History X (Tony Kaye) 1998: 119 minutes

Blue Velvet (David Lynch) 1986: 120 minutes

Bonnie and Clyde (Arthur Penn) 1967: 111 minutes

Chinatown (Roman Polanski) 1974: 131 minutes

City of God (Fernando Meirelles and Katia Lund) 2002: 130 minutes

A Clockwork Orange (Stanley Kubrick) 1971: 136 minutes

Dog Day Afternoon (Sydney Lumet) 1975: 124 minutes

Drugstore Cowboy (Gus Van Sant) 1989: 100 minutes

Fargo (Coen Brothers) 1996: 98 minutes

Fight Club (David Fincher) 1999: 138 minutes

Gangs of New York (Martin Scorsese) 2002: 166 minutes

Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai (Jim Jarmusch) 1999: 116 minutes (Available in our library--its on the reserve desk and you can check it out overnight)

The Godfather (Francis Ford Coppola) 1972: 175 minutes

The Godfather II (Francis Ford Coppola) 1974: 200 minutes

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (Guy Ritchie) 1998: 105 minutes

Mean Streets (Martin Scorsese) 1973: 110 minutes

Memento (Christopher Nolan) 2000: 113 minutes

Miller’s Crossing (The Coen Brothers) 1990: 115 minutes

Once Upon a Time in America (Sergio Leone) 1984: 227 minutes

The Professional (Luc Besson) 1994: 110 minutes

Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarrantino) 1994: 154 minutes

Requiem for a Dream (Darren Aronofsky) 2000: 102 minutes

Resevoir Dogs (Quentin Tarrantino) 1992: 99 minutes

Sexy Beast (Jonathan Glazer) 2000: 89 minutes (Ben Kingsley)

The Silence of the Lambs (Jonathan Demme) 1991: 118 minutes

Sin City (Robert Rodriquez and Frank Miller) 2005: 124 minutes

Slam (Marc Levin) 1998: 100 minutes

Snatch (Guy Ritchie) 2000: 104 minutes

The Sting (George Roy Hill) 1973: 129 minutes

Unforgiven (Clint Eastwood) 1992: 131 minutes

The Usual Suspects (Bryan Singer) 1995: 106 minutes

The Wild Bunch (Sam Peckinpah) 1969: 134 minutes

WEEK 1: What is a Movie?

2006-01-12T17:38:00.000-05:00

(Don't forget reading assignment for this week is the handout "Film: The Moving Image" and Chapter 1 in your textbook "Looking at Movies.")

To get descriptions/previews of these films visit the Internet Movie Database

Brokeback Mountain, Breakfast on Pluto, and Pride and Prejudice are new films that are currently showing at the downtown Kentucky Theater (support independent film venues!) and Rushmore is an older film which they will be showing as the midnight film on friday and saturday.

Munich is also available in many theaters around town.

All of the other films are readily available at video stores and libraries around town.

The purpose of these assignments is to increase your knowledge of films--so watch films that you have not seen before. When watching these films think about the documentary we watched in class. Attempt to pay attention to the editing and the art of filmmaking.

Week 1: What is a Movie?

IN CLASS FILM:

The Cutting Edge: The Magic of Movie Editing (Wendy Apple) 2004: 98 minutes.

OUTSIDE VIEWING OPTIONS:

Being John Malkovich (Spike Jonze) 1999: 112 minutes

Breakfast on Pluto (Neil Jordan) 2005: 135 minutes

Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee) 2005: 134 minutes

City of God (Fernando Meirelles and Katia Lund) 2002: 130 minutes

Crash (Paul Haggis) 2004: 113 minutes

Donnie Darko (Richard Kelley) 2001 (Director’s Cut 2004): 133 minutes

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Michel Gondry) 2004: 108 minutes

Fight Club (David Fincher) 1999: 139 minutes

Grizzly Man (Werner Herzog) 2005: 103 minutes

Hotel Rwanda (Terry George) 2004: 121 minutes

Memento (Christopher Nolan) 2000: 113 minutes

Million Dollar Baby (Clint Eastwood) 2004: 132 minutes

Mr. Death (Errol Morris) 1999: 91 minutes

Mulholland Drive (David Lynch) 2001: 147 minutes

Munich (Steven Spielberg) 2005: ?

