Introduction to the module
In this first seminar of 1700, we were given an introduction to the module. We learnt that in this module we will learn about all aspects of, not only film but television also.
Also in this seminar, we watched Andrea Arnold's, Oscar winning short film, 'Wasp'. I thoroughly enjoyed the film. I found it to be very captivating due to the camera movements and the story itself. I am a sucker for realism films, and thought this film in particular, used the british social realism style very well. What amazed me the most however, was the mise-en-scene, everything seemed so natural and only added to the story. Everything from the handheld cam, to the lighting, to the set design seemed very real; So, much so it looked like a documentary at times. I had heard of and wanted to watch this film prior to this viewing- I was not disappointed! I felt fully captivated in the little world of the film. I had heard of and wanted to watch this film prior to this viewing- I was not disappointed!
Overall I was really happy with this first session! :D
Week 2
In this seminar we talked about narrative. I studied Media in 6th form so I was familiar with the term, however, based on what we learnt in this seminar I realised that narrative wasn't just the way in which a story is told. Learning the difference between the story and the plot was actually kinda exciting for me as an aspiring film artist.
So what is the difference between story and plot?
Story- a simple series of events.
Plot- the cause and effect of events in the story.
The way the narration is made, is the way the audience watch the film, and for that other crucial elements are a part of it: setting, time, costume, sounds, narration, perspective.
So what is the difference between story and plot?
Story- a simple series of events.
Plot- the cause and effect of events in the story.
The way the narration is made, is the way the audience watch the film, and for that other crucial elements are a part of it: setting, time, costume, sounds, narration, perspective.
In the Lecture the class watched Alfred Hitchcock's 1954 hit 'Rear Window', starring James Stewart
and Princess of Monaco herself, Grace Kelly. Personally, as a thriller the film did nothing for me up until the very end; when I thought Grace kelly was going to get caught by the evil guy. I think this is because I am used to the thrillers we watch nowadays, but even the I don't feel very captivated in the films. I must say however, that the film was done incredibly well and can definitely see how this may have scared audiences in the 50's. It had a pretty straight forward narrative. The story is literally told from the protagonists apartment only. The audience is made to feel as though they are in the film themselves as we only see what the characters are able to see. I think was a very smart move from Hitchcock. In todays thrillers we are usually exposed to the main antagonist's view also, and I fee that this takes away from the suspense.
I must also comment on the editing of this film. I was pretty impressed with it, I feel as thought the editing followed the pace of the film very well. One thing I liked in particular was when the main antagonist is flashed with James Stewarts camera flash. Only when we were sure that he was the killer for sure, did we see anything from his perspective, and that was how the flash affected his eyes each time. I also liked the first shot of the film, where the setting of the film was established. This movie is a a good example of classic hollywood cinema! :D
and Princess of Monaco herself, Grace Kelly. Personally, as a thriller the film did nothing for me up until the very end; when I thought Grace kelly was going to get caught by the evil guy. I think this is because I am used to the thrillers we watch nowadays, but even the I don't feel very captivated in the films. I must say however, that the film was done incredibly well and can definitely see how this may have scared audiences in the 50's. It had a pretty straight forward narrative. The story is literally told from the protagonists apartment only. The audience is made to feel as though they are in the film themselves as we only see what the characters are able to see. I think was a very smart move from Hitchcock. In todays thrillers we are usually exposed to the main antagonist's view also, and I fee that this takes away from the suspense.I must also comment on the editing of this film. I was pretty impressed with it, I feel as thought the editing followed the pace of the film very well. One thing I liked in particular was when the main antagonist is flashed with James Stewarts camera flash. Only when we were sure that he was the killer for sure, did we see anything from his perspective, and that was how the flash affected his eyes each time. I also liked the first shot of the film, where the setting of the film was established. This movie is a a good example of classic hollywood cinema! :D
Week 3
In our seminar we talked about editing. We spoke about it in relation to rear window and other Films and television shows. Like I said previously, I studied media studies but we mainly focussed on film so I was therefore familiar with pretty much all the terms we spoke of in the seminar. But it was cool to be in a class where I knew something for sure. :P
In the lecture we focussed on sound and image. We watched francis Ford Coppola's 'The Conversation'. Again, I didn't particularly enjoy this film I'm not entirely sure why, but it just didn't interest me and I was kind of confused as to what was what. From the very beginning I was confused. The first shot alone baffled me. Were exposed to an establishing shot of the park, with music in the back ground. I would be lying if I said I knew the music was a diegetic sound, it wasn't until we see people playing music do we realise it is. The film focusses on a man (Gene Hackman) spying on a conversation using machinery, so they had to play a lot with sound. I thought the sounds we heard were quite ambitious, especially just before a conversation or when he backs out from one. I cant quite describe the sound but it sounded kind of science fictional to me. But it was a good attempt in my opinion.Week 4
In this seminar we spoke about the sound and image in relation to the film we watched the previous week, 'The Conversation'. I will repeat myself... was not at all impressed with the film. Nothing about it kept me interested enough to keep watching. I just remember at the end being like... WTF! That was my of expressing how much I disliked it. However I was fairly impressed with how they used sound, but only when it came to the spying. That sound I can still not describe was a good effort. Now thinking about it, I think guess that was their attempt to show how the sound travelled through all the wires? I don't know.
