
I made a post on the SNC/FA art blog, about the art of the movie poster. Check it out for many examples and links.
Anza is an unincorporated community in Southern California. It’s a desert at high altitude, which gives the landscape some strange characteristics. There are long stretches of nothingness with wide, gaping holes opening up in the sand, while other areas are lush and green. There are dry patches of brambles and cacti mixed with flowering trees and grass. The dryer ground is littered with thorns that stick in the soles of your shoes.
On the outskirts of town, there are small, dilapidated houses and motor homes spread out through the wilderness. Some are encircled with barbed wire to keep out trespassers. There are certain areas and roads that most locals know to avoid, because the people there tend to be strange and hostile. On front porches throughout the town, people sit creaking audibly in the sun and glaring at tumbleweeds. There is a sense of nothing happening and nothing continuing to happen.
A character I might set in this place is a young man who is just passing through town on his way to visit family. His car breaks down and he’s stuck there a while. Maybe he does something to accidentally upset the more unsavory folks who live here.
Walking through town, you’ll see businesses covered in pictures of scenes from all types of stories; fairy tails, religion and history. You’ll walk past shops selling woodcarvings because this village is the home of the woodcarving school. There are clothing stores selling lederhosen and dirndls of all sorts. There are tailors and shoemakers. You’ll also walk past some of the most amazing cheese and meat shops as well as bakeries and restaurants.
A fictional character I imagine in this place is woman who used to be a local. She moved to United States and has lived there for about five years. She is coming back to Oberammergau because her father is very ill.
1.
My color was pink. This color was repeated through out the film in several scenes. I believe my color was more of a wardrobe color rather than one that actually gave meaning to the film. There was only part in the film were I saw it in the background; I can not recall exactly were but it was one of the buildings. After reading Cynthia’s essay, she confirmed my connection to the color. I see pink as being hot and that is the feeling I get from the building. As I stated the color was in the wardrobe of many of the characters. For instance Smiley had a pink shirt, Mookies girl friend also had a pink shirt, as well as his sisters dress and hat. There were several other instances were this color showed up, but I feel that they are not worth mentioning.
2.
I really do not understand why Mookie did that. I believe it was misguided, he should have backed Sal up. Sal was a good guy trying to help Mookie out. It made no sense to me because it seemed as if Sal stood up for Mookie against his son. I understand the tension between Sal’s son Peno and expected to see them get in a fist fight, but that never happened. I really do not understand why the movie went in that direction. Ya, Radio was murdered by the police but I do not see that being Sal’s fault.
3.
In my eyes, I believe the film was not a political film. Yes it obviously dealt with race and the tensions between them. I do not believe it was supposed to spike a real world race right. Rather, I see the film as being entertaining and about a tight nit Brooklyn neighborhood. The one thing I found to be a little political was the theme song, Fight the Power. This song was played through out the movie, but as the video essay stated; there was no real connection to fighting the power. Besides the Police,at first they seemed to be on the side of the African American community. In the end, they killed Radio. Thus they need to fight the power that be!
1. The color I was assigned was brown. I noticed that most of the steps, front porches, streets, doors and many of the buildings were this color. The interior of Sal’s pizzeria was also mainly brown.
2. I completely disagree with Mookie’s actions at the climax of the film. I was very surprised by what he did, which leads me to wonder why it caught me off-guard; after all, the entire film focuses on his negative qualities (irresponsible parenting, laziness, lack of work ethic, greed). I think that up until that point, he was shown as a self-absorbed character who didn’t seem to care much about taking sides, as long as he got what he wanted. His reaction to Radio Raheem’s murder was the first time we see him jolted out of his own disinterest, which made it hard to predict what he might do.
3. I didn’t necessarily see this as a political film. It felt like more of a commentary on how personal grievances can get out of hand, and how they affect the way people interact with each other.
Here's some info on your midterm assignment, which will have two phases: a "rough draft" phase, due on week 6 of class (Feb. 23), and a "final draft" phase, due on week 8 (Mar. 9).
The basic outline of the project is this: I want you to choose at least two films by a currently-working independent film director, and write about them, trying to define what the director's personal stamp is. What are some commonalities of theme and style between the films? How would you describe the director's personal "vision?" The first article on Linklater's films, two assignments ago, does a pretty good job of this.
