Feminist Film / Media Studies

I must say I really enjoyed this class a lot too, it gave me a new perspective for watching film, and in particular reminded me that there was still a good genre out there: the documentary. For some time now I had been growing weary of the general cinematic experience. When as many times as not when I would sit down in front of that box or that screen and suffer the same plot lines, angles, scenes, (god forbid, cgi) and come out feeling nothing greater, nothing learned I did what one does when something continually disappoints them. I dumped it. I know, maybe I was hard on it and yes we still see each other once in awhile, we were lonely, but I lost a lot of trust. I was glad to have the documentary genre reintroduced to me.

Also this class helped me with some unanswered questions I had about gender politics. With the above reflections revealed, I think it's moot to say that I was interested in Rachel's course for the feminist aspect, rather than the film. Throughout my own exploration of ethics I had troubles concretely answering the question of feminism as it relates to hierarchy in general. The theory seemed incomplete to me in terms of how it regards the nature of the hierarchical structure is opposing in general. That is, does it oppose hierarchal structures altogether, does it still wish there to be such a stark Capitalism caste system, for example, are poor women equal to rich men and if so why not, and in which ways is it acceptable for them to be unequal? Why is this so? In short, was feminism concerned with the future as a matriarchy, a capital-archy, or anarchy? Don't let the term throw you, we are simply talking about the complete absence of hierarchy. Also, if gender itself has ever been seen as a hierarchy, will we be able to ever resolve the effects of the damage that it imposed? While mostly we appreciated the critique feminism and feminist film studies have brought to vivid attention, and did not have much time to spend on understanding a possible reification of the theory on the the politic side, I still believe I have come a lot closer to answering that question. (See my other post about my paper.)

But yes, in all I only wish we could have had this same class over a longer period of time. I would have liked to try to make a film! I wasn't very confident in my abilities to do that, and was blown away by what some had did with little or no experience. Hearing some people's experiences with gender, both amongst ourselves and from the films was fascinating and a growing experience.

Emma's conclusion was that all forms of hierarchy, the one which kept women oppressed as well as the one which kept people poor, as well as one which presumed things about you because of your race. Emma worked with other anarchists of the time to construct an ideology to be called "anarcha-feminism" which advocates that all oppression comes from the same general structure which could be directly combated. It recognized, more than anything, that equality among two classification's of humans is always going to leave a subset of people and therefore someone is left to discriminate against as long as there remains oppression and coercion in general. Many don't believe human-kind is mature enough for this sort of system, and I'd have to agree that they were right, right now we're not. But, a goal to aim for, and a defensible theory about why it is hard to fight only one small part of oppression at a time, as long as the general structure remains.

Posted by Douglas Young at 10:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

For my final project I delved into the topic of why it is difficult to realize a directed response known as "feminism." Searching around some I found some branches of feminism which attempted to imagine the manifestation of feminist theory. One of the most interesting activists of the early public onset of gender issues in the political realm in America was Emma Goldman. Today seen as one of the founding thinkers in the roots of feminism, at the time she did not consider herself a supporter of the suffrage movement, what today is referred to more generally as an aspect of first-wave feminism. Emma from the beginning, while obviously and ardently a support of women's rights, she noticed immediately the irreconcilability of it with hierarchy in general. As she put:

"Needless to say, I am not opposed to woman suffrage on the conventional ground that she is not equal to it. I see neither physical, psychological, nor mental reasons why woman should not have the equal right to vote with man. But that can not possibly blind me to the absurd notion that woman will accomplish that wherein man has failed. If she would not make things worse, she certainly could not make them better. To assume, therefore, that she would succeed in purifying something which is not susceptible of purification, is to credit her with supernatural powers. Since woman's greatest misfortune has been that she was looked upon as either angel or devil, her true salvation lies in being placed on earth; namely, in being considered human, and therefore subject to all human follies and mistakes. Are we, then, to believe that two errors will make a right? Are we to assume that the poison already inherent in politics will be decreased, if women were to enter the political arena? The most ardent suffragists would hardly maintain such a folly."