In the lecture we watched one episode form two very famous television programmes, 'Breaking Badand '24'. One I loved and the other I couldn't deal. We were focussing on Character and performance, and ironically, I didn't like 24 so much because of their characters. Seriously, I'm pretty sure everyone loved Elisha Cuthbert in 'The Girl Next Door'... In 24, she made want to be the villain who ends her! So whiney and annoying. Also, I was never a big fan of Kiefer Sutherland, and the character Jack Bauer really didn't help his reputation in my books! I'm not sure if it was his performance or how the writers intended him to be. In all fairness though, we watched an episode from he second season so I don't know of he was any different in the first season.
I had also never watched 'Breaking Bad', but I have been wanting to for a while. I absolutely loved the episode we watched. I personally think that Bryan Cranston's portrayal of Walter White is genius. I just find him to be very genuine and that makes a character believable. I was also impressed by the stock characters they have. But in general, the whole thing was really good. I loved the storyline and his motives.
Week 5
Week 5... already! In this seminar we went over what we focussed in the previous week, Character and performance. We spoke mainly about Walter white and his family. I also expressed my hatred for 24! I liked mostly being able to see how Walter White developed fairly quickly from being a quiet Lab teacher into a Crystal meth cooker.
Later on in the lecture, we watched a the Academy award winning documentary, 'Man on Wire' (James Marsh, 2008). So far this has been my second favourite thing we've watched in the lectures (Breaking bad being my favourite). In this session we focussed on Genre. I remember this documentary being described in the lecture, as a Heist film. Although the film was not about a robbery it did feel like it. these men were about to break the law. I liked also the look of the film mainly because of the black and white. It only added to the feel of the film.
Assignment 1
This is my 500 word essay for assignment 1.
I found it tough to be stick to the word limit and timing each shot was a hassle. However I was happy with the result, Richard gave me a grade 7 for it and also some valuable feedback.
Week 7
So were back from reading week and we recapped genre and the documentary 'Man on Wire'. I can barely remember what happened yesterday let alone what I watched 2 whole weeks ago. Luckily we had notes to look through. We spoke about what makes a genre. Here are some aspects:
- character
- hybrid genre
- audience
- content
- setting
- e.t.c.
Also in this session, Richard put us into groups and then gave us a genre to work with. For this task we were given rarity. Subsequently, we had to come up with a programme if this specific genre. We decided to create a short series of five episodes that followed the lives of a couple of teenagers and youth workers in Peckham. We wanted to show how youth workers work with kids in an attempt to change their lives and also how these teenagers live. From what I remember, Richard was impressed.
In the lecture we focussed on on realism and watched the 1998 Swedish film, 'Festen'. This is one of the several film that abide by the Dogme '95 movement. I love realism, and when I am making films professionally, I would want to always make films with a great deal of realism in them. I personally love the Dogme '95 movement, I find that its very gritty and obviously real. :D I don't know if I more disgusted by the provocative story or impressed with execution of the film. This was a provocative film indeed, but these are my favourites. :D POW!
