Boyhood Atlantic Article

I found this article to be interesting since we discussed how very relatable "Boyhood" was. I never really thought about who it would and would not be relatable for. Hope the link below works, because my computer is not letting me test it.


http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/09/the-not-so-relateable-boyhood/379700/

I will not wear that hip hugger thing, mother. It makes me look really fat!

If you want to see what I feel is a truly independent film, check out Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story. The actors are Barbie dolls, and the film is a combination dramatization/documentary/biopic.

It can't be shown publicly due to a cease and desist order from the Carpenters estate. However, you can find it on YouTube.

Here is the link:

Superstar.

By the way, the title of this post is a line Karen speaks in the movie.

My Presentation on 3.1415936525 etc.

Gloria Diaz

Dr. Kaufmann

Genre Study in Film

Pi Presentation

16 June 2015

I saw this movie when it came out in 1998, but borrowed it from the library to refresh my memory. It is a remake of the 1917 Paul Wegener film, “der Golem und die Taenzerin” (Wallis). That translates to the Golem and the Dancer.

I consider the cinematography of this film particularly striking, because using grainy black and white film for this helps the viewer sharpen his or her focus of what’s being viewed. What I mean by that is we can be dazzled by color, as well as distracted by it. I suggest if you are trying to learn about photography, to first shoot subjects in black and white. With the absence of color, things like light and shadow and form will become more apparent. These are pictures of ordinary things, but in black and white, you’re not as distracted by the color, and you’re probably paying more attention to the shape of the stop sign and the letters.

                                          (Diaz).

                                            (Diaz).

The fire plug goes from a yellow on green contrast to a gray on black contrast. The shadows and bolts seem to pop out more.

          

With this film, the grainy black and white aspect of it lets us know off the bat this is not going to be the velvety smoothness of classic films from the golden age of Hollywood. I think that is meant literally as well as figuratively. New York is a very colorful place, and Chinatown is certainly colorful, but both the city and the neighborhood are shown in tones of black, white and gray. The graininess of the film adds to the discord that is the plot of the film. It will not be a smooth ride visually, yet, much like a car accident, we don’t want to look away. The graininess also gives a sort of surveillance camera quality to it, almost as if we are watching something we aren’t supposed to—a guy who is obsessed with something, and that something will destroy him.

The use of black and white also helps viewers feel (although in a limited way, we cannot really “know” how a character feels) the single-mindedness that Max has towards finding the pattern he is so sure of. Aranofsky has said filming in color “would have been less expensive” (Wallis). The black and white serves as sort of a visual tunnel—nothing and nobody else matters to Max right now. As anyone who struggles with OCD knows, being obsessed with a problem or issue can take a toll mentally. Max’s headaches are just one more frustration in a situation that seems to be getting worse.

We can’t get inside Max’s brain, but having a brain just sitting in a sink or on the steps of a subway station (as is shown in the film) gives us some insight as to what’s going on. Max is aware he’s pretty gifted, yet his brain doesn’t quite work right—he has terrible migraines and he has to take medicine. I think we all have times where we would like to erase painful memories, or at least rinse off our gray matter with some nice cool water. If you poke certain areas of the brain, you can get some pretty interesting reactions. When Max pokes the brain on the subway steps, he hears a loud train horn. If this brain were attached to a human, the person might kick his leg. Obviously, Max’s migraines are as big an obsession as finding the number to unlock the stock market patterns. Here’s a Far Side cartoon illustrating what happens when you mess with gray matter.

                                                    (Jerem6).

The game Max and Saul play is called Go. It’s been played for thousands of years, and a unique handicapping system allows players of widely different skills to enjoy an evenly balanced game (“What is Go?”)

Incidentally, the Millennium Force Roller Coaster theme music and the opening credit music for Pi sound remarkably alike. Very computer-esque, very techno. Fitting, since Pi was released in 1998 and MF was established in 2000. Listen for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ1sZSCz47w   (Pi trailer)

Here is the theme music for Millennium Force: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG2T_uYDMeM

Pi won the Director’s Award in 1998 at Sundance. However, critics didn’t like it. They didn’t like the way the math was used; they said it wasn’t believable (Wallis).

The film was released by Artisan Entertainment, which is now owned by Lions Gate, which purchased the company in 2003. Artisan is probably best known for the 1999 film, The Blair Witch Project (Bates).

Works Cited

Bates, James. “Lions Gate to Buy Artisan Entertainment.” Latimes.com. Los Angeles Times,

            28 Oct. 2003. Web. 16 June 2015.

Diaz, Gloria. Fireplugs. 2015. Photograph.

Diaz, Gloria. Stop Signs. 2015. Photograph.