Just as true as in 1911, American politics remain a garbled mess that have hardly done anything noticeably different since women gained the right to vote. In Emma's eyes to recognize your place in culture's hierarchy and to fight for a better position within this merely displaces the rights of others. One can only get to the next rung of a ladder on the struggle of the rung below it. Only when one questions this very model, until we fight against or give up the things we benefit from for our discrimination (a whole longer discussion) the system will recreate itself in a new way.

My research helped me realize that feminism is incomplete if it does not recognize the role that hierarchy in general plays into the theorems. If it misses this subtlety then the reckless system it wishes to depose will only manifest itself in another way, which will further serve to discriminate against some classification of people. For these reasons Feminist needs to study and establish a position on hierarchy in general in order to successfully become a powerful subversive and liberating force.

Posted by Douglas Young at 10:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I’ve really enjoyed taking Feminist Film Studies this summer. I came in expecting to watch Hollywood films and critique their representations of women. Obviously, there’s a whole lot more to Feminist Film studies than I’d thought. I knew next to nothing about the theories we studied in this course—the male gaze, oppositional cinema, the feminist avant-garde, the connection between feminist film making and documentary, and the possibility of the female gaze (as potentially manifest in Campion’s The Piano)—all of these ideas were new to me. Even arguments critiquing existing feminist film theories, like critique of the absence of a female gaze and bell hooks on the problematic male gaze. With this onslaught of theory and critique, I felt that some of the beauty of filmmaking was lost (of course this always seems to happen to some degree when art is picked apart and analyzed). And I don’t mean to throw out analysis— I’m just worried that we shouldn’t be so hasty to trash dominant cinema altogether due to a past we’re now conflicted about. Audre Lorde says that “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house� – but what if some of the master’s tools work well, and positively? What if they create beautiful results? Can’t we merely throw out those that don’t work for us and replace them with newer models? All of cinema’s norms and constructions prior to feminist film studies were not necessarily bad. It would be a shame not to enjoy a classic Hollywood movie solely because of it’s lack of proper depiction of women. To some degree, I believe that these films may reflect the views on women held by society in their contexts. Though we look back and cringe, I think the cultural context needs to be taken into account and a bit (if only just a bit) of grace should be granted. I don’t want to have the entire illusion of cinema exposed by critique. I hope we can somehow strike a balance between understanding where a film is coming from and being critical of its content and form, all the while getting lost in the cinema magic.

I've really enjoyed being in a class with all of you. Thanks!

-Anna K-O

Posted by Annie at 4:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Besides opening my eyes to many different films and authors, this class helped me make sense of feminist and queer theory. I had taken a class this past fall called "Theorizing Dancing Bodies" in which we talked about Butler and other such theorists but I simply couldn't grasp warren their ideas/concepts. After this class, however, strengthen my understanding for which I am greatful.

I also learned that a lot goes into making a film. A film crew has to be 100% dedicated to the project or else it won't get made and the message won't reach the target audience. Also, the director of a film has to know a lot about lighting, color, film angles, etc in order to convey his/her message.

A few surprises: I had no idea it was so difficult for women to get into the film-making industry (the industry is still very sexist which made me quite sad). I also learned just how important correct terminology is when discussing trans issues. I'm very thankful that my eyes were opened to this topic because I had never really encountered it before; I appreciate learning about different people whenever i can. I also was impressed with everyone's final project films. Seriously y'all! Fabulous work!

I wish I had taken the opportunity to learn how to edit a video but sadly there just wasn't enough time on my end. I guess that's what i get for juggling 2 classes and nightly dance rehearsals.

Thank you everyone for making this class interesting and fun. I greatly enjoyed it!

Posted by baker473 at 4:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

First of all, I would just like to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this class. I have never taken a film studies course before and I am so glad I did. At first I was nervous because I didn’t know what to expect from the class, or Rachel, but now I feel like I have learned a significant amount of information as a result. I can “officially� call myself a blogger now, and I have gained the necessary tools in order to look at media through a feminist lens, which is something I really never did before. After this class, I know I will never watch a film the same way again.

I have also learned a great deal of information on technology, and to not be afraid of the computer (thank you Rachel for your willingness to teach me, and for your patience). Most importantly, I have acquired a considerable amount of knowledge on feminist theory in relation to film/and or other media. I have taken additional classes relating to theory, and they only briefly touched on feminist theory, and they were never in relation to film studies.

