Attention: This film response is an optional one. If you do this response, the file name should be "LastName.FirstName.OFR.Magnolia.S20"----if you have any Film Response grades that are "Falls Short," this is a chance to raise one of them. However, this Optional Response cannot replace an "Incomplete" grade. Also, please read the instructions for film responses again, very carefully, so that you can be sure to meet all requirements.
For this response I would like you to do the same kind of exercise you did for 12 Years a Slave. Usually, I come up with an idea for you to think about and respond to. I start by identifying an idea from the film that interests me and then follow a train of thought that leads to your discussion prompt. This time, I would like you to try to create a prompt as if you were the teacher and I were the student.
You'll still write two equal-length paragraphs, for a total of between 300 and 400 words:
First paragraph: Start by identifying ONE clip of particular significance to you. Describe this clip (focusing on the film work that MAKES it meaningful to you) and explain how it opens up an interesting and reasonable view of the film.
Second paragraph: Extending from the first paragraph, identify a debatable question or two that emerge from that moment in the film. First, lead up to those questions by explaining the ambiguity or debatable nature of the idea you discussed in the first paragraph. Second, ask your questions. Third, explain how those questions cut to the heart of the film and are worthy of discussion.
Challenge yourself to start a discussion of the film on your own terms.
Magnolia Discussion
Today, with this film, we continue our journey into some essential questions raised in our experience of art: "what is the nature of humanity?" and "what is the potential of humanity?" Who are we, and what makes us who we are? Is there a moral imperative that directs our path, or do we construct a morality that suits our intentions? Is there such a thing as evil? Is there such a thing as good? Do we choose between them, or do we simply fall into categories that conveniently describe our behavior?
As you work your way through this film, think carefully about the variety of human flaws these characters have. P.T. Anderson is very interested in exploring human responsibility, but he is also interested in the nature of weakness and the need for help. Do you find yourself judging or sympathizing? Is it possible for you to forgive or can you only condemn? Are all flaws created equal? Try to frame your question and debatable statements with P.T. Anderson in mind. Magnolia is a film unlike most you have probably scene, so you will need to work hard to size up these characters.
Here are some questions and ideas of my own:
As you work your way through this film, think carefully about the variety of human flaws these characters have. P.T. Anderson is very interested in exploring human responsibility, but he is also interested in the nature of weakness and the need for help. Do you find yourself judging or sympathizing? Is it possible for you to forgive or can you only condemn? Are all flaws created equal? Try to frame your question and debatable statements with P.T. Anderson in mind. Magnolia is a film unlike most you have probably scene, so you will need to work hard to size up these characters.
Here are some questions and ideas of my own:
- How do you make sense of the fragmented narrative? What effect does the dilated cross-cutting have on your viewing experience?
- Given its epic proportions, what is the effect of the film's personal focus on the characters? Is the film personal?
- Can we say what this film is about? Does it expand beyond the boundaries of a unified theme? What might that unified theme be?
- Judgment? Forgiveness? What's the difference?
- P.T. Anderson has said this film is his favorite of the ones he's made, but he also regrets making the final cut so long. How do you reconcile these contradictory points of view?
- My thesis: Magnolia is a film about forgiveness, the difficulty we face in forgiving, the necessity of forgiveness, etc. My reason for thinking this way is that the characters who wield justice in the film, without the opposing urge to forgive (be merciful), fall into a vortex of pain and suffering. Anderson seems to be challenging us to consider what we can forgive. I take this to mean not what crimes and misdeeds deserve forgiveness but how far WE can let ourselves go to forgive what we might call the "unforgivable." To the extent that the film is about forgiveness, it is also about love, for love, properly understood, is synonymous with forgiveness. That is, the opposite of love is condemnation (of the person, not the deed). "Tough part of the job. Tough part of walking down the street." Even Jim can see that life, like his job, is no easy task. It is, however, governed by a simple idea: love. Everything else is sickness and death.
- My other thesis: P.T. Anderson is the man. That is all.
