The "classic" film of Post Classical Hollywood

The end is at the beginning, but do not be quick to judge, for this is no detective story. This is director Christopher Nolan’s Memento (2000), widely considered to be a modern classic. But what makes Memento different is the brilliant and artistic manipulation of time and how effective this manipulation is at putting the audience in the shoes of protagonist Leonard Shelby, an anterograde amnesiac (one who cannot form new memories) seeking revenge for his wife’s rape and murder. The movie begins with a scene of Leonard killing a man unknown to the audience at the time, and from then on, it is a series of flashbacks containing information seemingly vital to Leonard on his mission to find his wife’s killer. However, in order to immerse the audience in the story, it is told through Leonard’s point of view, with some vital information about his past cleverly disguised in his “conversation” with a police officer (whose voice the audience never hears—but only later it is revealed that this is John Gammell (Teddy)). For the duration of the film, the audience must put together pieces of sometimes misleading information, just the way Leonard does, in order to find out what is really happening, and how Leonard’s wife really died. One might think that this film is almost entirely unique in that many elements of classical Hollywood Cinema are absent, however, in many ways, films like these truly characterize Post Classical Hollywood, with nontraditional use of time and space, as well as “incomplete” endings (For example, the audience never really knows what happens to Leonard at the very end (or beginning!) of the movie). Post classical era movies such as Memento and more recently, District 9, make use of anti-heroes and follow nontraditional endings as well (for example, in District 9, we also do not know if protagonist Wikus lives or dies). Memento is in many ways, the perfect example of a post classical Hollywood era film. It differs in almost every aspect of presentation from Classical Hollywood films, and perhaps that is why it is hailed a “modern classic.”

The role of establishing shots in Casablanca.

Michael Curtiz's film Casablanca perfectly conforms to the traits of the “Classical Hollywood Cinema” in several aspects, from it’s narrative structure to the melodrama in the film. However, Casablanca also makes use of filming techniques, most notably, the establishing shot, in order to better organize the narrative for the audience without necessarily detracting from the easy flow of the movie. The establishing shot serves as a silent introduction to all the characters and the settings pertinent to the scene that is about to take place. There are several prominent examples of establishing shots throughout the movie. As can be seen in the following scene for example, there is a quick establishing shot of the inside of Rick’s Café Americain just before Rick is introduced to Major Strasser by Captain Renault, which helps the audience orient themselves with where events in the narrative are occurring. Also, the opening scene of the movie has a series of establishing shots combined with a voice over narration to inform the audience of the historical context of the movie . Establishing shots primarily help the audience in understanding where a narrative is taking place and the significance of all the shown characters within that narrative.

House of Flying Daggers commentary

In our class, the feeling of heavy Westernization (strongly relying on visual effects and CGI to attract and hold an audience) is strong; however, the plot at least is strong, and the scenery complements it in an interesting way. The plot is indeed twisty, with the audience probably most confused with Jin, who is sort of the hero (sort of, in that the audience is directed to believe that he's noble subverting the failed government and saving Xiao), then realizing he's only attempting to infiltrate the Flying Daggers. This twisting plot line is complemented by the very simplistic and constantly beautiful scenery. the frequent symmetrical shots, like the image above, strike balance and simplicity where the plot is still developing in its non-linear fashion. The forests of bamboo and birch trees and the fields of flowers seem to be a happy constant for the love affair (an affair realized by the audience only near the end) between Jin and Xiao to thrive. When the lover confront each other, however, this happy medium is turned into a snowy, cold, forbidding expanse.

"Jaws" Movie Intro

The intro of "Jaws" uses both camera angle and musical score to add to the freighting element of the movie.

While the woman is in the water, the camera angles goes from showing her above the water, to taking the shark's point of view.

The camera angle becomes an underwater shot, coming under the girl, mimicking the way a shark attacks.

This theatrical element adds to the already suspenseful atmosphere of the film.

Also, with help from the camera angle, the score of the film adds to the suspense of the movie, thus achieving Spielburg's purpose.

The repeating "E" and "F" notes make their first "appearance" of the movie in this scene.

This becomes the trademark of a shark attack throughout the movie, which adds to the suspense and fear.

Tarantino's "Basterds" uses violence to send it's complicated message.