From reading the articles of Kuhn, Kaplan, Mulvey, etc., to watching films, and having in-class discussions, I will take with me the key ideas/and or arguments of feminist theory and its relation to film/and or other media. I might even muster up the courage to create a short film by myself someday after watching all of the incredible media pieces in class the past few days! And to know that many of the media pieces were “firsts� for some people is amazing! Even though our time together was somewhat short, I will never forget the class, Rachel, or classmates. It was so nice for everyone to express their opinions without judgment/and or criticism. Enjoy the rest of your summer everyone! Thank you!

Posted by smiles79 at 4:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The best thing I've gained from my class experience is unquestionably the jump-start of my video project. While I've been collecting footage for a few months, I was actually feeling rather uninspired to start piecing things together-- which would have been a big mistake. This is the first time that a class has actually inspired my movie-making, and for that I am really grateful. I am so glad that this class was able to be as intimate as it was, and I believe we're all very lucky to have shared this unique structure. If I had taken this as a lecture, I would have gotten a lot less out of it.
I've also been able to work on my understandings(/respect) of words and theories that I tend to find problematic. My position as a queer, trans person has given me a certain type of critical awareness, a kind that has kept me away from readings that I knew would be less-than-current. Being forced to read some important theory that I would not have chosen to was a rewarding experience. Even though I still feel the same way, I have a better grip on the context of some of these texts. I know there's plenty of work left to be done.
I look forward to doing mine.

Posted by Remy at 3:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The main thing I am going to take from this class is an increased confidence in my ability to understand and discuss film through a feminist lens of analysis. The scholarly readings we did helped me to gain a good working knowledge of the history of feminist thought with regards to the cinema. I had often read excerpts from Mulvey’s article and had heard passing references to other theorists in my other film classes, but I never felt I knew enough of the theory to discuss it with respect to the films I watched or to formulate my own opinions and theories with respect to the ideas that have already been circulating for years.
The other incredibly valuable thing about this course for me was the classroom environment. It was wonderful to be working with a small group of dedicated, thoughtful, diverse and respectful individuals. The atmosphere was both intellectually rigorous and incredibly comfortable. It was a great place to work together in order to develop our opinions about the various theories presented and share our analyses of the films we watched. The respectful atmosphere made it easy and comfortable to share opinions and ideas and the diverse and thoughtful student group made the conversations lively and interesting. (Obviously, so did Rachel, but if I say that, even in these parentheses, I sound like an awful kiss ass) What is most important about all of this is that after taking this class, in this environment, I feel familiar with the theory and comfortable with my ideas about it. I feel like I will be able to bring the theory I learned and opinions I developed in this class into other classes I take into the future and into other discussions with students and intellectuals, and that feels pretty damn good.

Posted by CGM at 2:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I wanted to take a film class and knew less than I would have liked about feminism so I decided to take this class, so glad I did! I have learned so much about film, feminism, and technology. I thoroughly enjoyed it and am taking so much information with me. This class has caused me to look more critically at the media in my everyday life. I cant help but notice things in movies, Internet, magazines, everything. Looking at the production company seal, where the villain stands on the screen, and frames frames everywhere. It is impossible to watch movies like I used to.

I knew very little about feminism and now I have a complete overview. Getting to understand what these directors go through and what they struggle with to get their films made was so moving. Everyone from Kimberly Pierce to Deepa Mehta is inspiring not just to filmmakers but any women entering a field filled with adversity.
I also learned a lot about using technology. I learned how to blog, add pictures to blogs, take screen captures, use a mini DV camera, and edit in imovie. I now have all of these wonderful new tools to create and express myself artistically. I was nervous about making my final video presentation but you were so supportive and helpful Rachel that it was easy, thank you so much.
This class was filled with so many interesting, unique, and knowledgeable people. I enjoyed all of the discussions and getting to understand people’s opinions about feminism, film, and how they intersect. Everyone was so personable and a joy to talk with in and out of class. It was a lovely environment to learn in.