12 Years a Slave
Attention: You should read the instructions for film responses again. For a "quality effort" grade, be sure to focus on the film work in ONE moment from the film per paragraph. Your file name should be "LastName.FirstName.FR7.S20"
For this response I would like you to do the same kind of exercise you did for The Thin Red Line. Usually, I come up with an idea for you to think about and respond to. I start by identifying an idea from the film that interests me and then follow a train of thought that led to your discussion prompt. This time, I would like you to try to create a prompt as if you were the teacher and I were the student.
You'll still write two equal-length paragraphs, for a total of between 300 and 400 words:
First paragraph: Start by identifying ONE clip of particular significance to you. Describe this clip (focusing on the film work that MAKES it meaningful to you) and explain how it opens up an interesting and reasonable view of the film.
Second paragraph: Extending from the first paragraph, identify a debatable question or two that emerge from that moment in the film. First, lead up to those questions by explaining the ambiguity or debatable nature of the idea you discussed in the first paragraph. Second, ask your questions. Third, explain how those questions cut to the heart of the film and are worthy of discussion.
Challenge yourself to start a discussion of the film on your own terms.
For this response I would like you to do the same kind of exercise you did for The Thin Red Line. Usually, I come up with an idea for you to think about and respond to. I start by identifying an idea from the film that interests me and then follow a train of thought that led to your discussion prompt. This time, I would like you to try to create a prompt as if you were the teacher and I were the student.
You'll still write two equal-length paragraphs, for a total of between 300 and 400 words:
First paragraph: Start by identifying ONE clip of particular significance to you. Describe this clip (focusing on the film work that MAKES it meaningful to you) and explain how it opens up an interesting and reasonable view of the film.
Second paragraph: Extending from the first paragraph, identify a debatable question or two that emerge from that moment in the film. First, lead up to those questions by explaining the ambiguity or debatable nature of the idea you discussed in the first paragraph. Second, ask your questions. Third, explain how those questions cut to the heart of the film and are worthy of discussion.
Challenge yourself to start a discussion of the film on your own terms.
12 Years a Slave Discussion
"There's nothing to forgive."
Today, with this film, we continue our journey into some essential questions raised in our experience of art: "what is the nature of humanity?" and "what is the potential of humanity?" Who are we, and what makes us who we are? Is there a moral imperative that directs our path, or do we construct a morality that suits our intentions? Is there such a thing as evil? Is there such a thing as good? Do we choose between them, or do we simply fall into categories that conveniently describe our behavior?
As you work your way through this film, think carefully about the ethical purpose that drove McQueen to make this film. You've already seen a film by Steve McQueen--Hunger--so you know he is very invested in social issues that many of us would rather ignore or pretend do not still matter. Try to frame your question and debatable statements with Steve McQueen in mind. He is such a daring filmmaker, not just in the way he shoots and edits his material, but in the types of stories he is willing to tell.
Some questions for us to consider:
- What is the narrative frame? Even without voice-over, does this film have a narrator?
- Why do you think McQueen decided NOT to use voice-over in this film? Unlike The Thin Red Line, the interludes in this film are typically silent instead of filled with commentary from one character or another.
- What is the shape of the plot?
- If you've watched to the end, you might say that this film is redemptive. On what basis could we say it is (or is not)?
- Is the content of this film more overwhelming than McQueen's Hunger, or any of the other films we watched that feature traumatic experiences?
- This film does not shy away from racist language--should we tolerate/accept/embrace the artistic use of such language given the story that this film attempts to tell?
- Should this brutal story, being based on a true one, be presented as film for our consumption?
- Does this film present a realistic view of slave conditions and treatment in the South?
- Does this film present a universal view of slave conditions and treatment in the South?
- Does this film (as a work of art) make an argument against slavery? If so, then why? I mean, is it not generally accepted now that slavery is evil and has justifiably been abolished as a sanctioned economic model?
- Is slavery a national evil?
Your questions and statements should encourage the exchange of ideas between you and your peers. You may ask additional questions about your concerns and confusions, but for the main content of your posting, try to think hard about ideas that relate to the heart of the film, how it's made, and what it achieves as a story. Including clip descriptions that your questions and statements relate to can help your classmates understand your meaning.
The Thin Red Line
Attention: This film response is an optional one. If you do this response, the file name should be "LastName.FirstName.OFR.ThinRedLine.S20"----if you have any Film Response grades that are "Falls Short," this is a chance to raise one of them. However, this Optional Response cannot replace an "Incomplete" grade. Also, please read the instructions for film responses again, very carefully, so that you can be sure to meet all requirements.