Week 8
In this seminar we focussed on realism in relation to 'Festen', and also talked about Dogme '95.
The Dogme '95... These are the rules:
- Filming must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in. If a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found
- The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. Music must not be used unless it occurs within the scene being filmed, i.e., diegetic.
- The camera must be a hand-held camera. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted. The film must not take place where the camera is standing; filming must take place where the action takes place.
- The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable (if there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera).
- Optical work and filters are forbidden.
- The film must not contain superficial action (murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.)
- Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden (that is to say that the film takes place here and now).
- Genre movies are not acceptable.
- The film format must be Academy 35 mm.
- The director must not be credited.
I like the idea of this manifesto and it is something I would definately like to try out some day. I however, do not agree with the director not being the credited, only because I believe a good film is transcended visually through a director.
In our lecture we watched the one episode from two television shows, 'Awake' and 'Game of Thrones',
and we focussed on fantasy and the fantastical. To be honest I remember much about 'Awake'. I was kind of confused about it. The only thing I noticed was the change is colour tone every time the main character woke up. The fact that it dealt with dreams was the only fantasy aspect I got from it.
'Game of Thrones' is another Tv show I had always wanted to watch but never got around to doing it. It was definitely not what I was expecting. I thought it was just a an epic story... I was wrong, It was much more than that. Surprisingly, I was not disappointed with all the fantasy in it. I thoroughly enjoyed it. That to me was a real fantasy, a fantasy without any hints of science fiction.
Week 9
In this seminar we continued talking about fantasy and the fantastic. As a filmmaker, I want to make something more down to earth, more real as I love to mess around with social norms and stereotypes. However, I am a big, big fan of fantasies. I find that they take me out of my day-to-day life and works my imagination. So how do we define fantasy and the fantastic?
here is:
-As with realism(s), can be defined in different ways (form, style, subject matter, tone), although most common as a narrative/thematic device, or as iconography
-Often features element(s) of magic or myth (creatures, species, settings etc)
-Presents us with alternate realities
-Sci-fi, which is more concerned with “what if...?” questions, and focuses more on technology.
-Often a heavy reliance on special effects and CGI
-Distinctive (often unique) use of language/names/words
In the lecture we dealt with the issues of representation and watched Kevin Lima's 'Enchanted' (2007). Again I had never watched this film before and when I heard we were watching it in this lecture, I wasn't exactly happy. In all honesty whilst watching the film, I was trying to dislike it, but it wasn't bad at all. I thought it was definitely a different take to disney films. In terms of representation however, I felt that it wasn't too different from all other stories. Yes, Amy Adam's character was like the sort of heroine but for most part she is the typical damsel in distress.
Week 11
This lecture was a sort of conclusion to our first part of the module and we watched none other, than my now favourite best worst movie of all time! I needn't say anymore! I guess a picture will do!
I do not know how else to describe this film. This film screening is something I will never forget... :D Thank you lecturers! :D
Assignment 2
Below is my essay for assignment two:
I was happy with this piece of work and got a nine for it. Obviously I was a little saddened given that I had gotten a 7 in my first assignment.
Week 13
So were back from out christmas break... FINALLY! Being at home all the time was driving me kind of nuts.
In this first seminar we were introduced to the second half of the module. We were given a brief view at what subjects we would be tackling for the rest of the year. Also, we had a new tutor... Mr. David Cottis. I had never worked with him before and so it was nice to meet him. He made the class introduce ourselves after he did. He made this lesson very nice and relaxed for us.
Later in the day in our lecture, we watched Oliver Stone's 'Platoon' as we were discussing Looking
through the glass: History in the films of Oliver Stone. I had seen 'Platoon' previously and I thought it was very Oliver Stone style... Long and controversial. I get the feeling that he has a view of the past that no one else does. It seems as though he learns something and like to adapt it to he sees it. Personally I love that he does that... I just find that his films are a little too long to keep me interested at all times.
