Clay+C.

=12/1/11=

Response to Tokyo Story
I found this film to be in the same vein of both //American Beauty// and //Rebel Without a Cause//. It decided to address slightly different issues though. //Tokyo Story// focused more on how children tend to distance themselves from their parents as they grow older, move out of the home and have and raise children of their own. Their behavior speaks volumes as to how they feel about having their parents come stay with them for a little vacation. They seem irritated and unhappy that they are there even though they do not see them very often. I found it strange that often times it is the in-laws that treat their mother and father in-law with much more kindness and warmth than their own biological children. Furthermore, the film also commented on the generational gap that exists between grandparents and their grandchildren. The grandparents try to reach out to get to know their grandchildren but they are shy or uninterested in their //boring// relatives. All while this is happening, the grandparents are apologetic about being an inconvenience and always thanking their hosts for the food, bed and hospitality. The film turned tragic when the grandmother fell ill and actually died. It seemed to take everyone by shock. Maybe they wished they would have been a little more kind during their visit since it was the final time they would have seen each other. = = =11/17/11=

Response to American Beauty
//American Beauty // definitely addresses the concept of the dysfunctional family. It does so in a strange way. We learn from the opening voice-over that Lester is already dead and is telling the story of the last year of his life from “beyond the grave”, which kind of seemed a little more eerie to me during this particular viewing. The film takes a risk by doing this. I believe that it is the director telling the audience that this movie is conceptual in nature, rather than concerned with plot twists, tension and suspense. The movie also reminded me a lot of //Rebel Without a Cause// in that both dealt with young people trying to grow up without having good relationships with their parents. Jane’s parents are estranged from each other, as we see in the dinner scenes or after Carolyn catches Lester masturbating to a fantasy of Jane’s friend, and she does not know how to communicate with them, thus withdrawing all together. Ricky has had to be his own support, knowing that his father’s ways will not be his own. He is probably the most confident of the characters. The relationship he forms with Lester is quite interesting. There are lots of homosexual undertones. Ricky’s father believes that his son is gay and spending time with the neighbor in this capacity. This turns out to be far from the case. Lester is killed as a result of this miscommunication, or rather, no communication at all. It also reminded me of //Rebel// because much as Jim was teaching his dad how to be a man, Ricky is helping Lester get through his own “mid-life crisis” by coaching him with a Zen styled philosophy. It had never occurred to me that there were so many similarities between these two films made nearly fifty years apart. = = =11/10/11=

Response to Rebel Without a Cause
The main theme in //Rebel Without a Cause// addressed the idea of delinquency. John is a boy who has lost his way in the world and doesn’t know how to transition into becoming a man. I think that the film is also a coming-of-age story in this way: John, through the snafu that he enters with the boys from school, is faced to choose what decision to make in this dire situation. Going to his father was no help, his mother didn’t want him to go to the cops and rat himself out. John is at a crossroads, confused by what his parents are saying and what he himself thinks is the morally right thing to do. These issues brought to the light in the film likely reflect sociological studies that were being done on young people during this time period. What do you do with a kid who is always questioning whether what is told is the right thing to do? John seems to be one of the kids who cannot go along with what the world is telling him. He paves his own way into adulthood but also quickly learns about the consequences of losing a friend, who he could have save, Plato. I feel like the last scene in the film at the mansion was meant to represent and mock in a way the lifestyle of the parents. The kids seem to form a small family by the pool, a union that Plato desperately craves, and are torn apart when the police enter the scene. This seems to be making a statement: if your kids live on the wrong side of the law, they’ll end up dead or in jail, while the kids that follow what their parents say will grow up and do things exactly as they were taught. It is so tragic because Plato was hardly delinquent in character but unfortunately snapped in a mental breakdown of sorts in the final shoot-out. = = =10/27/11=

