Vertigo is a 1958 film directed by legendary director Alfred Hitchcock. The psychological thriller stars James Stewart and Kim Novak as the "protagonists". James Stewarts character John "Scottie" Ferguson plays a former police detective of whom we see suffer from Vertigo, a fear of heights, while on the job early on in the film. John quickly forms an obsession as a result of desire for Madeline (played by Kim Novak) after he is hired by her husband, Gavin Elster to spy on her. However, John and the audience at this point are unaware that Madeline is actually a false creation of Judy (also played by Kim Novak) in order to cover up the murder of the real Madeline (Gavin presumably killed her and wanted John to testify that Madeline committed suicide).
As with the use of nicknames and false identities would suggest, the film deals with the psychoanalytic theme of a lack of a unified self and balance between the id, ego and superego of the characters' personalities. for instance, Johns character would seem to have a hard to control id as he consistently seeks the pleasure of Madeline's attention. When exposed to the real "Madeline", Judy, despite being technically the same person, John refuses to except her as her true self: insisting that she must become more like Madeline (unaware that she was in fact his vision of Madeline all along). He starts to fetishize the image of Madeline onto Judy. This film is a classic case of misidentified love. The film shows how one should not chase after their desires, as Lacan advises, because after all what you think you desire is in fact never quite what it seems in reality. Despite the fact that as a detective he is supposed to be objective, like the superego, John instead follows the demands of his id. The word Vertigo comes from the Latin 'to turn', I think this could symbolise or foreshadow Judy's transformation into Madeline which is later revealed. He is even offered the unconditional love and support of his long term friend Midge, but refuses to offer her romantic love despite how well suited they seem. This is most likely a fear of repeated rejection after Midge previously called off their engagement while in college. Midge has also become a sort of motherly figure to John and this has also likely turned him off of having a romantic relationship with her. Before being told that Judy was in fact the Madeline John knew, he starts to take on the role of the ego in trying to achieve the truth.
The film makes lots of references that would indicate John is suffering from castration anxiety. At the beginning of the film he is unable to 'perform' his job, I believe this is symbolisation for his lack of a romantic relationship. The bell tower in Vertigo is an obvious phallic symbol as it is thin tall and erect.
Friday, 8 January 2016
Wednesday, 6 January 2016
Wolf Of Wall Street Psychoanalysis
The lack
Satisfaction with life in general
Drugs - lots of em "how the fuck else would you do this job?"
We don't really want what we think we desire - desires money to buy things that will deliver them immediate desire instead of long-term happiness.
Fantasies have to be unrealistic, because the moment, the second you get what you seek, you don't, you cant want it anymore. In order to continue to exist, desire must have its objects perpetually absent.
Jordon is free from the chains of the Oedipus complex - why we feel for him. We kind of root for him because he is our reflection of our Id.
Jordan is the Id. He does precisely what he needs to do to get what he thinks he really wants.
In the scene with Mathew's character (the boss) and Jordan at the table, theres irony in the way Mathew talks about the clients. He says: "they're fucking addicted", the exact same could be said about these two characters and others on Wall Street. They enjoy the thrill of achieving their goal; making money.
"I was hooked in seconds" says Jordan over narration as he he's the sound of money: "You wanna know what money sounds like? Go to a trading floor on Wall Street"
At the end of the film Jordan doesn't learn from his mistakes. "Its all about revolutions". He claims to have cleaned up after he crashes his car, yet still chases money.
"The point of Lacan, and what makes Lacan's reading of desire, different from Brooks' and indeed what makes his reading of desire different from that of anyone who thinks of these structuralist issues in psychoanalytic terms, is that Lacan really doesn't believe that we can ever have what we desire. He has no doubt that we can have what we need. He makes the fundamental distinction, between having what we desire and having what we need. The distinction is often put between the distinction of the big "Other" (which one can never appropriate as an object of desire, it is perpetually and always elusive) and the little object of desire (which is not really an object at all, but is available to satisfy need).
Socio-biologically you can get what you need.
Psychoanalytically you can not get what you desire. (The big "Other")
To care is to be anxious - Jordan doesn't care throughout his schemes.
"be careful what you wish for you just might get it"
Notes from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57RhO4ByhcA:
According to french philosopher Gilles Deleuze and militant Felix Guattari the desire for oppression comes from the belief that people should repress their desires. Through this technique of repression, the masses are primed to accept fascism. Fascism is the fascination with and love of power. People yearn to be ruled, humiliated and dominated. They're aroused by their unconscious desires to submit to strength.
Notes from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IehFdgKPJB0:
"Sam Polk, a former Wall Street trader, decided to leave his job at the age of 30 because he realised he'd developed a severe addiction to money and he hated the culture that existed on Wall Street.
In a piece in The New York Times, he was extremely honest and candid about his experiences, he talked about how government officials were like buddy's and the members of wall street were treated like royalty" - Anna Kasparian
Polk stated:
"One of the things I came to realize was I had been using money as this thing that would quell all my fears. So I had this belief that maybe some day I would get enough money that I would no longer be scared ... I would feel successful. And one of the things I learned on Wall Street was no matter how much money I made, the money was never going to do it."
There is no end to greed
you feel like a victim when the guy next to you has gotten a bigger bonus.
Happiness has been taken and twisted by American culture - happiness always has to do with money or career success. You should focus on the things that money cant buy like your health, your family your love, you cant directly get that from money. in this environment people don't get that.
appreciation can be tough when the grass is always green on the other side.
Jordan Belfort seemed to have a desire to become happier. When it went bad he just indulged in more.
Cenk Uyger - "The paradox of the successful man is what drives him to be successful is that he's never satisfied, but that's precisely what makes his success irrelevant."
From commenter Helghastl33t: "It confirms my suspicions, they don't even know what they are doing. No massive conspiracy, no evil master plan. Pure base vices running wild in a system that not only allows it but encourages it. Active money management should become illegal, institutions trading money for moneys sake or speculating on goods purely for financial gain is a form of parasitism and no good can ever come from it."
