The animated film, The Girl Who Leapt Through Time, was comical and exciting to watch. The creators generated comedy by using simplistic dialogue. For example, Makato (main character) finds that her sister has eaten her pudding and travels back in time to prevent this from happening. When she does this, she looks at the pudding and pauses; the audience anticipating what she will say finds it funny when she finally utters the obvious, “pudding”! I found it interesting that something so simple could produce humor. A scene that was also very comical was when Mankato’s friend, Chikoti, asks her to date him. She leaps back numerous times to prevent this conversation from occurring. Each time becomes more and more of a joke. She first tries to change the subject completely, which makes no sense whatsoever. The second time she decides to just walk away as he is talking to her. These are both examples of the simplistic nature of the film that ultimately made it humorous.
I also thought the format of the film was very well planned. At the beginning of the film we see random scenes, where Makato runs into some problems. Although these were funny, I had a difficult time understanding the significance of these scenes. Later in the film, these scenes come into play as Makato travels back in time. The creators used them to give Makato a motive to use her time traveling powers to go back in time and change her clumsy acts. The first half of the movie was very straightforward, and was easy to follow, but as the film progressed, conflicts were unveiled.
Makato’s aunt mentions the possibility that others around her may be losing as she gains from time leaping. This caused the viewer to question how safe Makato’s time leaping really is. I thought the creator(s) of the film did a great job of setting up the main conflict, and presenting it in this way (through another character’s observation). Later in the film, Makato realizes that her friend Kosuke and an innocent girl could die because the breaks on her bike had been broken. I found myself wondering if Makato would ever figure out how to fix the mess she was in. Conflict in a film adds to its depth and makes it more appealing. I did not want Kosuke and the girl to die, which caused me to continue to watch due to suspense. The film used a simplistic style at first to create humor and set up the major conflicts, which ultimately make the film more fascinating to watch.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Midterm Paper Revision
Hi everyone. Just a reminder that the final revision of the midterm paper is due tomorrow in class. Be sure to attach the graded first version of the paper that we handed back to you--especially the typed comments you received. If possible try to staple this all together. You can detach the 10-on-1's and paraphrases at this point. I've pasted below a reminder of the format:
"Unless otherwise specified, all non-digital assignments must be handed in typed, printed, and stapled, and must include your name, the date, the course title, and an assignment title on the cover page. Papers must be formatted in black Times 12 font, double spaced, one-sided, with 1” top and bottom margins and 1.25” left and right margins. Please use a header or footer with page numbers and your last name since sometimes pages become detached. "
Also, here is some last minute advice about introductions and conclusions. They are always the last things to be sorted out!
Good luck, and don't be afraid to really rewrite instead of just 'editing' or 'revising'--we will be more forgiving of a major, yet imperfect, effort than of minor manicuring. In other words, if you just left things the same for this time around you would not get the same grade: we expect your writing and thinking to be more polished, or, if this is not the case, that it is because you reconsidered your argument and wrote an almost new paper.
FEEDBACK on Midterm Paper:
Introductions and Conclusions
Your introduction should introduce a problem or question. It should not try to contextualize the paper’s theme within broad categories like all of history or ‘mankind,’ but should instead articulate a modest and realistic scope for its exploration. The introduction does not need to present or summarize the essay’s entire argument, and it should not present a list of what will be discussed in the paper. It should present something as an interesting question, or a problem worth thinking about, and set the stage to begin this thinking. The conclusion should return to the problem or question raised in the introduction in such a way that it is clear the essay has ‘ended up’ somewhere different from where it began; it should not repeat the introduction, but reconsider the question or problem in a more nuanced way than was possible before the detailed readings that the paper offered. But, the conclusion should not claim to ‘wrap up’ everything or solve everything or offer the total and final truth about anything. It should not add new, large claims or expand to broad concerns such as the nature of art, society, the human mind, etc. It could, however, add a slightly changed emphasis to some argument or claim you have made, raising a small question or admitting that something could be seen otherwise or perhaps developed further. It may help to imagine that your paper is one chapter in the middle of a book you are writing: even though this one ‘chapter’ could stand on its own as ‘complete,’ and could appear in an anthology all alone and make sense, this ‘chapter’ feels like it begins by picking up an existing set of concerns (rather than starting from scratch) and feels like it ends by opening up avenues for thinking that would only be addressed in the next chapter.