Response to Grizzly Man
Having already seen this documentary before, I was surprised that the content continued to engage me during the second viewing. The most interesting thing I found to be about this film was how Werner Herzog composed the material. Many times, documentaries seem like they have footage that is trying to push a message across a bit too much, making the film seem self-righteous and artificial, as opposed to actually trying to capture what the truth of the situation or person actually was. This film was not like that at all for me. While watching, I continued to ponder our discussion about the differences between fictional films and documentaries, or if there is even a difference at all. In today’s world of movies, the subject matter of this film could seem like it could have been faked. Timothy’s eccentric personality and outrageous love for the bears and to be a bear were so un-human that it made me question if he was really even a person at all. Though I know that the documentary is true, I found it interesting to question it in this way. I also thought the composition of the film felt very organic and fluid. The message was more in the realm of telling a man’s life from the 100 hours of footage he left behind. There were a series of interviews but the director didn’t push it too far and didn’t strive for the “why” of the situation, which I really liked. It seemed like all the people he interviewed were asking why Timothy did what he did, but the answer is quite simple. It’s because he loved bears. That’s all, simple as that. It was his one passion left in a world which he despised. In the end, the story mainly told itself by means of the director’s superb editing. He was able to sift through the hours of footage and recreate Timothy from his home movies he made in the wilderness. Taking this approach gave the film a genuine feel that could not have been replicated. = = = = =10/20/11=

Response to High School
This film chose not to have a narrator, which gives the audience the impression that the situations that were chosen to be shown as a part of the film have key points that constitute to the overall message and theme of the film. Often I noticed themes surround the complicated process of coming of age among the high school students and how the teachers and administrators want to shape in some way the morals that will grown in these children as they mature into adults. From what I observed, the high school seemed to be in the more “affluent” part of the community. There were few minorities, mostly white children, but all whom had many opportunities to take part in various school-related activities. The situations that the documentarians include in the final cut were generally in the realm of student activities and the social and professional relationships between student and teacher, teacher and teacher, and parent, student, teacher. It was interesting to see how the high school more than forty years ago. I’m not sure if today is any rowdier or not, since it could be possible that some footage was not used as a part of the film. Speaking of form, I did find the way the documentarians chose to document the school was very effective. They really were like the clichéd “fly on the wall.” The characters of the documentary did not address the camera; they appeared as if a film crew was not right in front of them. Whatever technique this crew developed really made the footage that much better. By doing this, it seemed to help let the story tell itself rather than the documentarians trying to arrange the story into something that might end up bias one way or another. This made the film feel genuine. = = =10/13/11=

Clay, I liked your idea in class that the movie could be read as a satire of modern civilization. That kind of goes with your idea here that the movie is conceptual. -MH

Response to Walkabout
I believe that the director of //Walkabout// was creating a conceptual film to compare and contrast the two cultures. The first culture that the audience is introduced to is through the slide defining a //walkabout//. The second culture is the proper manners of the English, who had colonized Australia. Editing is used to compare different images without the images being explained by dialogue or narration. The city conceptualizes the ways of the whites. Voice classes, which forks to use, and a butcher preparing the meat that almost everyone will purchase at a clean, sterile marketplace. At first, the images confused me. I think I was confused for the first thirty or forty minutes of the film, but I stuck with it. The problem I encountered when trying to stretch my interest was that the characters of the woman and the young boy didn’t seem to respond to the tragic suicide of the father figure and exodus into the wilderness. It didn’t seem to bother them at all. This is what made me think the film was conceptual. The plot is not necessarily important in the conceptual film because the images and characters are representing a specific idea. In this film, the concept is the divide between two different societies and how they persist and influence each other. Despite being out in the wilderness, the mother is insistent that they keep their proper appearance. They were close to dying if they had not met the boy, who I assume was on his own walkabout. I did notice that as they spent more time with the aboriginal boy the mother and son began to look more undone. The mother’s hair became matted, and she swam naked, which made me think about to the beginning of the film when she was swimming in the pool. The boy stopped wearing his shirt and wore a type of warrior paint. They were becoming less and less English the more time they spent in the wilderness, until they returned to their civilization. = = =10/11/11=

Sequence Analysis Proposal
The opening sequence of David Fincher’s //Se7en// says a lot without using explicit methods. The audience learns a great deal about the character of Detective Somerset’s character and why he cannot work on the force any longer. In the genre of crime thrillers, there are few other opening sequences that tell us so much about the character without using a dialogue driven method. The scene opens to reveal Somerset (Morgan Freeman) preparing to go to work. We see a lot in his apartment that gives us clues to his character. Somerset arrives at a crime scene and is then introduced to the detective (Brad Pitt) who will be replacing him after he retires. He is seven days away from retirement, which acts in the script as a time clock, giving the audience a sense of urgency or panic. We also notice the weather is horrendously wet and windy. In my paper I plan to look at areas within mise-en-scene and cinematography to extract the devices show the story rather than tell it. Tentative thesis: Costuming, set design and camera angles quickly accomplish an introduction to the story’s characters while carefully building the foundations of the plot’s tension and suspense to hook audiences before the opening credits roll. = = =10/06/11=