Cedar Point Fanpage. “Millennium Force [HD] Theme/Station Music.” YouTube. YouTube,                      1 Jan. 2010. Web. 16 June 2015.

Jerem6. “Gary Larson on Pinterest.” Pinterest.com. Pinterest.com, n.d. Web. 18 June

            2015.

Visavedlatinv “Pi Trailer.” YouTube. YouTube, 30 Jul. 2006. Web. 16 June 2015.

Wallis, Frieder. “Analysis of Pi 1997, written and directed by Darren Aronofsky.”

            Aranofsky.tripod.com. Aranofsky.tripod.com, 23 Apr. 2001. Web. 17 June 2015.

“What is Go?” usgo.org. American Go Association, 2014. Web. 18 June 2015.

How To Make A Tarantino Film!

I found this video and thought everyone might get a kick out of it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRodrZNAZYs

Swingers (1996): Background on Jon Favreau and Doug Liman

   Swingers, a 1996 comedic screenplay, was created by Jonathan Kolia Favreau. Favreau not only wrote the screenplay, but also played the leading role of Mike in the film. Interestingly enough, Swingers was a product of Favreau tinkering around with a gift from his father. He was given screenwriting software which eventually led him to creating the original script. This film was then picked up by director Doug Liman, son of well-known legal strategist Arthur Liman (“The Liman Identity”, n.d.).  Favreau later commented that Swingers made Liman become “Doug Liman, not Arthur Liman’s son” thus helping him establish himself as an individual (“The Liman Identity”, n.d.). Liman later went on to direct films such as Mr. and Mrs. Smith and the Bourne Identity (“The Liman Identity”, n.d.). Choosing Liman as director was a gamble on Favreau’s part because he had other “six figure offers” from celebrities such as Jason Priestley. He ultimately chose Liman because he promised to cast Favreau himself and pal Vince Vaughn as the leads, which ultimately kick-started both of their careers (Jewel, 2015). Swingers was made on a relatively low budget of around $200,000, which helps it fit in to the “Indie” category of going against the higher budget, commerce driven, mainstream films of the time. It was later distributed by Miramax and grossed nearly $1.1 million in art houses and cinema centers (“Jon Favreau”, 2015).

 Favreau is someone who did not necessarily set out to work in film, but film found him. He was born in 1966 in Queens, New York City as the only son of two school teachers. He attended the Bronx High School of Science and then went on to college at Queens College in 1984. Surprisingly, he chose to drop out of college when he was just credits away from receiving a degree. He instead decided to move to Chicago to focus on comedy and perform in improvisational theaters (Biography, IMDb, n.d.). In 1993 while in Chicago, Favreau became acquainted with Vaughn as they both were cast in the film Rudy. Favreau went on to appear as “Eric the Clown” in Seinfeld, which is where he had his big break into the television realm. After more small roles, he decided to write himself and Vaughn in to an original screenplay. He also co-produced the film and cast himself as the “luckless, struggling actor who is emotionally shattered after losing his girlfriend” (Biography, IMDb, n.d.). Vaughn was cast as his opposite, a “cool, worldly, and outgoing buddy” type. According to IMDb, these two specific roles went on to define both Favreau and Vaughn’s later careers in film.

Following Swingers, Favreau returned to a television role starring in Friends as “Monica’s” love interest “Pete Becker” (Biography, IMDb, n.d.). In 1999, he was featured in the Showtime biopic Ricky Marciano. His feature film directorial debut was with the movie Made “a Mafioso comedy” also starring Vaughn again (“Jon Favreau,” 2015). Interestingly enough, Favreau went on to work with Vaughn many additional times in popular movies such as The Break-Up, Four Christmases, and Couples Retreat (Biography, IMDb, n.d.). Favreau’s best known directorial role is likely with Will Ferrell’s popular comedy Elf, which has become a Christmas staple. In addition, he helped both produce and direct 2008’s Iron Man starring Robert Downey Jr. and 2010’s Iron Man 2 (Biography, IMDb, n.d.). These two films earned more than $1 billion combined at box offices worldwide (“Jon Favreau, 2011).

Aside from box office success, Favreau is married and a father to three young children (Biography, IMDb, n.d.). He is quoted as saying, “I thought I would be working on Wall Street my whole life. It was the go-go '80s; there were yellow ties. It was just an exciting moment. And although I wasn't involved in the trading side of things, I was still around that culture, and I ultimately decided it just wasn't for me” (“Jon Favreau”, 2015). That clear decision to walk away from academia truly fits with Favreau’s self-described personality of “being a lazy person by nature, but whom can go from lazy to obsessive if engaged” (“Jon Favreau”, 2015).