The Pianist (Roman Polanski) 2002: 150 minutes

Pride and Prejudice (Joe Wright) 2005: 127 minutes

Requiem for a Dream (Darren Aronofsky) 2000: 102 minutes

Rushmore (Wes Anderson) 1998: 93 minutes

Sin City (Richard Rodriquez) 2005: 124 minutes

Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki) 2001: 125 minutes

Philosophy and Films: Being, Becoming and (Non)Belief

2005-12-08T23:22:00.000-05:00

RECOMMENDED READING/LISTENING:

BBC: In Our Time

Philosopher Zone: Online Radio Show

Philosophy Now

Philosophy Radio: Archive of Shows Online

Philosophy Talk: The Online Radio Show

Philosophy Talk: The Blog

Schuchardt, Read Mercer. “Cinema—The New Cathedral of Hollywood: How Films are Relacing Religion in Our Cinematic Age.” Metaphilm (November 9, 2001)

Wikipedia: Philosophy Portal

Readings about Existentialism as supplements for I Heart Huckabees:

Existentialism: Wikipedia Definition

Jean-Paul Sartre: Existentialism Is a Humanism

Summary of Some Main Points from Sartre's "Existentialism and Human Emotions"

IN CLASS FILM:

I Heart Huckabees (David O. Russell) 2004: 107 minutes.

Frazer, Bryant. “Existential Body Bag.” (2005)

Garrett, Daniel. “David Owen Russell’s I Heart Huckabees.” Offscreen 9.1 (January 31, 2005)

Kirby, Matt. “I Heart Huckabees: Premodern Help for Postmodern Times.” Metaphilm (November 12, 2004)

Mitsuda, Kristi. “Core Issues: I Heart Huckabees.” Reverse Shot (Autumn 2004)

Overstreet, Jeffrey. “I Heart Huckabees.” Christianity Today (October 1, 2004)

---. “The Movie Director Who Made Me a Priest.” Christianity Today (October 5, 2004)

Saunders, Alan and Kerry Sanders. "The Existential Detective Agency." The Philosopher's Zone (November 16, 2005)

Smith, Gavin. “Hearts and Minds: A screwball comedy about philosophical crisis, I ♥ Huckabees provides a featherlight crash course in weighty matters.” Film Comment (September/October 2004)

---. “David O. Russell Interviewed.” Film Comment (September/October 2004)

Walsh, David. “Confused, Struggling America.” WSWS (November 30, 2004)

OUTSIDE REVIEW FILMS:

12 Monkeys (Terry Gilliam) 1996: 130 minutes.

Dailey, Frances Flannery. “Bruce Willis as the Messiah: Human Effort, Salvation and Apocalypticism in 12 Monkeys.” Journal of Religion & Film 4.1 (April 2000)

Ostwalt, Conrad. “Visions of the End: Secular Apocalypse in Recent Hollywood Film.” Journal of Religion & Film 2.1 (April 1998)

Rascaroli, Laura. “Scopic Drive, Time Travel and Film Spectatorship in Gilliam’s Twelve Monkeys and Bigelow’s Strange Days.” Kinema (Spring 2001)

The Addiction (Abel Ferrara) 1995: 82 minutes

Frazer, Bryant. “The Addiction.” (1995)

A.I.: Artificial Intelligence (Steven Spielberg) 2001: 145 minutes.

Flannery-Dailey, Frances. “Robot Heavens and Robot Dreams: Ultimate Reality in A.I. and Other Recent Films.” Journal of Religion & Film 7.2 (October 2003)

Frazer, Bryant. “Ghost in the Machine: A.I.” (2001)

Glaister, Stephen M. “Saving A.I.: Artificial Intelligence: Philosophical Aspects of Spielberg’s Neglected Robo-Epic.” Bright Lights Journal #48 (May 2005)

Koresky, Michael. “Connective Tissue: A.I.—Bridging the Spielberg Gap.” Reverse Shot (April/May 2003)

Robnik, Drehil. “Saving One Life: Spielberg’s Artificial Intelligence as Redemptive Memory of Things.” Jump Cut 45 (Fall 2002)

Solman, Gregory. “Awakening to A.I.’s Dream.” Senses of Cinema 27 (July-August, 2003)

Walsh, David. “Starting Over: A.I.: Artificial Intelligence.” WSWS (July 16, 2001)

American Beauty (Sam Mendes) 1999: 122 minutes.

Frazer, Bryant. “That Obscure Object of Desire: American Beauty.” (1999)

Hole, George T. “American Beauty: Look Closer.” Movies and the Meaning of Life: Philosophers Take on Hollywood. eds. Kimberly A. Blessing and Paul J. Tudico. Chicago: Open Court, 2005: 153-168.

Lorence, James L. “Suburban Anxiety in Modern America: American Beauty (1999) and the Pitfalls of Prosperity.” Screening America: United States History Through Film Since 1900. NY: Pearson/Longman, 2006: 195-203.

Smith, David L. “’Beautiful Necessities’: American Beauty and the Idea of Freedom.” Journal of Religion & Film 6.2 (October 2002)

Spiegel, James S. “The Theological Aesthetic of American Beauty.” The Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 4 (Summer 2003)

Walsh, David. “Is This the Real Thing?: American Beauty.” WSWS (September 29, 1999)

Blade Runner (Ridley Scott) Studio Release 1982/Director's Cut 1993: 117 minutes.

