Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Week 5: Ideology, Auteurism & Counter Cinema: The Disruption of Classical Narrative
A Bout de Souffle (Breathless)
Country: France
Year: 1960
Director: Jean-Luc Goddard
Length: 87 min
Language: French
Awards:
Critical Comments:
Breathless is a very difficult film to read because I am not exposed to foreign films especially one that comes from the French New Wave. However, my experience with Breathless came from an earlier and different source in which it became a novelty film. Therefore, Breathless to me is a timeless film but it is too contained with its own context that only through the readings that I am slightly able to understand the novelty of it and what are the meanings involved.
The representation of love takes in many forms in Breathless. We have Michel who goes around freeloading from women who he presumably slept with. The romantic expectations of love is absent except to use as a contact of past acquaintence. This changes when Michel comes to Patricia who he wants to take to Italy after he is pursued for a crime. Michel follows Patricia around like in the scene where she is selling the New York Herald. Michel is only able to relate with Patricia about serious issues like the long talk they had in her room.
The relationship between Michel and Patricia represents how man can have love to a single woman when love can be easily expressed to others. The convention (that are antithectical to the classical narrative) used to give that meaning by the director (auteur) is a mark of presenting meaning with style.
Readings:
Country: France
Year: 1960
Director: Jean-Luc Goddard
Length: 87 min
Language: French
Awards:
- Best Director - Jean-Luc Goddard (Berlin Film Festival)
- Best Film - Jean-Luc Goddard (French Syndicate of Cinema Critics)
- Feature Film - Jean Luc Goddard (Prix Jean Vigo)
Critical Comments:
Breathless is a very difficult film to read because I am not exposed to foreign films especially one that comes from the French New Wave. However, my experience with Breathless came from an earlier and different source in which it became a novelty film. Therefore, Breathless to me is a timeless film but it is too contained with its own context that only through the readings that I am slightly able to understand the novelty of it and what are the meanings involved.
The representation of love takes in many forms in Breathless. We have Michel who goes around freeloading from women who he presumably slept with. The romantic expectations of love is absent except to use as a contact of past acquaintence. This changes when Michel comes to Patricia who he wants to take to Italy after he is pursued for a crime. Michel follows Patricia around like in the scene where she is selling the New York Herald. Michel is only able to relate with Patricia about serious issues like the long talk they had in her room.The relationship between Michel and Patricia represents how man can have love to a single woman when love can be easily expressed to others. The convention (that are antithectical to the classical narrative) used to give that meaning by the director (auteur) is a mark of presenting meaning with style.
Readings:
- Cook, Pam, ed (1985) 'Authorship and counter-cinema' The Cinema Book, New York: Pantheon, 192-195. The reading describes about some of the methods of studying films by Jean-Luc Godard as an auteur and its relations with history. From this reading, the French New Wave and the Dzigo Vertov group were about making films that were a social practice. Such films would be thought provoking and this would be a great shift from the classical Hollywood narrative. To the French New Wave, films should be political that addresses social issues, in which Jean-Luc Godard spent most of his filmmaking career centered on Maoism. Jean-Luc Goadard makes films that are emphasised on relationships. Breathless, Jean-Luc Godard first attempt in filmmaking, was essentially about the relationship between man and women. Another interesting point made in the reading is how directors as auteurs are evolved by the history and circumstances that surround them. At the time when Breathless was made as a counter-cinema to the Hollywood cinema, it had a cynical tone of reference to Hollywood cinema, like the idolization of Humphrey Bogart which the French New Wave movement sprouted from but as an opposition to it.
- Buckland, Warren (1998) 'Film Authorship: the director as auteur' Teach Yourself Film Studies, London: Hodder, 72-100. This reading gives a very comprehensive history of the auteur policy and what does it represent. The example given to examine Breathless is very much applicable and speaks very much about how it is a film made by an auteur and not simply just another director. I find the concentrated emphasis of the difference of the narrative and the director very interesting. Directors as auteurs can stand seperately from the narrative of the film. Once it is done right, this is how an auteur can transform a mediocre script into a stylise film. Auteurs are about trying to place a signature styles in their films and that is why they have consistency in their film. The most prominent style that Jean-Luc Godard had displayed in Breathless is mentioned in the reading, the discontinity editing when Michel shoots the police. This is already an imprint of him as an auteur who wants to change the way that we see scenes being shot. Auteurs in search of creating their own style find ways on how to shoot a scene differently from different angels to different editing.
Monday, October 30, 2006
Week 14: Conclusion
Cinema Paradiso
Country: Italy
Year: 1989
Director: Giuseppe Tornatore
Length: 155 min / 170 min (Director's Cut)
Language: Italian
Critical Comment:
Cinema Paradiso is an excellent film that brings back the memories of cinema, film, the audience and film history.
Cinema Paradiso shows how ci nema can have an affect on the lives of the people it touches. It is a novel piece with a novel narrative. A small boy in town who has a curious passion and fascination for cinema and film who grows up to be the projectionist after a disaster in the town's only cinema and later goes out to be a filmmaker himself. Cinema Paradiso reminds us that cinema is watched and engages with the emotion of the audience. It is like a documentary that is almost similar to Bloody Sunday, that it enacts what cinema means to the audiences. Different emotions, expression, behaviours, attitudes and practices of watching cinema are shown. From the man who spits over the balcony, the man who memorizes every line until the end to the man that just wants to sleep in the cinema. Cinema Paradiso is like a docu-drama in that sense, it wants to represent realism of the different audiences that sometimes we find sitting right next to us.
This film also reminds me of Singin' in the Rain that base its narrative on film history. Toto is very much involved in the filmmaking process (since young until the end) like Don Lockwood is as an actor. Both also experience a decline of a certain era. While Don Lockwood sees the death of silent film (through the coming of sound), Toto witnessed the demolition of his hometown cinema; the death of cinema altogether (due to the TV, which was seen as the antithesis of cinema, which the film dedicates a small scene to it, 'Cinema with no film?').
But Cinema Paradiso although it has these undertones of realism and documentary about film and cinema in general, it still manages to fit in and draw the audience into its own unique narrative and seperate. The story of Toto as a child and how he befrie nds with Alfredo would go a long way to build a father-son relationship. A father which Toto nev er remembered. The love of a father for his son plays a very big part in the narrative and helps th e development of the character. Alfredo, the father, as a figure of wisdom, respect, sacrifice, companion and love speaks very much about fatherhood and it contribution in making Toto (a boy) into a man (although he never taught Toto how to become a 'bull').
Inserting a romance story is a great effect to elevate the mood of the narrative while it has its implications in the narrative. There are many types of love in Cinema Paradiso. A fatherly love that is shared between Alfredo and Toto (a father-son relationship), Toto's love for cinema (passion for art) and a romantic love between Toto and Elena (love between male and female). The theme of love is also explored through the cut scenes that Alfredo leaves behind for Toto in the end of the film. Love in film (with all the kissing scenes from various films) is just like love for film. We find the same experience for 'happy endings' in love like how Toto finally 'reunites' with Elena after 30 years in real life.
Readings:
Country: Italy
Year: 1989
Director: Giuseppe Tornatore
Length: 155 min / 170 min (Director's Cut)
Language: Italian
Awards:
- Best Foreign Language Film (Oscar)
- Best Foreign Film (Awards of the Japanese Academy)
- Bert Actor - Philippe Noiret (BAFTA Awards)
- Best Actor in a Supporting Role - Salvatore Cascio (BAFTA Awards)
- Best Film not in the English Language (BAFTA Awards)
- Best Original Film Score (BAFTA Awards)
- Best Screenplay, Original - Giuseppe Tornatore (BAFTA Awards)
- Grand Prize of the Jury - Giuseppe Tornatore (Cannes Film Festival)
- Best Film - Giuseppe Tornatore (Cleveland International Film Festival)
- Best Poster - Jouineau-Bordugue & Gilles Jouin (Cesar Awards)
- Best Music - Ennio Morricone (David di Donatello Awards)
- Best Actor - Philippe Noiret (European Film Awards)
- Special Prize of the Jury - Giuseppe Tornatore (European Film Awards)
- Best Foreign Film (Golden Globe)
- Best Foreign Film (KCFCC Award)
- Actor of the Year - Philippe Noiret (ALFS Award)
- Foreign Language Film of the Year (ALFS Award)
- Best Foreign Language Film - Giuseppe Tornatore (Mainichi Film Concours)
- Best Foreign Film - Giuseppe Tornatore (Robert Festival)
- Best Young Actor Under Nine Appearing in a Foreign Film, Special Award - Salvatore Cascio (Young Artist Awards)
Critical Comment:
Cinema Paradiso is an excellent film that brings back the memories of cinema, film, the audience and film history.
Cinema Paradiso shows how ci nema can have an affect on the lives of the people it touches. It is a novel piece with a novel narrative. A small boy in town who has a curious passion and fascination for cinema and film who grows up to be the projectionist after a disaster in the town's only cinema and later goes out to be a filmmaker himself. Cinema Paradiso reminds us that cinema is watched and engages with the emotion of the audience. It is like a documentary that is almost similar to Bloody Sunday, that it enacts what cinema means to the audiences. Different emotions, expression, behaviours, attitudes and practices of watching cinema are shown. From the man who spits over the balcony, the man who memorizes every line until the end to the man that just wants to sleep in the cinema. Cinema Paradiso is like a docu-drama in that sense, it wants to represent realism of the different audiences that sometimes we find sitting right next to us.
Cinema Paradiso which centers about cinema is then very much related with Salaam Cinema as it tries to capture the essence of cinema. A film about cinema. It gives us an indepth look about the cinema projector and film (which caused caused a fire and later in the film, it becomes fireproof, 'Changes come too late') just like the snippets of shots of the filmmaking equipment that was used to shoot Salaam Cinema. We become very attached with the projector and the other equipment such as the film reels (and even the piles of invoices) because we see it very often and it is a large part of the narrative. The film is very much about the cinema just as much as its character, Toto (Salvatore).
This film also reminds me of Singin' in the Rain that base its narrative on film history. Toto is very much involved in the filmmaking process (since young until the end) like Don Lockwood is as an actor. Both also experience a decline of a certain era. While Don Lockwood sees the death of silent film (through the coming of sound), Toto witnessed the demolition of his hometown cinema; the death of cinema altogether (due to the TV, which was seen as the antithesis of cinema, which the film dedicates a small scene to it, 'Cinema with no film?').
But Cinema Paradiso although it has these undertones of realism and documentary about film and cinema in general, it still manages to fit in and draw the audience into its own unique narrative and seperate. The story of Toto as a child and how he befrie nds with Alfredo would go a long way to build a father-son relationship. A father which Toto nev er remembered. The love of a father for his son plays a very big part in the narrative and helps th e development of the character. Alfredo, the father, as a figure of wisdom, respect, sacrifice, companion and love speaks very much about fatherhood and it contribution in making Toto (a boy) into a man (although he never taught Toto how to become a 'bull').
Inserting a romance story is a great effect to elevate the mood of the narrative while it has its implications in the narrative. There are many types of love in Cinema Paradiso. A fatherly love that is shared between Alfredo and Toto (a father-son relationship), Toto's love for cinema (passion for art) and a romantic love between Toto and Elena (love between male and female). The theme of love is also explored through the cut scenes that Alfredo leaves behind for Toto in the end of the film. Love in film (with all the kissing scenes from various films) is just like love for film. We find the same experience for 'happy endings' in love like how Toto finally 'reunites' with Elena after 30 years in real life.
Readings:
- Ebert, Roger (1990) 'Cinema Paradiso - review'. Chicago Sun-Times. http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19900316/REVIEWS/3160302/1023. This review summarises Cinema Paradiso and is quite correct in addressing the meanings of emotions of the film. It evens point some trivia like the poster of Citizen Kane and other films from filmmakers of the era like Kurosawa. The narrative of Cinema Paradiso which I personally feel is an important part of the film where every process of Toto's growth is witnessed, Ebert is right to say that by the time Toto turns into a teenager, it turns a little predictable. However, althought predictable in the sense of Toto tragic romance with Elena, it builds the climax of the most powerful ending for the love of cinema (and the expression of love).