Belfort seemed to have little patience when he had little and little gratitude and respect when he had everything.
From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3fzFUs-hYM:
If we're all greedy we can win together - this is the essence of Wall Street character Gordon Gekko
Greed only works at the expense of others in a connected capitalist society
Belfort unlike Gekko makes no moral argument on screen - he knows what he is doing is wrong yet he does it anyway.
Theres no tragedy haunting his steps like the downfall of Gordon Gekko or the extreme paranoia and eventual disappearance of Henry Hill from Goodfellas.
When Belfort eventually goes to prison in the film he narrates: "see for a brief fleeting moment, I'd forgotten I was rich, and I lived in a place where everything was for sale" he says this as we see him play tennis in jail.
Belforts crimes are met with minimal physical and psychological punishment. The real Jordon even introduces his character as: "the single badest motherfucker I have ever met" - its no surprise the film was deemed to have glorified, unapologetically and endorsing capitalist excess. The film doesn't offer the negative critique like Goodfellas, it doesn't even offer a satirical critique such as in American psycho.
The joke is never on Jordon, its on everyone else.
Like Spring Breakers, the film explores excess and is constructed of excess e.g the three hour runtime, the endless montages.
However refusing to critique doesn't mean by extension Scorsese is endorsing.
His extensive use of close-up reveals his vulgarity of this way of living. The montages exorst instead of glamourize. Pretty is less distracting than disorienting, less desirable than overwhelming.
The excesses of Jordon Belfort are OUR excesses; like him we're too enlightened to know the expensive of which our gazillion products are made, like him we don't make any attempt to moralise our way through the system, like him, we just don't care. The disgust we feel for Belfort is hypocritical. The indignation we inflict on him is less a righteous act than a self-righteous delusion.
The film is so unapologetically excessive that the audience might finally realise that the screen they thought they were watching was in fact a camera.
Satisfaction with life in general
Drugs - lots of em "how the fuck else would you do this job?"
We don't really want what we think we desire - desires money to buy things that will deliver them immediate desire instead of long-term happiness.
Fantasies have to be unrealistic, because the moment, the second you get what you seek, you don't, you cant want it anymore. In order to continue to exist, desire must have its objects perpetually absent.
Jordon is free from the chains of the Oedipus complex - why we feel for him. We kind of root for him because he is our reflection of our Id.
Jordan is the Id. He does precisely what he needs to do to get what he thinks he really wants.
In the scene with Mathew's character (the boss) and Jordan at the table, theres irony in the way Mathew talks about the clients. He says: "they're fucking addicted", the exact same could be said about these two characters and others on Wall Street. They enjoy the thrill of achieving their goal; making money.
"I was hooked in seconds" says Jordan over narration as he he's the sound of money: "You wanna know what money sounds like? Go to a trading floor on Wall Street"
At the end of the film Jordan doesn't learn from his mistakes. "Its all about revolutions". He claims to have cleaned up after he crashes his car, yet still chases money.
"The point of Lacan, and what makes Lacan's reading of desire, different from Brooks' and indeed what makes his reading of desire different from that of anyone who thinks of these structuralist issues in psychoanalytic terms, is that Lacan really doesn't believe that we can ever have what we desire. He has no doubt that we can have what we need. He makes the fundamental distinction, between having what we desire and having what we need. The distinction is often put between the distinction of the big "Other" (which one can never appropriate as an object of desire, it is perpetually and always elusive) and the little object of desire (which is not really an object at all, but is available to satisfy need).
Socio-biologically you can get what you need.
Psychoanalytically you can not get what you desire. (The big "Other")
To care is to be anxious - Jordan doesn't care throughout his schemes.
"be careful what you wish for you just might get it"
Notes from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57RhO4ByhcA:
According to french philosopher Gilles Deleuze and militant Felix Guattari the desire for oppression comes from the belief that people should repress their desires. Through this technique of repression, the masses are primed to accept fascism. Fascism is the fascination with and love of power. People yearn to be ruled, humiliated and dominated. They're aroused by their unconscious desires to submit to strength.
Notes from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IehFdgKPJB0:
"Sam Polk, a former Wall Street trader, decided to leave his job at the age of 30 because he realised he'd developed a severe addiction to money and he hated the culture that existed on Wall Street.
In a piece in The New York Times, he was extremely honest and candid about his experiences, he talked about how government officials were like buddy's and the members of wall street were treated like royalty" - Anna Kasparian
Polk stated:
"One of the things I came to realize was I had been using money as this thing that would quell all my fears. So I had this belief that maybe some day I would get enough money that I would no longer be scared ... I would feel successful. And one of the things I learned on Wall Street was no matter how much money I made, the money was never going to do it."
There is no end to greed
you feel like a victim when the guy next to you has gotten a bigger bonus.
Happiness has been taken and twisted by American culture - happiness always has to do with money or career success. You should focus on the things that money cant buy like your health, your family your love, you cant directly get that from money. in this environment people don't get that.
appreciation can be tough when the grass is always green on the other side.
Jordan Belfort seemed to have a desire to become happier. When it went bad he just indulged in more.
Cenk Uyger - "The paradox of the successful man is what drives him to be successful is that he's never satisfied, but that's precisely what makes his success irrelevant."
From commenter Helghastl33t: "It confirms my suspicions, they don't even know what they are doing. No massive conspiracy, no evil master plan. Pure base vices running wild in a system that not only allows it but encourages it. Active money management should become illegal, institutions trading money for moneys sake or speculating on goods purely for financial gain is a form of parasitism and no good can ever come from it."
Belfort seemed to have little patience when he had little and little gratitude and respect when he had everything.
From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3fzFUs-hYM:
If we're all greedy we can win together - this is the essence of Wall Street character Gordon Gekko
Greed only works at the expense of others in a connected capitalist society
Belfort unlike Gekko makes no moral argument on screen - he knows what he is doing is wrong yet he does it anyway.