In conclusion, Favreau’s career success in acting, directing, writing, and producing were born out of his first original screenplay Swingers. This film currently sits at an 87% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and the “critics consensus” states that this film “made stars out of Vince Vaughn and Jon Favreau, while also establishing Doug Liman as a director to watch (Swingers, 2015).

 Works Cited

"Biography." IMDb. IMDb.com. Web. 14 June 2015.

"Biography: Jon Favreau." Bio.com. A&E Networks Television. Web. 14 June 2015.

Jewel, Dan, and Anna David. "Swing And A Hit." People 46.22 (1996): 115. Academic Search Premier. Web. 15 June 2015

"Jon Favreau." Bio. A&E Television Networks, 2015. Web. 13 June 2015.

"Swingers (1996)." Rotten Tomatoes. Web. 15 June 2015.

"The Liman Identity." NYMag.com. Web. 13 June 2015.

1994, Annus Mirabils of Independent Film

I sensationally claimed that I consider Pulp Fiction the last independent film, which is true in that after Miramax's incredible success, financially and critically, with the film, every studio wanted to get in the indie business--and all did with smaller dependents such as Fox Searchlight, Focus Features, Sony Pictures Classics, Paramount Vantage, etc.
      With less fanfare but more underground interest, though, a New Jersey convenience store clerk made a not-so-boring film about his boring job and in the process became an acclaimed auteur in the former vein of independent directors.
 
In the video above Smith talks to a film hopeful about his inspiration from Richard Linklater's route to film-making with his Slackers.  Smith, in turn, inspired other hopefuls to make their films themselves instead of waiting for some studio man to greenlight them.  One of those hopefuls was our next filmmaker--Jon Favreau, with his first film, Swingers.  Swingers, maybe not so surprisingly, became attached to Harvey Weinstein's Miramax--as was Clerks.
  By the way annus means year in Latin (and mirabilis, wonderful), in case you were wondering.

Quentin Tarantino, Old-Fashioned Provocateur

Anyone who's seen a Tarantino film--or even heard of one--knows he's eager to press the hot buttons of audiences.  Hence, scene with the unfortunate Big Brained Brad and his cohorts, caught between Jules cruel jibes and terror at their imminent fate, or poor Marvin's accidental, comical shooting, and so on.  Scene after scene he intentional mixes emotions that we don't think should be mixed--comedy and terror, satire and violence.  Crushing us in such vices make his scenes hard to forget, even for those who don't find gets caught between the jaws of his dramatic machines.  Consequently, he gets everyone's attention--one of his major goals--but such visceral attention often misses the moralistic world his characters inhabit.
   With all the excitement it's easy to miss Jules' transformation from vicious hitman to St. Francis-like wander actually giving away all he has to two other petty criminals in the hope that they reform their wayward lives (whether they will or not isn't the point, we're focused on Jules).  His soon-to-be ex-partner Vince will face his own moral test in the form of Mia Wallace.  Will he stay true to the trust of his employer, Marcellus, or give in to the obvious attraction Mia and Vince develop over the course of their evening?
    Vince does stay true, and it's also easy to miss that Tarantino's created a perfect cinematic love story which never even comes to an actual kiss (though Vince blows Mia one at the conclusion of their "not-a-date" night).  Nevertheless, Vince pays for his imagined transgression (and perhaps his duller vision, not to mention his drug addiction and murderous profession) when Butch returns to honor his father's (and family's) memory by retrieving the forgotten watch.  Similarly, he returns to save his mortal enemy at the hands of psychotic rapists--ultimately to his benefit since his "debt" to Marcellus is repaid, but that outcome would have been hard to predict as he crept samurai-like down the improvised dungeon steps.
   Despite Tarantino's apparently amoral approach good is rewarded and evil punished with almost Code-like predictability in Pulp Fiction.

