Wrap Up

I had a lot of fun doing this blog. I am wrapping it up now since it is the end of my semester. I have learned a lot by doing this and it has helped a lot with my studies also. As a Mass Communication major this blog allowed me to look in-depth into film and improve my critical thinking and writing skills. As most of the films i have reviewed were older one the whole time i thought what current film be represents these topics and the one that hit a lot of the topics is Crash. If you have not seen this movie it is definitely a must see as it hits on a lot of cultural issues. Some of the main topics are immigration, racism, the American dream, gender issues, class issues, and marriage issues. I do now know on movie which covers such extensive issues so well. I haven't seen it in some time so i cannot give a detailed review.
Thanks for reading. i hope you have enjoyed this as much as i have.

I Am Sam (2001)

I Am Sam, a film about a mentally handicapped father trying to win custody of his daughter from the court. It is a great film starting at the artistic and cinematographic level. The angles the director uses are very usual but work well with this film. The cinematography is mostly hand-held cameras. Although the camera work is very shaky but it is not distracting, but it almost seems natural as it mirrors a sense of what it would be like to be Sam. The camera also reflects Sam’s emotions. When Sam becomes agitated so does the camera. The editing is very jumpy and includes many jump shots. The lighting is also thought of to be from Sam’s point of view. In the courtroom everything is lit under a blue light so the scene is flooded in an unnatural way as that what the viewers expect Sam’s perception to be very different from their own.

When comparing this film to Murderball, they both are quite different. Murderball, is a film about people with physical disabilities while I Am Sam features the mental disabled. I feel these two films present the dichotomy of the disabled, people who were born with the disability and those who occurred the disability later on in life. In Murderball we saw how hard it was for these people to overcome their differences in the present time since they were not always disabled. I Am Sam features a variety of characters that were born with mental disabilities. What I think is most important is that both of these groups are shown to be fully capable. These two films create a new genre or subject that is rarely seen in films, but one that is heart touching. I think it is safe to assume that most Americans know of at least 1 person in their family or maybe as friends who suffers from a disability. But why are these not shown much in American film? One of the guys from Murderball said he was living the American Dream. It is one that is quite different than one that is shown in popular film, but to him his life is the American Dream.

I Am Sam is on an underlying look, about parenting and what it takes to be a good parent. Sam is contrasted with Michelle Pfeiffer’s character, Rita. Both of whom are parents. Through the visuals and the scenes the viewer see Sam as a better loving father to his daughter than Rita is a mother to her son. Rita’s role is a very stereotypical one, she is a hard working mother who has to give up something to be so successful, and that is her family. She looses touch with her son, and we soon find out her husband is cheating on her. The contrast of these two is quite remarkable We actually see the Sam is fully capable of being a loving parents despite his disability because so many parents out there who are not disabled fail to meet the needs of their children.

Soul Food (1997)

My first reaction to the film is that it did not fit the stereotypical form that is seen in most films based on African American families. The film can be appreciated by anyone. I feel everyone no matter which race can relate to this film. I do not see this as an African American film but as a family film. Everyone with a family can relate. Family dinners bring everyone together that’s why Thanksgiving is still such a popular holiday. People with large families can relate to the matriarch character that is the rock or the glue that holds everyone together. I could have done without a lot of the voiceovers that are heard throughout the film.
Most films that are directed at black audiences seem to almost always be fast-paced, loud and violent. Soul Food tells it’s story in a kinder gentler fashion. This is where it breaks stereotypes. Where stereotypes run rampant when looking at the readings is with the women. We have the head of the family a large black woman, an aunt Jemima type. Within the three sisters we have the business women, the mother, and the whore.
I also saw this film as it relates to the other films, and what sticks to me most is its relation to Avalon. I saw Avalon as a film where the family was brought together by family dinner and TV broke them apart. In Soul Food this family was also brought together over Sunday family dinner and was torn a part for a little bit when the Matriarch mother was hospitalized. As shown in Avalon and Soul Food, family dinner are “All- American” and possibly are the root or at least ties to the American Dream

Joy Luck Club (1993)