Week 14
In this seminar we continued to talk about platoon a little more and history in film and TV on a more general field. We spoke of the message 'Platoon' gave out, which was a a clear conflict between the men in the same battalion and something they are not proud of. This is made clear when we hear Charlie Sheen's character saying "we did not fight the enemy; we fought ourselves". We also talked about the WW2, cold war and etc.
We watched 'Buffy: The Vampire Slayer' in out afternoon lecture and the subject of today's lecture was subtext In all honesty everyone in our generation loved Buffy once upon a time, but looking at it now I don't know what all the fuss was about. I guess it was just really appealing watching a good looking teenage girl beat the crap out of Vampires and Demons.
Week 15
In the seminar we kept on talking about subtext as well as Buffy. After the class expressed their feeling towards Buffy, we spoke of it in more detail. We followed mainly Stephen King's subtext definition in the horror genre. According to King these are the four subtexts:
This afternoon lecture was probably one of my favourite one! We looked at documentaries and watched Nick Broomfield's 1993 Documentary 'Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer'. I was familiar with Nick Broomfield after watching 'Biggie & Tupac' (2002). I love his style of documentary and how he approaches each event. I feel that its very personal to him to be a part of the situation and I respect that fully.
Week 17
In this seminar we talked a bit about authorship and what give a director that title. We talked about several things we continuously see in a directors films. Quentin Tarantino for example is famous for his, anti-heroes, blood, violence and most remarkably his alleged obsession/fetish with feet. Also we began to talk about out visual essays.
Later in the day we watched an international film, from Argentina, called 'Nueve Reinas (Nine Queens)'. I found this film to be quite funny actually. I wasn't too sure if I would like it because usually con artist films, for me anyway, have to be really smart. This film however had a very different feel to it- it was simple! I am a big fan of international cinema, I love Spanish film especially.
Assignment 3- Visual Essay
For my visual essay, initially I was going to base it on one of my favourite film artists out today, Steve McQueen. However I was having a tough time finding enough material to talk about, as he has onle ever made two feature films. Adding to my dismay, I could not access any of his short films only either as they had only been used in art galleries for art expositions. Consequently I settled for something with a lot more to talk about- Zombies!
I was a little apprehensive about doing this at first as I am not an editor and had never edited before, thus I took it upon myself to lean online. I am quite proud of what I made and the grade I got which is a 9.
Here is my finished Visual Essay:
Visual essay- Horror- The zombie sub-genre. from Miguel Fonseca on Vimeo.
Week 19
In this seminar we spoke about world cinema a little more. David had asked us in the lecture to bring in a film from our home countries. Now, I had never watched many Portuguese films... which is ironic because I'm from there. I tend to watch a lot of spanish ones. My brothers however, suggested I would speak about a very famous portuguese film called, 'Capitaes de Abril (April Captains)' (2000). This was a good one to talk about because, in Portugal not many film are released to do with history. This film however, focusses of the events that lead to the portuguese revolution back in the 70's. I also explained, why I tend to not watch Portuguese films and TV. I said that in Portugal everyone is too obsessed with imitating the english and the americans. They seem to have this idea that everyone has a perfect life here and in America. This is what they try to bring in their TV shows and films. Its not at all realistic or true to the country. I must say however that this is mostly recent, as there have been really good film that have come out of portugal.
In the lecture afterwards the theme was "Stardom", and for that we watched 'Birth' (Jonathan Glazer, 2004). The film was pretty strange, but for some reason I find that Nicole Kidman fits really well into odd films, 'The Others' being a really good example. She just seem very sweet and innocent and something weird always happens. makes things more fun. haha I the film itself reminded me a little of 'Changeling' (Clint Eastwood, 2008) because of the reincarnation thing and dealing with loss.
Week 20
In this Seminar we kept on talking about stardom. I found this to be very subjective... you cant really put a stamp at what a STAR is. for example some people may consider Taylor Lautner a star... I consider him a black hole! -_- In my opinion a star in todays world is someone who had broken through their craft, and is now know foe everything apart what they should be know for... their work! Thats what I think a star is today! However, a real star for me is someone who is a star at their work, so, Meryl Streep! The woman has been known for he career and her career only pretty much. without the behind her all the time... she is still considered to be the most successful actress of all time. The same goes to Daniel Day-Lewis. All in all it depends on what each individual deems it to be.