Response to Citizen Kane
//Citizen Kane // is a film that combines both diegetic and nondiegetic through the director’s choice of where and when to use music and sound effects. From the introduction of the film, music was used and the narrator told about Kane’s death and recounted a few event of the tycoon’s life in a grandiose and exaggerated manner. This made me think that the film was a satire, also along with learning that Orson Wells was poking a big finger at William Randolph Hurst. This concept made the film even more interesting for me as a viewer. The orchestral music and the loud narrator as the film began gave off a feeling of sensationalism. It also established that there was a mysteriousness to the late Charles Foster Kane: “The most public private life” a news headline proclaimed before the introduction concluded, before the newsman set out to discover the meaning behind the phrase “rosebud.” The shots were edited to be both quick and jarring to imply that the media knew so much about Kane that they felt uneasy that the “rosebud” eluded them. From seeing the entire film, I believe that the meaning of “rosebud” was referring to the childhood that Charles never had, thus the one place in his life when he was not continually under the eye of the media. The reporter could never have gotten that far into Kane’s life without having the eye-witness to that particular even: the day that Kane was given over to Walter Parks Thatcher. Going back to the music, I noticed that in times of success or overcoming an obstacle when a goal was accomplished, music was used in the jubilee. In contrast with this, when there is drama between Kane and any other the other characters the score is silent. This causes the audience to assess how the conflict influences the characters involved in the plot. = = =9/22/11=

Response to Days of Heaven
//Days of Heaven// is a film that is primarily told through two elements: the narration of the young girl, Linda, and through strong, vivid images. The narration is interesting because it is told through the mind of this young girl who probably has little experience dealing with love, which is the main conflict in the film. Despite this, her narration appears perceptive and keen with its insights into personal matters outside her own. Not every film could be narrated by a child and get away with it, but the director uses familiar image to make Linda seem more adult-like. For example, she has a thick Chicago accent and smokes cigarettes with her brother and Abby. These actions make her seem older and wiser to the audience and less like an adolescent. Her narration also reveals things about other characters the audience would not have known. Being said, it can be assumed that her narration is used as a device to keep the plot in momentum. It is also through her narration that the theme of good versus evil emerges when she states, “The devil was on that farm.” The line plays into the title of the film, the word “days” being used as a “short period of time.” This was just a few scenes before the grasshoppers sweep over the land and, while in a frenzy of cleaning them from the wheat field, the Farmer’s anger boils over and attacks Bill, inadvertently catching the entire field on fire. The scene of the fire in the field is probably one of the strongest in the entire film. The director uses this as an emotional conduit for the jealously and disgust that the Farmer has been amassing ever since he began suspecting Bill and Abby were not who they said they were. But the emotion proves to be devastating as it transmits into the physical world, ruining the entire field. The director also returns to the familiar image of the celebration scene while everyone is jumping around the fire, singing, dancing and laughing. This instance, the people are doing quite the opposite. The audience sees only their shadows as they collect buckets of grasshoppers and throw them into the fire. These two scenes together create the beginning and end of the second act of the film. = = =9/15/11=