Theres no tragedy haunting his steps like the downfall of Gordon Gekko or the extreme paranoia and eventual disappearance of Henry Hill from Goodfellas.
When Belfort eventually goes to prison in the film he narrates: "see for a brief fleeting moment, I'd forgotten I was rich, and I lived in a place where everything was for sale" he says this as we see him play tennis in jail.
Belforts crimes are met with minimal physical and psychological punishment. The real Jordon even introduces his character as: "the single badest motherfucker I have ever met" - its no surprise the film was deemed to have glorified, unapologetically and endorsing capitalist excess. The film doesn't offer the negative critique like Goodfellas, it doesn't even offer a satirical critique such as in American psycho.
The joke is never on Jordon, its on everyone else.
Like Spring Breakers, the film explores excess and is constructed of excess e.g the three hour runtime, the endless montages.
However refusing to critique doesn't mean by extension Scorsese is endorsing.
His extensive use of close-up reveals his vulgarity of this way of living. The montages exorst instead of glamourize. Pretty is less distracting than disorienting, less desirable than overwhelming.
The excesses of Jordon Belfort are OUR excesses; like him we're too enlightened to know the expensive of which our gazillion products are made, like him we don't make any attempt to moralise our way through the system, like him, we just don't care. The disgust we feel for Belfort is hypocritical. The indignation we inflict on him is less a righteous act than a self-righteous delusion.
The film is so unapologetically excessive that the audience might finally realise that the screen they thought they were watching was in fact a camera.
Saturday, 19 December 2015
Mulvey - The Male Gaze & Queer Gaze
The Male Gaze is a theory placed forward by Laura Mulvey: a feminist film theorist. It theorises the idea that due to the male dominance in the industry of cinema, the result is that the audience are most often subject to a view of females on screen from the perspective of the heterosexual male. This, in her view, does not accurately portray the characteristics of women. Instead women are often objectified in film. The whole premise of the male gaze theory is that of how women are represented differently to men in the media and popular culture. A common saying goes that in mainstream cinema, "men are to be admired and women are to be desired". In general, mainstream popular cinema is aimed at heterosexual teenage males as these are the primary audience as they spend the most on consuming cinema and merchandising. Men in cinema are often portrayed as the heroic type and are not sexualised anywhere near to the extent of women.
Criticism of this theory
Forms of male gaze
There are numerous forms of gaze which take place in films, according to Mulvey. These include but are not limited to the five key forms of cinematic gaze: the intra-diegetic gaze, the extra-diegetic gaze. the camera gaze, the editorial gaze and the spectator gaze. The first, the intra-diegetic gaze, takes place when a character gazes at another character or object in the text. This form of gaze is typically shown via the point of view shot from the gazing characters perspective and is utilised with shot-reverse-shot editing technique.
The camera gaze is perhaps one of the most well recognised forms of gaze in films by audiences. A common example of this form of gaze is in the 2007 Michael Bay film Transformers whereby the camera is looking up at the main female stars figure as she opens a car bonnet. Unlike the intra-diegetic gaze, this gaze is not also from a characters perspective. This scene in particular has become an iconic figure for the debate of the male gaze. Some argue that despite it objectifying and fetishizing Megan Fox's character it also shows the character as confident, knowledgeable in the predominately 'manly' field of engineering and free to express herself in whatever way she likes.
Criticism of this theory
Forms of male gaze
There are numerous forms of gaze which take place in films, according to Mulvey. These include but are not limited to the five key forms of cinematic gaze: the intra-diegetic gaze, the extra-diegetic gaze. the camera gaze, the editorial gaze and the spectator gaze. The first, the intra-diegetic gaze, takes place when a character gazes at another character or object in the text. This form of gaze is typically shown via the point of view shot from the gazing characters perspective and is utilised with shot-reverse-shot editing technique.
The camera gaze is perhaps one of the most well recognised forms of gaze in films by audiences. A common example of this form of gaze is in the 2007 Michael Bay film Transformers whereby the camera is looking up at the main female stars figure as she opens a car bonnet. Unlike the intra-diegetic gaze, this gaze is not also from a characters perspective. This scene in particular has become an iconic figure for the debate of the male gaze. Some argue that despite it objectifying and fetishizing Megan Fox's character it also shows the character as confident, knowledgeable in the predominately 'manly' field of engineering and free to express herself in whatever way she likes.
Friday, 11 December 2015
Freud - The Id, Ego & Superego
Introduction to Freud
Austrian neurologist Sigmund Freud is the father of the psychological medicine of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis was not meant however to be about curing people of their mental 'illnesses' instead it is about trying to unveil their deeper roots and how they came to fruition in the first place. Freud would spend most of his life exploring the human condition looking for answers. Despite a lot of his theories, especially that regarding women, being dismissed by todays psychologists and scientists, a case can be made for the continued relevance of Freud's work in psychology.
The Structural Model of the Personality
Freud is most recognised for his work regarding the theoretical symbolic structural model of the human personality that was first published in 1933. In this work Freud tried to give examples that would best suit the argument for past experiences and instinctual affects on personality. He split personality into three separate parts: the 'I', 'it' and 'above-I' (otherwise and more commonly known as the id, ego and superego).
The Id
The id, as Freud believed, was the instinctual part of the human personality. This part, present from birth, is only concerned with the principal of pleasure and hence demands instant gratification to such pleasures. These pleasures are instinctual such as the libido and even aggression. The id is subconscious and self-concerning only and is not concerned with the complications that come with the pleasures it desires. For example, if one were to only have an id, they would likely end up in a lot of trouble or harm for not considering the affects of their actions on others and what is considered socially acceptable behaviour. The subconscious is believed to take up almost 90% of our brain power and activity, meaning that only around 10% is conscious to us. It is possible however to become aware of your id's desires as although the subconscious is not currently in focal awareness, we can still notice it in action. For instance, we may instinctively carry out elements of driving without consciously deciding to do so.