Good introductions from your papers (modified):
From 1925 to 1931, Alfred Stieglitz photographed clouds. He accumulated a collection of these photographs, giving each image the title “Equivalent” despite the fact that each represented a different scene captured at a different time. What equates these photographs may be their collective attempt to freeze the movement of a cloud, always in flux, into the instantaneous form of an image. With this photographic representation of movement, Stieglitz continues the exploration begun by early motion photographers Edweard Muybridge, Étienne-Jules Marey, and Anton Bragalia.
Alfred Stieglitz’s Equivalent (1930) captures both the temporality and timelessness of clouds. As a single photograph, it conveys motion and stillness, intention and contingency. It both reproduces reality and creates something new. As one in a series of cloud photographs all titled Equivalent, it is just part of a larger project that initiates a new kind of photography, departing from a tradition that includes the chronophotography Edweard Muybridge and Étienne-Jules Marey, and the photodynamism of Anton Bragaglia. As a composition in both time and space, Stieglitz’s project bridges the gap between poetry and painting that Lessing explored in Laocoon. And, with a subject matter peculiarly between form and movement, this photography of clouds seems to embody and challenge Henri Bergson’s opposition between the creative flux of duration and the “snapshot” views with which we capture and represent it.
Around the turn of the twentieth century, instantaneous photography seemed to offer new possibilities for representing time and motion. Anticipating the invention of cinema, Edweard Muybridge and Étienne-Jules Marey developed techniques of chronophotography, attempting to inscribe the trace of movement within a rapid series of photographic images. In the 1920’s and 1930’s, however, Alfred Stieglitz explored a different kind of serial photography, producing a body of work with a different representation of time. Photographing clouds over a span of about ten years, he created a uniquely delayed series collected under the general title “Equivalent.” While each photograph captures only one particular instant, the relationship between these photographs and the moments that they instantiate suggest that photography can represent multiple and complex temporalities.
"Unless otherwise specified, all non-digital assignments must be handed in typed, printed, and stapled, and must include your name, the date, the course title, and an assignment title on the cover page. Papers must be formatted in black Times 12 font, double spaced, one-sided, with 1” top and bottom margins and 1.25” left and right margins. Please use a header or footer with page numbers and your last name since sometimes pages become detached. "
Also, here is some last minute advice about introductions and conclusions. They are always the last things to be sorted out!
Good luck, and don't be afraid to really rewrite instead of just 'editing' or 'revising'--we will be more forgiving of a major, yet imperfect, effort than of minor manicuring. In other words, if you just left things the same for this time around you would not get the same grade: we expect your writing and thinking to be more polished, or, if this is not the case, that it is because you reconsidered your argument and wrote an almost new paper.
FEEDBACK on Midterm Paper:
Introductions and Conclusions
Your introduction should introduce a problem or question. It should not try to contextualize the paper’s theme within broad categories like all of history or ‘mankind,’ but should instead articulate a modest and realistic scope for its exploration. The introduction does not need to present or summarize the essay’s entire argument, and it should not present a list of what will be discussed in the paper. It should present something as an interesting question, or a problem worth thinking about, and set the stage to begin this thinking. The conclusion should return to the problem or question raised in the introduction in such a way that it is clear the essay has ‘ended up’ somewhere different from where it began; it should not repeat the introduction, but reconsider the question or problem in a more nuanced way than was possible before the detailed readings that the paper offered. But, the conclusion should not claim to ‘wrap up’ everything or solve everything or offer the total and final truth about anything. It should not add new, large claims or expand to broad concerns such as the nature of art, society, the human mind, etc. It could, however, add a slightly changed emphasis to some argument or claim you have made, raising a small question or admitting that something could be seen otherwise or perhaps developed further. It may help to imagine that your paper is one chapter in the middle of a book you are writing: even though this one ‘chapter’ could stand on its own as ‘complete,’ and could appear in an anthology all alone and make sense, this ‘chapter’ feels like it begins by picking up an existing set of concerns (rather than starting from scratch) and feels like it ends by opening up avenues for thinking that would only be addressed in the next chapter.