In the opening sequence with the family party I first noticed the diversity of the group. This might have been the first time I have seen such a large group of Asian American on the screen. The diversity came with the Caucasian Americans that are set in the background. This seems to be where these characters stay too, in the background. I went into the film knowing it would be a film on race. So I went in with the mindset trying to see who was left out. At the beginning I could tell the only characters would either be Asian Americans and Caucasian males. African Americans and Latino Americans were left out of this film. I think having a film based on Asian Americans the producers might have thought that including other races in the story even as background characters would have taken away from their point. I think this takes away from the film and adds to the problem with current films. The same thing is done with women. All the women shown in the film are Asian American. I do not think there were any Caucasian women in the film even in the background.
When viewing the film noticing who was left all is one of the only things I took in, I did not think to look at these characterizations. After the film i did some reading and i read some critiques on the film. In the reading it laid out what these characterizations and really opened my eyes. I am quite surprised I did not see it myself. The reading talks about the film being very stereotypical. The Asian males in the film are perceived as being bad and white males are shown as good. I do not agree with this and the paper gives counter arguments too. The white males are seen as being good, but there is the husband that cheats on his wife. The most likeable male in the whole film his the father of June. I’m glad I read this review as it opened my eyes up further at the critical critique of the film.
I found the film to be very confusing. Given all the different points of views and the flashbacks it was hard for me to follow who’s story was being told. I do not know how the could have really corrected this since the film originated as a book and story lines are easier to follow when reading. During the flashbacks I mostly was thinking to myself. “Ok, who is telling this story, and whose mother or daughter is she?” I think as a viewer this took a lot away from a film that almost solely relied on narrative.

Thunderheart (1992)

I surprisingly thought the film Thunderheart was exceptional. Even though it did have a few slow points, the action throughout was exciting. What I found most interesting in the film is that the Native Americans were shown not in the normal stereotyped roles. Rarely did we see a Native American in full headdress and loincloth, the only time we say this was during special ceremonies. Most of the time the Native Americans were dressed in normal clothes, just like the white men. The Native Americans were also never shown as very tempered. A stereotype that Native Americans have from films is being very hotheaded and angry people. In Thunderheart, the Native Americans were calm and very spiritual people. The film would have been without action if it weren’t for the white man. The white characters were all quick to draw their guns and randomly shoot without looking. This seemed a little absurd at some points, all the shots flying with no one looking or really aiming. While some stereotypes were broken in the film I still think some remained a little. Graham Greene’s character always knew more about the crime scene than Val Kilmer’s character. Greene would walk up to the location touch the ground and be able to tell who has been there and how long ago they had left. He looked at a show print and figured body type, weight, and injuries. I don’t quite know if this is

I did some readings on the subject of Native American representation in film. The thing i found most interesting is a part where the reading talks about the new style of Native American films as being nostalgic Hollywood blockbusters. Were as the film changes the typical view of a Hollywood Western while still having a white lead character come in and investigate a social problem. I read this after viewing the film and it changed my reaction a little. As I was proud to see stereotypes being broken throughout the film, I did not see it plain as day that the white man had to come in and fix all the problems. Maybe on a better note, he needed to come in to open the eyes for the rest of the white population.

The part of the movie I do not understand and I think needs more discussion is the part of the Goons. I understand that the head guy wants to take the land away from the Native Americans. At first I thought they held some sort of police role. But this still did not make sense to me because I felt like there were too many different sections of police activity. The reservation had their own police force and the FBI was there too. The only thing I can take from it was that the Goons were the local police force that patrolled the border because they had no sanction on the reservation. Their exact role in the story did not come out in the film. They were the bad guys but that is all, their characters were not developed

A Soldiers Story (1984)

The film shows a variety of racism that African Americans had to face in the mid 1940’s. The film does not only show racism from whites to blacks but also blacks to blacks. Some of the most hated words come from the black sergeant himself. Black stereotypes could be seen in every character. The film highlights C.J. an illiterate, simple character who clashes with Sergeant Waters, who has great black pride but he also resents the black men he feels are hurting the race. I feel these two characters are great in contrast and the tension between the two add a lot to the ideas the film is trying to get through.
What I learned most from the film is about this character Waters. Never seeing an African American who is portrayed this way has opened up my eyes. I enjoyed the character, not what he stood for but how the film-shed light on the racism African American men had to deal with at this time. I found the characterization to be superb. He was a light skin man who was given a little power from the white man and ran with it. His name even implies purity as water is known as a pure element.