The Superego
In order to ensure that the id doesn't run amuck, the superego or 'above-i' is developed through social experiences. Through parental guidance and society, we form a sense of morality as we grow older. Over time what we consider socially acceptable behaviour and 'good' or 'bad' may vary depending upon our experiences. This also unconscious part of our personalities will inflict a sense of guilt or shame onto you if you do not follow it. It is our sense of conscience. The superego is concerned with what others will think of them. The superego is also concerned with the ideal or perfect self we all aspire to be. If the ideal self is too high to possibly realistically achieve, then the person will not be rewarded with a sense of pride that comes with wish fulfilment.
The Ego
Often times the superego will have conflicting routes of action with the id. In order to achieve harmony and avoid chaos the ego is present to mediate the two. This is the conscious part of the personality that Freud argues has the ability to consider reality and make logical decisions that find a balance between the desires of both the id and superego. This is based upon the reality principal. a compromise will often have to be made in order to avoid dire consequences. Due to the size of the unconscious in comparison to the conscious mind, it is suggested that because of this the ego has a more often than not difficult time trying to control the id. Neuroses are the ways in which we repress the reality principal.
Austrian neurologist Sigmund Freud is the father of the psychological medicine of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis was not meant however to be about curing people of their mental 'illnesses' instead it is about trying to unveil their deeper roots and how they came to fruition in the first place. Freud would spend most of his life exploring the human condition looking for answers. Despite a lot of his theories, especially that regarding women, being dismissed by todays psychologists and scientists, a case can be made for the continued relevance of Freud's work in psychology.
The Structural Model of the Personality
Freud is most recognised for his work regarding the theoretical symbolic structural model of the human personality that was first published in 1933. In this work Freud tried to give examples that would best suit the argument for past experiences and instinctual affects on personality. He split personality into three separate parts: the 'I', 'it' and 'above-I' (otherwise and more commonly known as the id, ego and superego).
The Id
The id, as Freud believed, was the instinctual part of the human personality. This part, present from birth, is only concerned with the principal of pleasure and hence demands instant gratification to such pleasures. These pleasures are instinctual such as the libido and even aggression. The id is subconscious and self-concerning only and is not concerned with the complications that come with the pleasures it desires. For example, if one were to only have an id, they would likely end up in a lot of trouble or harm for not considering the affects of their actions on others and what is considered socially acceptable behaviour. The subconscious is believed to take up almost 90% of our brain power and activity, meaning that only around 10% is conscious to us. It is possible however to become aware of your id's desires as although the subconscious is not currently in focal awareness, we can still notice it in action. For instance, we may instinctively carry out elements of driving without consciously deciding to do so.
The Superego
In order to ensure that the id doesn't run amuck, the superego or 'above-i' is developed through social experiences. Through parental guidance and society, we form a sense of morality as we grow older. Over time what we consider socially acceptable behaviour and 'good' or 'bad' may vary depending upon our experiences. This also unconscious part of our personalities will inflict a sense of guilt or shame onto you if you do not follow it. It is our sense of conscience. The superego is concerned with what others will think of them. The superego is also concerned with the ideal or perfect self we all aspire to be. If the ideal self is too high to possibly realistically achieve, then the person will not be rewarded with a sense of pride that comes with wish fulfilment.
The Ego
Often times the superego will have conflicting routes of action with the id. In order to achieve harmony and avoid chaos the ego is present to mediate the two. This is the conscious part of the personality that Freud argues has the ability to consider reality and make logical decisions that find a balance between the desires of both the id and superego. This is based upon the reality principal. a compromise will often have to be made in order to avoid dire consequences. Due to the size of the unconscious in comparison to the conscious mind, it is suggested that because of this the ego has a more often than not difficult time trying to control the id. Neuroses are the ways in which we repress the reality principal.
Thursday, 10 December 2015
'Little Brother'
Little Brother from Chris Bradley on Vimeo.
As part of our coursework, fellow HNC Creative Media Production students and I were given the opportunity to animate, write and star in our own short clay animation as part of an outreach project produced by Nuneaton Museum & Art Gallery. The film was commissioned as the centre piece of a new exhibition at the gallery based upon the theme of 'protest'. In order for it to be appropriate viewing for any visitor, limitations to what we could create were set. These included this theme of protest, a universal
subject matter and the exclusion of any age-restricting qualities. Over the course of eight three-hour sessions, we created a 5 minute short film regarding our modern surveillance society with the help of filmmaker Chris Bradley of Willowmann Productions.
In our first couple of sessions we had to come up with a story that related to our theme. Later on it quickly became evident that a lot of this time would have been better spent on the production of the sets and filming. As per our shared viewpoint, the film quite clearly expresses an underlying message of anti-govenment mass surveillance. We chose this theme as not only did we feel it was historically relevant to the importance of protest, but that in recent years it has become also very contemporary due to the recent revelations of the bulk collection and surveillance capabilities of GCHQ and National Surveillance Agency of the US. However, upon reviewing the film, I noticed that there was an irony to it being funded by a council branch of the government itself. This became apparent towards the ending of the film, during the end-credit roll in which the museum added the line line 'The views expressed in this film are those of the students and not necessarily those of Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council'. Some of my contributions to the film included; the making of the park scenery, the formation of the tallest antagonist in this scene, creative advise for the story, coming up with lighting setups and animating the dog and duck models.