Good introductions from your papers (modified):
From 1925 to 1931, Alfred Stieglitz photographed clouds. He accumulated a collection of these photographs, giving each image the title “Equivalent” despite the fact that each represented a different scene captured at a different time. What equates these photographs may be their collective attempt to freeze the movement of a cloud, always in flux, into the instantaneous form of an image. With this photographic representation of movement, Stieglitz continues the exploration begun by early motion photographers Edweard Muybridge, Étienne-Jules Marey, and Anton Bragalia.
Alfred Stieglitz’s Equivalent (1930) captures both the temporality and timelessness of clouds. As a single photograph, it conveys motion and stillness, intention and contingency. It both reproduces reality and creates something new. As one in a series of cloud photographs all titled Equivalent, it is just part of a larger project that initiates a new kind of photography, departing from a tradition that includes the chronophotography Edweard Muybridge and Étienne-Jules Marey, and the photodynamism of Anton Bragaglia. As a composition in both time and space, Stieglitz’s project bridges the gap between poetry and painting that Lessing explored in Laocoon. And, with a subject matter peculiarly between form and movement, this photography of clouds seems to embody and challenge Henri Bergson’s opposition between the creative flux of duration and the “snapshot” views with which we capture and represent it.
Around the turn of the twentieth century, instantaneous photography seemed to offer new possibilities for representing time and motion. Anticipating the invention of cinema, Edweard Muybridge and Étienne-Jules Marey developed techniques of chronophotography, attempting to inscribe the trace of movement within a rapid series of photographic images. In the 1920’s and 1930’s, however, Alfred Stieglitz explored a different kind of serial photography, producing a body of work with a different representation of time. Photographing clouds over a span of about ten years, he created a uniquely delayed series collected under the general title “Equivalent.” While each photograph captures only one particular instant, the relationship between these photographs and the moments that they instantiate suggest that photography can represent multiple and complex temporalities.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Pine Flat
Pine Flat was extremely different from any film I had viewed up to this point in my life. Due to my past viewing experiences, I typically go into films expecting: action, dialogue, interaction of humans, plot, and editing ‘personality’ (cuts, different points of view, panning), amongst other things. For most of this 2+ hour film I did not get what I anticipated.
It was a different way of watching/seeing than I am used to. I felt like I kept noticing little things and looking for similarities and differences because the action wasn’t brought/ presented to me. Since the film seemed so tedious, every little detail became a big event.
An example of this is the clip with the boy playing the harmonica. Since the nature within which he is placed is calm/ tranquil/ repetitive we don’t recognize its movement as action (as much at least); we are not surprised when the river keeps running or the grass keeps swaying in the wind. Human movements are also expected by us, yet not as systematically; we notice when the motions occur. The boy adjusts the way he is sitting. These are not simply motions like: up, down, up, down. He puts one leg up, stands, sits, itches his head, etc. Each motion is unique and new and at random intervals of time (not systematic) so each is noticed.
Throughout the film I closed eyes every once and a while to listen to what was occurring (trying to use my different senses to see if I could pick up anything else that was going on). Both with my eyes open and with them closed, there was no real sense of anticipation. This is, in part, because nothing was really happening (in an action sense); the only real sense of anticipation or anxiety I felt was waiting for/ hoping that something would occur.
In fact, there was only one time throughout the 2+ hours where I actually felt involved. This was when the boy in the forest pointed the gun at the camera. This scene provoked emotion within me and therefore made me pay attention to it. The rest of the film appeared to be more interested in our own thoughts of what is occurring in each scene. I think this is true because the author doesn’t really sway our opinions but changing the point of view or framing of the shots.
The frame for each clip was a set distance from the people and it was placed at a particular angle. The director did not zoom, scan, create different angles, or create cuts (within each 10 minute clip at least). There was not only very little action within the clips (done by nature or the individuals), there was also no ‘action’ or motion of the camera. All of these things, in my view, added to tediousness of the film.
The still, framed, character of the clips made them more like photographs than what we think of, at least today, as film. Closer yet, the clips are like a photo shoot, in which the artist studies a subject, focuses in on it, and waits to capture the pregnant moment or best frame. However, we (the audience) experience the whole “action” or duration of the subject (or the entire photo shoot) rather than just getting the pregnant moment that is captured and released by the photographer.