For this response I would like you to do the same kind of exercise you did for Birdman. Usually, I come up with an idea for you to think about and respond to. I start by identifying an idea from the film that interests me and then follow a train of thought that leads to your discussion prompt. This time, I would like you to try to create a prompt as if you were the teacher and I were the student.
You'll still write two equal-length paragraphs, for a total of between 300 and 400 words:
First paragraph: Start by identifying ONE clip of particular significance to you. Describe this clip (focusing on the film work that MAKES it meaningful to you) and explain how it opens up an interesting and reasonable view of the film.
Second paragraph: Extending from the first paragraph, identify a debatable question or two that emerge from that moment in the film. First, lead up to those questions by explaining the ambiguity or debatable nature of the idea you discussed in the first paragraph. Second, ask your questions. Third, explain how those questions cut to the heart of the film and are worthy of discussion.
Challenge yourself to start a discussion of the film on your own terms.
For this response I would like you to do the same kind of exercise you did for Birdman. Usually, I come up with an idea for you to think about and respond to. I start by identifying an idea from the film that interests me and then follow a train of thought that leads to your discussion prompt. This time, I would like you to try to create a prompt as if you were the teacher and I were the student.
You'll still write two equal-length paragraphs, for a total of between 300 and 400 words:
First paragraph: Start by identifying ONE clip of particular significance to you. Describe this clip (focusing on the film work that MAKES it meaningful to you) and explain how it opens up an interesting and reasonable view of the film.
Second paragraph: Extending from the first paragraph, identify a debatable question or two that emerge from that moment in the film. First, lead up to those questions by explaining the ambiguity or debatable nature of the idea you discussed in the first paragraph. Second, ask your questions. Third, explain how those questions cut to the heart of the film and are worthy of discussion.
Challenge yourself to start a discussion of the film on your own terms.
The Thin Red Line Discussion
"O my soul, let me be in you now. Look out through my eyes. Look out at the things you made. All things shining."
Today, with this film, we continue our journey into some essential questions raised in our experience of art: "what is the nature of humanity?" and "what is the potential of humanity?" Who are we, and what makes us who we are? Is there a moral imperative that directs our path, or do we construct a morality that suits our intentions? Is there such a thing as evil? Is there such a thing as good? Do we choose between them, or do we simply fall into categories that conveniently describe our behavior?
As you work your way through this film, think carefully about how Terence Malick chose to film and narrate this story. Try to frame your question and debatable statements with Terence Malick in mind. He has such a unique approach to telling a war story that we need to acknowledge who this film stands out from what we would normally expect a war film to be.
Here are some questions for us to consider:
- Does this film have a narrator? If so, who is telling the story? Does the teller use words to tell the story? What is the narrative frame?
- Who is Train? Why are most of the voice-overs his words?
- How would you describe the "direction" of events in the story? What does this plot arrangement tell us about the film?
- Sacrifice seems to be a motif in this film. What are some examples of sacrifice in the film? Does this emphasis on sacrifice make the film about redemption?
- Would you say that this film has a protagonist? An antagonist? If so, who? If not, why not?
In your discussion posting, please share ONE thought-provoking question and TWO thought-provoking, debatable statements about The Thin Red Line to the "Debatable Statements" forum in D2L. Please see the calendar and the discussion forum description for additional information.
Your questions and statements should encourage the exchange of ideas between you and your peers. You may ask additional questions about your concerns and confusions, but for the main content of your posting, try to think hard about ideas that relate to the heart of the film, how it's made, and what it achieves as a story. Including clip descriptions that your questions and statements relate to can help your classmates understand your meaning.
The voices of Train:
VO - 1:57 - 2:30
“Whatʼs this war in the heart of nature? Why does nature vie with itself? The land contend with the sea? Is there an avenging power in nature? Not one power, but two?”