Prior to working on this project, none of the students had any experience in the production of clay animation. This proposed many challenges. Most significantly, and unsurprisingly, it turned out that the modelling of great-looking clay characters required a particularly high level of attention to detail alongside an understanding of the extraordinary craft involved in clay animation. In order to meet our tight deadline, instead of initially assigning specific filmmaking roles, we all had to take part in the production of the sets and characters. Despite having this limited time-frame which ultimately restricted our potential outcome, I nevertheless enjoyed the process and believe that overall, the film turned out to be much better than anticipated thanks to the combination of all of our aspects of filmmaking coming together in unity via the expert editing of Chris Bradley.
 |
| The creation of the sets and characters. |
subject matter and the exclusion of any age-restricting qualities. Over the course of eight three-hour sessions, we created a 5 minute short film regarding our modern surveillance society with the help of filmmaker Chris Bradley of Willowmann Productions.
 |
| The development of the narrative. |
Prior to working on this project, none of the students had any experience in the production of clay animation. This proposed many challenges. Most significantly, and unsurprisingly, it turned out that the modelling of great-looking clay characters required a particularly high level of attention to detail alongside an understanding of the extraordinary craft involved in clay animation. In order to meet our tight deadline, instead of initially assigning specific filmmaking roles, we all had to take part in the production of the sets and characters. Despite having this limited time-frame which ultimately restricted our potential outcome, I nevertheless enjoyed the process and believe that overall, the film turned out to be much better than anticipated thanks to the combination of all of our aspects of filmmaking coming together in unity via the expert editing of Chris Bradley.
Wednesday, 9 December 2015
Contextual Study Evaluation
When tasked with writing a contextual study, I came across many challenges. The first problem i came across was simply where to start once I had viewed all of the potential films to study and collected my research. Not being an expert on the American new wave alongside having no first-hand experience of the movement meant that everything I could write about the context would hence be from the perspective of my references. In order to add my own insight on the films context, I tried to relate psychological elements I had picked up during analysis of the films.
Things I did well:
thorough research
concise wording; to the point
detailed analyses
Things I could've done better:
More books/print sources
organisation of information: should've placed them into related sections.
organised the study chronologically to give a better understanding of the time period - despite this idea, I think that perhaps separating the study onto singular focus on the separate films was the better idea as it meant i could properly flesh out my thoughts and not have to keep swapping which film I talked about.
Should've started writing the study sooner as I ran out of time to add all of my research.
Things I did well:
thorough research
concise wording; to the point
detailed analyses
Things I could've done better:
More books/print sources
organisation of information: should've placed them into related sections.
organised the study chronologically to give a better understanding of the time period - despite this idea, I think that perhaps separating the study onto singular focus on the separate films was the better idea as it meant i could properly flesh out my thoughts and not have to keep swapping which film I talked about.
Should've started writing the study sooner as I ran out of time to add all of my research.
Friday, 4 December 2015
Contextual Study of the American New Wave
Contextual Study of the American New Wave
In this contextual study, I foremost discuss how Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde (1967) and Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver (1976), were affected by their institutional context. I've selected these films as I consider them to be the most important and influential films of the American new wave of cinema; their creations consist of and highlight key factors for how the movement came to be.
Before diving into the defining era at the focus of this contextual study; the late 1960’s through to the early 1980’s, it's important to understand the impact of the French new wave of the late 1950’s and 1960’s. In fact, it was this new age of ground-breaking films made by artistic, avant-garde filmmakers for which the term 'Nouvelle Vague' (“new wave”) was coined by film critics of the time - Sterrit (1999). The industries’ traditional focus of film being simply a tool to present literature, as opposed to it being an art form of itself, fuelled young, dissatisfied filmmakers to create films with a fresh narrative and editing approach, among other components.
The French critics of this period, especially those of the film magazine Cahiers Du Cinema, believed a rise of ‘auteurs’ would be the best way forward for the French film industry. Auteur Theory refers to the idea in film criticism that the director is the primary creative visionary of a film. In other words, the director is the author of the film (“auteur” meaning “author” in French). No matter how collective and industrial the creation of a film, the basis of this theory is that when it is appropriately applied, the directors’ personal vision for the film still manages to be seen. The comprehension of auteur theory is essential when studying the rise of “New Hollywood” as to the majority of the up-and-coming directors that defined this era, it was how they thought modern cinema should be.
The auteur approach to film making allowed for audiences to better connect to the characters and stories on screen, as they were by nature, explorations of the human condition by the eye of the camera itself: the directors. For example, the theme of isolation from society and feelings of loneliness displayed in Taxi Driver, were introspectively explored by the director Martin Scorsese and tapped into the mind-set of the audiences because they're universal and deep-rooted concepts.
"I don't think people anticipated that the therapeutic writings of a twenty-something dealing with inner-city solitude would hit such a nerve with the audience" – Paul Schrader, the films screenwriter. What I find particularly interesting about this quote is how when viewed from another perspective, it also reflects the creation of the film's script by Schrader himself.
Prior to Taxi Driver, the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor was awarded to Robert De Niro for his role in Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather Part II and Ellen Burstyn was award Best Actress for her role in Scorsese's own previous film to Taxi Driver: Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore. These recognitions of talent then allowed for Scorsese to get funding for Taxi Driver in 1976, as De Niro had already agreed upon starring in the film.
Robert De Niro, a previous Scorsese collaborator at the time, portrays Travis Bickle; the anti-hero, ex-US marine protagonist in this mid 1970's based vigilantly film. Throughout the film, a series of failed attempts to connect to people take place which ultimately leads him to take violent action into his own hands. The reason for this failure, from my research and view, is due to his psychological dysfunction caused by post-traumatic stress disorder: a result of exposure to the harsh realities of the Vietnam war he was recently honourably discharged from, as previously argued by Carrie Gorringe (1995). This most notably results in Travis never taking a step back to consider the possible viewpoints of others. Instead, he believes that the way he views his New York City surroundings; as filled with low-life scum, is in fact how the city truly is. Travis' inability to deal with the givens of existence only furthermore solidifies these viewpoints. This idea of existentialism is likely to have influenced and thus utilised by Schrader after he read Albert Camus' The Stranger (1942) around the time of writing the script: a novel which is often regarded as an exemplar of such. To the audience, it is clear that Travis' problems are self-inflicted. But in order to keep viewing himself as the protagonist of his life story, he must force himself to only focus on the things he despises. He insists all of the problems in his life; sexual frustration, loneliness and anger are the cause of others.