Week 12: Non-narrative Film
Koyaanisqatsi
Country: USA
Year: 1982
Director: Godfrey Reggio
Length: 87 min
Language: English / None
Awards:
Critical Comment:
The film is a piece of art since it doesn't use most conventions of filmmaking that we are normally used to see and expect from a narrative film. Koyaanisqatsi uses the simple essence of filmmaking of sound, cinemetography and editing. The shots are arranged according to different themes that when accompanied by the other elements of film it gives out whole new meanings.
First of all in terms of film style, Koyaanisqatsi touches on our raw senses. It does not stimulate our mind to think about what is being represented in the film. The imagery that comes together with the music makes us feel about what the film is representing. For example, the scenes of clouds that is notably repeated throughout the film and stands as a seperate motive and theme in the film itself emits an energy of the mystic, the heavens and even god(s). It is the film stlye that speaks to us directly rather than the meanings that we try to derive from the film. The lack of a narration gives space for us as the audience to make up our own narration. We are stimulated by the film.
To find any meaning in this film would be purely individual effort. Although in a broad sense, we can and will have different ways of reading and deriving our own meanings from watching any single film but Koyaanisqatsi takes this notion to its extreme. With the lack of so-call 'guidance' from the conventions that are familiar to us, Koyaanisqatsi gives us an infinite free space to reflect on what is being represented on film. The exploration of these open territories is perhaps the aim of Koyaanisqatsi. With so many different readings on the film, it is impossible to make sense out of it. As individual audience, we are meant to create our own meanings and that is enough to fully appreciate the film. This is the beauty of Koyaanisqatsi.
The following are some of the readings that I have came up from watching Koyaanisqatsi. Each and every one of them are based on my personal experience, thoughts, values and circumstances that would widely deviate from how others read this film.
I mentioned clouds as an example of theme and motive earlier. I believed that while many would agree that the opening scenes of Koyaanisqatsi has the discourse of man vs. nature. The opening scene of clouds, clouds in the city and the shadows of clouds represent the presence of a celestial being up above. This could further be seen as the presence of a god, a deity, a omniscient being or entity. Clouds serve as the barrier between man and that being which can be when man tries to penetrate that barrier to reach for the stars, the exploding rocket concludes that such attempt is forbidden and the cause of man's destruction. All of a sudden from this reading, the discourse of man agasint nature is changed into a discourse of man vs. god. Nature is embedded in god and any defilement men has against it defiles god. (Note that i used a lower case when refer to god, this is in no particular reference to any god to any religion).
Another meaning that I find very appealing in Koyaanisqatsi is how humanity is represented. First we see the glimpse of man as marauders of nature, we reap the earth of its resources and organize ourselves to prosper from those resources. Man brings technology with them to better improve their lives and the cause of civilization. As cities build up that become monuments of civilization, man is taken over by technology. We let technology determine our way of life, we go through our daily live like machines ourselves. From a way to better organize ourselves, we become a system that is repetetive, fast-paced and boring. However, it seems that Koyaanisqatsi also tries to remind us of our humanity, the things that make us essentially human. To feel emotion and have different outlook, we have different appearances (like when the close shots of people on the street) which makes us unique in our own way. While we are seperated as individuals in the inside, we appear like a united, homogenious whole from the outside, as a civilization. This point of view is seen through the 'god's eye view' of the cinematography that are mostly made out of long shots.
Yet at the end of the film, humanity continues to advance in technology. The electronic chips and their schematics represent miniaturization, how far man has developed which is ironically and analogously represented by the cities that man build. It as though the system that humanity has become is based on the electronic system that man would create, a paradox of the relationship between man and technology. Man is technology and technology is the basis of man. Another way of seeing this relationship of man and technology is that it serves as a warning or a glimpse into the future; the direction that mankind is taking.
This comes to the conclusion of the film. After we see the scences of the electronic systems, the film takes one last overlook on mankind. As an emotional being, as civilization, as part of a system but who are we and what does the future holds for us? This is very much related to the Hopi prophecy and mankind's anxiety for what will happen and anticipation for what is going to happen as predicted by the prophecy.
Readings:
Country: USA
Year: 1982
Director: Godfrey Reggio
Length: 87 min
Language: English / None
Awards:
- Best Documentary (Kansas City Film Critics Circle Awards)
- Best Music - Philip Glass (Los Angeles Film Critics Association Awards)
- Best Feature - Godfrey Reggio (Sao Paulo International Film Festival)
- Audience Award - Godfrey Reggio (Warsaw International Film Festival)
Critical Comment:
The film is a piece of art since it doesn't use most conventions of filmmaking that we are normally used to see and expect from a narrative film. Koyaanisqatsi uses the simple essence of filmmaking of sound, cinemetography and editing. The shots are arranged according to different themes that when accompanied by the other elements of film it gives out whole new meanings.
First of all in terms of film style, Koyaanisqatsi touches on our raw senses. It does not stimulate our mind to think about what is being represented in the film. The imagery that comes together with the music makes us feel about what the film is representing. For example, the scenes of clouds that is notably repeated throughout the film and stands as a seperate motive and theme in the film itself emits an energy of the mystic, the heavens and even god(s). It is the film stlye that speaks to us directly rather than the meanings that we try to derive from the film. The lack of a narration gives space for us as the audience to make up our own narration. We are stimulated by the film.
To find any meaning in this film would be purely individual effort. Although in a broad sense, we can and will have different ways of reading and deriving our own meanings from watching any single film but Koyaanisqatsi takes this notion to its extreme. With the lack of so-call 'guidance' from the conventions that are familiar to us, Koyaanisqatsi gives us an infinite free space to reflect on what is being represented on film. The exploration of these open territories is perhaps the aim of Koyaanisqatsi. With so many different readings on the film, it is impossible to make sense out of it. As individual audience, we are meant to create our own meanings and that is enough to fully appreciate the film. This is the beauty of Koyaanisqatsi.
The following are some of the readings that I have came up from watching Koyaanisqatsi. Each and every one of them are based on my personal experience, thoughts, values and circumstances that would widely deviate from how others read this film.
I mentioned clouds as an example of theme and motive earlier. I believed that while many would agree that the opening scenes of Koyaanisqatsi has the discourse of man vs. nature. The opening scene of clouds, clouds in the city and the shadows of clouds represent the presence of a celestial being up above. This could further be seen as the presence of a god, a deity, a omniscient being or entity. Clouds serve as the barrier between man and that being which can be when man tries to penetrate that barrier to reach for the stars, the exploding rocket concludes that such attempt is forbidden and the cause of man's destruction. All of a sudden from this reading, the discourse of man agasint nature is changed into a discourse of man vs. god. Nature is embedded in god and any defilement men has against it defiles god. (Note that i used a lower case when refer to god, this is in no particular reference to any god to any religion).
Another meaning that I find very appealing in Koyaanisqatsi is how humanity is represented. First we see the glimpse of man as marauders of nature, we reap the earth of its resources and organize ourselves to prosper from those resources. Man brings technology with them to better improve their lives and the cause of civilization. As cities build up that become monuments of civilization, man is taken over by technology. We let technology determine our way of life, we go through our daily live like machines ourselves. From a way to better organize ourselves, we become a system that is repetetive, fast-paced and boring. However, it seems that Koyaanisqatsi also tries to remind us of our humanity, the things that make us essentially human. To feel emotion and have different outlook, we have different appearances (like when the close shots of people on the street) which makes us unique in our own way. While we are seperated as individuals in the inside, we appear like a united, homogenious whole from the outside, as a civilization. This point of view is seen through the 'god's eye view' of the cinematography that are mostly made out of long shots.
Yet at the end of the film, humanity continues to advance in technology. The electronic chips and their schematics represent miniaturization, how far man has developed which is ironically and analogously represented by the cities that man build. It as though the system that humanity has become is based on the electronic system that man would create, a paradox of the relationship between man and technology. Man is technology and technology is the basis of man. Another way of seeing this relationship of man and technology is that it serves as a warning or a glimpse into the future; the direction that mankind is taking.
This comes to the conclusion of the film. After we see the scences of the electronic systems, the film takes one last overlook on mankind. As an emotional being, as civilization, as part of a system but who are we and what does the future holds for us? This is very much related to the Hopi prophecy and mankind's anxiety for what will happen and anticipation for what is going to happen as predicted by the prophecy.
Readings:
- Bordwell and Thompson (1993) 'Chapter 4: Non-narrative Formal Systems' Film At: An Introduction 4th ed, New York, McGraw-Hill, 102-141. This reading explores the types of non-narrative systems which is divided into four types. With the absence of the narrative, this type of films have to rely on other elements of film that audiences are able to relate which requires a different type of reading in their part. Koyaanisqatsi is mentioned and I agree with how it is elaborated as an associational film. Koyaanisqatsi, after this reading as an associational film in my opinion covers to a certain degree all the others types of the non-narrative system. However, it shares on the dependence of using powerful visual elements to make meaning out of the text.
- Koyaanisqatsi Official Website, www.showcasecinemas.co.uk/php-bin/frameme.php?/page=/films/koyaanisqatsi. The director proclaims Koyaanisqatsi as art. As art it does not intend to have a meaning but wants each and every one of us to appreciate the piece of art and create our own meanings. I find this true when watching Koyaanisqatsi that it is impossible to come up with the exact same meaning with everyone who watches it. From this reading, I can be confident that my meaning as I have mentioned are purely my meanings alone as how I interpreted it. Therefore, Koyaanisqatsi as a film is more like an art piece rather than having an implied meaning but to have an prologue and epilogue, one can only wonder how free Koyaanisqatsi is open to interpretation.
Week 10: National Cinema
Atarnajuat: The Fast Runner
Country: Canada
Year: 2001
Director: Zacharias Kunuk
Length: 168 min
Language: Inuktiut
Awards:
Critical Comment:
For a film that is based on an epic tale especially one that has been passed down from generation to generation and has survived on oral tradition alone, it is closest to the heart of the audience. Stories that our parents pass down unto us from our ancestors never seem to lose its charm no matter how many times they told to us. There is an appeal in traditional stories that always fascinate us and it is difficult to capture the emotions, intensity, life lessons and moralistic values of good over evil. One day, these same stories and their mystical effects would be passed down unto our own children and the cycle continues. In Atarnajuat, everything revolves around a cycle. There is a beginning and there is an end but in between it breeds a new cycle and they would continue with its own cycle.
The basic unit of the Inuits in the film is the family. There is a natural reliance on others especially on the ones who are family in order to survive in the cold environment where the film is set. Once the family tie is broken, it develops many misery, suffering, pain that in turn creates emotions of jealousy, selfishness and vengence. These are the spokes of the wheel that turns its unending cycle, affecting anyone that gets in its path. Only through perseverance and unity in the family can these cycles end and the hardship would stop. The cycle begins when Sauri murders another Inuit to become the chief. His family becomes tainted with the same evil as Oki lust over his supposedly promised bethroed, Atuat. Puja, who is the only one who manages to find her way into Atarnajuat's family sows distrust between Atarnajuat and his brother. Once evil is allowed to enter a family, that family would face the consequences. Even though Atuat and his sister-in-law forgives Puja, it was her that led to the murder of Atarquat. To the family that is destroyed by Puja and Oki, Atuat shows perseverance in the face of misery. Atarnajuat escapes and finds refugee from a lone Inuit who protects him and nourishes him back to health. Atarnajuat becomes the avenger that wants to reunite with his family and bring an end to the vicious cycle that has ruined his family and caused the death of his brother. By the end, Atarnajuat shows mercy even when Oki deserves death but vengence will only beget vengence. By sparing Oki's life, the cycle ends although not without a sad ending in the end.
Such values that good will prevail over evil if only eventually through time, the film teaches very basic human lessons. Through the mystical and sentimental narrative of an old tale, represented on film, this story would begin a new cycle of its own. Atarnajuat has shown that film does not require an ambitious narrative in deliver simple lessons of life, the ability of film as a form of representation has helped the Inuit to share a story that can teach these life lessons just as well. Film has preserved a tale that has relied on oral tradition and hopefully through film the tale would pass on.