Tarantino's Pulp Fiction

Posted for Abbie Bischoff
Before this week, I’d never seen Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction. I was a little confused by people’s reactions when I mentioned what movie I would be presenting over. Watching the film for myself, I know understand a little better why Pulp Fiction is a well discussed movie that has debatably been the end of real independent films. I felt as though I’d been watching a low budget Holly Wood film and the appearance of several well-known and popular actors threw me off. I had trouble distinguishing the aspects of what made this film independent until I watched the second disc that came in the DVD pack, containing bonus material such as a documentary behind the work that went into the movie. I discovered that Tarantino didn’t have a lot of money which surprised me again as I truly felt as if I’d just seen a Holly Wood produced drama or slasher film. However, TriStar Pictures had invested well over five hundred thousand dollars for the project, and Pulp Fiction wasn’t taken around and shown in art houses but appeared in theaters (Seal, 2013).
    Tarantino definitely has a unique style in which he presents his film. I admit that I’m still confused about the plot despite having watched the film three times now. From what I gather, there are several different plots, or characters’ points of view, that add up to create a suspenseful and bloody story in a way that reminds me of the Coen Brothers’ Blood Simple. Perhaps this is part of what ultimately drives Pulp Fiction from the realm of independent movies and into a cult classic.
    Our textbook, Indie: An American Film Culture by Michael Z. Newman, states in the fifth chapter on page 184, Pulp Fiction’s storyline encourages the “rearranging [of] segments to form a coherent linear story…..in an unorthodox, puzzle-like format” (Newman, 184). While the film did not make a favorable impression on me and lost me in the intricate twists and loops of its plot, Pulp Fiction struck a chord in many viewers.
       Tarantino’s film not only brought in a little over two hundred million dollars, but also in an article appearing in Entertainment Weekly, a quote was made referring to Pulp Fiction in that the film had caused a huge change in the culture of mainstream media (Seal, 2013). For an ‘independent’ film, Pulp Fiction stepped outside of its boundaries and crossed that line into mainstream cinema. An interesting result from this is that it appears people either love the film or hate it. On page 211 of our textbook, the author defines cult independent films as “those [films] that inspire intense and exclusive fandoms” (Newman, 211).
       To compare Pulp Fiction’s potential status as a cult film, regardless of its dubious independent status, we should take note of the fans of the film’s response and compare it to those who belong to true mainstream fandoms. Such fandoms could include, and are not limited to, the fandoms of Star Trek and Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and perhaps even the new Avengers series.
    While there are still debates about Pulp Fiction and whether or not it is a cult film, looking at true fans’ reverence for the movie is identical to the reverence shown by classic fandoms for great pop culture films like Star Trek and Star Wars. There is not a doubt in my mind that Pulp Fiction has shattered the realm of independent films with its huge success and made its way into the category of cult classics, and while I still don’t understand people’s fascination with the film, as a person belonging to the Star Trek fandom I can respect the amount of love a person has for films others might not understand or appreciate for its cultural value.


Works Cited
Newman, Z. Michael. “Indie: An American Film Culture.” Columbia University Press. New York 2011.

Seal, Mark. “Cinema Tarantino: The Making of Pulp Fiction.” Vanity Fair, March 2013.

Indie Controversy

Controversy often accompanies independent films.  To a certain extent indie films court controversy in order to be noticed at all.  On the other hand, Hollywood generally shies away from controversy in order to not alienate any potential viewers.  However, in the course of polarized reactions to films such as Lynch's Blue Velvet, Lee's Do The Right Thing, or Tarantino's Pulp Fiction the actual points being made are ignored or misunderstood.
    Obviously, Lynch is no more endorsing Frank's violent obsession any more than Lee is proposing Mookie's actions as a solution to racial strife.  Both are simply exploring human behavior and social problems.  We could say these misunderstandings are partially responsible for conventional Hollywood skittishness about such focus.
   The other aspect that gets lost is simply presenting and exploring an issue does not mirror the director's views in a direct fashion.  Good writers and directors feel compelled to explore all sides of an issue rather than simply present a foregone conclusion (Hollywood's favorite stance when they do wade into such waters).  It's a different (and more aesthetically truthful) notion of what morality is.  Morality is often about the collision of two perceive goods rather than a simple battle of good and evil.  Consequently, we see Sal's desire to "own" his place of business and do as he pleases with his American-Italian Wall of Fame, though we acknowledge Buggin' Out's point about accommodating his  wholly African-American customers.  Both have a right to their views, but are unwilling to listen to or acknowledge the other's rights, which of course is where the problem begins.  Soon it becomes a shouting match and quickly descends into violence.  Sal's is sacrificed, but in the process so is Radio Raheem.  A minor problem quickly becomes deadly, and nothing ultimately is resolved.  Sadly, as our discussion noted, this is still the case as Eric Garner's tragic death in the same city under similar circumstances suggests.
    The critical response that took Lee to task for irresponsibly inciting violence with the film (which never actually occurred) demonstrates he hit a nerve.  However, the critical sermonizing suggests a desire to turn attention away from the problems he exposes to a nonexistent potential problem.  This critical turn mirror the larger society's tendency toward exactly the same response--turning away rather than confronting the matter.  Blaming the victims for their deaths rather than addressing the issues that brought them about in the first place.  Hence, we find ourselves mourning yet another victim.