Posted by Sophia at 1:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I have enjoyed this class so much. In the beginning, as Rachel had warned us, I wasn’t used to and therefore didn’t appreciate being able to analyze film and media in a critical way. It didn’t take long though for me to get into the habit and find a greater purpose behind watching movies and media with a closer eye and sharper analysis. I know now that, at least for a while to come, that I won’t be able to watch anything the same way. Now that I have spent time with a great class and a true teacher who has taken the time to discuss and process the images and messages of film and media, which are so often skimmed over, I have develop a new kind of knowledge that I wasn’t expecting to gain. I no longer just sit down and turn on the television and “zone out� as I used to, now I see the details that go into making film and media, and to me that’s a good thing.

I had learned about the feminist praxis before, but wasn’t given the tools to apply it. It was an amazing opportunity to learn and spend time on feminist/film theory and then use it in practice by making my own media. I think everyone did an amazing job with their pieces, and I really enjoyed spending the last two days of class seeing the result of work in class and the bond we developed in such a short time. I would love to continue to see anything that anyone works on. Maybe we could post it to the blog if that’s possible? Thank you so much Rachel! All of the time you spent with me, teaching me and giving me the tools to express my vision was a great gift. Thanks to the class for a great space where I felt comfortable doing that.

Posted by Abby Newberg at 11:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

When I registered for this class, I wasn't really sure what to expect. It had been a while since I'd taken any film classes, and I'd never really discussed feminism in depth before. I absolutely loved taking this class. I felt that we had some great discussions, and we really had an awesome group of people who were genuinely interested in talking about feminism and film and where and how the two intersect. I loved the variety of the films we watched, and I thought they fit in very well with what we were discussing in terms of the readings.

It's hard to sum up what I learned. I'd say overall I'm now able to analyze films from a feminist perspective, and to include not only content, but context and form as well. Our discussions of form reminded me of why I became an SCMC major in the first place. One of the issues I had with some of my SCMC classes was that they were all theory and no practice. In this class, we got to do both. I was excited to have the opportunity to create my own piece of media, and to learn the tools I needed to do so (i.e. taking a stab at using IMovie). I think it's important to have a mix of theory and practice to put theory into a live, active context rather than just words on paper or a computer screen.

With that, I believe it's important to know the history of feminist film theory, and I'm glad that was included in this class. Feminism is constantly changing, and I feel that practice can help to illustrate these changes, and offer multiple perspectives on various issues. I think that with this class, we just started to scratch the surface of both feminism and film. This class was a great introduction to both, and I hope to continue analyzing films in terms of context, content, and form, and to engage in practice through the creation of more media in the future.

Posted by Radical Dreamer at 11:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

First of all, I just want to say how much I loved taking this class. I learned a great number of film terms I never knew before, and now find myself analyzing movies constantly. Mulvey’s article and terms were the most helpful in terms of feminist theory, and Kaplan’s feminist theoretical models were simple and descriptive, so that I could understand the basics of each term. I also particularly enjoyed learning about the history of feminism, especially second wave feminism because I was always perplexed as to the details of this movement. The Hip-hop documentaries we watched in class were also very helpful, because they gave an overview of the music industry and music videos, and provided a great deal of information—I have taken other classes that discuss hip-hop, but have not shown films like these, that provide so much information.

In regards to feminist film, I would suggest that directors attempt to make films that contain aspects of homosexuality, or that allow for ambiguity of sexual preference—to at least eliminate heteronormativity. I would also suggest films that are more ambiguous, open-ended (as Kuhn suggests) and that lean away from conventional plots and camera shots.

Again, I just want to say how much I loved this class. This class has inspired me to make a documentary about my own family. I have always toyed with the idea, but now I’m determined to make it. My uncle has editing software, and we both think it would be a great idea to tape our next family reunion and make a doc. with interviews. Thanks so much Rachel!

Posted by Samantha B at 11:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This was such a great class and I really learned a lot from it. I think the two most important things I picked up from it were the film terms and the idea of intersectionality. We had talked about intersectionality a little in my past GWSS classes (taken at another University) but I felt like we really explored it in this class. Looking at No! and Water it was so apparent that the issues these women face are no way near the issues I have to face when it comes to my womanhood.