Cupitt, Cathy. “Eyeballing the Simulacra: Desire and Vision in Blade Runner.” The Rhizome Factory (August 10, 2001)

Kozlovic, Anton Karl. “From Holy Aliens to Cyborg Saviours: Biblical Subtexts in Four Science Fiction Films.” Journal of Religion & Film 5.2 (October 2001)

Lightman, Herb A. and Richard Patterson. “Cinematography for Blade Runner.” (1982) American Cinematographer (Reprint: March 1999)

LoBrutto, Vincent. “Production Design: Blade Runner.” Becoming Film Literate: The Art and Craft of Motion Pictures. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2005: 39-45.

Wee, Valerie Su-Lin. “The Most Poetic Subject in the World.” Kinema (Spring 1997)

Brazil (Terry Gilliam) 1985: 131 minutes.

Hamel, Keith James. “Modernity and Mise-En-Scene: Terry Gilliam and Brazil.” Images 6 (May 1998)

Contact (Roger Zemeckis) 1997: 150 minutes.

Keith, Heather and Steve Fesmire. “Our Place in the Cosmos: Faith and Belief in Contact.” Movies and the Meaning of Life: Philosophers Take on Hollywood. eds. Kimberly A. Blessing and Paul J. Tudico. Chicago: Open Court, 2005: 17-31.

Sadlek, Gregory M. “Robert Zemeckis’s Contact as a Late-Twentieth Century Paradiso.” Journal of Religion & Film 5.2 (October 2001)

Sison, Antonio D. “Epiphany of the Throne-Chariot: Merkabah Mysticism and the Film Contact.” Journal of Religion & Film 9.1 (April 2005)

Stone, Bryan P. “Religious Faith and Science in Contact.” Journal of Religion and Film 2.2 (October 1998)

Groundhog Day (Harold Ramis) 1993: 101 minutes.

Ebert, Roger. “Groundhog Day: A Great Movie.” Chicago-Sun Times (Janaury 30, 2005)

Foley, Michael. “Phil’s Shadow: On the Lessons of Groundhog Day.” Touchstone (December 7, 2003)

Goldberg, Jonah. “A Movie For All Time: Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow, Groundhog Day Scores.” National Review (February 14, 2005)

Minority Report (Steven Spielberg) 2002: 146 minutes.

Chung, Alex. “Divine Intervention: Minority Report.” Reverse Shot (Spring 2004)

Erickson, Steve. “Minority Report.” (2002)

Frazer, Bryant. “Does Whatever a Spider Can: Minority Report.” (2002)

Friedman, Lester D. “Minority Report: A Dystopic Vision.” Senses of Cinema 27 (July-August, 2003)

James, Nick. “An Eye For an Eye: In His Future Cop-On-The-Run Thriller Minority Report, Steven Spielberg Pushes Himself to Revel in the Sordid Mess of Human Dysfunction.” Sight and Sound (August 2002)

Karounos, Michael. “Minority Report.” Journal of Religion & Film 6.2 (October 2002)

Walsh, David. “In Favor of a Police State? Not Quite …: Minority Report.” WSWS (July 4, 2002)

Solaris (Steven Soderbergh) 2002: 99 minutes.

Fujiwara, Chris. “Why?: Steven Soderbergh Remakes Solaris.” The Boston Phoenix (November 28-December 5, 2002)

Strange Days (Kathryn Bigelow) 1995: 145 minutes.

Frazer, Bryant. “Strange Days.” (1995)

Plate, Brent S. and Tod Linafelt. “Seeing Beyond the End of the World in Strange Days and Until the End of the World.” Journal of Religion & Film 7.1 (April 2003)

Rascaroli, Laura. “Scopic Drive, Time Travel and Film Spectatorship in Gilliam’s Twelve Monkeys and Bigelow’s Strange Days.” Kinema (Spring 2001)

The Truman Show (Peter Weir) 1998: 103 minutes.

Castle, Robert. “Performance World: The Truman Show’s Sociology.” Bright Lights Film Journal 49 (August 2005)

Ebert, Roger. “The Truman Show.” Chicago Sun-Times (June 5, 1998)

Mercadente, Linda A. “The God Behind the Screen: Pleasantville & The Truman Show.” Journal of Religion & Film 5.2 (October 2001)

Walsh, David. “The Truman Show: Further Signs of Life in Hollywood.” WSWS (June 15, 1998)

Waking Life (Richard Linklater) 2001: 99 minutes.

Hughes, Darren. “Seeking ‘Holy Moments’ in the Movies: Waking Life.” Long Pauses (October 22, 2002)

Jones, Kent. “To Live or Clarify the Moment: Rick Linklater’s Waking Life.” Senses of Cinema 19 (March-April 2002)

Pevere, Geoff. “Mind Your Step: Waking Life.” Cinema Scope (2001)

Rowin, Michael Joshua. “Life Is But a Dream: Waking Life.” Reverse Shot (Summer 2004)