David Lynch's Blue Velvet

"Now it's dark"

David Lynch was born in Missoula Montana in 1946. Lynch studied art during and after high school. Lynch took a trip to Europe to pursue his study of art. According to Lynch Europe was so clean and beautiful that he found no inspiration there. He returned to Philadelphia where he was more inspired by the grime, graffiti, and violence. In the late 60’s and early 70’s Lynch started making short films that combined live action and animation. His first feature film, shot in black and white, was Eraserhead, which premiered in 1977. Eraserhead is a dark, eerie, and somewhat disturbing film.  This film starred Jack Nance, who starred in nearly all of Lynch’s films until his death in 1996. Eraserhead got Lynch enough attention to be considered for his next film The Elephant Man which premiered in 1980. Lynch’s next film was Dune, an expensive disaster at the box office as well as with critics. Lynch’s fourth feature film was Blue Velvet. After Blue Velvet Lynch then created the feature Wild at Heart as well as the critically acclaimed television show Twin Peaks from around 1990 to 1992. Following Twin Peaks were Lost Highway in 1997 and Mulholland Drive in 1999. Lynch’s last feature film to date is Inland Empire in 2006. Showtime has recently picked up a continuation of the Twin Peaks series with Lynch at the helm.

            Blue Velvet stars Kyle MacLachlan, Issabella Rossellini, Laura Dern, and Dennis Hopper. Kyle MacLachlan worked previously with Lynch in Dune and will be one of the primary characters later in the television show Twin Peaks. Blue Velvet is a distinctly small town American film. The movie opens with hyper surreal images of an idealized small town America with rose and tulip lined white picket fences, tree lined neighborhoods, a crossing guard helping school kids cross the street, a fire truck with a waving fireman, complete with a Dalmatian, a suburban home with a man watering the lawn while his wife watches television. It doesn’t take us long to see what we’re in for as the man watering the lawn has a stroke or heart attack and the camera zooms down into the sod of the yard and we see a bunch of insects crawling all over one another, as the music changes from Bobby Vinton’s Blue Velvet to loud abrasive “music.”

            This movie explores a lot of dualism. The first we see of that is the idealized small town America and the hint that we are soon going to witness the more dark and disturbing underbelly of the same small town. There is a dualistic nature to Kyle MacLachlan’s character, Jeffrey, as well. Jeffrey is young and innocent, yet at the same time has a strong curiosity that pulls to the darker side of things as well as voyeuristic tendencies. There are the clear oppositions of good and evil taking place with the characters Jeffrey, Sandy, Sandy’s father the detective, and Dorothy in opposition to Frank Booth and his gang of friends and followers. We also see the dualistic aspects of overly bright saturated colors with bleak darkness throughout the film. There’s the opposing nature of the women in the film. Dorothy with her dark hair symbolizes danger and sexuality to Jeffrey, who generally only interacts with her at night. Sandy has blonde hair and symbolizes innocence and hope for Jeffrey, and he generally interacts with her during the day.

            Blue Velvet is also a love story. The strongest and most obvious is Frank’s love for Dorothy, disturbing and unhealthy as it is. There is also a developing love between Jeffrey and Sandy. Also Jeffery may feel as though he loves Dorothy initially. It ends up just being sexual excitement and the need to try to help her.

            Blue Velvet has enjoyed some critical success. As of this writing Rotten Tomatoes has it at 93% based on 60 reviews. Lynch was nomitated for a best director Oscar, Isabella Rossellini won an Independent Spirit Award for the Best Female Lead, and Dennis Hopper won an award for the best supporting actor from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association. Roger Ebert is one of the strongest critics opposed to Blue Velvet. His primary problem is that of the strong sexual despair and violence. Ebert sees it as being gratuitous and serving no purpose.

Indie Controversy

Indie films sometimes garner attention because of their controversial presentation and perspective on sexuality--and are able to explore such territory because they are independent of mainstream squeamishness over such territory.  Blue Velvet was no exception.  In the case of Blue Velvet, the various groups and individuals condemning the film for its perspective mistakenly assumed Lynch somehow endorsed Frank Booth's violence against women.  Lynch caught heat for his supposedly being amoral or even immoral simply because one of his characters is. It seems more likely Lynch's position is more closely aligned with Jeffery's than Frank's.  He's curious, but also appalled.
     We'll find similar controversy with the films of Quentin Tarantino, who clearly follows Lynch's lead in exploring contested cinematic territory and drawing from some of Lynch's more striking images (the torture scene and lopped ear in Reservoir Dogs for example).
    The public outcry and response shows, if nothing else, how successfully both director/writers strike chords in their audiences.  One of their main strategies in doing so is catching us between discordant emotions.  In the scene above audiences find themselves alternating between titillation (at the voyeuristic situation of Jeffery in the closet) and menace (when the tables are turned) and violence when Frank enacts his ritualistic violation.  Another notable element (usually ignored in the rush to condemnation) is the exploration of the origins of male violence against women.  In Frank's case, we see how it comes from his fears and insecurity about women, especially maternal figures.  Seeing and being seen (and controlling who and what is seen and being seen) is a large part of this control--hence Frank's insistent orders for every not to look at him, something we also hear from Dorothy when she discovers Jeffery spying on her from the closet.  Most importantly, Lynch doesn't excuse Frank, he simply observes ("sees" him). 