New York City was the ideal setting for Scorsese's first attempt at a mainstream major motion picture as according to the screenwriter Paul Schrader “Only true loneliness can be depicted when the protagonist is surrounded by people everywhere he goes”. Both Scorsese and Schrader were also born and raised in a religious household in New York City, as noted by Spark Notes (2013). Scorsese in particular has noted that whilst growing up in Little Italy, he experienced a lot of crime and violence and that to him it was "just the way things were". This perspective is likely to have influenced his approach to the filming and added to the films real-life resembling grittiness Biskind, P (1999). When compared to the city of today, the New York depicted in Taxi Driver is noticeably less of a family oriented tourist destination. Times Square was host to peep shows and the streets were regularly aligned with prostitutes.
Despite being overly-exaggerated by Travis in the feature, during the mid 70's, the period in which the film is set, the city of New York was a lot filthier than today's. Due to the near Bankruptcy of the city in 1974, the trash collectors went on strike, this meant that the city became increasingly aligned with warm garbage, to which the city did not have an immediate funded solution for. Jimmy Carter, a presidential candidate at the time promised that the city would not have to file for bankruptcy. He later won the national election in 1976 and solved New York's garbage problem. Comparably within the film, Senator Charles Palentine is also running for presidency. To Travis' surprise it just happens that Palentine requires his cab service. Whilst talking to Palentine, Travis states that he is a big supporter. However he was unable to identify him without confirmation and when questioned upon his policies, Travis admits that he is unaware of any. These are great example of Travis' many contradictions.
Unknowingly, you can convince yourself of something that isn’t true. This is why such self-inflicted isolation and loneliness can lead to the formation of what we call “Mad Men” such as Travis. Travis Bickle is a true American in the sense that there are heroes and villains in his anti-hero viewpoint. The thought of being a powerless victim is what drives him to commit what he believes to be heroic acts: this is confirmed by the posting of the newspaper articles. One thing for sure is that Travis has “good” intentions, this is why we can feel for him. However, as expressed by Scorsese's most recent collaborating actor Leonardo DiCaprio (2013), this is what also traps us.
Sometimes certain camera movements and techniques were employed just because they felt 'right' during shooting. In an interview with Scorsese, the director stated that often times decisions such as the “style” of the film in terms of its visuals were just the way Scorsese thought the film would be, not necessarily intended to be Gothic New York horror-esque, Scorsese, M (2011). This is what is referred to as organic film making, it was a major part to the free-style of film making explored by the French. It was the director following the vision in his head in that particular moment, not trying to add meaning via metaphors such as the smoke in the opening shot being representative of a certain hell on earth.
Taxi Driver draws parallels to John Ford's The Searchers (1956), in which the protagonist tries to save someone who doesn't necessarily want to be saved. However the difference between The Searchers and Taxi driver is that Travis does so for his ego, not because its the moral thing to do. His violent actions in the final scene are likely to have psychologically scarred Iris, a 12 year old prostitute played by Jodie Foster, counterproductive to supposedly "saving" her: his intended plan. Due to not viewing his first film until his late teens, Schrader's influences are mostly literature such as The catcher in the Rye: similarly to Travis Bickle, Holden's attitude remains unchanged at the story's end, implying no maturation. Another work of influential loneliness is Fyodor Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground.
Upon release, despite ringing the zeitgeist of the youthful audience and therefore achieving commercial success, Taxi Driver was not a raving critical success. In fact, when it comes to truly ground-breaking films such as this, most are not referred to as such until their impact on the industry has been recognised much later. Film critic Roger Ebert (1976) was one of the few of the time that understood the messages and purpose behind the films shockingly lurid sequence of events.
Almost a decade prior to the release of Taxi Driver, Arthur Penn's legendary film Bonnie and Clyde was released on August 13th 1967. The film came at a critical time for Hollywood: the studio system had been on a dramatic downward trajectory since the mid 1940's as a consequence of the rise of television and an outdated business model that relied on attracting audiences with extravagant musicals, films based on popular novels and famous movie stars. Overall, the types of mainstream movies released had become typical and thus tiresome to many. The audiences were being pulled in to the small screen with consistent coverage of various revolutionary movements of the time such as the civil rights movement and sexual revolution. In order to survive the system had to change; studios started to have greater confidence in younger, unknown filmmakers following Penn's commercial smash hit. Thanks to the successes of Bonnie and Clyde and The Graduate, mainstream films started to become more original and less novel-based. Now revered film critic Pauline Kaul argued upon release that Bonnie and Clyde indicated the rise of a “new” Hollywood, to much disbelief of her peers.
The feature shares common revolutionary cinematic themes of idiosyncrasy, sexual frustration, alienation and rebellion with that of Taxi Driver. It awakened audiences from their movie-going slumber; they were liberated by a form of cinematic entertainment that needn’t rely on sheer spectacle alone. Subversive comedy and frank sexual discussions resonated. Unlike any mainstream films before, the "villains" in Bonnie and Clyde were The violence in Bonnie and Clyde is a means to an end for their joyous ride. 'Moreover, from the moment Clyde introduces himself and his partner, saying, "I'm Clyde Barrow and this is Miss Bonnie Parker. We rob banks", the movie brazenly romanticises the outlaws – bank robbers and killers.' page 49, Biskind, P (1999). This startled and challenged the pre-conceptions of sadism within villains that audiences and critics alike were accustomed to with “old Hollywood”. How could these murderers seem so innocent? It was this confusion that led to initial bad reviews. This film broke significant ground because it made audience members step back and consider why they disliked it when so many others didn’t.
