Bibliography/Research Question

How did arthouse cinema, in New York and LA, propel “I’m Not There”?

Anderson, John. “Dylan Movie Set To Open Like A Rolling Premiere”. New York Times 21 August 2007. 28 October 2008.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/movies/21dyla.html?8dpc=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1187722862-URyUhCrm6RAQ61mD0PLhUg
Film Forum, distribution of film.

Clark, John. “Survival Tips for the Aging Independent Filmmaker”. New York Times 1 October 2006. 27 October 2008.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/movies/01clar.html?pagewanted=2&sq=Film%20Forum%20%20showing
Film Financing for Indies/Indie Directors and Producers.

Dawtrey, Adam. “Cannes plans take shape”. Variety 4 April 2007. 27 October 2008.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117962499.html?categoryid=1236&cs=1&query=im+not+there
News from festival, little info.

Frater, Patrick. “Foreign Tales told at AFM”. Variety 7 November 2005. 28 October 2008.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117932573.html?categoryid=1236&cs=1&query=%22ARP%22+I%27m+Not+There
French sales house Celluloid Dream handles “I’m Not There”

Hayes, Dade. “Rethinking Independent Film Finance”. Variety 5 September 2008. 27 October 2008.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117991730.html?categoryid=3235&cs=1&query=%22I%27m+Not+There%22
Indie films financial struggles and ideas on fixing it.

Hayes, Dade. “Dylan biopic blows to Forum”. Variety 6 August 2007. 28 October 2008.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117969795.html?categoryid=13&cs=1&query=Film+Forum+%22I%27m+Not+There%22
Info about release.

Kelly, Brandon. “Canada Tries to Curb Production Slide”. Festival Central 3 September 2008. 27 October 2008.
http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=festivals&jump=story&id=1061&articleid=VR1117991523&cs=1&query=%22I%27m+Not+There%22
Woes, one line mention of I’m Not There. Useless.

McCarthy, Todd. “I’m Not There”. Variety 4 September 2007. 27 October 2008.
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117934602.html?categoryid=2880&cs=1&query=I%27m+Not+There
Review of movie.

Morfoot, Addie. “Tangled Up In ‘I’m Not There’”. Variety 14 November 2007. 27 October 2008.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117976027.html?categoryid=38&cs=1&query=%22I%27m+Not+There%22
Premiere news and stories from production.

Morfoot, Addie. “NY’s Film Forum fuels award hopes”. Variety 24 October 2007. 28 October 2007
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117974693.html?categoryid=2734&cs=1&query=Film+Forum+2007
History of theater and info on “I’m Not There” and its opening.

Thompson, Anne. “Indie Spirit Noms: I’m Not There Leads Field”. Variety 24 November 2007. 27 October 2008.
http://weblogs.variety.com/thompsononhollywood/2007/11/indie-spirit-no.html?query=im+not+there
Little info on budget.

Vivarelli, Nick. “Endgame, Piedmont trigger fund”. Variety 1 September 2008. 27 October 2008
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117991394.html?categoryid=1236&cs=1&query=%22I%27m+Not+There%22
US films in Italy.

Week 11

104-114

1. They bother with it because it allows for a broader appeal, mixing plot, for the keen viewers, and spectacle, for those specifically interested in action, into a tight knit film that will appeal to more that a certain niche of viewers.

2. What he means is that many action movies contain the same story structure and motifs; ticking clocks, clear cut act structure, emotionally broken hero, villains with clearly motivated sinister plans of which at the beginning force the protagonist to be reactive and later to be proactive, buddy-cop relationships with an arising conflict which calls their relationship into jeopardy as well as a group relationship with the same arising conflict.

3. Overall, action takes up 53 minutes of physical action and the remaining 73 minutes contains; plot which focuses on emotional and cerebral action.

51-72

1. What I believe Bordwell is talking about when he says “genre ecology” is the development and the relationship between directors/writers in those developments of blending genres. He characterizes the current range of genres as a blend of old B-genres with established A-genres, but lacking the original staples of musicals, westerns and domestic melodramas.

2. By “worldmaking”, Bordwell is referring to directors attention to detail within films, in a sense layering detail upon detail, which in turn creates a world all it’s own, a fantasy world. Also, as in Tarantino’s case, the ability to create characters that could potentially exist within another film subsequent or previous to the time and setting of their original inception into film. As well as creating ancillary products that could further allow the viewer to delve deeper into the created world. The narrative design is then affected by the worlds potential, the characters decisions become driven by what possible decisions can be made.

3. The rise and fall of contemporary genres is due in part to director/writer ingenuity; the desire to create an original piece, or elaborate by adding on genres that have yet to be “mined”.

Confused on this question? Fall of contemporary genres? Do you mean like the musicals, westerns or melodramas?

4. Maximally classical, means that the film is more classical than it needs to be. For instance Groundhog Day implores symbolism within its’ mise-en-scene that goes, to an extent unnoticed, and may, in some opinions, be unnecessary to a comedy.

5. Give the audience the full puzzle, don’t forget a piece and don’t make the pieces to big where it becomes too easy, too obvious to piece together. Allusions help in creating more pieces and therefore can provide greater entertainment to those aware of the references.