Blue Velvet - David Lynch

Like many of the independent film makers we have learned about thus far, David Lynch pushes the boundaries on what is understood as a great film. He created new ideas in how to lead the viewer into emotions. Most notably, Lynch excels at presenting conflicting subject matter that reflect the duality in the human experience. Lynch is able to coerce emotions from the viewer by guiding them through familiar conflictions that become increasing as each scene passes. Lynch's style in film making can easily be seen in the opening shot of Blue Velvet. The shot falls down to red roses in front of a white picket fence. The beauty and natural grace of the roses are juxtaposed by the man made geometrical, sterile object. David Lynch is a creator that understand the beauty of struggle, and knows how to draw his audiences attention.

Stranger Than Paradise

Stranger Than Paradise was a film produced by James Roberto Jarmusch or Jim as most people called him. Jim was born on January 22, 1953 in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio. Jim was born to immigrant parents. His mom worked as a reviewer of film and theatre for the Akron Beacon Journal before marrying his father. Jim’s father was a businessman that worked for the B.F Goodrich Company. At a very young age Jim was introduced to films by his mother, Jim’s mom would drop him off at the local cinema while she ran errands. Jim stated that the first adult film he recalls having seen was the 1958 cult classic Thunder Road and that the violence and darkness left a very deep impression on him at seven years old. Another influence from his childhood was Ghoulardi, an eccentric Cleveland television show that featured horror films. After Graduating high school Jim moved to Chicago and enrolled in the Medill School of Journalism but Jim was kicked out for refusing to take any Journalism related classes. After this occurrence Jim transferred to Columbia University for the following year and wanted to become a poet. During his time at Columbia University Jim began to write short semi-narrative abstract pieces, and edited the undergraduate literary journal. Jarmusch's final year university project was completed in 1980 as Permanent Vacation, his first feature film. It had its premiere at the International Film festival Mannheim-Heidelberg and won the Josef von Sternberg Award. It was made on a very stringent budget of around $12,000 in misdirected scholarship funds and shot by cinematographer Tom DiCillo on 16 mm film. This film received positive reviews from critics and was the beginning of Jim’s career as a director. 

Indie Film Categories

It's the Same Old Song

We didn't bring up the prominently featured Four Tops hit (once put on by Meurice and then returns over the credits).  The first verse seems to refer to Abby's sweet demeanor but steely determination in resolving Marty's torture (even if it isn't Marty).

You're sweet (you're sweet) as a honeybee 
But like a honeybee stings 
You've gone and left my heart in pain 
All you left (all you left) is our favorite song 

The other significant verse is the chorus:

Now it's the same old song

But with a different meaning since you been gone

It's the same, same old song

But with a different meaning (Since you been gone)

This works as a wry nod to the revamped genre and love triangle plot that comprises the film.  They're reprising the "same old song" but with a difference in their stylish and knowing presentation.

Blood Simple

Blood Simple is something of an oddity since it does follow the usual independent film route of the personal (auteur) statement film, instead opting for a retro genre film, now known as neo-noir.  As it turns out, their ambitions weren't to remain entirely independent filmmakers, but to carve out a niche for themselves within the current Hollywood system.

 The Coens are both college educated, Joel at NYU studying film, Ethan at Princeton, studying philosophy. On that basis I think the initial impression of the Coens brothers were that they were NYC wisenheimers into making wry nods at their audience with cinematic references. Which isn't entirely untrue, but isn't entirely accurate either.

  As it turns out, they grew up in a suburb of Minneapolis, making super 8 versions of and worked with Sam Raimi making Evil Dead, which offers a somewhat different impression.

   Of course, they were aiming to make their own movie, but in movie business there's a classic catch 22: you can't get in without making a movie, but no one is going to give you millions of dollars to make a movie if you haven't already made a movie. The obvious solution is to make a movie, but it's hard to do without money, especially in the old days when you actually had to use film.

   Their solution was to raise money with short three trailer of the film you're planning to make (scripted storyboarded, etc.)--essentially start filming, hoping that they'd be able to finish the rest. This is exactly what the Coen Bros. did, renting the camera equipment over a long weekend (President's Day), meaning you could have it for about 5 days but only pay for one day.

   They shot the significant bits of the film: gun being loaded, man being buried alive, gunshots fired through a wall and light streaming through bullet holes and showed the trailer around to social groups in the hopes of persuading people to give them money to fund it with the hope they'll be able to make their money back with a sufficient profit.