Later in the lecture we focussed on "Quality Television" We watched and episode from two shows I had never seen before. These were 'SIX FEET UNDER' and 'Community' which was completely unknown to me. So we watched both of the shows and I wasn't sure if I like them or now. I mean I definitely did not like 'Community' because it just pathetic in my opinion, but 'SIX FEET UNDER' had themes that would interest me. I think I would have to watch the complete first season to be able to judge it properly. Oliver then explain that quality television usually have the same themes and usually come from HBO. Some themes would include, sex, murder, fantasy e.t.c.
Week 21
In this seminar we continued to speak about quality television. Again, a subjective topic. We watched some clips of television shows that were considered quality TV. These clips did not interest half of the class I am sure, which begs the question. What is Quality Television? Well I don't have an answer for sure, but I think I had a valuable opinion. I think that Quality television, is: 'Dexter', 'The Big Bang Theory', 'True Blood', 'Misfits'... why? Because I like them! Quality television is down to ones opinion. If a person likes a show, then to them that is quality TV, no?
In the afternoon lecture we watched 'High Noon'(Fred Zinnemann, 1052), starring Garry Cooper and Grace Kelly. I usually tend to look away from the western films... this one had Grace Kelly in it so why not? :D It was ok. I found quite funny because it broke the conventions of the hero story, when at the end Grace Kelly saves Garry Coopers character, which means technically she's the hero? David went to talk about controlling ideas. He explained what they were in relation to the film high noon.
Week 22
So in this seminar we were asked to sit in a circle and talk about controlling ideas. He had asked us to thing of a TV show or film and figure out what the controlling idea was. I will not lie... I was absolutely baffled - I had no idea what it meant. So I bothered David a little and he was able to explain to me. I was then able to pick a film. I thought I'd be smart and pick an easy one. haha! I picked 50 Cent's film, 'Get Rich or Die Trying'. I am not a fan of the film but it just made sense to use it.
If the...
Controlling idea = cause + value...
Then the title of the film is, the films controlling idea. I know this because I have seen the film and it pretty much is getting rich or die trying. :P
So this was out last lecture for the year... scary!
We watched a film from Hong Kong called 'Chungking Express' (Kar Wai Wong, 1994). The film was strangely good. I like to see how foreign cinema is executed and this film in particular felt, or seemed to have felt as chaotic as Hong Kong seems to be at times. I also like how they played around with number and their significances. Not interestingly is that the director, Kar Wai Wong never attended a film school. :D I have seen some asian films, but usually all the famous ones we all know about like 'house of the flying daggers. But I did enjoy this lecture it opened up my eyes a little more into the world of cinema.
Week 23
AHHHHHHHHH! Our last 1700 seminar for the year! I feel kind of sad about it. I have had a blast being at uni. A five month break is way too long!
Anyway... in this seminar David informed us that we would be having a summary quiz. So, he put us into groups and believe it or not my group won! :D It was actually kind of tough trying to remember everything form so far back, but it was a good recap. Most of all it was a fun lesson, and its always a pleasure to be taught by David!
So long 1700!
In our lecture we watched the one episode from two television shows, 'Awake' and 'Game of Thrones',
and we focussed on fantasy and the fantastical. To be honest I remember much about 'Awake'. I was kind of confused about it. The only thing I noticed was the change is colour tone every time the main character woke up. The fact that it dealt with dreams was the only fantasy aspect I got from it.
'Game of Thrones' is another Tv show I had always wanted to watch but never got around to doing it. It was definitely not what I was expecting. I thought it was just a an epic story... I was wrong, It was much more than that. Surprisingly, I was not disappointed with all the fantasy in it. I thoroughly enjoyed it. That to me was a real fantasy, a fantasy without any hints of science fiction.Week 9
In this seminar we continued talking about fantasy and the fantastic. As a filmmaker, I want to make something more down to earth, more real as I love to mess around with social norms and stereotypes. However, I am a big, big fan of fantasies. I find that they take me out of my day-to-day life and works my imagination. So how do we define fantasy and the fantastic?
here is:
-As with realism(s), can be defined in different ways (form, style, subject matter, tone), although most common as a narrative/thematic device, or as iconography
-Often features element(s) of magic or myth (creatures, species, settings etc)
-Presents us with alternate realities
-Sci-fi, which is more concerned with “what if...?” questions, and focuses more on technology.