Tarantino's new war movie "Inglourious Basterds"(sic) starring Brad Pitt is a rip roaring thrill ride of Nazis, violence, and scalping. The movie itself is classic Tarantino, from the nail biting tension he builds in the first scene, to the gratuitous violence shamelessly shown at every moment, to the oddly fitting spaghetti western-style musical stings and riffs for each character. But what really intrigues about the superficially meaningless violence is the message Tarantino is putting through. (See below for a link to the synopsis)

Basterd's is a complex movie. On the surface, we have a campy, Tarantino-style action movie, initially comparable to Tarantino's early Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2, drowning in action and viol

ent spectacle. But, move a layer down, and Tarantino's movie is a simultaneously a tribute to the old style Western action films of yesteryear, such as "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" and "The Searchers", and the macaroni war movies such as "The Dirty Dozen" and "Where Eagles Dare". The music and timing are reminiscent of the classic Western, with an initially sprawling exposition that gradually speeds up as the movie unfolds, all the while punctuated by thematic music and well timed stings. The setting is pure war movie, a standard "good guys vs. bad guys" with most of the movie set in France. In an ironic nod to the classic war movies of old, the last half of the movie is set in a local movie theatre where a war movie is being shown, and the movie being played serves as both a plot device and a message in itself. Needless to say, Basterds pays an excellent homage to the movies that inspired it.

But if we delve even deeper, Tarantino is saying something more. The way he frames the main

characters the Basterds is almost villainous, and the majority of the Wehrmacht and SS characters we meet in the film are presented in way that is almost sympathetic. Tarantino

sets us up for a conflict. By contrasting displays of "righteous" American violence to "evil" Nazis with demonstrations of Nazi characters humanity, he flips the expectations of the audience. We know the Nazi's are evil. But we also come to view the Basterd's as evil too, their acts of violence start to approach the brutality of the Nazi's themselves. Tarantino wants us to contrast the two types of violence, and his message is multifaceted. I think he wants us to understand

that violence is still violence, no matter how righteous, and at the same time he wants to send a good over evil moral message (which he does with the climax of the love interest at the end). Basterd's is more complex than it might seem to say the least.

A Commentary of Spielberg's Jaws

Jaws, the classic american film, portrays the frightful events of a man-eating shark devastating a small island town. Throughout the film, Spielberg incorporates various types of shots as he conveys this frightful story. For example, in the very beginning, the whole scene of the boy chasing the girl is categorized by a series of medium shots. However, as this playful race into the water turns into a gruesome and mysterious shark attack, the camera changes to the first person view of the shark as it illustrates a close up of the girl in an underwater angle. This shift in viewpoint creates this mysterious tension as the audience senses the eventual death of the girl but does not know when.

Spielberg really has created something special here. In addition to the changing camera shots and angles, action and "special effects" (cheesy to most now) blend to make an exciting movie. From the excessive shark head barrages into the steel cage to the eventual oxygen tank explosion, Spielberg really gets the adrenaline pumping throughout the second half of the movie. Ultimately, great shotmaking combined with some action packed special effects scenes makes for a great movie.

Is this a commentary on culture or an Economics lesson?

Reaction to “Concepts of culture: public policy and the cultural industries” –Nicholas Garnham

At first glance this reading looked like it could very subtly pass off as part of a lesson in a respectable Economics textbook. As Nicolas Garnham defines the concept of cultural industries—“It sees culture, defined as production and circulation of symbolic meaning, as a material process of production and exchange, part of, and in significant ways determined by, the wider economic processes of society with which it shares so many common features.” [Film Studies Reader, 19], the definition suggests that the analysis of cultural industries centers more around the industrial aspect than its cultural counterpart that we have grown so used to seeing in this course.

The reading as a whole is divided between the explanations of the Structure and Dynamics of these cultural industries, as well as cultural repertoire and distribution. Garnham talks about how the film industry will manipulate the types of productions based on maximization of audiences, and that some film makers tend to continue making certain types or storylines in films which they know from past audience responses to be “reliable” in terms of success, and more importantly, a profit.

It is interesting to see how this “drive to audience maximization” departs entirely from any sort of culture, and turns into a game of what I would call “economic chess” which involves maximizing profits through advertisements which influence the audience and limiting or “blocking” competition through monopolies and close connections among these industries and government.

Garnham also makes a very valid point when he writes that no matter how much film industry executives manipulate the film for the “desired” audience response, in the end, it is inherently unpredictable. Sometimes the intended meaning and audience’s interpretation of the meaning of a film can differ, which at times can be disastrous to the film maker. In order to counter this risk, film makers typically produce and release multiple films, of which maybe the overwhelming success of one can erase any losses resulting from other sub-par films.

The next claim Garnham makes is bold—but in a practical sense, it is true. Essentially Garnham states that is distribution and marketing, more so than the actual production, that is the source of “power and profit”.

I believe that while all of the aforementioned points are excellent practical observations—they are purely economical in nature. What part of these principles can be applied to areas other than “cultural texts”? The ideas of profit maximization, optimization, vertical and horizontal integration and inherent risk are all applicable in areas outside of the realm of film and related media. The main idea: everything is a business.