   On that basis, they more or less raised a million dollars, got some of the principles to defer fees, which means they could make the film for about mil and half--a fairly exorbitant compared to some later independent films such as El Mariachi, Clerks, or In the Company of Men.

    Although there are a number of idiosyncratic filmmakers out there, few get to have their visions released intact by major studios. However, 20th Century Fox (under studio president Joe Roth) released Raising Arizona, Miller's Crossing, and Barton Fink, in an arrangement with the Washington, D.C., company Circle Films. Circle has financed all of the Coens' pictures ever since releasing their independently made first feature, Blood Simple.

   The film had a mixed reception after its debut in the Cooper Theater and various film festivals around the country. J. Hoberman in the Village Voice said the film had the “heart of a bloomingdale's window and the soul of a resume,” while Pauline Kael quipped that the film “comes off as self-mocking, but there's no self to mock. Nobody committed to anything, and nothing to be lost but a mil and a half.” Others were more complimentary. David Denby called it “one of the most brazenly self-assured directorial debuts in American film history,” and Fangoria, found it “an art film, a comic tragedy, a splatter film, a murder story that honors Hitchcok without insulting his memory.”

Under the Influence of Opera

I wanted to mention this quotation by film scholar Ray Carney on Cassavetes' approach to film:

The secret of Cassavetes' method is to deny viewers every form of intellectual distance and control. The experiences he presents can't be held intellectually at arm's length. They won't be simplified by being translated into received ideas or push-button emotions. They resist being formulated. They must be challengingly negotiated moment by moment the way we live and feel things in real life. In all of their unresolved sprawl and mutability, the experiences in his films are the opposite of the canned, pre-programmed summaries of experience most other movies provide....

It's a good formulation of the different position Cassavetes' films put viewers in--and why they resist typical ways of watching and reacting to his work.

In our discussion someone compared the film to theater, which is apt, and not only because the script was initially aimed at a stage performance.  The minimal editing and long shots which characterize the cinematography in the film brings out this theatrical approach.  As Cassavetes put it, he simply lit the scene and let the actors do the scenes.  We watch as if they are performing on stage rather than cutting constantly to a specific reaction, as is the more conventional practice.  Such minimal editing is another reason why the already long scenes feel even longer.  We're expecting much more cutting from character to character.

  To take it further, I'd extend the analogy into musical theater, in this case the original musical theater, opera, which Cassavetes himself encourages in the film by including several arias from operas (La Boheme, Aida, etc.).  The reference emphasizes what we might call the operatic way that Mabel approaches her life (and connects with Carney's characterization above). 

American Film Independent--John Cassavetes

   John Cassavetes directed A Woman Under the Influence  in 1973.  He was born in New York on December 9th in 1929, the son of Greek immigrants. He went to school at the New York Academy of Dramatic Arts and graduated in 1953. After completing school and having a tough time trying to find work on Broadway he went on starting in roles on television and then into some films. “Cassavetes still refers to himself as a “professional” actor and an “amateur” director, as most of his films have been financed by his acting career.” (Jacobs) He acted films such as Rosemary’s Baby and The Fury.(Erickson) In the case of this movie he actually had to mortgage his house. Luckily it paid off years later. (Jacobs)
  Having read a review by Roger Ebert on “A Woman Under The Influence” Ebert felt that Cassavetes was the most important of the American Indi filmmakers. (Ebert) He also noted that John Cassavetes was one of just a few directors whose movies you could identify by the by the dialogue, shots, scenes and characters within it. He noted Hitchcok as an example. Ebert felt that this film was the greatest of all of his films. (Ebert)
  The movie actually has his wife, Gena Rowlands, playing the wife Mabel in the movie along with both his and Gena’s mothers playing roles as the mothers in the film. Playing the husband, Nick Longhetti, is his friend Peter Falk. The movie is about a somewhat dysfunctional family where the wife really wants to please her husband but is constantly trying to hold it all together. It is about a mother who loves her children dearly but is also thinking most everything is a crisis. “There is no safe resolution at the end of a Cassavetes film. The characters seek to give love, receive it, express it, and comprehend it” (Ebert)
  In 1959 his first film, Shadows, was a low budget film shot in 16mm which was unscripted and not necessarily Hollywood material. In 1960 at the Venice Film Festival Shadows won the Critics Award and stirred interest. Following the success of Shadows Paramount contracted Cassavetes but the partnership did not last long. Prior to A Woman Under the Influence he directed a few more movies about marriages with Faces(1969) and Minnie and Moskowitz (1971). Many of his movies dealt with the struggles of marriage, understanding the opposite sex, and of course troubles with alcohol, sex, drugs, and self-doubt.
  In conclusion Cassavettes  likes to do movies about the actors and their lives. He was considered the most amateur of amateurs visually in the way he put the movies together with thing like a shaky picture. His movies did not necessarily revolve around a plot but more focused on the characters in it and their struggles.

