Hook teaches us to not only watch the movie, but to look at who made the movie, who chose the cast, and wrote the script. Does an actor's race determine which roles they will play? I thought it was interesting for her to point out how in the original storyline for the movie "Smoke," there was no indication for the race of the thief, yet the director chose an African American man to play the character. It makes me wonder if the movie would have still been received as well with a white thief or if the person who was stolen from was African American.
Some of the strategies have to do with critical viewing, and looking past the movie itself. I guess it's similar to what I said before about checking out who directed, who produced it and who wrote it and how they all kind of meshed together. Also knowing the audience and who perceived what messages from the movie is also important. Pulling out common stereotypes is also important. Movies, television and other types of popular culture are where we get our views on society especially now that people aren't reading nearly as much as they used to, so it's really important to pull apart these stereotypes and break down barriers that we see.
I believe what she means by "enlightened witness" is someone who critically watching these films and actually pulling apart the things we find to be wrong, and stereotypical. We need to bust the myths that the movies put out about people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. An "enlightened witness" would probably bring an open mind to be able to objectively look at the movies and decide what they think the movie is trying to say about queers. A keen eye to detail would also be important. Also a desire to do research and look behind the scenes and figure out who went into making the movie might also be a valuable skill.
Bell Hooks
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/173713
I agree with the idea that you think movies do not mean to but always use stereotypes for certain characters in movie such as using an African American as a thief in a movie. It doesn’t mean that black people are all thieves but Hollywood usually casts them to play that particular role in movies. I too wonder how certain movies would be different if the genders of the characters would be different. I also believe that Hollywood and the movies create stereotypes that make people believe certain genders or ethnicities behave a certain way. I like your definition of an enlightened witness and how we as people need to bust the myths that movies and television create. Having an open mind is necessary when it comes to the media that is presented to us. I agree with your critique.
I agree with the idea that you think movies do not mean to but always use stereotypes for certain characters in movie such as using an African American as a thief in a movie. It doesn’t mean that black people are all thieves but Hollywood usually casts them to play that particular role in movies. I too wonder how certain movies would be different if the genders of the characters would be different. I also believe that Hollywood and the movies create stereotypes that make people believe certain genders or ethnicities behave a certain way. I like your definition of an enlightened witness and how we as people need to bust the myths that movies and television create. Having an open mind is necessary when it comes to the media that is presented to us. I agree with your critique.
You are spot on with the suggestion to "pull apart" films. I wish I could take cross sections of a given film to really see it objectively, but intricately. There are so many little clues and insights we can pick up from any scene in a movie that may often times go unnoticed. I like the way you described the idea of truly dissecting a film in order to really dig deep and get a grasp on what is actually being conveyed, potentially not at the surface level. I love this entry!
I actually also had the same thought during hooks' discussion of the film "Smoke", in regards to how the film would be received if the man being stolen from had been African American. Part of me wants to say that the film would received in a similar way- however, I also have to question: would the interpretation to the film be completely different if this were the case? Unfortunately, we live in a society where these types of distinctions in film almost universally hold weight and latent significance, and thus, the film's meaning would dramatically be shifted in the eyes of the audience.