Atarnajuat uses close-up shots.This gives intimacy between characters instead of taking long shots to see the wide expand of the Antartic. The film also allows us to have a glimpse at the lifestyle of the ancient Inuit people who survived solely on hunting. Raw and bloody meat are means of survival and is shown almost directly without remorse. In the cultural context of the Inuit, these are bounty that are very important part of their lives.
Another element of Atarnajuat is the presence of spirits. There are good spirits as well as evil spirits. Atarnajuat was guided by his father's spirit that allowed him to escape from his would-be murderers. The evil spirit which has ruled the hearts of Oki and his thugs is finally excorsised at the end of the film.
Readings:
Country: CanadaYear: 2001
Director: Zacharias Kunuk
Length: 168 min
Language: Inuktiut
Awards:
- Golden Camera - Zacharias Kunuk (Cannes Film Festival)
- Best Foreign-Language Film (Central Ohio Film Critics Award)
- Lina Brocka Award - Zacharias Kunuk (Cinemanila International Film Festival)
- New Director's Award - Zacharias Kunuk (Edinburgh International Film Festival)
- FIPRESCI Prize Special Mention - Zacharias Kunuk (Flanders International Film Festival)
- Grand Prix - Zacharias Kunuk (Flanders International Film Festival)
- Claude Jutra - Zacharias Kunuk (Genie Awards)
- Best Achievement in Direction - Zacharias Kunuk (Genie Awards)
- Best Achievement in Editing - Zacharias Kunuk, Norman Cohn & Marie-Christine Sarda (Genie Awards)
- Best Achievement in Music Original Score - Chris Crilly (Genie Awards)
- Best Motion Picture - Norman Cohn, Paul Apak Angilirq, Zacharias Kunuk & Germaine Wong (Genie Awards)
- Best Screenplay - Paul Apak Angilirq (Genie Awards)
- Best Feature Film - Zacharias Kunuk (Hawaii International Film Festival)
- Best Feature - Zacharias Kunuk (Newport International Film Festival)
- Best Feature Film - Zacharias Kunuk (San Diego International Film Festival)
- Best Feature - Zacharias Kunuk (Santa Fe Film Festival)
- Best Canadian Film (Toronto Film Critics Association Awards)
- Best Film Feature - Zacharias Kunukk (Toronto Film Critics Association Awards)
- Best Canadian Feature Film - Zacharias Kunuk (Toronto International Film Festival)
Critical Comment:
For a film that is based on an epic tale especially one that has been passed down from generation to generation and has survived on oral tradition alone, it is closest to the heart of the audience. Stories that our parents pass down unto us from our ancestors never seem to lose its charm no matter how many times they told to us. There is an appeal in traditional stories that always fascinate us and it is difficult to capture the emotions, intensity, life lessons and moralistic values of good over evil. One day, these same stories and their mystical effects would be passed down unto our own children and the cycle continues. In Atarnajuat, everything revolves around a cycle. There is a beginning and there is an end but in between it breeds a new cycle and they would continue with its own cycle.
The basic unit of the Inuits in the film is the family. There is a natural reliance on others especially on the ones who are family in order to survive in the cold environment where the film is set. Once the family tie is broken, it develops many misery, suffering, pain that in turn creates emotions of jealousy, selfishness and vengence. These are the spokes of the wheel that turns its unending cycle, affecting anyone that gets in its path. Only through perseverance and unity in the family can these cycles end and the hardship would stop. The cycle begins when Sauri murders another Inuit to become the chief. His family becomes tainted with the same evil as Oki lust over his supposedly promised bethroed, Atuat. Puja, who is the only one who manages to find her way into Atarnajuat's family sows distrust between Atarnajuat and his brother. Once evil is allowed to enter a family, that family would face the consequences. Even though Atuat and his sister-in-law forgives Puja, it was her that led to the murder of Atarquat. To the family that is destroyed by Puja and Oki, Atuat shows perseverance in the face of misery. Atarnajuat escapes and finds refugee from a lone Inuit who protects him and nourishes him back to health. Atarnajuat becomes the avenger that wants to reunite with his family and bring an end to the vicious cycle that has ruined his family and caused the death of his brother. By the end, Atarnajuat shows mercy even when Oki deserves death but vengence will only beget vengence. By sparing Oki's life, the cycle ends although not without a sad ending in the end.
Such values that good will prevail over evil if only eventually through time, the film teaches very basic human lessons. Through the mystical and sentimental narrative of an old tale, represented on film, this story would begin a new cycle of its own. Atarnajuat has shown that film does not require an ambitious narrative in deliver simple lessons of life, the ability of film as a form of representation has helped the Inuit to share a story that can teach these life lessons just as well. Film has preserved a tale that has relied on oral tradition and hopefully through film the tale would pass on.
Atarnajuat uses close-up shots.This gives intimacy between characters instead of taking long shots to see the wide expand of the Antartic. The film also allows us to have a glimpse at the lifestyle of the ancient Inuit people who survived solely on hunting. Raw and bloody meat are means of survival and is shown almost directly without remorse. In the cultural context of the Inuit, these are bounty that are very important part of their lives.
Another element of Atarnajuat is the presence of spirits. There are good spirits as well as evil spirits. Atarnajuat was guided by his father's spirit that allowed him to escape from his would-be murderers. The evil spirit which has ruled the hearts of Oki and his thugs is finally excorsised at the end of the film.
Readings:
- Said, S.F (2002) 'Northern Exposure' Sight and Sound 12:2, February, 22-25. I fully agree with this reading that sees Atarnajuat as an epic tale that inspires fascination from timeless classics like the Gilgamesh. Such tales have an attachment to folk lore that it mesmerizes us (whether as audience or listeners) with its fantasy. I find it interesting that Said pointed out the similarites Atarnajuat has with Joseph Camphell's narrative structure. There is a hidden appeal for us to such stories of grand porportions of drama and resolution that Atarnajuat is clearly in line with. This reading has given me a mental note when watching films so that I can know the reasons of why we enjoy such films and their experience is timeless.
- Crofts, Stephen (1993) 'Reconceptualising National Cinema/s', Quarterly Review of Film and Video 13:3, 49-67. This clearly differentiates between first, second and third cinema. The implication I get from this rather complicated reading is that while national productions are meant to appeal to its own cultural context and are read as such, once it is taken out of that context the readings could drastically change. National cinema is thus a tricky definition to describe a cinema. While one meaning is derived from a film from its local audiences, it gives out entirely new meaning when it is viewed globally. So National Cinema cannot be identified for the type of film that they are well known for producing because even that identity varies outside its national structures. Atarnajuat perhaps has found success only when it has been taken outside it context and shown to the outside world. To the Inuits, the way of life and the harsh cold environment of Iglooik is accepted as normal but to others who have read and criticized the film it is that environment that has created a meaning in itself as the discourse of man versus a nature that requires patience and close family relations for survival.
- Chun, Kimberly (2002) 'Storytelling in the Artic Circle: An Interview with Zacharias Kunuk' Cineaste 28:1, Winter 21-23. This interview with Zacharias Kunuk describes how Atarnajuat was made and how difficult it is to make the film due to environmental and weather conditions. Through this interview I can see how Kunuk wanted to preserve the themes and lifestyle of the Inuit people in this film. He explains how legends like Atarnajuat and the lessons to be learned from it are very much a part of the Inuit people. These are the cultural context that national cinemas revolves and developes on which is unique to itself. However, I find it ironic on how Kunuk had a hard time finding the proper funding to film Atarnajuat when as a national film should find its easiest access into national cinema. Also, the success of Atarnajuat enjoyed abroad rather than in Canada
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Week 11: Film, Politics and Sexuality
The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert
Country: Australia
Year: 1994
Director: Stephan Elliott
Length: 104 min
Language: English
Awards:
Critical Comment:
By now it is interesting to note that I have seen at least 3 road movies and out of 2 of them are made in Australia. The road movie provides a good inside scope of issues that filmmakers are making a statement about because we travel together with the characters of the road movie. We hear everything they say, we see everything they do and we can even know everything they are thinking. In The Adventures of Priscilla, our attention is placed on the questionable gender, thus the representation of sexuality is what the film is all about.
As suggested in queer theory, Priscilla is a provocative film. Since even to this modern day and age where sexuality (and their role in society, especially in Asia) is still a clearly divided boundaries. A male is determined by his physical features just as much as a female by her biological construct. Sexuality in film, the way Priscilla presents it, is ambigious. The question of sexuality also becomes part of an identity and it is that identity of ambiguity that can lead to discrimination. These are the real adventures of Priscilla and her passengers. The characters in
the film that even set foot in that bus are queer in nature. The main chracters, Mitzi, Felicia and Bernadette are queer for their appearance (Bernadette in particular has even changed physically), Bob the 'gentleman' is queer for his taste or appreciation for drags and their performances, Mitzi's wife is presumably lesbian and their son, is queer for being able to accept his ambigiously (or reversed) gendered father and mother.
While the characters find little acceptance on their journey ('Aids fuckers go home', the boys from the mines, Bob's hometown bar and their would-be Samaritan 'saviours' when their bus broke down in the middle of the outback), the film itself also finds little recognition. Their major awards come mostly for their costume while the acknowledge of the film comes mostly a year later. The greatest recognition comes from the GLAAD awards which considers it as an epitome of queer film which makes Priscilla a classical example of queer theory film.
To questions one's sexuality like Priscilla is a sign of resistance against the mainstream. Queer theory is naturally anti-establishments against the norm or what is accpeted by the majority.
The film style was the crucial key that makes Priscilla although provocative but light-hearted which I feel is a more effective way to change the attitudes. There is a strong tinge of social realism in this film because even though it can not be taken seriously, the queer issues the film addresses are very real. The film style was what made Priscilla considered as a comedy. It uses exagerating editing (like when the trio realised that they are stuck in the middle of the outback and Felicia says 'shit' which is echoed across the outback and the kaleidescope scope effect when the butch-femme in the Palace Hotel said she could only see female impersonators).
But what is most exaggerating of the film is easily the costume (which has been acknowledged) that I believe serves as an iconography of the film. The choice of using such 'frock's which comes as part of the job description of the main characters also makes it a musical. Wherever they perform, their 'frocks' together with their song and dance never fail to impress and inspire the awe of the Hollywood spectacle. Which brings out another question of performance and gender. As a male performers (although they call each other girls) who dresses in woman's clothing and lip-sync to songs sang by women (including 'fucking' Abba), it is a parody reminiscence of Singin' in the Rain where Kathy had to 'throw' her voice for Lina.
As performers whether on stage or on film, falsehood and illusion can happen. So is queer theory a kind of falsehood or misconception ('Mommy, maybe a trip to the desert could help me with this phase I'm going through...') or is an issue like sexuality (or other queer identities) able to hide behind the cover of the illusion and falsehood on the stage (or screen)? We have to think about how audiences see what they want to see during a performance regardless of who is the performer. The same people that watch your performance and cheer for you in one minute would discriminate you for your identity the next. It was easier for Mitzi and Felicia to find acceptance (like among their fans in Sydney and the aborigins they stumbled upon in the middle of the outback) when they perform rather than when mingling with the community with their identities (like Felicia when trying to mix with the 'boys club' from the mines). What is the difference between a performer and a person on the street that are both queer?
The 'frocks' in Priscilla can also be read as a insignia of empowerment. Felicia's dream to be dressed as a queen ('s'he even wanted to wear a tiara!) and stand on King's Canyon can a sign of personal resolve of a queer against the mainstream. The dazzling 'frock' gives strength to the characters that even though 'it hurts' (Mitzi) sometimes when they are discriminated or marginalized, it shows that they are 'toughen up' (Bernadette) and are proud to be 'a cock in a frock on a rock', which could be what the 'bloody country needs'.
Another meaning of the 'frock' that can be derived is the one that was turned into a kite with the shape of a female. The kite eventually landed in what can be assumed to be Japan, which could indicate that the adventures and challeges faced in Priscilla could apply in Japan or Asia in general. The distinction and the courage to stand up proudly as a queer is still closeted and people there could be unwilling to stand out.