Week 10

1. The five conditions include: a new generation of directors (the movie brats; Spielberg, Lucas, Coppola, etc.), new marketing strategies (wider massive advertising campaigns), new media ownership and management styles (MCA with Universal, etc.), new technology of sound and image reproduction (SFX, Dolby Sound, etc.), and new delivery systems.

Question: What does he mean new delivery systems? Like VCR’s and at home devices?

2. I believe, New Hollywood being defined as “the different as same” refers to this new age of Hollywood containing different people who are filling the same roles as Classical Hollywood icons. I believe, New Hollywood being defined as “the same as different” refers to the idea of New Hollywood taking certain aesthetics from International cinema, which are opposite in structure and style of Classical Hollywood, and creating a New movement. In essence being the same as different. Yes/No? Maybe so?

3. Elsaesser is talking about the horror genre in particular; rupturing realism by disrupting cause and effect patterns (often leaving out the cause of killers/monsters motivation until the end? I think), disrupting shot/countershot, continuity and reverse field editing in order to create a sense of mystery, suspense, and horror, as well as deliberately misleading the viewer and with holding information, especially with sound.

Question: Could you explain reverse field editing just a little?

4. The sound and image relationship within horror films deliberately is not synchronized in terms of cause and effect, question and answer; thus preventing viewers from answering the question of the sounds source and in turn creating suspense and when used effectively with score, inducing fear.

5. Paintings, films, technology of the past are alluded to, but only at a secondary level, hidden in subtext, underneath the story of Dracula being played out, thus it is like these older texts are still visible in the story of Dracula which is layered on top.

6. It is a prototypical because the vampire film is nothing new, but the allusions to the predecessors are. The self-reflection draws attention to the form which is constantly being reused to tell the same story but with different plots.

13. My monitor is a collage of competing realities, countering Bazin’s notion of the screen being a window into reality, the screen in this multimedia world functions as a glass house which is barraged by images, which mesh and juxtapose to create a pseudo reality which calls into question the very notion of the true function of film as an art form and maybe propels it into nothing more than stimuli for the senses.

Question: I’ve been thinking this over for sometime, wouldn’t the music industry be the first industry to promote multimedia, and merchandise? I’ve been thinking about A Hard Day’s Night (1964) from United Artists, and the cross promotion that helped propel The Beatles, which in turn television saw as the future and created The Monkees for television but incorporating music in order to fully capitalize on merchandise.

Also, I’m not sure if anyone else has this problem, but my CHC has contains the largest misprint I’ve ever seen. Literally 31 identical pages are reprinted, so my book goes from pages 1-170 then the next page starts at 139 and goes to 170. After 170, on the opposite page is page 203 of Elsaesser’s essay. Weird stuff.

Week 9

2. Usually, films with multiple protagonists slowly begin to focus specifically on one or two characters, allowing the setup to further the primary character and the development to further the second and also reinforce their bond.

3. The main tactics include; "ticking clocks"(deadlines) that require characters to make and solve appointments, appointments which cause deadlines to be made, motifs that create deeper meanings throughout films, repeated objects or lines of dialogue which focus audience attention on key plot information can produce a great deal of pleasure in an audience member, wide range of knowledge that allows the audience to know enough but not enough to prevent guessing about plot development(strategic limitations), and long range goals that allow characters to room to grow.

4. Passages of overtness refers to moments within film where the film itself is speaking directly to the viewer, sometimes voice over or inter-titles or deliberate opening and closing shots that offer information on the films plot. Montage is highly overt and then maybe what I previously said is less self-conscious.

I was going to ask a question about "passages of...less self-conscious" but then I realized it was question 4. I'll think about it more.

Also, personally, I enjoy Bordwell's writing more than any writer we've read thus far.

CHC Questions

1. I don't think I get Bordwell's, Thompson's and Staiger's view or maybe it's just that I don't agree with it. If my understanding is correct, and that is they find classical Hollywood still prevalent in today's films because today's films still incorporate a form of classical narration, then I disagree with them, because it definitely "flattens" out the history of film. If you were to take the same view and apply it to literature, you would lose nearly all movements simply because in the end they have a beginning a middle and an end. Most movements in literature are created by few and last only a short while, so why can't the same thought process be used to label film movements? I recall you said something about film not being seen as an art form??? But I think that was when we were discussing how merchandising has so fully become incorporated.

2. Fordist/Post-Fordist Hollywood? This relates to Hollywood because instead of mass produced assembly line products, Hollywood began producing genre pieces for specific niche audiences???Now, huge question, this is a new "movement" in terms of production, is it not? So, is there a timeline just for the production aspect and a timeline just for the stylistic choices in movies? Do these overlap? If so, why? Personally they shouldn't.

3. Spectacle through plot? There is always a plot in my opinion even if Bruce Willis spends three fourths the time blowing things up. I feel like this attack may come from those who regard art cinema as a better style, influencing intelligent thought, with the idea that blockbusters though widely appealing to the mainstream creates vegetables who digest the moving image without thought. Is this true? Who first stated this? I agree with Schatz and the idea of plot advances through spectacle.

I may have rambled incoherently, but reading this article created a cross fire in my mind of which I have yet to sort out.