Part one was about individual kids. Each of these six clips has similarities. Each child was placed in the center of the screen while they were filmed. They were the focus of the shot and of the audience’s attention (for the most part). The centering of the child stresses their importance to the piece of work. They are thus seen as the central part of the work. Each child is also within a nature scene. Within this tranquil nature, however, there are unnatural elements (things that are not from nature, but rather man-made with technology and by mechanical means). These creations of mankind catch the attention of the audience because of their direct contrast with the peaceful sounds and sights of nature. Examples of these inventions that are seen within the film are: harmonica, book, gun, car, and airplane.
The six clips from part 2, about groups of kids, also have similarities amongst them. For one, they are more “typical” of what people expect from a film. There was: dialogue, interaction with humans, and some action (ex. shooting of each other with guns). All in all, the scenes from part 2 had more motion and far more variety in the kinds of motion. The ‘characters’ within these clips had interaction with humans rather than just nature. The clips appeared less tedious due to these additions.
There are many different forms of time within this piece. Some of them are: the time it took to film (and if the had to re-film), the time it too to edit, and the time it took for it to play (while we watched). These types of time are all mechanical and clock regulated, like in the Chaplin films. Each shot has duration and they are all the same. Ten minutes, the same amount of repetitive, aggravating time. On the other hand, the time is not mechanical. In this way, we don’t realize how much time has elapsed while watching it. There are no real indicators or references to time throughout besides the fact that we logically realize that time is passing.
There are also different spaces in which these times took place. There was the space/ location where it was filmed, the space where it was edited, and the space where it was screened, amongst others.
All in all I found this film tedious and would not like to see it again. On the other hand, (to give it some credit) it was a creative idea and it really made the viewer think while watching.
Laura Wood
It was a different way of watching/seeing than I am used to. I felt like I kept noticing little things and looking for similarities and differences because the action wasn’t brought/ presented to me. Since the film seemed so tedious, every little detail became a big event.
An example of this is the clip with the boy playing the harmonica. Since the nature within which he is placed is calm/ tranquil/ repetitive we don’t recognize its movement as action (as much at least); we are not surprised when the river keeps running or the grass keeps swaying in the wind. Human movements are also expected by us, yet not as systematically; we notice when the motions occur. The boy adjusts the way he is sitting. These are not simply motions like: up, down, up, down. He puts one leg up, stands, sits, itches his head, etc. Each motion is unique and new and at random intervals of time (not systematic) so each is noticed.
Throughout the film I closed eyes every once and a while to listen to what was occurring (trying to use my different senses to see if I could pick up anything else that was going on). Both with my eyes open and with them closed, there was no real sense of anticipation. This is, in part, because nothing was really happening (in an action sense); the only real sense of anticipation or anxiety I felt was waiting for/ hoping that something would occur.
In fact, there was only one time throughout the 2+ hours where I actually felt involved. This was when the boy in the forest pointed the gun at the camera. This scene provoked emotion within me and therefore made me pay attention to it. The rest of the film appeared to be more interested in our own thoughts of what is occurring in each scene. I think this is true because the author doesn’t really sway our opinions but changing the point of view or framing of the shots.
The frame for each clip was a set distance from the people and it was placed at a particular angle. The director did not zoom, scan, create different angles, or create cuts (within each 10 minute clip at least). There was not only very little action within the clips (done by nature or the individuals), there was also no ‘action’ or motion of the camera. All of these things, in my view, added to tediousness of the film.
The still, framed, character of the clips made them more like photographs than what we think of, at least today, as film. Closer yet, the clips are like a photo shoot, in which the artist studies a subject, focuses in on it, and waits to capture the pregnant moment or best frame. However, we (the audience) experience the whole “action” or duration of the subject (or the entire photo shoot) rather than just getting the pregnant moment that is captured and released by the photographer.
Part one was about individual kids. Each of these six clips has similarities. Each child was placed in the center of the screen while they were filmed. They were the focus of the shot and of the audience’s attention (for the most part). The centering of the child stresses their importance to the piece of work. They are thus seen as the central part of the work. Each child is also within a nature scene. Within this tranquil nature, however, there are unnatural elements (things that are not from nature, but rather man-made with technology and by mechanical means). These creations of mankind catch the attention of the audience because of their direct contrast with the peaceful sounds and sights of nature. Examples of these inventions that are seen within the film are: harmonica, book, gun, car, and airplane.