Speaking of Asians, while Priscilla has values that are against mainstream society in terms of sexuality, their treatment of the Asian woman brings in another question. Queer theory are not appreciative of any representation of the queer in mainstream films. They accuse such films for stereotyping the queer characters who are normally terminated from the most ghastly to the most humorous fashion. It is ironic in a way that while Priscilla as a queer film also uses stereotyping of the Phillipine woman (or Asians in general). Either this was a gimmick of western cinema against the east or it goes into another area of how race is represented in film. Such issues could have more sensitive concerns and impacts than queer theory but perhaps the identity of an Asian in western cinema is already a form of queer theory itself due to the context of how it is used.
Readings:
Country: Australia
Year: 1994
Director: Stephan Elliott
Length: 104 min
Language: English
Awards:
- Best Costume Desgin - Lizzy Gardiner & Tim Chappel (Oscar)
- Best Achievment for Costume Design - Lizzy Gardiner & Tim Chappel (AFI)
- Best Achivement in Production Design - Owen Paterson (AFI)
- Best Costume Design - Lizzy Gardiner & Tim Chappel (BAFTA)
- Best Make Up/Hair - Cassie Hanlon, Angela Conte & Strykermeyer (BAFTA)
- Best Movie (Chlodrutis Award)
- Outstanding Movie (GLAAD Media Awards)
- Best Actor - Terence Stamp (Golden Space Needle Award)
- Best Film (Golden Space Needle Award)
Critical Comment:
By now it is interesting to note that I have seen at least 3 road movies and out of 2 of them are made in Australia. The road movie provides a good inside scope of issues that filmmakers are making a statement about because we travel together with the characters of the road movie. We hear everything they say, we see everything they do and we can even know everything they are thinking. In The Adventures of Priscilla, our attention is placed on the questionable gender, thus the representation of sexuality is what the film is all about.
As suggested in queer theory, Priscilla is a provocative film. Since even to this modern day and age where sexuality (and their role in society, especially in Asia) is still a clearly divided boundaries. A male is determined by his physical features just as much as a female by her biological construct. Sexuality in film, the way Priscilla presents it, is ambigious. The question of sexuality also becomes part of an identity and it is that identity of ambiguity that can lead to discrimination. These are the real adventures of Priscilla and her passengers. The characters in
the film that even set foot in that bus are queer in nature. The main chracters, Mitzi, Felicia and Bernadette are queer for their appearance (Bernadette in particular has even changed physically), Bob the 'gentleman' is queer for his taste or appreciation for drags and their performances, Mitzi's wife is presumably lesbian and their son, is queer for being able to accept his ambigiously (or reversed) gendered father and mother.While the characters find little acceptance on their journey ('Aids fuckers go home', the boys from the mines, Bob's hometown bar and their would-be Samaritan 'saviours' when their bus broke down in the middle of the outback), the film itself also finds little recognition. Their major awards come mostly for their costume while the acknowledge of the film comes mostly a year later. The greatest recognition comes from the GLAAD awards which considers it as an epitome of queer film which makes Priscilla a classical example of queer theory film.
To questions one's sexuality like Priscilla is a sign of resistance against the mainstream. Queer theory is naturally anti-establishments against the norm or what is accpeted by the majority.
The film style was the crucial key that makes Priscilla although provocative but light-hearted which I feel is a more effective way to change the attitudes. There is a strong tinge of social realism in this film because even though it can not be taken seriously, the queer issues the film addresses are very real. The film style was what made Priscilla considered as a comedy. It uses exagerating editing (like when the trio realised that they are stuck in the middle of the outback and Felicia says 'shit' which is echoed across the outback and the kaleidescope scope effect when the butch-femme in the Palace Hotel said she could only see female impersonators).
But what is most exaggerating of the film is easily the costume (which has been acknowledged) that I believe serves as an iconography of the film. The choice of using such 'frock's which comes as part of the job description of the main characters also makes it a musical. Wherever they perform, their 'frocks' together with their song and dance never fail to impress and inspire the awe of the Hollywood spectacle. Which brings out another question of performance and gender. As a male performers (although they call each other girls) who dresses in woman's clothing and lip-sync to songs sang by women (including 'fucking' Abba), it is a parody reminiscence of Singin' in the Rain where Kathy had to 'throw' her voice for Lina.
As performers whether on stage or on film, falsehood and illusion can happen. So is queer theory a kind of falsehood or misconception ('Mommy, maybe a trip to the desert could help me with this phase I'm going through...') or is an issue like sexuality (or other queer identities) able to hide behind the cover of the illusion and falsehood on the stage (or screen)? We have to think about how audiences see what they want to see during a performance regardless of who is the performer. The same people that watch your performance and cheer for you in one minute would discriminate you for your identity the next. It was easier for Mitzi and Felicia to find acceptance (like among their fans in Sydney and the aborigins they stumbled upon in the middle of the outback) when they perform rather than when mingling with the community with their identities (like Felicia when trying to mix with the 'boys club' from the mines). What is the difference between a performer and a person on the street that are both queer?
The 'frocks' in Priscilla can also be read as a insignia of empowerment. Felicia's dream to be dressed as a queen ('s'he even wanted to wear a tiara!) and stand on King's Canyon can a sign of personal resolve of a queer against the mainstream. The dazzling 'frock' gives strength to the characters that even though 'it hurts' (Mitzi) sometimes when they are discriminated or marginalized, it shows that they are 'toughen up' (Bernadette) and are proud to be 'a cock in a frock on a rock', which could be what the 'bloody country needs'.
Another meaning of the 'frock' that can be derived is the one that was turned into a kite with the shape of a female. The kite eventually landed in what can be assumed to be Japan, which could indicate that the adventures and challeges faced in Priscilla could apply in Japan or Asia in general. The distinction and the courage to stand up proudly as a queer is still closeted and people there could be unwilling to stand out.
Speaking of Asians, while Priscilla has values that are against mainstream society in terms of sexuality, their treatment of the Asian woman brings in another question. Queer theory are not appreciative of any representation of the queer in mainstream films. They accuse such films for stereotyping the queer characters who are normally terminated from the most ghastly to the most humorous fashion. It is ironic in a way that while Priscilla as a queer film also uses stereotyping of the Phillipine woman (or Asians in general). Either this was a gimmick of western cinema against the east or it goes into another area of how race is represented in film. Such issues could have more sensitive concerns and impacts than queer theory but perhaps the identity of an Asian in western cinema is already a form of queer theory itself due to the context of how it is used.
Readings:
- Goldstein, Lynda (1997) 'Getting into Lesbian Shorts: White Spectators and Performative Documentaries by Makers of Color' in Chris Holmlund and Cynthia Fuchs, eds, Between the Sheets, In the Streets: Queer, Lesbian, Gay Documentary, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 175-189. Although queer conquers the difference between gender and sexuality, it still faces barriers when it comes to race. Racial interpretation brings out different erotic or sexual expectations which accroding to this reading is predominated by the white spectator. So in queer theory, there are undertones of racial determinism that may not be accessable to other races. It is difficult to see this in Priscilla since there only other non-white characters themselves are not notably queer. However it is perhaps that since these characters are not queer that queer theory is a notion that is shared among whites. Queer theory is able to explore questionable sexuality but it cannot reach across racial borders.
- Doty, Alexander (2000) 'Queer Theory' in John Hill and Pamela Church Gibson (eds.), Film Studies: Critical Approaches, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Queer theory wants to explore film in a non-normative approach. While in the reading it is stated clearly that queer readings should pararelle with normative readings, it is a 'twisted' form of reading a film. It refutes the assumptions made by the straight audience and wants to see the film by dismissing the expected sexuality and political identity. The reading also gives a little insight about films made with queer theory in mind which Priscilla is one. It brings the question of queerness right into film as an element that requires queer reading. For example like in a normative reading of Priscilla, it could be engaged with the discourse of discrimination against the queer and the acceptance for queerness. However, from a queer perspective, Priscilla explores what feminism has to offer for the characters and how it can empower their identity as they explore about their true sexuality.
Friday, October 27, 2006
Week 7: Film Genre I: Narrative, Genre and the Politics of Representation
Thelma and Louise
Country: USA
Director: Ridley Scott
Year: 1991
Length: 129 min
Language: English
Awards:
Critical Comments:
Thelma and Lousie is undoubtbly a road movie where both ladies had to make a getaway first from their daily lives then to Mexico after accidentally commiting a murder. This element of the road movie is mixed together with the Western as one leg of the journey takes place across the Texas landscape with the appearance of cowboys (JD). During this leg of the journey, Thelma and Louise become fugitives of the law and they both become care-free, living as happy outlaws with fredom, just like in the Western genres where the law cannot catch them, at least until the end.
The characters of Thelma and Louise are so rich in diversity that differet types of study can be done on their characteristics alone.
First of all although many may find this disagreeable but I feel that the relationship between Thelma and Louise suggests the bond between a mother and a daughter. Thelma (who is ironically a housewife but has no kids because her husband was 'not ready') acts like a wild child. She is eager to break free from her mould as a housewife who isn't allowed to do a' goddamn thing', she initially leads the duo into trouble as she nearly gets rape by a married man on the way to their vacation. She is reckless and rebellious against strict control and order (like absconding from the house without the permission of her husband, 'letting her hair down' with strong liquor and easily exchanging conversation with a stranger at the bar that could rape her). However once trouble starts when Louise shoots her would-be rapist, Thelma becomes helpless, frozen with fear and panics, following the lead and orders of Louise right after the traumatic moments. The wild side of Thelma is one aspect that makes her childlike in the sense that she wants to go out and experience the world, without fear and taking risks. She yearns to travel but 'didn't have the opportunity' to do it. When Louise asked her whether she has found her calling, she screams out that she has found 'the call of the wild'. But her recklessness not only causes trouble for both of them not once, but thrice. First she was being too friendly with a stranger who would turn out to be her rapist, second she left their 'future' unguarded after her delliance with JD and lastly she told JD who was later arrested by the police on where they were headed. This foolish recklessness is part of being young at heart (Thelma got married at the age of 18).
Louise, on the other hand, is like a mother to Thelma because she is the one that constantly keeps Thelma in check and tells her what to do. We can see an instance of Louise's maternal instinct is when she tells a couple of young girls that they are too young to be smoking and that it ruins their sex drive. One other simple example is when Thelma places her legs on the dashboard for Louise's Thunderbird convertible, Louise nags at her. Her controlling nature is akin to a parent to a misbehave child and its is that nature that is similar with Thelma's husband that was acting more like her father, 'you're as bad as Darryl'. This motherly nature is also seen when she tells Thelma that she is not used to seeing her so 'sedate'. She is the one that takes charge of what they are going to do after shooting the rapist. She was the only one who had a real plan to run all the way for Mexico and talk to her boyfriend, Jimmy, to wire her savings to her. Only when all their money had been stolen does Louise finally breaks down in despair without anymore options on what to do next.
However when the film nears to its end, the bond between mother and daughter seemingly dissipates. The 'daughter' Thelma all grown up from her ordeals and traumas (nearly getting rape and cheated by JD), becomes an adult. The tone of the remainder of the film explores Thelma and Louise as two individuals rathers than having a shared bond. This individuality and independence is a central theme that can be expected from the Western genre. The idea of self-justification (like how Thelma politely robs the store and how they deal punishment on the harassing truck-driver) on a woman can be read as a masculine side of feminity. The idea of women having to depend on men breaks down in this film which shows that feminism isn't a weakness but can be a strength. Independence is a part of feminism.
In fact the film addresses feminism and masculinity both ways. The men in Thelma and Louise are particularly queer. Masculinity is a confused idea represented in the film. The society is patriachal (Thelma and Louise would not be believed), they underestimate women (Thelma's husband calls her a 'nutcase') and deny feminity (one of the police officers calls love, 'that kind of shit') but they display feminity themselves (the police officers watching a melodrama and the patrol officer who cries like a baby after hearing a few gunshots). This is an interesting approach to queer theory. While Thelma and Louise as females are gradually becoming stronger in a feminise sort of way, the men in the film are becoming more feminine. From a pro-feminism perspective, feminism is seen to be growing to become more stronger while masculinity is in the decline. While in another way, this could be seen that there is another side to masculinity that is feminine and there is another side to feminity that is more masculine. This way, the film is opening up another side and revealing the other side of things, re-exploring and changing the ideas that we once had about masculinity and feminism.