DS - 20:18 - 21:19
“I just canʼt help how damn scared I am, Sarge, all right? I canʼt help it. I got—You know, my stepdaddy took a block and beat me when I was real little. And I—I was scared. And I used to run. I used to hide. Hell, I slept in a chicken coop a whole lot of nights. And, uh—I never thought itʼd get no worse than that. But Iʼm living by the—by the minute over here. Iʼm counting the seconds. And weʼre gonna be landing—Weʼre gonna be landing soon. Thereʼs gonna be air raids. Weʼre probably gonna die before we get off the beach. This place is—Itʼs like a big floating graveyard.”
“Whatʼs your name, kid?”
“I want to own an automobile when I get out.”
“Whatʼs your name?”
“Edward — Edward B. Train”
“Train.”
“The only things that are permanent is—is dying and the Lord. Thatʼs it. Thatʼs all you got to worry about. This war ainʼt—This war ainʼt gonna be the end of me. And it ainʼt gonna be the end of you neither.”
VO - 31:02 - 32:55
“Who are you who live in all these many forms? Your death that captures all. You too are the source of all thatʼs gonna be born. Your glory, mercy, peace, truth. You give calm a spirit, understanding, courage. The contented heart.”
VO - 1:50:42 - 1:52:31
“This great evil. Where does it come from? How did it steal into the world? What seed, what root did it grow from? Whoʼs doing this? Whoʼs killing us, robbing us of life and light, mocking us with the sight of what we might have known? Does our ruin benefit the earth? Does it help the grass to grow, the sun to shine? Is this darkness in you too? Have you passed through this night?”
VO - 2:02:57 - 2:03:17
“Hours like months. Days like years. Walked into the golden age, stood on the shores of a new world.”
VO - 2:06:06 - 2:06:36
“Canʼt nothing make you forget it. Each time you start from scratch. War donʼt ennoble men. It turns ʼem into dogs. Poisons the soul.”
VO - 2:17:02 - 2:18:10
“We were a family. Howʼd it break up and come apart, so that now weʼre turned against each other, each standing in the otherʼs light? How did we lose the good that was given us, let it slip away, scatter it, careless? Whatʼs keeping us from reaching out, touching the glory?”
VO - 2:23:22 - 2:24:04
“One man looks at a dying bird and thinks thereʼs nothing but unanswered pain. But deathʼs got the final word. Itʼs laughing at him. Another man sees that same bird, feels the glory, feels something smiling through it.”
DS - 2:40:23 - 2:41:11
“Somethinʼ I can come back to. Some kind of foundation. I mean, I donʼt know what, you know—what your plans are, but Iʼm determined now. Iʼve been through the thick and thin of it. You know, I may be young, but Iʼve lived plenty of life. Iʼm ready to start living it good. You know, my daddy always told me itʼs gonna get a whole lot worse before it gets better. You know, ʼcause life ainʼt supposed to be that hard when youʼre young. Well, I—I figure after this, the worst is gonna be gone though. Itʼs time for things to get better. Thatʼs what I want. Thatʼs whatʼs gonna happen. Iʼm getting older now. By no means old, but older.”
VO - 2:41:11 - 2:43:05
“Where is it that we were together? Who were you that I lived with, walked with? The brother. The friend. Darkness and light. Strife and love. Are they the workings of one mind, the features of the same face? O my soul, let me be in you now. Look out through my eyes. Look out at the things you made. All things shining.”
4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days
Attention: You should read the instructions for film responses again. For a "quality effort" grade, be sure to focus on the film work in ONE moment from the film per paragraph. Your document name should be "LastName.FirstName.FR6.S20"
This Romanian film offers a rich opportunity for cultural study—set in 1987 (twenty years earlier than its release date), it shows us a country that is economically and socially opposite to the opulence of America at the time. But the director, Cristian Mungiu, manages to give this movie a more personal than cultural significance. The highly emotional content of the film, enhanced by the slooooowwww shooting style (hardly any cuts), creates an uncomfortable level of intimacy with the characters.
This Romanian film offers a rich opportunity for cultural study—set in 1987 (twenty years earlier than its release date), it shows us a country that is economically and socially opposite to the opulence of America at the time. But the director, Cristian Mungiu, manages to give this movie a more personal than cultural significance. The highly emotional content of the film, enhanced by the slooooowwww shooting style (hardly any cuts), creates an uncomfortable level of intimacy with the characters.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)