-Often a heavy reliance on special effects and CGI
-Distinctive (often unique) use of language/names/words
In the lecture we dealt with the issues of representation and watched Kevin Lima's 'Enchanted' (2007). Again I had never watched this film before and when I heard we were watching it in this lecture, I wasn't exactly happy. In all honesty whilst watching the film, I was trying to dislike it, but it wasn't bad at all. I thought it was definitely a different take to disney films. In terms of representation however, I felt that it wasn't too different from all other stories. Yes, Amy Adam's character was like the sort of heroine but for most part she is the typical damsel in distress.
Week 11
This lecture was a sort of conclusion to our first part of the module and we watched none other, than my now favourite best worst movie of all time! I needn't say anymore! I guess a picture will do!
I do not know how else to describe this film. This film screening is something I will never forget... :D Thank you lecturers! :D
Assignment 2
Below is my essay for assignment two:
I was happy with this piece of work and got a nine for it. Obviously I was a little saddened given that I had gotten a 7 in my first assignment.
Week 13
So were back from out christmas break... FINALLY! Being at home all the time was driving me kind of nuts.
In this first seminar we were introduced to the second half of the module. We were given a brief view at what subjects we would be tackling for the rest of the year. Also, we had a new tutor... Mr. David Cottis. I had never worked with him before and so it was nice to meet him. He made the class introduce ourselves after he did. He made this lesson very nice and relaxed for us.
Later in the day in our lecture, we watched Oliver Stone's 'Platoon' as we were discussing Looking through the glass: History in the films of Oliver Stone. I had seen 'Platoon' previously and I thought it was very Oliver Stone style... Long and controversial. I get the feeling that he has a view of the past that no one else does. It seems as though he learns something and like to adapt it to he sees it. Personally I love that he does that... I just find that his films are a little too long to keep me interested at all times.
Week 14
In this seminar we continued to talk about platoon a little more and history in film and TV on a more general field. We spoke of the message 'Platoon' gave out, which was a a clear conflict between the men in the same battalion and something they are not proud of. This is made clear when we hear Charlie Sheen's character saying "we did not fight the enemy; we fought ourselves". We also talked about the WW2, cold war and etc.
Week 15
In the seminar we kept on talking about subtext as well as Buffy. After the class expressed their feeling towards Buffy, we spoke of it in more detail. We followed mainly Stephen King's subtext definition in the horror genre. According to King these are the four subtexts:
- Vampires- sex/sexuality
- Werewolf- Fear of not having control/ your animalistic side.
- Ghost- Fear of the past/being haunted with the past
- The Thing- Fear of the unknown
Afterwards David put us into groups and gave each group a category and with that category we would have to come up with a story containing that element given. My group was given 'The Thing- fear of the unknown'. It was kind of hard to come up with a story for this task as we would have to come up with our own creature. We didn't want to use the zombies in a post apocalyptical world because it will always be the same... regardless of the fact that I am a massive fan of zombies! :D Anyway... so out story would follow a group of american soldiers who signed a waiver to allow the us army research team, to use their bodies for experiments were they killed in combat. A group of about a dozen soldiers was gathered after they suffered terrible injuries. The thing is that the soldiers had not died... they were just severely injured and so the US army research team took them in anyway to perform experiments. The experiment was to inject these soldiers with several animal's DNA and hope that they would make them stronger. These were just tests... Turns out that the experiments did work and it mutated the soldiers in an unexpected way and all hell struck through!
This afternoon lecture was probably one of my favourite one! We looked at documentaries and watched Nick Broomfield's 1993 Documentary 'Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer'. I was familiar with Nick Broomfield after watching 'Biggie & Tupac' (2002). I love his style of documentary and how he approaches each event. I feel that its very personal to him to be a part of the situation and I respect that fully.