The Anniversary Party (2001)

In Alan Cumming’s and Jennifer Jason Leigh’s The Anniversary Party (2001), the opening sequence titled, “Starting the Day”, there are many compositional elements that impact the viewer through out the first scene. Mise-en-scène and Cinematography can be used to subtly change the mood from being very peaceful to something more serious. I will first explain how mise-en-scène is used to express the mood in the first sequence. Next I will show how the directors used cinematography as a tool to articulate mood.
First, the literal definition of mise-en-scène is ‘staging a scene’ this includes things such as lighting, costumes, and movement on screen. In the first shots of the film all the viewer sees is skin, just legs and arms moving over top of each other. Next lips and kissing is seen. All of this initially sets the mood to being very intimate. The female character is later find out to be named Sally is seen first kissing her husband then kissing her dog Otis. This sets the audience into thinking of a very happy couple from their interactions and body movement. After this series of shots a blind quickly rolls open and puts an end to the previous intimate mood. The next thing that is seen is the couple enjoying yoga lessons from an instructor. The couple is outside of a modern designed house with a lot of big glass windows. They are on yoga mats in front of a very tranquil atmosphere, which features a pool and tropical plants. When watching this portion without any sound the setting and the slight smooth motions of the characters relax the viewer. When the diegetic sound is added, the mood changes from tranquil to very stressful. In the background we can hear airplane traffic, loud outdoor sounds and a continuous house phone ring. At one point a message being left on the answering machine is heard, all of which is very loud, and covers up the yoga instructor’s soft voice. Two maids barge through and once again break the silence. This diegetic sounds plays a major part in shaping the actual mood from what is perceived and what is sensed. Next the scene is moved from outside into the bedroom. In the bedroom there is soft natural lighting that gives the place a comfortable feeling. The characters are on the bed and all that can be heard are the maids talking in the background from the other room. The couple starts to get intimate and all the background sound is gone. This gives the scene a very sensual mood. This is quickly disrupted by another phone call. Sally is agitated when she finds out who is on the phone. The scene becomes tense as she leaves the room, going into the bathroom. The viewer sees Sally in the bathroom while they hear her husband Joe in the other room on the phone talking. Through Sally’s facial expression the viewer can tell she is less than excited. She also secludes herself in the bathroom, which adds to the tension because it is a tight enclosed space. It is less welcoming than the large bedroom. This sequence ends with a slight smirk from Sally that gives the audience a feeling of more trouble to come.
Cinematography is another component that adds to the director’s idea of mood.
The directors of The Anniversary Party use cinematography elements to intensify the moods. In the opening shots mentioned before have a very intimate mood; the camera distance increases upon this. In this series of shots we see extreme close-ups of legs and arms. These extreme close-ups give the viewer the visuals of only the couple’s bare skin running over top of each other. Another scene where cinematography plays a part in expressing mood is in the yoga scene. The viewers originally see the couple in frontal view and camera angle. When the maids come in and disrupt the camera angle switches to a rear view of the couple and a frontal view of the maids who walk towards the screen. The maids walking towards the camera increase the feeling of bombardment. Also during the yoga scene, Sally runs to answers the phone. In this shot, while she is on the phone the camera pans to the left to show black and white family photos on the wall. The viewers find out the doctor is on the phone and is talking to Sally about her potentially being pregnant. The pan to the black and white photos gives the comfortable feeling of family. The camera then quickly goes to a close-up shot of Sally’s face and zooms in to see the sad expression on her face as the viewer finds out that she is not pregnant. This is another sudden change in mood from one that was a little more peaceful to a serious and sad mood.
The directors of The Anniversary Party, Cumming and Leigh, did an excellent job when expressing mood change throughout the first sequence. They used many aspects of each mise-en-scène and cinematography to convey the mood they were looking to express. The whole sequence was very smooth and visually pleasing. This made it easy to see changes in mood.

Avalon (1990)

The movie Avalon is about a Jewish immigrant family from Eastern Europe trying to assimilate to life in the United States.

One of the greatest issues raised is family values and how they are different here in America. The families, when they come over stay very close and hold regular circle meetings. As time goes on and the family starts assimilating more into the American culture they lose touch with their family and start to distance themselves. One example of this is when one part of the family moves to the suburbs and the other part take offense to this because they will no longer be close. Soon siblings start fighting about Thanksgiving dinner and refusing to ever show up again. With so much bickering going on I feel it’s the Americanization that made the family apart. They are celebrating Thanksgiving a holiday they do not really understand but will still fight about their traditions of waiting for everyone is present to cut the turkey.

At the beginning of the film the American symbols so profusely present that it made me feel a little nauseous. Everything you saw was yelling Red White and Blue. As the film goes on these symbols disappear and we start seeing “America” inside the family.
One of the things that I learned most is how modernity changed American life. Television for example changed the family’s routine completely. At first the family left their dinner at the table once their favorite television program came on. At the end of the film you see the family eating in silence in front of the TV during Thanksgiving dinner.

A question I had about the film was why was it important to make sure the audience knows the family is of obvious Jewish ancestry but make no clear mention of this in the film? Throughout the film they remained neutral no displaying any Jewish traditions. Is this film supposed to be a greater look at Americanization and less on religion?