Included in your paper, in addition to your "auteurist" analysis, I want the following things included:
1. A brief bio of the director, and some notes on the production history of the films (how was it made, and in what cinematic context did it appear?).
2. A close reading of at least one scene from each film. What was the narrative intent of the scene (what emotions, feelings, and thoughts did the director intend to invoke), and how did the director achieve those ends? Use the language of film-making to describe the formal strategies of the scenes -- how is framing, composition, color, camera placement, camera movement, sound design, and/or editing used to further the aims of the scenes? How do the performances of the actors contribute?
What I don't want to see in your papers is a basic summary break-down of the film, tracing the plot for start to finish, in a sort of junior-high book-review format. Give whatever narrative background you need to explain your points, but I'm not interested in a top-to-bottom summary. Feel free to "spoil" anything in the film, up to and including the ending -- that's fine if it helps you to make your point about the director's relation to style and theme. But don't give plot-summary just to fill space.
Below is a list of contemporary independent directors. It's not comprehensive by any means, and if there's a director not included on the list who you'd like to write about, let me know in the "comments" on this blog post. Plug some of these names into wikipedia (or maybe google images if you want to get a hit of visuals) to get a sense of what their work might be like. I haven't researched availability of the films of these directors -- before you commit to one, see if you can get your hands on a couple of their movies, through streaming, your local rental place, or what have you.
Once you've selected your director, post their name in the "comments" to this blog post -- and make sure no one else beat you to them. I want everyone to be focusing on a different director.
I highly recommend you pick out your director by the end of the week.
chantal akerman
pedro almodovar
alison anders
paul thomas anderson
wes anderson
ramin bahrani
noah baumbach
bong joon-ho
charles burnett
catherine breillat
jane campion
lisa cholodenko
larry clark
the coen brothers
sofia coppola
pedro costa
alfonso cuaron
the dardenne brothers
julie dash
jonathan demme
clare denis
abel ferrara
stephen frears
michel gondry
stuart gordon
debra granik
david gordon green
peter greenaway
michael haneke
hal hartley
werner herzog
nicole holofcener
hou hsiao-hsien
jim jarmusch
jia zhang ke
spike jonze
neil jordan
aki kaurismaki
harmony korine
ang lee
mike leigh
kasi lemmons
terrence malick
lucrecia martel
takashi miike
gaspar noe
park chan-wook
alexander payne
lynne ramsay
robert rodriguez
george romero
david o russell
john sayles
steven soderbergh
quentin tarantino
julie taymor
tsai ming-liang
gus van sant
nancy savoca
todd solondz
lars von trier
john waters
michael winterbottom
You can also choose from directors we've seen, or will be seeing, in class, who are still working (some of these directors have made both indy and studio films -- it might be interesting to compare/contrast their independent and commercial modes. Pick two of their films that aren't being screened for class, if you're interested in one of these)
david cronenberg
spike lee
richard linklater
david lynch
guy maddin
martin scorsese
agnes varda
wong kar wai
For reading #1:
According to Price, the unifying theme in all of Linklater’s films is the idea of idleness, particularly the idleness of the young and poor. Rather than glorifying or condemning idleness, Linklater simply explores the effect that it has on people. He is also very interested in time as a concept, and how it can be manipulated through the medium of filmmaking.
For reading #2:
I think that "style is the artist's means of defining the relationship of the spectator to the film" is another way of saying that style encompasses every method a director uses to influence the viewer’s experience as they watch. Everything that a filmmaker does to put their own unique spin on things, or to make separate films feel as if they’ve all come from the same mind or source, is “style”.
As for Linklater’s approach to making Before Sunrise, I think that incorporating elements like improvisation and collaborative scriptwriting do give the film a sense of realism. For instance, allowing the actors to draw from their own personal histories is an interesting way to give the characters a believable back-story. I think that, to a certain degree, drawing on past experience is something that all writers and actors do to ensure a sense of realism.
For #3:
Film definitely has the most unique relationship to time compared to other mediums. You can look at a painting for as little or as long as you want, or you can read a book all in one sitting or spread it out over a period of months, but a film takes a set amount of time to experience the thing in its entirety. And of course, time has to pass within the storyline of the film, which opens up endless possibilities for how time is experienced by the viewer; the story could take place in real-time, or it could be non-linear, or it could encompass the entire life of a character from beginning to end.