Screening Notes: Viaggio in Italia

For this screening notes assignment, we explore the "Shot, Connotation, Myth Production" style of analysis and apply it to a single shot in Viaggia in Italia directed by Roberto Rossallini.

Denotation:
A man and woman sit outside while the woman sunbathes. The couple talks and do not look at each other often, and the woman recounts a former pursuer's efforts to woo he to her husband. The camera shots focus primarily on the separation between the two with very isolating shots.

Connotation:
Katherine is telling this story to Alex, her husband, and it is easy to see that she is unhappy in her current marriage. When looking at the context of this shot, one can understand that the relationship has lost its romance, even to the point of Katherine thinking about how much better her life was before.

Myth Production:
A common thought in humans is the belief that he or she will be better off in another place. Examples include "the grass is always greener in other pastures", one will be happier with another person, the need for the next things in life, assumption of gratification while not being content in the current situation. Journey to Italy isn't dispelling this myth, but promoting it. The audience is meant to believe that Katherine should leave her marriage, and that divorcing is the best option because she'll be happier with another man. The music in the background reflects the mood, it is a somber ditty that adds sense of hopelessness for the relationship's strength and future.

Blog #4 - Essay 1 Outline

(1) Main Argument

Formalism is the best way to approach and study films because it provides the most complete way to view and analyze the aspects of movies. It allows analysts to do a sort of close reading on a sequence or shot, and discuss how the different aspects of the shot contributes to the film as a whole.

(2) Claim #1

Formalism allows us to take an individual aspect of the film and describe the effect it has on the audience.
Example: Focusing on music score in the beginning of Psycho stirs the audience to become very tense. This gives the viewer an intense looming that something terrifying will happen in the future.

 

(3) Support for Claim #1

Further development of example and quote from Wood.

 

(4) Claim #2 [complete sentence(s)]

Compartmentalizing a film's parts through the Formalistic approach can allow the viewer to analyze the internal dialog of Marion. When Marion plays out what the conversations between those parties involved, she assumes the worst. When this happens, the audience recognizes that Marion begins to feel guilty, but tries to shrug it off, creating further suspense surrounding Marion and the stolen money.

 

 

(5) Support for Claim #2

Perkins quote: "[director's resources] neither leap out at us from the fictional world nor impose upon it a rhetoric it cannot sustain."

 

 

(6) Claim #3 [complete sentence(s)]

 

The formalism approach is also the best way to interpret the scene inside the Bates Motel when Norman entreats Marion to food, and continues to spy on her. When he looks through the peep-hole to see her undress, the shot where his eye is nearly fully framed, one can truly appreciate his consumption. The lighting and other effects in the shot emphasize this.

 

(7) Support for Claim #3

Woods: "much of the film's significance is summed up in a single visual metaphor, making use again of eyes, occurring at the film's focal point."

Screening: Psycho

• The music starts off the movie with an incredibly ominous tone.
• Much of what happens in the first 15 minutes doesn't play out the way I thought it would.
• I had expected the police office in the beginning to show up again later in the movie or the man from whom the $40,000 was stolen to be the 'psycho'.
• The cinematography is really enjoyable and the tracking shots are very well done.
• The shot lengths were perfect, neither too long or too short.
• I didn't notice an Alfred Hitchcock cameo in this film... did I miss it?
• I was not expecting Norman Bates to be the psycho... and his mother?
• The ending scene where the psychiatrist was explaining Norman's condition was a really great scene- it gave valuable insight that the audience couldn't have received another way, and it was filmed very strongly.
• Although I had never seen this film, I was very excited too. I was not overly impressed, but it was a very solid movie, and I really want to watch it again knowing the ending.
• Also, I am excited to read commentary on this movie so I can develop greater insight.

Blog Assignment #3: Grapes of Wrath

1) At the end of Grapes of Wrath (1940) the famous depiction of Rosasharn offering her breast milk to a dying man (in Steinbeck's novel) is omitted. Many modern critics may claim that director John Ford is keeping this scene from his film as an auteur, but obviously, this occurrence would not be allowed to be shown in cinema in the 1940's, despite what Ford truly desired. Instead, Ford places a happier spin on the ending of the film. Does this make him an auteur? The simple answer is yes, he is because he creates and 'alternate ending' but does so in order to get his film approved by the board.

2) Auteur theory delves into the idea that an author, or director, has a unique and consistent touch on all the films he or she directs and that a director makes of breaks a film. This theory is interesting, but also cannot be completely confirmed or solidified because of many factors. If one is to believe that auteur theory is completely true, then he or she is likening the director of a film directly to an author of a book or a piece of writing. However, one cannot merely dismiss the fact that an author of a book is the sole proprietor of that piece of work, but a film director is the spearhead and leader of the film, but there are many many other people involved. People who spend their time trying to prove the absolute validity of auteur theory waste their time because the fact that a myriad of people have their hand in the work is unavoidable. Andrew Sarris claims that, "an expert production crew could probably cover up for a chimpanzee in the director's chair," and furthers that in order to find the director's true impact on the outcome of a film one needs to examine what happens "after a number of films, a pattern is established," (Sarris 141). He is correct in asserting that auteur theory is substantial because it emphasizes and recognizes the director's role in creating a film, but is not the absolute truth.

Screening: Grapes of Wrath

• The scene where Tom returns to his home is very dark, difficult to see.
• When Tommy sees his family, they all think that he broke out of jail and only the children hug him, the rest of the people, including his mother, shake his hand.
• There is no music in the film, no soundtrack or score, just music during the dance scene.
• Good commentary on sexes in the last scene in the movie.
• Film has social commentary of misuse of police authority.
• This movie also explores the proletariat / bourgeoisie relationship.
• Much of Grapes of Wrath is dependent on Tommy's stoic character and Ma's strength, by that the film carries on.
• I honestly don't think Ma's character was well developed, seemed a bit forced at times.
• This movie is said to be among the great American classics, but I was not exceedingly impressed, it was slow and the characters weren't well enough developed.

Screening: Midnight in Paris

• Opening scene has great 'montage' (Eisenstein reference) maybe 4 minutes long.
• 'Golden Age thinking' people who have difficulty appreciating there own age desire to live in another.
• The Paul character is extremely pretentious and makes the viewer uncomfortable.
• The viewer relates to Gil's unhappiness with the situation about Paul and Inez.
• "No subject is terrible if the story is true." - Ernest Hemingway
• Gil is caught up in his own environment, but is continually drawn out of it by Inez and her friends and family. He doesn't seem to belong at all.
• Ernest Hemingway continually wants to fight.
• I would probably enjoy this film more if Owen Wilson wasn't the lead character.
• Gil meets: F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, Pablo Picasso, Salvador Dali, T.S. Elliot, Gertrude Stein, Man Ray, Luis Buñuel, and more.
• Allen (director) is exploring the idea of unhappiness in one's time. It is exemplified by Gil's desire to live in the past, and also by Adriana.