The iconography that is recognisable in the film and is expected from the Western genre is the gun. Thelma initially brought the gun with her as a precautionary measure. It did came to use and resulted the death of the rapist. The gun ,during the beginning of the film, is a tool of protection.
Much later in the film, the gun is used by Thelma to scare the police patrol and tuck him into his own crusier's boot. The gun suddenly elevates its status from protection to power (in which case against man or men). As Thelma and Louise break free in the wild Texas landscape, liberated from the patriachal society, they are express this freedom through power, power gained outside the constraints of the (patriachal) law which is what the gun represents.
Readings:
Country: USA
Director: Ridley Scott
Year: 1991
Length: 129 min
Language: English
Awards:
- Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen - Callie Khouri (Academy Awards)
- Best non-European Film - Ridley Scott (Bodil Awards)
- Best Actress - Geena Davis (Boston Society of Film Critics Awards)
- Best Foregin Actress - Geena Davis & Susan Sarandon (David di Donatello Awards)
- Best Screenplay-Motion Picture - Callie Khouri (Golden Globes)
- Actress of the Year - Susan Sarandon (London Critics Circle Film Awards)
- Director of the Year - Ridley Scott(London Critics Circle Film Awards)
- Film of the Year (London Critics Circle Film Awards)
- Best Actress - Susan Sarandon & Geena Davis (National Board of Review, USA)
- Best Supporting Actor - Harvey Keitel (National Society of Film Critics Awards)
- Golden Spike - Ridley Scott (Valladolid International Film Festival)
- Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen - Callie Khouri (Writers Guild of America)
Critical Comments:
Thelma and Lousie is undoubtbly a road movie where both ladies had to make a getaway first from their daily lives then to Mexico after accidentally commiting a murder. This element of the road movie is mixed together with the Western as one leg of the journey takes place across the Texas landscape with the appearance of cowboys (JD). During this leg of the journey, Thelma and Louise become fugitives of the law and they both become care-free, living as happy outlaws with fredom, just like in the Western genres where the law cannot catch them, at least until the end.
The characters of Thelma and Louise are so rich in diversity that differet types of study can be done on their characteristics alone.
First of all although many may find this disagreeable but I feel that the relationship between Thelma and Louise suggests the bond between a mother and a daughter. Thelma (who is ironically a housewife but has no kids because her husband was 'not ready') acts like a wild child. She is eager to break free from her mould as a housewife who isn't allowed to do a' goddamn thing', she initially leads the duo into trouble as she nearly gets rape by a married man on the way to their vacation. She is reckless and rebellious against strict control and order (like absconding from the house without the permission of her husband, 'letting her hair down' with strong liquor and easily exchanging conversation with a stranger at the bar that could rape her). However once trouble starts when Louise shoots her would-be rapist, Thelma becomes helpless, frozen with fear and panics, following the lead and orders of Louise right after the traumatic moments. The wild side of Thelma is one aspect that makes her childlike in the sense that she wants to go out and experience the world, without fear and taking risks. She yearns to travel but 'didn't have the opportunity' to do it. When Louise asked her whether she has found her calling, she screams out that she has found 'the call of the wild'. But her recklessness not only causes trouble for both of them not once, but thrice. First she was being too friendly with a stranger who would turn out to be her rapist, second she left their 'future' unguarded after her delliance with JD and lastly she told JD who was later arrested by the police on where they were headed. This foolish recklessness is part of being young at heart (Thelma got married at the age of 18).
Louise, on the other hand, is like a mother to Thelma because she is the one that constantly keeps Thelma in check and tells her what to do. We can see an instance of Louise's maternal instinct is when she tells a couple of young girls that they are too young to be smoking and that it ruins their sex drive. One other simple example is when Thelma places her legs on the dashboard for Louise's Thunderbird convertible, Louise nags at her. Her controlling nature is akin to a parent to a misbehave child and its is that nature that is similar with Thelma's husband that was acting more like her father, 'you're as bad as Darryl'. This motherly nature is also seen when she tells Thelma that she is not used to seeing her so 'sedate'. She is the one that takes charge of what they are going to do after shooting the rapist. She was the only one who had a real plan to run all the way for Mexico and talk to her boyfriend, Jimmy, to wire her savings to her. Only when all their money had been stolen does Louise finally breaks down in despair without anymore options on what to do next.
However when the film nears to its end, the bond between mother and daughter seemingly dissipates. The 'daughter' Thelma all grown up from her ordeals and traumas (nearly getting rape and cheated by JD), becomes an adult. The tone of the remainder of the film explores Thelma and Louise as two individuals rathers than having a shared bond. This individuality and independence is a central theme that can be expected from the Western genre. The idea of self-justification (like how Thelma politely robs the store and how they deal punishment on the harassing truck-driver) on a woman can be read as a masculine side of feminity. The idea of women having to depend on men breaks down in this film which shows that feminism isn't a weakness but can be a strength. Independence is a part of feminism.
In fact the film addresses feminism and masculinity both ways. The men in Thelma and Louise are particularly queer. Masculinity is a confused idea represented in the film. The society is patriachal (Thelma and Louise would not be believed), they underestimate women (Thelma's husband calls her a 'nutcase') and deny feminity (one of the police officers calls love, 'that kind of shit') but they display feminity themselves (the police officers watching a melodrama and the patrol officer who cries like a baby after hearing a few gunshots). This is an interesting approach to queer theory. While Thelma and Louise as females are gradually becoming stronger in a feminise sort of way, the men in the film are becoming more feminine. From a pro-feminism perspective, feminism is seen to be growing to become more stronger while masculinity is in the decline. While in another way, this could be seen that there is another side to masculinity that is feminine and there is another side to feminity that is more masculine. This way, the film is opening up another side and revealing the other side of things, re-exploring and changing the ideas that we once had about masculinity and feminism.
The iconography that is recognisable in the film and is expected from the Western genre is the gun. Thelma initially brought the gun with her as a precautionary measure. It did came to use and resulted the death of the rapist. The gun ,during the beginning of the film, is a tool of protection.
Much later in the film, the gun is used by Thelma to scare the police patrol and tuck him into his own crusier's boot. The gun suddenly elevates its status from protection to power (in which case against man or men). As Thelma and Louise break free in the wild Texas landscape, liberated from the patriachal society, they are express this freedom through power, power gained outside the constraints of the (patriachal) law which is what the gun represents.
Readings:
- O'Shaughnessy, Micheal and Jane Stradler (2002) 'Genre, Codes and Conventions'. Media and Society: An Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 113-126. This reading tells about the framework of genre in film. It is interesting to see that O'Shaughnessy relates that some genres are grown within American society and that these genres can a form of cultural imperialism. This reading sees Thelma and Louise as a combination of three genres; road movie, buddy movie and the western movie. However I would like to suggest that Thelma and Louise can also be read as a criminal genre. There is the conventions of a gun, a crime (murder and armed robbery), a cop (or cops and even the FBI) and a thief (Thelma and Louise). One other thing that was pointed out by O'Shaughnessy is that Thelma and Louise used a repetition of themes and conventions in all three genres but reversed the gender of the characters that itself has provided new meaning. I believe that certain issues raised within a genre, like the femme fatale of the film noir can be addressed within the context or through the conventions of another genre. Such issues may revolve around sexuality, identity, politics and idealogy that have a universal issue in whatever genre that are explored. This means that like how the gun as an iconography in Thelma and Louise is interchangable from the context of a road movie to a Western, so as issues like feminity are addressed in Thelma and Louise as liberation of women to how the female role in society is changed (another form of 'liberation') in the film noir, like Killer's Kiss.
- Griggers, Cathy (1993) 'Thelma and Louise and cultural generation of new butch-femme' in Collins et ad, eds, Film Theory Goes to the Movies, New York: Routledge, 128-141. Thelma and Louise is examined by this reading from a very feminine perspective. I find that this reading gives a very different sort of perspective and gives whole new meanings from elements and discourses of the film that radiates with feminism qualities. The iconographies represented the issues related with women that is set within a patriachal society. Although I would feel that the readings gives a different perspective, I am unable to relate with the meanings that is imposed by this reading. However, from this I learn that film can be read from a gender socio-economics that may not be the main issue of but should contribute to gain a more complete reading of the film. Another point I like to add that relates this reading with Thelma and Louise is that feminity should be taken into consideration when females replace male roles in film genres.
Week 9: Film Genre II
Killer's Kiss
Country: USA
Year: 1955
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Length: 67 min
Language: English
Awards: Best Director (Locarno International Film Festival)
Synopsis: Davey Gordon saves a lady dancer from her boss and finds himself more than he asked for.
Critical Comment:
Stanley Kubrick is a renown director for his noir films. Killer's Kiss was amazingly produced, financed, edited and shot by himself which makes Killer's Kiss such a well respected film.
Killer's Kiss as a film noir has set its stylistic conventions within the genre that is recognisable. Killer's Kiss was shot with using the motives of extreme bright lights, complete darkness and large shadows. These lighting effects gives Killer's Kiss the mood of secrecy, revealing something that is hidden, vouyerism and naked exposure. There are also grim imageries in the mise-en-scene for example the infamous showdown between Davey and Rappalo in the mannequin factory. The mannequins in my reading represents the female and the sort of feminism which is the central theme for the femme fatale. Killer's Kiss being Kubrick's second feature film was probably getting into the idea and the characteristics of the femme fatale. This film brings out an interesting meaning of woman as objects which I would discuss much later on.
Other recognisable conventions of the film noir that can be found in Killer's Kiss is the voice narration of the main character. The narration of Davey in the beginning tells us the deeper feelings and shows the frustration that is kept inside him as he paces around the train station. Such feelings exposes the character to us as though we are intruding his inner thoughts. In reverse psychology, it gives us the fear of our thoughts being revealed to others. This goes very well togethetr with the lighting effect that 'reflects' on our human nature to hide something in the darkness.
The central aspect that I find in Killer's Kiss and to most film noir as a genre is the presence of the femme fatale. In Killer's Kiss, the femme fatale is Gloria. As the word fatale implies there is danger of death when one gets mixed up with these characters. If we examine from the narrative, she alone could be blamed for causing the death of two men. Davey's manager, Albert and her boss Rapallo. Her ability to do so is because of her ability to mislead men with her 'love'. Her appearance as a meek, delicate and fragile figure gives the impression of dependency to the strong, masculine and protective features of the male, which Davey and Rappalo were able to provide. However, what both men don't realize is that they have become dependent on her
existence as a female and are willing to kill each other in order to preserve their dependcy for her. Albert was 'killed' because she misled Rappalo to belive that Albert was her runaway lover. Rappalo himself was killed by Davey who did it either out of vengence, jealousy or as the explanation given in the film, self-defense. Gloria have manipulated these men and toyed them to killing each other even when it is not within their nature. The menacing Rappalo who runs a considerably shady business when confronted by Davey after Gloria's kidnap confessed that murder wasn't his intention.
Love in Killer's Kiss is not the romantic experience between man and woman. To the femme fatale like Gloria, love is a tool and 'it is foolish to confuse love with pity'. We have seen how love can be fickle. Love, in Killer's Kiss, can be turned into obession and jealousy and even money.Rapallo became obsessed with Gloria and is 'mad' about her that he is willing to be her 'slave' and 'suffer to know how [she] feels'. Rappalo is also willing to command his thugs to commit murder out of 'jealousy' for Albert. A pretense of love can also bring in money when Gloria's sister, Iris, marries herself off just to pay the bills for their father's medical care.
Although love can be used as a tool, Killer's Kiss does not paint a completely dark picture of this wonderful feeling. Iris is willing to die for love (for her father) while Gloria returns to Davey for the happy ending even after she sold him out just to survive (although this scene is questionable for its reason of insertion by the director). Davey's love for Gloria appears genuine and is strong enough as a conviction to come and her save her personally.