The six clips from part 2, about groups of kids, also have similarities amongst them. For one, they are more “typical” of what people expect from a film. There was: dialogue, interaction with humans, and some action (ex. shooting of each other with guns). All in all, the scenes from part 2 had more motion and far more variety in the kinds of motion. The ‘characters’ within these clips had interaction with humans rather than just nature. The clips appeared less tedious due to these additions.
There are many different forms of time within this piece. Some of them are: the time it took to film (and if the had to re-film), the time it too to edit, and the time it took for it to play (while we watched). These types of time are all mechanical and clock regulated, like in the Chaplin films. Each shot has duration and they are all the same. Ten minutes, the same amount of repetitive, aggravating time. On the other hand, the time is not mechanical. In this way, we don’t realize how much time has elapsed while watching it. There are no real indicators or references to time throughout besides the fact that we logically realize that time is passing.
There are also different spaces in which these times took place. There was the space/ location where it was filmed, the space where it was edited, and the space where it was screened, amongst others.
All in all I found this film tedious and would not like to see it again. On the other hand, (to give it some credit) it was a creative idea and it really made the viewer think while watching.
Laura Wood
Deleuze Cinema
1. The first section of the text deals primarily with neo-realism and what it is exactly. Deleuze begins with the subject of the ASA and the SAS, saying that different parts of space are separated now. “The small form ASA is therefore no less compromised than the large form SAS.” The main point here is that actions and situations have become more disconnected from each other and actions do not necessarily belong to a specific person. Deleuze use the term “white events” referring to events which have no effect on the bearer of the action because he is “internally dead.” He compares this to the driver in Taxi Driver because the driver has not decided what he is going to do, but no matter what happens, it essentially is going to have the same effect on him.
2. Clichés are the answer to the linkage between everything in this world according to Deleuze. He says, “what forms the set are clichés, nothing else. Nothing but clichés, clichés everywhere. . . .” These clichés have to do with political or social events on the news dispersed within a movie or the voice-over that is common in most cinema. He refers to these as “actualities” and the “eye of the camera.” The unknown person behind the camera is cliché that penetrates each and every one of us because he somehow knows what is happening in the story. He is saying that clichés are important in making the connection between the viewer and the characters in a film. There are physical, optical, auditory, and psychic clichés, all of which contribute to the others, creating a vivid connection and adding to neo-realism.
3. In neo-realism, “the real is no longer represented or reproduced but ‘aimed at.’” Deleuze says that there is no motor extension anymore, but rather a “dreamlike connection.” This “dreamlike connection” could be looked at as something that does not really end but continues as an action in a situation. In neo-realism there is no sensory-motor situation but instead optical and sound situations. He uses the term “any-space-whatever” to talk about optical and sound situations in neo-realism that are disconnected. These situations in the “any-space-whatever” created opsigns and sonsigns that can deal with variable images from everyday life. In order to get to a pure optical and sound image, sensory-motor image is completely dissolved and the clichés are left behind.
-Danny Ponticello
2. Clichés are the answer to the linkage between everything in this world according to Deleuze. He says, “what forms the set are clichés, nothing else. Nothing but clichés, clichés everywhere. . . .” These clichés have to do with political or social events on the news dispersed within a movie or the voice-over that is common in most cinema. He refers to these as “actualities” and the “eye of the camera.” The unknown person behind the camera is cliché that penetrates each and every one of us because he somehow knows what is happening in the story. He is saying that clichés are important in making the connection between the viewer and the characters in a film. There are physical, optical, auditory, and psychic clichés, all of which contribute to the others, creating a vivid connection and adding to neo-realism.
3. In neo-realism, “the real is no longer represented or reproduced but ‘aimed at.’” Deleuze says that there is no motor extension anymore, but rather a “dreamlike connection.” This “dreamlike connection” could be looked at as something that does not really end but continues as an action in a situation. In neo-realism there is no sensory-motor situation but instead optical and sound situations. He uses the term “any-space-whatever” to talk about optical and sound situations in neo-realism that are disconnected. These situations in the “any-space-whatever” created opsigns and sonsigns that can deal with variable images from everyday life. In order to get to a pure optical and sound image, sensory-motor image is completely dissolved and the clichés are left behind.
-Danny Ponticello
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