The characters of Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker are based off real-life Great Depression-era bank-robbing outlaws of the same names. The famed outlaws and their gang, originally from Dallas, Texas, travelled across the United States until their ultimate death in a police ambush in Sailes, Louisiana. Accurate to the real ambush, the ending of the film was ground-breaking for its time as it unflinchingly showed the 167 bullets shot at their vehicle, kill the gang. The graphic violence in the film reflected the live-television news images of a brutal war in Vietnam which was taking place during production, as mentioned by Snider, E D (2010). The fact that many Americans could watch a war unfold live from their living rooms contributed to a growing opposition to the war.
In this contextual study, I foremost discuss how Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde (1967) and Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver (1976), were affected by their institutional context. I've selected these films as I consider them to be the most important and influential films of the American new wave of cinema; their creations consist of and highlight key factors for how the movement came to be.
Before diving into the defining era at the focus of this contextual study; the late 1960’s through to the early 1980’s, it's important to understand the impact of the French new wave of the late 1950’s and 1960’s. In fact, it was this new age of ground-breaking films made by artistic, avant-garde filmmakers for which the term 'Nouvelle Vague' (“new wave”) was coined by film critics of the time - Sterrit (1999). The industries’ traditional focus of film being simply a tool to present literature, as opposed to it being an art form of itself, fuelled young, dissatisfied filmmakers to create films with a fresh narrative and editing approach, among other components.
The French critics of this period, especially those of the film magazine Cahiers Du Cinema, believed a rise of ‘auteurs’ would be the best way forward for the French film industry. Auteur Theory refers to the idea in film criticism that the director is the primary creative visionary of a film. In other words, the director is the author of the film (“auteur” meaning “author” in French). No matter how collective and industrial the creation of a film, the basis of this theory is that when it is appropriately applied, the directors’ personal vision for the film still manages to be seen. The comprehension of auteur theory is essential when studying the rise of “New Hollywood” as to the majority of the up-and-coming directors that defined this era, it was how they thought modern cinema should be.
The auteur approach to film making allowed for audiences to better connect to the characters and stories on screen, as they were by nature, explorations of the human condition by the eye of the camera itself: the directors. For example, the theme of isolation from society and feelings of loneliness displayed in Taxi Driver, were introspectively explored by the director Martin Scorsese and tapped into the mind-set of the audiences because they're universal and deep-rooted concepts.
"I don't think people anticipated that the therapeutic writings of a twenty-something dealing with inner-city solitude would hit such a nerve with the audience" – Paul Schrader, the films screenwriter. What I find particularly interesting about this quote is how when viewed from another perspective, it also reflects the creation of the film's script by Schrader himself.
Prior to Taxi Driver, the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor was awarded to Robert De Niro for his role in Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather Part II and Ellen Burstyn was award Best Actress for her role in Scorsese's own previous film to Taxi Driver: Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore. These recognitions of talent then allowed for Scorsese to get funding for Taxi Driver in 1976, as De Niro had already agreed upon starring in the film.
Robert De Niro, a previous Scorsese collaborator at the time, portrays Travis Bickle; the anti-hero, ex-US marine protagonist in this mid 1970's based vigilantly film. Throughout the film, a series of failed attempts to connect to people take place which ultimately leads him to take violent action into his own hands. The reason for this failure, from my research and view, is due to his psychological dysfunction caused by post-traumatic stress disorder: a result of exposure to the harsh realities of the Vietnam war he was recently honourably discharged from, as previously argued by Carrie Gorringe (1995). This most notably results in Travis never taking a step back to consider the possible viewpoints of others. Instead, he believes that the way he views his New York City surroundings; as filled with low-life scum, is in fact how the city truly is. Travis' inability to deal with the givens of existence only furthermore solidifies these viewpoints. This idea of existentialism is likely to have influenced and thus utilised by Schrader after he read Albert Camus' The Stranger (1942) around the time of writing the script: a novel which is often regarded as an exemplar of such. To the audience, it is clear that Travis' problems are self-inflicted. But in order to keep viewing himself as the protagonist of his life story, he must force himself to only focus on the things he despises. He insists all of the problems in his life; sexual frustration, loneliness and anger are the cause of others.
New York City was the ideal setting for Scorsese's first attempt at a mainstream major motion picture as according to the screenwriter Paul Schrader “Only true loneliness can be depicted when the protagonist is surrounded by people everywhere he goes”. Both Scorsese and Schrader were also born and raised in a religious household in New York City, as noted by Spark Notes (2013). Scorsese in particular has noted that whilst growing up in Little Italy, he experienced a lot of crime and violence and that to him it was "just the way things were". This perspective is likely to have influenced his approach to the filming and added to the films real-life resembling grittiness Biskind, P (1999). When compared to the city of today, the New York depicted in Taxi Driver is noticeably less of a family oriented tourist destination. Times Square was host to peep shows and the streets were regularly aligned with prostitutes.
Despite being overly-exaggerated by Travis in the feature, during the mid 70's, the period in which the film is set, the city of New York was a lot filthier than today's. Due to the near Bankruptcy of the city in 1974, the trash collectors went on strike, this meant that the city became increasingly aligned with warm garbage, to which the city did not have an immediate funded solution for. Jimmy Carter, a presidential candidate at the time promised that the city would not have to file for bankruptcy. He later won the national election in 1976 and solved New York's garbage problem. Comparably within the film, Senator Charles Palentine is also running for presidency. To Travis' surprise it just happens that Palentine requires his cab service. Whilst talking to Palentine, Travis states that he is a big supporter. However he was unable to identify him without confirmation and when questioned upon his policies, Travis admits that he is unaware of any. These are great example of Travis' many contradictions.
Unknowingly, you can convince yourself of something that isn’t true. This is why such self-inflicted isolation and loneliness can lead to the formation of what we call “Mad Men” such as Travis. Travis Bickle is a true American in the sense that there are heroes and villains in his anti-hero viewpoint. The thought of being a powerless victim is what drives him to commit what he believes to be heroic acts: this is confirmed by the posting of the newspaper articles. One thing for sure is that Travis has “good” intentions, this is why we can feel for him. However, as expressed by Scorsese's most recent collaborating actor Leonardo DiCaprio (2013), this is what also traps us.