Grapes of Wrath (1940)

The American 1940 film, The Grapes of Wrath, is based on the 1939 Pulitzer Prize winning novel by the same name. John Ford directed this John Steinbeck remake and won an Academy Award in 1941 for Best Director. The film opens up in Oklahoma during the Dust Bowl with Tom Joad hitchhiking his way back to his family home after recently being released from prison. His family is very happy to see him, but soon inform him that the bank recently foreclosed on their farm. They explain to him their plans to head out west for California, the place they call “The Land of Milk and Honey”, to search for employment. The large family, which includes Ma, Pa, Grandma, Grandpa, and various other family members, leaves the next morning at daybreak to California via Route 66. The trip is found to be very grueling and takes a huge toll on the Joad family as Grandpa and Grandma Joad both die before even making it to California. Once the family reaches California they find the work is not what they were hoping it would be. They are forced to work just above slave labor, barely making enough to live. They find themselves moving from camp to camp hoping to luck upon “The American Dream”.

Most generally the American Dream refers to the thought that one’s affluence depends on their ability to work hard and be successful in society. Many aspects and goals must be considered before someone's life or lifestyle can be deemed a success or failure of the American Dream. The dream can be America seen as an Eden, or a Utopia in a character's thoughts. Chances of such thoughts are rare due to the fact that not everyone can have what they want and be happy. Individually, however, someone could feel triumph no matter how society feels together as a whole, or their thoughts about the independent character. The final aspect, possibly the most important, is finding a sense of optimism for the future. Even if the goals are not being met, as long as there is will to succeed, there is a way to succeed.

The Grapes of Wrath obliterates all chances to thrive and live the American Dream. The Great Depression had hit rock bottom, the times were at their worst. The family worked well below living wage and had to buy supplies and food from the company market that charged three times the amount than elsewhere. The whole family worked, the kids and even the pregnant sister. Promise of jobs and a new life were around every corner. But they all led to false hopes and a poorer family. In the film Ma Joad says, “Up ahead there’s a thousand lives we might live, but when it comes down to it, it will only be one.” This shows the optimism of the family at the time. As the family moves on and on you get a desperate feeling from the family that they are soon going to loose more members if their luck doesn’t turn over soon. America at this time was not a Utopia for the Joad family. It was displayed that the only way to succeed, was to succeed individually, for society was at an all time low.

The film never showed a successful family, or even a successful couple. The ones we saw with jobs were the gas station attendants. In today’s and most standards these people would not be ones that are look up to. This was a contrast at how bad the family had gotten. The lack of any great wealth is a great sign of the ideology of the film. The film was not out to make it look like the American Dream was possible leaving wealthy people out added to the despair.

Tom Joad, “I been thinking about us, too, about our people living like pigs and good rich land layin' fallow. Or maybe one guy with a million acres and a hundred thousand farmers starvin'. And I been wonderin' if all our folks got together and yelled...”

Ma Joad, “Oh, Tommy, they'd drag you out and cut you down just like they done to Casy”
Tom Joad, “They'd drag me anyways. Sooner or later they'd get me for one thing if not for another.”  

This quote from the film was the only mention of the rich and wealthy, and it is eluded that this could be only one person and everyone else is left with nothing but to starve. The people taking over the land are never seen and the workers that come and run everyone out do not know who they are working for either, they are just getting by like everyone else.

America was definitely not seen as an Eden, more of as a living hell. The Grapes of Wrath shows the story of a family who fails at almost every sense of the American Dream. One part they hold onto strong is optimism for a better future. This optimism is brought to the last lines of the film, Ma Jode says, “Rich fellas come up an' they die, an' their kids ain't no good an' they die out. But we keep a'comin'. We're the people that live. They can't wipe us out; they can't lick us. We'll go on forever, Pa, 'cause we're the people.” Optimism is all the family has as they continue their journey onward looking to find work and strike the American Dream. As a viewer you want to root for the family to succeed but in the end agree that the American Dream is just an allusion of a place filled with milk and honey.

Related Links:

Grapes of Wrath at The Internet Movie Database: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032551/ 

http://www.filmsite.org/grap.html

Getting started

As a senior Mass Communications Major at Miami University I throughly enjoy analyzing and critiquing media, especially TV and films. For  this blog i will focus on American film. What i will essentially be doing is screening certain films that pertain to American culture and posting my thoughts about the film here. If you share this same interest I would  like to hear how you feel about these films and hear your take on how you viewed them.

My first screening will be the literary classic turned film, The Grapes of Wrath (1940). The American Film Institute recently voted this film 27th Greatest Movie of All Time in their 2007 rankings. Thanks