In Killer's Kiss there is the question of woman as objects. Objects do not bring out any anxiety or fear, man prize over objects and cherishes them. The idea of woman as an object that pleases
man with love, feeds his obsession to do anything with her and then to discard her just like any other object. Rappalo is confused between the difference of his love for Gloria and his treatment of Gloria (and other women) as objects. He runs a 'human zoo' which gives the impression of women being locked up in a cage and leashes them out as dance partners for the right price. His monologue about how he 'spoiles everything' he touches when he barges into Gloria's room also implies that Gloria is just a thing rather than a person to him. Lastly, the mannaqeuin warehouse is a symbolic mise-en-scene that reflects heavily on the idea of woman as objects. Notice also how Rappalo gladly hacks away the mannaqeuin that Davey throws at him in order to reach him. This could be a sign that Rappalo would easily discard any woman that stands in his way when there is something else at hand (killing Davey).
Readings:
Country: USA
Year: 1955
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Length: 67 min
Language: English
Awards: Best Director (Locarno International Film Festival)
Synopsis: Davey Gordon saves a lady dancer from her boss and finds himself more than he asked for.
Critical Comment:
Stanley Kubrick is a renown director for his noir films. Killer's Kiss was amazingly produced, financed, edited and shot by himself which makes Killer's Kiss such a well respected film.
Killer's Kiss as a film noir has set its stylistic conventions within the genre that is recognisable. Killer's Kiss was shot with using the motives of extreme bright lights, complete darkness and large shadows. These lighting effects gives Killer's Kiss the mood of secrecy, revealing something that is hidden, vouyerism and naked exposure. There are also grim imageries in the mise-en-scene for example the infamous showdown between Davey and Rappalo in the mannequin factory. The mannequins in my reading represents the female and the sort of feminism which is the central theme for the femme fatale. Killer's Kiss being Kubrick's second feature film was probably getting into the idea and the characteristics of the femme fatale. This film brings out an interesting meaning of woman as objects which I would discuss much later on.
Other recognisable conventions of the film noir that can be found in Killer's Kiss is the voice narration of the main character. The narration of Davey in the beginning tells us the deeper feelings and shows the frustration that is kept inside him as he paces around the train station. Such feelings exposes the character to us as though we are intruding his inner thoughts. In reverse psychology, it gives us the fear of our thoughts being revealed to others. This goes very well togethetr with the lighting effect that 'reflects' on our human nature to hide something in the darkness.The central aspect that I find in Killer's Kiss and to most film noir as a genre is the presence of the femme fatale. In Killer's Kiss, the femme fatale is Gloria. As the word fatale implies there is danger of death when one gets mixed up with these characters. If we examine from the narrative, she alone could be blamed for causing the death of two men. Davey's manager, Albert and her boss Rapallo. Her ability to do so is because of her ability to mislead men with her 'love'. Her appearance as a meek, delicate and fragile figure gives the impression of dependency to the strong, masculine and protective features of the male, which Davey and Rappalo were able to provide. However, what both men don't realize is that they have become dependent on her
existence as a female and are willing to kill each other in order to preserve their dependcy for her. Albert was 'killed' because she misled Rappalo to belive that Albert was her runaway lover. Rappalo himself was killed by Davey who did it either out of vengence, jealousy or as the explanation given in the film, self-defense. Gloria have manipulated these men and toyed them to killing each other even when it is not within their nature. The menacing Rappalo who runs a considerably shady business when confronted by Davey after Gloria's kidnap confessed that murder wasn't his intention.
Love in Killer's Kiss is not the romantic experience between man and woman. To the femme fatale like Gloria, love is a tool and 'it is foolish to confuse love with pity'. We have seen how love can be fickle. Love, in Killer's Kiss, can be turned into obession and jealousy and even money.Rapallo became obsessed with Gloria and is 'mad' about her that he is willing to be her 'slave' and 'suffer to know how [she] feels'. Rappalo is also willing to command his thugs to commit murder out of 'jealousy' for Albert. A pretense of love can also bring in money when Gloria's sister, Iris, marries herself off just to pay the bills for their father's medical care.Although love can be used as a tool, Killer's Kiss does not paint a completely dark picture of this wonderful feeling. Iris is willing to die for love (for her father) while Gloria returns to Davey for the happy ending even after she sold him out just to survive (although this scene is questionable for its reason of insertion by the director). Davey's love for Gloria appears genuine and is strong enough as a conviction to come and her save her personally.
In Killer's Kiss there is the question of woman as objects. Objects do not bring out any anxiety or fear, man prize over objects and cherishes them. The idea of woman as an object that pleases
man with love, feeds his obsession to do anything with her and then to discard her just like any other object. Rappalo is confused between the difference of his love for Gloria and his treatment of Gloria (and other women) as objects. He runs a 'human zoo' which gives the impression of women being locked up in a cage and leashes them out as dance partners for the right price. His monologue about how he 'spoiles everything' he touches when he barges into Gloria's room also implies that Gloria is just a thing rather than a person to him. Lastly, the mannaqeuin warehouse is a symbolic mise-en-scene that reflects heavily on the idea of woman as objects. Notice also how Rappalo gladly hacks away the mannaqeuin that Davey throws at him in order to reach him. This could be a sign that Rappalo would easily discard any woman that stands in his way when there is something else at hand (killing Davey).Readings:
- Abrams, Bell and Urdis (2001) 'Genre', Studying Film, London: Arnold, 174-190. This is a very useful reading that describes genre from different perspectives. After reading this, I have learned that genre is undefinable because of the complexity and considerations that we have to take in attempting to determine what is genre. Genre can be tool as well as a set of rules on how certain films are made. I am able to relate Killer's Kiss as a film noir and its significance with the reading when it was explaining how iconography and style are some of the conventions of the film noir genre. Killer's Kiss is considered a noir film for its low-key lighting, the presence of a femme fatale and the execution of a crime. This makes me to believe that while certain films should be considered to be within their genre based on how the genre is manipulated. There are so many meanings and context of the genre, that a film and it auteur should make clear what his/her film is intended to fall into which genre. Of course, film with hybrid genres that are considered as postmodern filmmaking should state clearly what are the genres it intends to be seen as. I believe that the question of genre would be almost unrelevant as film would eventually expand its style, convetions and creative use of those conventions that it is pointless to identify film for its genre instead of its content. Genre could only be a tradition of filmmaking. This goes to shows how delicate and complicated it is to address the issue of genre of a film.
- Russel, Lawrence (2000) 'Killer's Kiss' FCourt Reviews, http://www.culturecourt.com/f/noir/kkiss.html. This review looks deeply into the style of Kubrick's Killer's Kiss. It is interesting on how the reviewer brings out the question of the 'boxed' space in Killer's Kiss. This idea of confinement in a perfect structure (a box as in a perfect square) could be some of the conventions and meaning of Killer's Kiss and film noir as a genre. There is an imprisonment of some kind that are making the characters like Davey, frustrated and miserable (after losing a bout in the 'boxing' ring) which could have made him susceptible to Gloria, the femme fatale. Perhaps this is how the femme fatale gains that attraction to men in the film noir, as a result of a subconcious spatial oppression that would eventually lead to death ?
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Week 4: Hollywood: Spectacle and Classical Narrative
Singin' in the Rain
Country: USA
Year: 1952
Director: Stanley Donen & Gene Kelly
Length: 103 min
Language: English
Awards: Best Motion Picture Actor - Musical/Comedy (Golden Globe Award), Best Written American Musical (WGA Award)
Synopsis: Don Lockwood finds love and conflict during the beginning of the sound era in Hollywood.
Critical Comments:
Singin' in the Rain has quite an interesting identity as a film. It is a classical musical Hollywood narrative film about the coming of sound and the classical musical Hollywood narrative. Due to its narrative structure, I am inclined to read Singin' in the Rain from its narrative structure because it would only be fair to examine the meanings from its narrative and sequence.
One of the things that Singin' in the Rain addresses about Hollywood as a film industry is the
star system. In the time setting of Singin' in the Rain, the star system excites the film industry. There is an elevated status that a person can achieve in the Hollywood industry which comes with fame, glory and even power (like how Lina Lamont threatens 'RF' of Monumental Picutres). Everything that comes with the star system has created an illusion of glamour and success that most do not recognise is a result of hard work as a celebrity (when Don Lockwood tells his story about his career). However, that celebrity status of an actor is the very core question fir Singin' in the Rain. As I have discussed in my entry for Salaam Cinema. Who is the actor or what makes an actor ? What is an actor in film ?
Just as how Kathy Selden was criticial about Don Lockwood as a well-known celebrity for his status but not an actor, that I find these questions very significant. As actors and their performance are part of the element of film (in most cases), so it should be crucial to understand the very people or person that we see 'represented' on film. It is question of whether our admiration and envy for them is a sign of respect for their acting skills (and their contribution to film as film) or only because they bring out our fanaticism for someone famous. Are actors famous for the right reasons in film? In Singin' in the Rain, Kathy does not seem to think highly of actors (of that era), they are just like 'shadows' on the screen.
Has the star system dilluded everyone in Hollywood during the 1920-30s. Stars are nothing but people who looked good on screen or have appeared in many movies. They bring nothing to the film in terms of aesthetic performance that can give its own meaning as an element of film. If the stars can't really act, then they are just like puppets.
The severity of this question is exclaimated by Lina Lamont. Her credibility as an actress (because of her voice) is in contradiction to her celebrity status. Her company (to the dismay of Don Lockwood) tries very hard to cover up that fact that she can't act but the people love her (until the end of the movie). She was just a face, another face that makes the industry go round but it is because of this position, she could wield substancial power on the industry. If power is placed on those that are not really a contribution to film that is built up by its elements, then what is left for film? Film would become a stage where big stars battle each other in a game of fame (and shame). There can be no appreciation for film, 'you see them once and you've seen them all'.
However, it does not mean that Singin' in the Rain does not have any other readings that can be derived from it.
It also tries to represent the introduction of sound into cinema. This is an interesting reflection of film history. When sound was first introduced, there were many who believed that it would revolutionaize the industry as many as the sceptics that believed it was just a trend. Singin' in the Rain is like a documentary (it even used real names, like the first talkie film, The Jazz Singer, produced by Warner Bros.) in its examination of the inception of the sound era and the slow death of silent cinema. The narrative of Singin' in the Rain which is centered on the 'stars' of a (albeit fictional but cunningly pun-ed) studio company showed how film companies had to adapt itself to the technology of sound during that era.
As film history was written (although not exclusively and comprehensively), the introduction of sound was set to change the way of film and the Hollywood industry from that point on in the 1920s (which Singin' in the Rain was set in). Those that failed to fit in that change would face the consequences and for Don Lockwood and Lina Lamont, it could the end of their careers.
But from the narrative of Singin' in the Rain, with sound it was an opportunity for filmmakers rather than a curse of technology.
It was with sound that the classical Hollywood narrative could evolve in creating a new genre. It opened up the sensation of sound and allowed a new feast for the spectators which could have only been possible (and creatively logical) with the combination of audio and visual. The classical Hollywood narrative would become well-known as the musical with its grand and glamourous spectacle and the celebrated combination of song and dance on film for the first time.
What I cannot seem to read or try to understand is the entire sequence of the 'Broadway Melody' especially the relation between 'supposedly' Don Lockwood and the alluring lady in the casino, the black and white dance and the party. Such scenes I feel would not fit itself very well in terms of narrative for Singin' in the Rain but other meanings from the perspective of idealogy and sexuality would be more likely and relevant.
Readings:
Country: USA
Year: 1952
Director: Stanley Donen & Gene Kelly
Length: 103 min
Language: English
Awards: Best Motion Picture Actor - Musical/Comedy (Golden Globe Award), Best Written American Musical (WGA Award)
Synopsis: Don Lockwood finds love and conflict during the beginning of the sound era in Hollywood.
Critical Comments:
Singin' in the Rain has quite an interesting identity as a film. It is a classical musical Hollywood narrative film about the coming of sound and the classical musical Hollywood narrative. Due to its narrative structure, I am inclined to read Singin' in the Rain from its narrative structure because it would only be fair to examine the meanings from its narrative and sequence.