Sometimes certain camera movements and techniques were employed just because they felt 'right' during shooting. In an interview with Scorsese, the director stated that often times decisions such as the “style” of the film in terms of its visuals were just the way Scorsese thought the film would be, not necessarily intended to be Gothic New York horror-esque, Scorsese, M (2011). This is what is referred to as organic film making, it was a major part to the free-style of film making explored by the French. It was the director following the vision in his head in that particular moment, not trying to add meaning via metaphors such as the smoke in the opening shot being representative of a certain hell on earth.
Taxi Driver draws parallels to John Ford's The Searchers (1956), in which the protagonist tries to save someone who doesn't necessarily want to be saved. However the difference between The Searchers and Taxi driver is that Travis does so for his ego, not because its the moral thing to do. His violent actions in the final scene are likely to have psychologically scarred Iris, a 12 year old prostitute played by Jodie Foster, counterproductive to supposedly "saving" her: his intended plan. Due to not viewing his first film until his late teens, Schrader's influences are mostly literature such as The catcher in the Rye: similarly to Travis Bickle, Holden's attitude remains unchanged at the story's end, implying no maturation. Another work of influential loneliness is Fyodor Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground.
Upon release, despite ringing the zeitgeist of the youthful audience and therefore achieving commercial success, Taxi Driver was not a raving critical success. In fact, when it comes to truly ground-breaking films such as this, most are not referred to as such until their impact on the industry has been recognised much later. Film critic Roger Ebert (1976) was one of the few of the time that understood the messages and purpose behind the films shockingly lurid sequence of events.
Almost a decade prior to the release of Taxi Driver, Arthur Penn's legendary film Bonnie and Clyde was released on August 13th 1967. The film came at a critical time for Hollywood: the studio system had been on a dramatic downward trajectory since the mid 1940's as a consequence of the rise of television and an outdated business model that relied on attracting audiences with extravagant musicals, films based on popular novels and famous movie stars. Overall, the types of mainstream movies released had become typical and thus tiresome to many. The audiences were being pulled in to the small screen with consistent coverage of various revolutionary movements of the time such as the civil rights movement and sexual revolution. In order to survive the system had to change; studios started to have greater confidence in younger, unknown filmmakers following Penn's commercial smash hit. Thanks to the successes of Bonnie and Clyde and The Graduate, mainstream films started to become more original and less novel-based. Now revered film critic Pauline Kaul argued upon release that Bonnie and Clyde indicated the rise of a “new” Hollywood, to much disbelief of her peers.
The feature shares common revolutionary cinematic themes of idiosyncrasy, sexual frustration, alienation and rebellion with that of Taxi Driver. It awakened audiences from their movie-going slumber; they were liberated by a form of cinematic entertainment that needn’t rely on sheer spectacle alone. Subversive comedy and frank sexual discussions resonated. Unlike any mainstream films before, the "villains" in Bonnie and Clyde were The violence in Bonnie and Clyde is a means to an end for their joyous ride. 'Moreover, from the moment Clyde introduces himself and his partner, saying, "I'm Clyde Barrow and this is Miss Bonnie Parker. We rob banks", the movie brazenly romanticises the outlaws – bank robbers and killers.' page 49, Biskind, P (1999). This startled and challenged the pre-conceptions of sadism within villains that audiences and critics alike were accustomed to with “old Hollywood”. How could these murderers seem so innocent? It was this confusion that led to initial bad reviews. This film broke significant ground because it made audience members step back and consider why they disliked it when so many others didn’t.
The characters of Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker are based off real-life Great Depression-era bank-robbing outlaws of the same names. The famed outlaws and their gang, originally from Dallas, Texas, travelled across the United States until their ultimate death in a police ambush in Sailes, Louisiana. Accurate to the real ambush, the ending of the film was ground-breaking for its time as it unflinchingly showed the 167 bullets shot at their vehicle, kill the gang. The graphic violence in the film reflected the live-television news images of a brutal war in Vietnam which was taking place during production, as mentioned by Snider, E D (2010). The fact that many Americans could watch a war unfold live from their living rooms contributed to a growing opposition to the war.
Bibliography
References:
- Bonnie and Clyde (1967) Film. Directed by Arthur Penn. [DVD] Warner Bros.-Seven Arts.
- The Graduate (1967) Film. Directed by Mike Nichols. [.mov] United Artists.
- Taxi Driver (1976) Film. Directed by Martin Scorsese. [.mov] Columbia Pictures.
- EBERT, R (1976) Taxi Driver Review. www.rogerebert.com. [Online] [Accessed: 4th November 2015].
- SPARK NOTES (2013) Taxi Driver: Context [Online] Available from: www.sparknotes.com. [Accessed: 1st November 2015].
- Snider, E D (2010) What’s the Big Deal?: Bonnie and Clyde (1967) Available from: www.thefilm.com [Online] [Accessed: 27th October 2015].
- Carrie Gorringe (1995) Taxi Driver, Nitrate Online [Online] Available from www.nitrateonline.com [Accessed: 27th October 2015].
- Sterrit, David (1999). The Films of Jean Luc Godard. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press, Print.
- Scorsese, M (2011) Martin Scorsese, Paul Schrader & Sam Rockwell Talk "Taxi Driver" Rerelease With AMC [Online] Available from: www.youtube.com [Accessed: 28th October 2015].
- DiCaprio, L (2013) Leonardo DiCaprio on Taxi Driver | Charlie Rose [Online] Available from: www.youtube.com [Accessed: 28th October 2015].
- Biskind, P (1999) 'Easy Riders, Raging Bulls'. 1st Edition. Simon and Schuster.
- Merchant, G (2005) 'The Making Of Taxi Driver'. 1st Edition. MQ Publications Ltd. Book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)