Easy Rider

Dennis Hopper claimed that Easy Rider was the first film to be made independently and distributed by a major studio. The statement is true as far as it goes, but ignores the fact that the group (Bert Schneider and Bob Rafaelson) financing the film was already working with studios (creating the Monkees for TV). Further, Fonda came from Hollywood royalty (his father Henry Fonda of course, sister of already successful Jane), and Hopper had been toiling away (albeit grudingly) since he appeared in Rebel Without a Cause.

The film did address contemporary subjects and issues in a way most American films at the time didn't, though it used a familiar Hollywood form, the road movie to do so, and that Roger Corman's American International Pictures had been successfully making for years (and which both Fonda and Hopper had appeared in). In other words, the independence wasn't more in financing—a unexpected boon to the films producers, namely Rafaelson, Schneider, Fonda and Hopper.

Audience "Panels"

A separate (and much easier) assignment is to ensure our panel gets some thoughtful questions from the audience and spark discussion. Everyone will sign up to ask questions for each film. Your duties here are basically to find out something about the film beforehand (read some reviews, look for background info) and form some questions.

Obviously, you will sign up for a film other than the one you'll be presenting on.
Post your questions as comments to the presentation/posts on the blog (and of course ask them during the class).

Film Panel Description

Everyone will be choosing a film panel to participate on. It involves choosing an element of the three or four basic areas of a film or the director’s work: biography (their lives), filmography (their films), production, distribution of the film, critical reception (reviews) or something related to the food in the film.

Info for films is available either through books (highest points--ACPL has a strong film collection), magazine articles (equally high points--see Ebsco search) or Internet (this will likely be less useful for many of the films—fewer points). For contemporary reviews see rottentomatoes.com site; for information about the production (how it was made) and distribution (how it came to the public), see books, film magazines, and newspaper articles (high points).
These aspects are not the only possible topics for a paper. You may have other questions you want to pursue about particular actors, other food-related items. Don’t hesitate to do so. Coordinate the various sections with the various presenters.

Basically, you're trying to find points of interest to start us thinking about the film and to intrigue us.

Post your presentation to the blog BEFORE you present it to the class, especially any visuals (which can then be shown during your presentation. Be sure to tailor your posting to this format. In other words, you won't just plunk a chunk of text here, but some manageable portion with some links for further information and pertinent visuals.

Posting to the Blog

Posting on the blog may seem intimidating if you haven't done it before, but the following link should help.  Be sure you've signed into the blog first (see sign in in upper right corner).  Otherwise you won't be able to author posts.
  Be sure to sign in via the Sign in in the upper righthand corner before posting or commenting.
     The key for most will be to make sure to choose the "Compose" tab when Posting rather than getting into the Html editing  (located under the other tab), which requires more knowledge and trouble.

Also, don't be afraid to ask questions if you run into problems.

Welcome to Indie Film, Summer 2015

Indie Films at Cinema Center (Corner of Clay and Berry in Fort Wayne), May 19-June 23.  Films are free and open to the public, as are the discussions afterward.  The film is introduced at 7, and the films begin at 7:30pm.  The discussion is after the film.

We'll cover early independent film makers such as Peter Fonda and John Cassavetes to those of what might be called the golden age of independent filmmaking in the late 80s and 90s (Coens, Jarmusch, Lynch, etc.) to an intriguing recent reappearance in Linklater's Boyhood (2014)

  The focus is historical, so we look at early and “golden age” (80s and 90s) independent directors and producers, and cultural, considering “indie” as a set of assumptions about film content, characters, plot structure, etc.

Film Schedule

1. May 19 Hopper, Easy Rider (1967) (Newman, Introduction and Chapter 1)
          21 Cassavetes, Woman Under the Influence (1973)  (Newman, Chapter 2 and 3)

    2.           26 Coens, Blood Simple (1981) (Newman, Chapter 4)

                    28 Jarmusch, Stranger Than Paradise (1983) (Newman, Chapter 5)

    3. June 2 Lynch, Blue Velvet (1986) (Newman, Chapter 6)
                   4   Midterm (at IPFW, SB 184)

    4.         9  Lee, Do the Right Thing (1989)

                11 Tarantino, Pulp Fiction (1994)

   5.         16 Favreau, Swingers (1996)

                   18 Aronofsky, Pi (1998)  

    6.     23 Linklater, Boyhood (2014)