IN the Mood...

There are numerous directions one could take in discussing this film, the least of which seems to be the story. Thus, narrative...The almost invisible shifts (particularly in the filmic tradition) in time often confuses the story in some manner. We cannot always tell when time has changed or when the characters change (as when they are "playing" the roles of their spouses). The camera (and costumes) provide only discrete clues to such shifts. How do these affect the story and the viewer's relationship with such?

In class we are also interested in hearing from you concerning your final paper, which you should already be researching and formulating (at least) if not writing.

Feeling kinda Moody

We will be talking about the relationship between the verbal dexterity of Moody's novel and the ways that Lee handles such in his film. That is, the use of a guiding voice throughout the novel is easy to identify in the voice-over of the film, but the complications and differences extend well beyond this overt narrational difference. How might the narrational choices affect our relationship to the texts?

It's somehow that the book's style leads to its story (rather than the usual reversal, which would be a marker of realism). That is, we know that we are reading when we are reading (it's in contrast to cinema's invisible style, it seems). What might be the cinematic equivalent of this literary style? 

8 1/2 and Borges

I know that several of you are trying to start a new thread on this blog with no success. I am not sure what the problem is. So, use this as the start. Others: read along and respond.  And, I realize that this week's notes did not make a smooth transition to the webpage; I will bring them along on Tuesday.

Hoop Dreams

Well...I was hopeful that one of you would start a discussion thread. But... so...

Rather than talk too much about the story of Hoop Dreams (though that would be interesting in another setting), we will be discussing how it (and other documentaries) make meaning. That is, Sobchack (our author of the week) claims that with documentary we have a "subjective relation to an objective cinematic...text" (pg 1).  What might this mean? Don't merely repeat what she's written but strike out on your own as to how we may have this relationship with Hoop Dreams. How does that film construct itself as an experience? What sorts of strengths and/or weaknesses can you find with the phenomenological model of cinematic identification forwarded in the article? How do our relations differ between fiction and non-fiction films? Don't mere state the obvious here but use advanced vocabulary to understand how these relations differ.

Brazil and Prufrock

I suspect that the poem for next week might present some challenge. That's OK. In class, we will spend some time breaking it down; that is, we will work through much of the poem to discover how it makes meaning (which is similar to the ways we perform cinematic analysis: breaking down scenes in terms of cinematography, editing, etc. to find out how meaning is made). Do be sure to read the poem and try to work through some of it on your own. 

I put it together with Brazil because at some level they both concern the breakdown of society and the individual's attempt to balance his reality and his perceived reality. Whence the (unrealized) expectations in these characters (Prufrock and Sam)? What is it about their societies that prompts such (seemingly disconnected) expectations? Additionally, can you discuss the forces at work on thee characters that prompt such? We know that Brazil is visually rich. Does Gilliam use this texture toward anything more than baroque excess?

Barton Fink and Scanner Darkly

I welcome all the new participants in our class discussions last week. It is always a good thing to reveal your involvement with the material. This doesn't mean that you have to like that material, but that you should show how you are intellectually involved/engaged in it. To that end, we turn to two other texts, Barton Fink and A Scanner Darkly.

These two texts do not at all promote catharsis, that moment when the text comes around in full-circle (regularly with summary, ending/conclusion, bows all wrapped). We leave BF and SD with no real sense of how to "read" them. So, in class, I would like to hear various ways we can receive them. As you can tell from my online notes, I will discuss them in terms of capitalism: how, by working in "Capital Pictures" and a drug culture, these texts explore contemporary capitalism's mass-production, mass-consumption and the forms in which we find such. 

All,

I got bombarded with many written responses in class yesterday, some of which contained good ideas and analyses. This fact also points to some frustrations, though: where were all these comments in our class discussions? Recall a post I made early in the semester about speaking up in class, taking intellectual risks, and voicing your ideas. By showing up for class, doing the standard requirements, and not separating yourself from others (in class or in written form), you will earn a 'C' (the default grade for all college-level work). It is all too obvious that some are still playing on their computers, phones, or doing other classwork (with headphones in ears!). Others sit quietly with no texts, notes, or obvious effort to engage the class in any way whatsoever. 

As for A Woman Under the Influence and "A Room of One's Own": notes are now online. However, I want to encourage you to strike out on your own in terms of analysis, particularly connecting the two texts. Obviously they are both focused on "woman." How (as film specifically) deal with Mabel, her house, and her marriage? How does the camera function? What is the relationship between camera and its subject/object? Don't write merely about story here but about elements that are particular to cinema. How might the ideas that Woolf highlights be seen in the film? How does Woolf see history and the future for woman?