Let me say that I loved this documentary- it so intriguing as well as heartbreaking. I this is the film I payed most attention to in of all films we watched in the lectures. It really was heart wrenching! I realise that what Aileen did was just incredibly wrong, but, I would not help but to believe her story- I believed all that she said. Most horrible for me was seeing Arlene Pralle use Aileen as a money magnet!
I was familiar with this story as I had watched 'Monster' (2004), starring Charlize Theron. I had always praised Charlize for her performance in portraying Aileen. However, it was not until I watched this documentary that I fully saw how far Charlize went to become Aileen. She was a reincarnation. I analysed Aileen pretty well in this documentary and everything from they way she spoke, to the way she smoked and even eye movements. Just phenomenal! I thoroughly enjoyed this gripping lecture.
Week 16
In the morning seminar we continued to speak about documentaries in more detail and spoke of the different types of documentaries. Before we talked about that, we addressed the Aileen Wuornos documentary. I expressed how I felt towards it and spoke of Charlize Theron's performance. Then the real thing began.
Here are the 6 modes of documentaries:
- Poetic- moves away from the "objective" reality of a given situation or people to grasp at an inner "truth" that can only be grasped by poetical manipulation codes emphasises visual associations, tonal or rhythmic qualities, descriptive passages, and formal organisation favours mood, tone and texture.
- Expository- emphasises the verbal and argumentative logic often using a narrator. assumes a logical argument and a "right" and "proper" answer using direct address plus offering preferred meaning.
- Reflexive- Acknowledges the constructed nature of the documentary and flaunts it - conveying to people that this is not a necessarily "truth" but a reconstruction of it - "a"truth, not "the" truth.
- Observational- takes on the "fly on the wall" aspect sort of like a reality TV show such as Big Brother.
- Paticipatory- Unlike the observational mode, this mode welcomes direct engagement between filmmaker and subjects.
- Performative- emphasises the subjective nature of the documentarian as well as acknowledging the subjective reading of the audience.
I feel that this was hard to remember... and I still don't remember them all but with time I shall! :D
In this seminar we talked a bit about authorship and what give a director that title. We talked about several things we continuously see in a directors films. Quentin Tarantino for example is famous for his, anti-heroes, blood, violence and most remarkably his alleged obsession/fetish with feet. Also we began to talk about out visual essays.
Later in the day we watched an international film, from Argentina, called 'Nueve Reinas (Nine Queens)'. I found this film to be quite funny actually. I wasn't too sure if I would like it because usually con artist films, for me anyway, have to be really smart. This film however had a very different feel to it- it was simple! I am a big fan of international cinema, I love Spanish film especially.
Assignment 3- Visual Essay
For my visual essay, initially I was going to base it on one of my favourite film artists out today, Steve McQueen. However I was having a tough time finding enough material to talk about, as he has onle ever made two feature films. Adding to my dismay, I could not access any of his short films only either as they had only been used in art galleries for art expositions. Consequently I settled for something with a lot more to talk about- Zombies!
I was a little apprehensive about doing this at first as I am not an editor and had never edited before, thus I took it upon myself to lean online. I am quite proud of what I made and the grade I got which is a 9.
Here is my finished Visual Essay:
Visual essay- Horror- The zombie sub-genre. from Miguel Fonseca on Vimeo.
Week 19
In this seminar we spoke about world cinema a little more. David had asked us in the lecture to bring in a film from our home countries. Now, I had never watched many Portuguese films... which is ironic because I'm from there. I tend to watch a lot of spanish ones. My brothers however, suggested I would speak about a very famous portuguese film called, 'Capitaes de Abril (April Captains)' (2000). This was a good one to talk about because, in Portugal not many film are released to do with history. This film however, focusses of the events that lead to the portuguese revolution back in the 70's. I also explained, why I tend to not watch Portuguese films and TV. I said that in Portugal everyone is too obsessed with imitating the english and the americans. They seem to have this idea that everyone has a perfect life here and in America. This is what they try to bring in their TV shows and films. Its not at all realistic or true to the country. I must say however that this is mostly recent, as there have been really good film that have come out of portugal.