One of the things that Singin' in the Rain addresses about Hollywood as a film industry is the
star system. In the time setting of Singin' in the Rain, the star system excites the film industry. There is an elevated status that a person can achieve in the Hollywood industry which comes with fame, glory and even power (like how Lina Lamont threatens 'RF' of Monumental Picutres). Everything that comes with the star system has created an illusion of glamour and success that most do not recognise is a result of hard work as a celebrity (when Don Lockwood tells his story about his career). However, that celebrity status of an actor is the very core question fir Singin' in the Rain. As I have discussed in my entry for Salaam Cinema. Who is the actor or what makes an actor ? What is an actor in film ?Just as how Kathy Selden was criticial about Don Lockwood as a well-known celebrity for his status but not an actor, that I find these questions very significant. As actors and their performance are part of the element of film (in most cases), so it should be crucial to understand the very people or person that we see 'represented' on film. It is question of whether our admiration and envy for them is a sign of respect for their acting skills (and their contribution to film as film) or only because they bring out our fanaticism for someone famous. Are actors famous for the right reasons in film? In Singin' in the Rain, Kathy does not seem to think highly of actors (of that era), they are just like 'shadows' on the screen.
Has the star system dilluded everyone in Hollywood during the 1920-30s. Stars are nothing but people who looked good on screen or have appeared in many movies. They bring nothing to the film in terms of aesthetic performance that can give its own meaning as an element of film. If the stars can't really act, then they are just like puppets.
The severity of this question is exclaimated by Lina Lamont. Her credibility as an actress (because of her voice) is in contradiction to her celebrity status. Her company (to the dismay of Don Lockwood) tries very hard to cover up that fact that she can't act but the people love her (until the end of the movie). She was just a face, another face that makes the industry go round but it is because of this position, she could wield substancial power on the industry. If power is placed on those that are not really a contribution to film that is built up by its elements, then what is left for film? Film would become a stage where big stars battle each other in a game of fame (and shame). There can be no appreciation for film, 'you see them once and you've seen them all'.
However, it does not mean that Singin' in the Rain does not have any other readings that can be derived from it.
It also tries to represent the introduction of sound into cinema. This is an interesting reflection of film history. When sound was first introduced, there were many who believed that it would revolutionaize the industry as many as the sceptics that believed it was just a trend. Singin' in the Rain is like a documentary (it even used real names, like the first talkie film, The Jazz Singer, produced by Warner Bros.) in its examination of the inception of the sound era and the slow death of silent cinema. The narrative of Singin' in the Rain which is centered on the 'stars' of a (albeit fictional but cunningly pun-ed) studio company showed how film companies had to adapt itself to the technology of sound during that era.
As film history was written (although not exclusively and comprehensively), the introduction of sound was set to change the way of film and the Hollywood industry from that point on in the 1920s (which Singin' in the Rain was set in). Those that failed to fit in that change would face the consequences and for Don Lockwood and Lina Lamont, it could the end of their careers.
But from the narrative of Singin' in the Rain, with sound it was an opportunity for filmmakers rather than a curse of technology.
It was with sound that the classical Hollywood narrative could evolve in creating a new genre. It opened up the sensation of sound and allowed a new feast for the spectators which could have only been possible (and creatively logical) with the combination of audio and visual. The classical Hollywood narrative would become well-known as the musical with its grand and glamourous spectacle and the celebrated combination of song and dance on film for the first time.
What I cannot seem to read or try to understand is the entire sequence of the 'Broadway Melody' especially the relation between 'supposedly' Don Lockwood and the alluring lady in the casino, the black and white dance and the party. Such scenes I feel would not fit itself very well in terms of narrative for Singin' in the Rain but other meanings from the perspective of idealogy and sexuality would be more likely and relevant.
Readings:
- Gomery, Douglas (1998) 'Hollywood as Industry', Hill and Church Gibson, eds, The Oxford Guide to Film Studies, 245-254. The reading tells us that although film is a text by itself and should be read as such, the importance of the context is still significant enough to affect the reading of a film. It continues to explore the historical periods of Hollywood as an industry and how it remains to be the most popular film industry in the world. I find Singin' in the Rain reflects very much on the studio system era. As the narrative in the film also revolves around the coming of sound which was a technological revolution in film history. So not only can a film be read by itself, the surrounding circumstances to the film (the industry and its structure) but also its relation to history or film history. This contrasts but compliments with the readings on film language that we should also look at film from the outside, in a wider context rather than concentrating solely on the language itself. Like Singin' in The Rain, it gives a meaning of how filmmakers adapt to new technology, overcome the difficulties by these technologies and then creatively use that technology as an additional tool to express art.
- Cohen, Steven (2000) 'Case Study: Interpreting Singin' in the Rain', Gledhill and Williams, eds, Reinventing Film Studies, London: Arnold, 53-75. Cohen has taken a wide approach in studying Singin' in the Rain from a myraid of angels ranging from the narrative, the cultural and industrial context to its symbolism of the dance sequences, characters and even placement of events or 'plot'. Although Cohen admits that it is not meant to be a comprehensive case study of Singin' in the Rain, it rings enough truth as an evidence to what was discussed by Gomrey (who was in fact referecned in this reading). This shows that a film can be read from so many angels that it almost becomes a matter of preference as a critic to find their own reading and meaning. I find this a model study of film and would like to apply them in future film screenings but the content of such readings for each film in this unit alone would be able to fill a book and the process could be never ending. This is perhaps how films like Singin' in the Rain can remain so timeless, its meaning can change according to the time it is read even though it is not the intended meaning of the director or auteur. This coincides with genres that also changes over time with new innovations between genres as well as through self-development. The most interesting thing I find in this reading is that it touches on my question of actors as stars in my critical comment earlier. However, it takes the perspective of cultural studies to explore the star and stardom. Nevertheless, such studies could guide my future interpretation of stars culturally but also in industries.
Monday, October 23, 2006
Week 3: Elements of Film Style III - The Documentary Film: The Representation of Reality
Salaam Cinema
Country: Iran
Year: 1995
Director: Mohsen Makhmalbaf
Length: 75 min
Language: Persian
Critical Comments:
What is cinema ? The language of cinema is not really overt in Salaam cinema. It strips out the projected image that suspends our disbelief when watching this film. We can see everything that makes this film. The equipment, the director, the lights, the stage (even though it's just a small box), realism in this film exposes it in its making. There are really not much hidden or derivable meaning in Salaam cinema as the intentions of Makhmalbaf are made very clear in his conversation with those in his 'audition'. Without the spectacle and glamourous illusion, Makhmalbaf is able to capture the raw essence of aspiring actors and lovers of cinema in his home country in a candid way.
Actors are real because they are not acting, in fact in realism, there are really no actors. Everyone is an actor in a realist film especially when filming a documentary. The language of film speaks through the reality and the audiences are not addressed by Makhmalbaf. He is equally as part of this film as his 'auditioners'. It was also interesting to see that while many had the impression of film as some kind of entertainment, there were actors with roles to play and directors made the decisions of what is happening in the film. Many of those who were in that audition were shocked (like the 'blind' man) that they already part of a film but one that was entirely within their expectations.
Salaam cinema challenges that to present film as realism. There is more to film that watching it in the cinema. In Salaam cinema I can see that Makmalbaf who made this film on the occasion for the centenary celebration of film, trace some of its history. Like the rather talented singers that reminds us of the classical Hollywood musical and some of the famous names in cinema which we can see in a 'who do you look like' game.
But what I personally find the most interesting thing about Salaam Cinema in the end is the question of the actor. What is the actor in cinema and what role does the actor play in cinema. This is very relevant in realism film but just one aspect I believe of realism.
Salaam Cinema 'reveals' the evolution of actors behind cinema and how 'cruel' cinema has really been when interviewing the teenage girls that took up almost 30 minutes in the film. The question of actors expected to be artist or humane brings out questions whether actors who can easily manipulate and 'sell' their emotions are still considered humane. Have they given up so much in the name of acting and cinema that they have ascended to a state of artistry that they have forgotten what makes them human? This may be true with actors in the fictional film but in Salaam cinema, Makhmalbaf believes that cinema is for everyone. No one has to choose whether they have to be an artist or human. Realism allows anyone to be an actor without going through this rather morbid dilemma in filmmaking. However the questions remain whether cinema would remain to be for everyone. With the closing shot of the girls holding a blackboard with 'to be continued' in Persian written on it, this can be a never-ending question as to whether film really is for everyone. Actors had to sell their 'humanity' to order to be an artisit in cinema while there are no need for actors in realist cinema.
Readings:
1.Branston and Stafford (1996) 'Realism', The Media Student's Book 3rd ed, London & New York: Routledge, 446-472. This reading tells how different types of realism has been potrayed on film that has different ideas of realism. It was interesting to read about how realism came about as a movement since the 18th century and has been an undying tradition ever since. Realism is a form of aesthetics rather than simply just about capturing 'real life'. To apply what I have read from this reading into Salaam Cinema, the film follows the precepts of the documentary of Direct Cinema. Salaam Cinema does not attempt to bring out any political discourses that wants to change the behaviour of the audience that watches the film. It is simply a documentary about people (Iranians) and what are the ideas they had about cinema which I find it very fitting for a centinary tribute to cinema. As a documentary about cinema after 100 years in Iran, it lets ordinary people tell the audience what they felt and what were the impressions (many which probably were not aware that Salaam Cinema was meant to be a documentary). This is realism right there. The absence, in fact, this is shown through the presence, of the director's mediation in Salaam Cinema preserve Salaam Cinema in its realism state.
2.Traverso, Antonio & Martin Mhando (2005). 'Salaam Cinema: Unlikely Journeys in Documentary' in Asian Cinema, special issue on Asian Documentary (Spring 2005). Traverso suggest that Salaam Cinema puts the questions and theories of the documentary genre back into the drawing board. He tells western film theorist, critics and audience to rethink their initial ideas they had about documentary and realism. For the most part, I find the points made by Traverso agreeable if not more detailed than my critical comments that I had about Salaam Cinema.
However, there some points that I find although unique from its standpoint, I find it not entirely significant or possibly a different reading of the same context. First of all is how Traverso related the theme of religion and spirituality of Salaam Cinema as a context to be read in the film. I cannot really agree that religion should be read as a seperate context in the film but rather it contributes to the discourses of documentary. As Traverso mentioned that Salaam Cinema is documentary about film and explores about the relationship of film during its inception as a device of capturing actuality, religion in an Asian country should be one, if not major part of that actuality. Makhmalbaf as an Iranian that comes from an Islamic country is using film to present realism. Realism as has been discussed of carrying different meanings and natures in different locations in Iran, is religion. This supports the argument that Western theorist, critics and audience need to reconsider what should be a documentary. The realism in Salaam Cinema shows that documentary film should and can be done regardless of religion and in another case, as suggested by Traverso, gender.
What I find most interesting in this reading is how Traverso could come up with the discourse of cinema as power which his points have made it convincing and also interesting to note.
3.Review of Salaam Cinema, http://www.wsws.org/arts/1995/sep1995/makh-s95.html. This review tells how Salaam Cinema transforms from a fictional film to a documentary and hints on the possibility the Makhmalbaf had more than he bargained for. This review although sufficient in describing the viewing experience of Salaam Cinema, does not in my opinion do enough justice of acknowledging Salaam Cinema as a provocative film. It provides the background of Makhmalbaf and Salaam Cinema but not the critical analysis and the reading that we can expect to find in Salaam Cinema
Country: Iran
Year: 1995
Director: Mohsen Makhmalbaf
Length: 75 min
Language: Persian
Critical Comments:
What is cinema ? The language of cinema is not really overt in Salaam cinema. It strips out the projected image that suspends our disbelief when watching this film. We can see everything that makes this film. The equipment, the director, the lights, the stage (even though it's just a small box), realism in this film exposes it in its making. There are really not much hidden or derivable meaning in Salaam cinema as the intentions of Makhmalbaf are made very clear in his conversation with those in his 'audition'. Without the spectacle and glamourous illusion, Makhmalbaf is able to capture the raw essence of aspiring actors and lovers of cinema in his home country in a candid way.