Response to Pan's Labyrinth
Guillermo del Torro’s //Pan’s Labyrinth// is fortified with solid narratives and two vastly different “worlds,” one created by the young girl Ophelia and the other a backdrop of reality set in fascist Spain during World War II. Why Ophelia creates this other reality is obvious from the beginning. She does not want to be out in the country with her mother, she is upset by her father’s death and she soon learns that her step-father, the captain, is a malicious and stern military officer. Early in the film, the two narratives emerge. There is Ophelia’s fantastical quest to return to her home world as Princess Moanna and the fascist military’s conquest to squash the guerrilla soldiers hiding in the mountains. The stories follow one another in this instance. As Ophelia’s journey becomes more frightening and dangerous, so too does the fighting between the military and the guerrilla rebels become more intense. The narratives are restricted to the perspective of the particular character. The audience does not have the opportunity to enter the head of Ophelia or Mercedes or the Captain. Through dialogue and gestures we are always aware of their feelings, especially Ophelia whose acting is emotionally based. Dualism exists in this film as well. The split between reality and fantasy is emphasized. I believe it is being used in this case to conceptualize the imagination and pleasure of being a young child, when magic could still be seen, a gift Ophelia has not lost. Maybe in this case her over-active imagination is spurred by her disliking for her new home, the subconscious’s method of attempting to escape. And escape Ophelia does. Mise en scene plays a strong role in distinguishing reality and Ophelia’s fantasy world. The reality presented in the film is brutal and tyrannical represented through the staunch military regalia. On the other hand, Ophelia’s world is saturated in a golden hue and magical creatures that seem older than any other living thing, as if they just appeared from the ground. = = =09/08/11=

Response to Stagecoach
Yesterday’s film //Stagecoach// is a classic example of a story that utilizes the form of the quest narrative. In a quest narrative, there are generally a group of individuals who are all headed the same way (everyone is headed to Lordsborg), but everyone has a different motive for wanting to go there. For example, Curly wants to go to Lordsborg to meet up with Ringo Kid, who he meets up with earlier in fact. Hartfield, the southern gambler, is motivated when he sees Lucy Mallory and wishes to follow her. Mallory on the other hand is pregnant and going to reunite with her husband who is in the cavalry. Ringo Kid probably has the most intense of the motives. He wants to return to Lordsborg to avenge the deaths of his father and brothers, slain by Lou Plumber and his posse. Some of the others motives are secondary and a little less important to the scope of the movie. Samuel Peacock is simply trying to get to Kansas City, back to his family, while Doc Boone is driven by his alcoholism and follow Peacock, who has a bag full of whiskey. The desires within each of the characters are what gives the audience a reason to fell invested in the film. It also makes certain turning points that much more tragic. For example, when the stagecoach passes Lee’s Ferry and is just about to Lordborg, the Apache attack and Peacock, one of the gentlest characters riding along, is shot in the chest by an arrow. That, along with the newborn baby in the arms of Dallas the prostitute, makes for a suspenseful gallop to the climax of the film. After the climax, it film begins to reveal who gets to fulfill their desire, or why they wanted to go to Lordborg in the first place. Most notably and intense is the shoot-out between Ringo Kid and Lou Plumber. Kid drop Lou in a firefight, and he and Dallas, unexpectedly, are let go by Curly and head to his ranch across the border.

= = =09/01/11= =Response to The Night of the Hunter=

The first element that struck me about //The Night of the Hunter// was the obvious dualism that persisted throughout the entire film. This notion of polar-opposites, such as day/night, good/evil, land/water, parallels the characteristics of the charlatan preacher Harry Powell, whose character is driven by a stringent reverence which reveals itself as misogyny; he also wears the dualism on his knuckles, love and hate, as he explains the left hand is the hand which Cain struck down Abel and the right hand is the hand representative of love. Through this use of dualistic imagery, symbolism emerges. In the beginning of the film, the Sunday school teacher warns her children of false prophets as they will arrive in sheep’s clothing. The introduction also serves as foreshadowing, letting the audience know immediately that Harry Powell is a fake and not to be trusted, yet everyone that he runs into, except for the children, who see right through his false piousness, is enamored. The separation between good and evil directly parallels what time of day it is. The pure evil in Harry Powell only reveals itself when the sun has gone down, thus the lighting conveys this hidden characteristic; it is also only at night when the mother realizes the truth about Powell’s desire for the money, and it is at night when Powell finally disposes of the mother by killing her and running the car into the river, which is rather ironic looking back at how she stated that she felt cleansed after speaking to Powell the very first time. On the other hand, during the day Powell’s ruse is in full force and almost everyone hangs on each word that slithers off his tongue, except the young boy John, who knows the truth. The river also serves as a symbol for escape. Only when John is down by the river talking to the old drunk does he feel safe away from the charlatan preacher; this is probably why he and Pearl flee to the river bank after locking Powel in the basement.