In the lecture afterwards the theme was "Stardom", and for that we watched 'Birth' (Jonathan Glazer, 2004). The film was pretty strange, but for some reason I find that Nicole Kidman fits really well into odd films, 'The Others' being a really good example. She just seem very sweet and innocent and something weird always happens. makes things more fun. haha I the film itself reminded me a little of 'Changeling' (Clint Eastwood, 2008) because of the reincarnation thing and dealing with loss.
Week 20
In this Seminar we kept on talking about stardom. I found this to be very subjective... you cant really put a stamp at what a STAR is. for example some people may consider Taylor Lautner a star... I consider him a black hole! -_- In my opinion a star in todays world is someone who had broken through their craft, and is now know foe everything apart what they should be know for... their work! Thats what I think a star is today! However, a real star for me is someone who is a star at their work, so, Meryl Streep! The woman has been known for he career and her career only pretty much. without the behind her all the time... she is still considered to be the most successful actress of all time. The same goes to Daniel Day-Lewis. All in all it depends on what each individual deems it to be.
Later in the lecture we focussed on "Quality Television" We watched and episode from two shows I had never seen before. These were 'SIX FEET UNDER' and 'Community' which was completely unknown to me. So we watched both of the shows and I wasn't sure if I like them or now. I mean I definitely did not like 'Community' because it just pathetic in my opinion, but 'SIX FEET UNDER' had themes that would interest me. I think I would have to watch the complete first season to be able to judge it properly. Oliver then explain that quality television usually have the same themes and usually come from HBO. Some themes would include, sex, murder, fantasy e.t.c.
Week 21
In this seminar we continued to speak about quality television. Again, a subjective topic. We watched some clips of television shows that were considered quality TV. These clips did not interest half of the class I am sure, which begs the question. What is Quality Television? Well I don't have an answer for sure, but I think I had a valuable opinion. I think that Quality television, is: 'Dexter', 'The Big Bang Theory', 'True Blood', 'Misfits'... why? Because I like them! Quality television is down to ones opinion. If a person likes a show, then to them that is quality TV, no?
In the afternoon lecture we watched 'High Noon'(Fred Zinnemann, 1052), starring Garry Cooper and Grace Kelly. I usually tend to look away from the western films... this one had Grace Kelly in it so why not? :D It was ok. I found quite funny because it broke the conventions of the hero story, when at the end Grace Kelly saves Garry Coopers character, which means technically she's the hero? David went to talk about controlling ideas. He explained what they were in relation to the film high noon.
Week 22
So in this seminar we were asked to sit in a circle and talk about controlling ideas. He had asked us to thing of a TV show or film and figure out what the controlling idea was. I will not lie... I was absolutely baffled - I had no idea what it meant. So I bothered David a little and he was able to explain to me. I was then able to pick a film. I thought I'd be smart and pick an easy one. haha! I picked 50 Cent's film, 'Get Rich or Die Trying'. I am not a fan of the film but it just made sense to use it.
If the...
Controlling idea = cause + value...
Then the title of the film is, the films controlling idea. I know this because I have seen the film and it pretty much is getting rich or die trying. :P
So this was out last lecture for the year... scary!
We watched a film from Hong Kong called 'Chungking Express' (Kar Wai Wong, 1994). The film was strangely good. I like to see how foreign cinema is executed and this film in particular felt, or seemed to have felt as chaotic as Hong Kong seems to be at times. I also like how they played around with number and their significances. Not interestingly is that the director, Kar Wai Wong never attended a film school. :D I have seen some asian films, but usually all the famous ones we all know about like 'house of the flying daggers. But I did enjoy this lecture it opened up my eyes a little more into the world of cinema.
Week 23
AHHHHHHHHH! Our last 1700 seminar for the year! I feel kind of sad about it. I have had a blast being at uni. A five month break is way too long!
Anyway... in this seminar David informed us that we would be having a summary quiz. So, he put us into groups and believe it or not my group won! :D It was actually kind of tough trying to remember everything form so far back, but it was a good recap. Most of all it was a fun lesson, and its always a pleasure to be taught by David!
So long 1700!
No comments:
Post a Comment