Actors are real because they are not acting, in fact in realism, there are really no actors. Everyone is an actor in a realist film especially when filming a documentary. The language of film speaks through the reality and the audiences are not addressed by Makhmalbaf. He is equally as part of this film as his 'auditioners'. It was also interesting to see that while many had the impression of film as some kind of entertainment, there were actors with roles to play and directors made the decisions of what is happening in the film. Many of those who were in that audition were shocked (like the 'blind' man) that they already part of a film but one that was entirely within their expectations.
Salaam cinema challenges that to present film as realism. There is more to film that watching it in the cinema. In Salaam cinema I can see that Makmalbaf who made this film on the occasion for the centenary celebration of film, trace some of its history. Like the rather talented singers that reminds us of the classical Hollywood musical and some of the famous names in cinema which we can see in a 'who do you look like' game.
But what I personally find the most interesting thing about Salaam Cinema in the end is the question of the actor. What is the actor in cinema and what role does the actor play in cinema. This is very relevant in realism film but just one aspect I believe of realism.
Salaam Cinema 'reveals' the evolution of actors behind cinema and how 'cruel' cinema has really been when interviewing the teenage girls that took up almost 30 minutes in the film. The question of actors expected to be artist or humane brings out questions whether actors who can easily manipulate and 'sell' their emotions are still considered humane. Have they given up so much in the name of acting and cinema that they have ascended to a state of artistry that they have forgotten what makes them human? This may be true with actors in the fictional film but in Salaam cinema, Makhmalbaf believes that cinema is for everyone. No one has to choose whether they have to be an artist or human. Realism allows anyone to be an actor without going through this rather morbid dilemma in filmmaking. However the questions remain whether cinema would remain to be for everyone. With the closing shot of the girls holding a blackboard with 'to be continued' in Persian written on it, this can be a never-ending question as to whether film really is for everyone. Actors had to sell their 'humanity' to order to be an artisit in cinema while there are no need for actors in realist cinema.
Readings:
1.Branston and Stafford (1996) 'Realism', The Media Student's Book 3rd ed, London & New York: Routledge, 446-472. This reading tells how different types of realism has been potrayed on film that has different ideas of realism. It was interesting to read about how realism came about as a movement since the 18th century and has been an undying tradition ever since. Realism is a form of aesthetics rather than simply just about capturing 'real life'. To apply what I have read from this reading into Salaam Cinema, the film follows the precepts of the documentary of Direct Cinema. Salaam Cinema does not attempt to bring out any political discourses that wants to change the behaviour of the audience that watches the film. It is simply a documentary about people (Iranians) and what are the ideas they had about cinema which I find it very fitting for a centinary tribute to cinema. As a documentary about cinema after 100 years in Iran, it lets ordinary people tell the audience what they felt and what were the impressions (many which probably were not aware that Salaam Cinema was meant to be a documentary). This is realism right there. The absence, in fact, this is shown through the presence, of the director's mediation in Salaam Cinema preserve Salaam Cinema in its realism state.
2.Traverso, Antonio & Martin Mhando (2005). 'Salaam Cinema: Unlikely Journeys in Documentary' in Asian Cinema, special issue on Asian Documentary (Spring 2005). Traverso suggest that Salaam Cinema puts the questions and theories of the documentary genre back into the drawing board. He tells western film theorist, critics and audience to rethink their initial ideas they had about documentary and realism. For the most part, I find the points made by Traverso agreeable if not more detailed than my critical comments that I had about Salaam Cinema.
However, there some points that I find although unique from its standpoint, I find it not entirely significant or possibly a different reading of the same context. First of all is how Traverso related the theme of religion and spirituality of Salaam Cinema as a context to be read in the film. I cannot really agree that religion should be read as a seperate context in the film but rather it contributes to the discourses of documentary. As Traverso mentioned that Salaam Cinema is documentary about film and explores about the relationship of film during its inception as a device of capturing actuality, religion in an Asian country should be one, if not major part of that actuality. Makhmalbaf as an Iranian that comes from an Islamic country is using film to present realism. Realism as has been discussed of carrying different meanings and natures in different locations in Iran, is religion. This supports the argument that Western theorist, critics and audience need to reconsider what should be a documentary. The realism in Salaam Cinema shows that documentary film should and can be done regardless of religion and in another case, as suggested by Traverso, gender.
What I find most interesting in this reading is how Traverso could come up with the discourse of cinema as power which his points have made it convincing and also interesting to note.
3.Review of Salaam Cinema, http://www.wsws.org/arts/1995/sep1995/makh-s95.html. This review tells how Salaam Cinema transforms from a fictional film to a documentary and hints on the possibility the Makhmalbaf had more than he bargained for. This review although sufficient in describing the viewing experience of Salaam Cinema, does not in my opinion do enough justice of acknowledging Salaam Cinema as a provocative film. It provides the background of Makhmalbaf and Salaam Cinema but not the critical analysis and the reading that we can expect to find in Salaam Cinema
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Week 2 : Formalism and Realism - Elements of Film Style II
Bloody Sunday
Country : UK / Ireland
Year : 2002
Director : Paul Greengrass
Length : 107 min
Language : English
Awards :
Synopsis : A film of what happened on 30th January 1970 in Derry, Northern Ireland also known as 'Bloody Sunday'
Critical Comments:
Bloody Sunday is like watching four documentaries at the same time. With each fade out, we have given an entirely different perspective on the events that transpire on Bloody Sunday. This gives a sense of seeing the larger picture and that the blame of the event is shared among those that were involved.
The film explores issues like Beneath Clouds because it is about creating an understanding to both sides of Bloody Sunday. It uses realist techniques such as naturalistic lighting, real locations and most of all a sense of real-time shooting. Everything we see that happen in the film is almost as though it happened simultaneously. The only time when this real-time convention was disobeyed was during the turning point of the march. When the
youth broke rank from the main body of the march and started provoking the Bristish military. This highlights the film of presenting different points of view. The scene was shown twice in the film but on one hand in the youths' point of view who thought that the march has been dilluded from their course. On the other hand from the organizers of the march, the youth are seen as reckless hooligans who just wanted to vent their anger on the intimadating and closely sitauted British military.
This presentation of different perspective is also shown through the eyes of the British military. The command post had a hard time coordinating the troops and was very cautious to maintain order rather than violence. However, to the Para unit, they were more eager to unleash their ruthlessness on the undeserving Irish, many of whom had misgivings about them for killing their comrades. The Para was about reclaiming their honour on a 'battlefield' while the commanding officer was to ensure that order is the highest priority.
In the end of the film and after the actual (and realisticly represented) shooting happened, it remains to see who's fault is it in the end. Bloody Sunday had the same purpose like Beneath Clouds that this film is aimed at drawing a clearer picture to promote understanding while it uses the realist techniques of a docu-drama (which is somewhat similar to Salaam Cinema because Bloody Sunday used unprofessional actors who themselves had taken part on the actual Bloody Sunday). Perhaps the message is that it is too difficult to point out who's fault is whose. Although the responsibilities are clear but it is about closing wounds that should be everyone's responsibility. The ugly truth needs to be reveal before any consensus can be made and that is what I believe Bloody Sunday is trying to achieve.
Readings:
Country : UK / Ireland
Year : 2002
Director : Paul Greengrass
Length : 107 min
Language : English
Awards :
- Golden Berlin Bear (Berlin International Film Festival),
- Prize of the Ecumenical Jury (Berlin International Film Festival),
- Best Actor (British Independent Film Awards),
- Best Director (British Independent Film Awards),
- Best Director of a Feature Film (IFTA Awards),
- Best Feature (IFTA Awards),
- Best Script (IFTA Awards),
- Best Sound (IFTA Awards),
- Audience Award (Sundance Film Festival)
Synopsis : A film of what happened on 30th January 1970 in Derry, Northern Ireland also known as 'Bloody Sunday'
Critical Comments:
Bloody Sunday is like watching four documentaries at the same time. With each fade out, we have given an entirely different perspective on the events that transpire on Bloody Sunday. This gives a sense of seeing the larger picture and that the blame of the event is shared among those that were involved.
The film explores issues like Beneath Clouds because it is about creating an understanding to both sides of Bloody Sunday. It uses realist techniques such as naturalistic lighting, real locations and most of all a sense of real-time shooting. Everything we see that happen in the film is almost as though it happened simultaneously. The only time when this real-time convention was disobeyed was during the turning point of the march. When the
youth broke rank from the main body of the march and started provoking the Bristish military. This highlights the film of presenting different points of view. The scene was shown twice in the film but on one hand in the youths' point of view who thought that the march has been dilluded from their course. On the other hand from the organizers of the march, the youth are seen as reckless hooligans who just wanted to vent their anger on the intimadating and closely sitauted British military.
This presentation of different perspective is also shown through the eyes of the British military. The command post had a hard time coordinating the troops and was very cautious to maintain order rather than violence. However, to the Para unit, they were more eager to unleash their ruthlessness on the undeserving Irish, many of whom had misgivings about them for killing their comrades. The Para was about reclaiming their honour on a 'battlefield' while the commanding officer was to ensure that order is the highest priority. In the end of the film and after the actual (and realisticly represented) shooting happened, it remains to see who's fault is it in the end. Bloody Sunday had the same purpose like Beneath Clouds that this film is aimed at drawing a clearer picture to promote understanding while it uses the realist techniques of a docu-drama (which is somewhat similar to Salaam Cinema because Bloody Sunday used unprofessional actors who themselves had taken part on the actual Bloody Sunday). Perhaps the message is that it is too difficult to point out who's fault is whose. Although the responsibilities are clear but it is about closing wounds that should be everyone's responsibility. The ugly truth needs to be reveal before any consensus can be made and that is what I believe Bloody Sunday is trying to achieve.
Readings:
- Abrams, Bell and Udris (2001) 'The Language of Film', Studying Film, London: Arnold, 92-116. This reading tells about film having its own language that can be understood and 'read' in a different way. It uses it to express meaning whether from the narrative or style. Film requires us as the audience to visually see the meaning and not read it literally as we would from a text. Therefore the process of reading film is much complicated but once we can understand its language (which we can understand it differently), we are then able to understand the meaning of the film. Of course, film is created with the use of different film conventions and techniques that once we familiarize ourselves we can see how these conventions and techniques are used to create their own meaning. This reading provides some examples of how such conventions and techniques have been used in different types of films. It also explains how these film languages can be read. The reading also talks about the basic seperation on the idea of using film as a medium; the realist and formalist. Bloody Sunday in accordance to the reading is a realist film. It follows a tradition of British documentary filmmakers that addresses social issue in which case is a historical event that has social and political implications. Bloody Sunday obeys the convention of trying to represent the events on January 7 with as little mediation as possible on the director's part. However, the reading suggest that realism cannot be fully represented on film. Although I find this agreeable but to a certain extent, realism can be represented on film. Realism isn't perceived from what we see on film but we make out of it from the attempt of representing reality. Realist is only a means to an end, an end that we create from ourselves as spectators of something that is presented to us. In Bloody Sunday, we are watching a film that wants us to see a side of the truth (a word which is closely linked with reality), if not the whole truth of what really happened. The meaning of this truth would vary between the survivors on Bloody Sunday and the British would either believe their actions were justified or were ignorant of such a tragedy. Such is the result of how film can be read.
- Bloody Sunday (n.d.). Bloody Sunday online review. Retrieved on February 13, 2006 from http://www.unreel.co.uk/reviews/b/bloody_sunday/index.cfm. This reading gives a very account of the realist techniques used in Bloody Sunday from the mise-en-scene of the location, the actors (who were casted with their religious background in mind), the cinematography and editing. The reviewer also suggest that the director, Paul Greengrass wanted to make Bloody Sunday spill out the reality of the situation, humanizing the protestors as innocent victims while demonizing the British military as the bloodthirsty hooligans. I find it ironic that for a film that is aimed to create empathy for both sides, it would willingly admit the fault of the British military (Paul Greengrass is British). Bloody Sunday becomes a film that begs for forgiveness from those who suffered on that day by recognizing their own faults.