Plus just meeting all the different people in the class helped me learn. I had amazing talks before and during class with a lot of the students that I think cleared some previous judgment I’d had. And as far as the film terms go I now understand more about how a film is put together and will be able to talk to my film friend back home more in depth about movies. I’m really looking forward to sharing my knowledge. I haven’t agreed with everything we’ve read in class but I learned some interesting theory that I’ve already started discussing with others outside of class. Thanks again Rachel, I really did love this class.

Posted by gagui001 at 8:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

For this Final Project I decided to do a short three-minute video summarizing my unique story concerning my ethnicity. I wanted to express my feelings and struggles growing up Half Puerto Rican in a small Minnesota town. I was a first generation American born Puerto Rican on my father’s side, but I lived with my mother who was born in mound, my grandma still lives in mound. I identified with this very close community in my town, however I still felt curious and unaware of my Puerto Rican heritage, growing up and I knew very little about that part of me. I felt like I should know more and started to have questions about the culture as the world was asking me to define my ethnicity, check the box Puerto Rican, Hispanic, Non-white. I would do this but did it mean? I spent a week in Puerto Rico during the end of high school. It was this wonderfully enlightening experience that helped me feel confident in identifying myself as Puerto Rican.

Posted by Sophia at 11:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

For my final I have created an extended preview of the autobiodocumentary I am already working on for my senior project in GWSS/SCMC. First I aim to make visible my trans body. I will not settle for the "Boys Don't Cry" representation of trans masculinity. I am interested in capturing the many ways that my experience is both wonderful and frightening. As my focus is on change and its relation to linguistics, I have tried to highlight the reality of my construction (of cinema and of identities) and the many authors who have influenced my way of seeing. I have put my camera on myself and also given the camera to my partner to explore my feelings as a subject of documentary. I also seek to expose the ways in which current trans health care pathologizes and excludes. This preview is a brief glimpse of what I will be finishing in Spring 2010.

Also, I ended up finishing this entire project with Final Cut Pro instead of Adobe Premiere Pro. It was a good exercise in editing outside of my comfort zone.

Posted by Remy at 10:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

For our final project, we collaborated on a piece of avant-garde cinema. We used Laura Mulvey's "Visual Pleasure in Narrative Cinema" as a jumping off point in determining our methods. The film involves ruptures of the male gaze, exposure of the means of production and alternative forms of visual pleasure and narrative structure in order to displace the conventional framework presented by mainstream film.
The film is structured around a dream narrative to allow for an unconventional presentation of time and space. It also relies heavily on humor. It is our belief that entertainment is a worthwhile and valuable tool in building a relationship with one’s audience and we believe entertaining films can be made which break free of some of the dominating and dominant forms presented by Hollywood. That is not to say our film is without reference. It relies on several techniques which come out of the slapstick and cartoon traditions in order to express its humor.
We would still like to avoid plot details for the time being. The more pertinent issues will be addressed in a Q&A following the film.
Enjoy!
Carl and Anna

Posted by CGM at 12:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Hollywood often tries to use realism to convey and represent what is perceived as natural (Kaplan, “Feminist Theoretical Models"). Throughout history, Hollywood films (with a few exceptions) have had a tendency to oppress and marginalize Mexico and Mexicans through representation. With my creation of a digital story I hope to offer my own personal narrative of my study abroad experience in Mexico to offer a perspective that challenges the stereotypes of Mexico and Mexicans typically seen in Hollywood cinema.

Common Hollywood Stereotypes of Mexico and Mexicans:

- Mexico is often shown as either a beautifully hopeless Third World country or a desolate, poverty-stricken land of barbarians.

- Spring Break towns and/or border towns.

- Women- perceived as exotic sexual objects of desire for the male gaze (common representation- Mexican maid).

- Men- carefree, lazy, macho criminal, sex/drug addict, mustache, poor English accent, barbaric, and inferior to the "American hero".

- Mexican history often inaccurate, incomplete, or dependent on American history.

The means in which I’ve chosen to present my project is through digital storytelling. Digital storytelling offers a mode of personal narrative through media that is often posted online for viewing, which offers a wide capacity of distribution. It exists outside of mainstream media (i.e. Hollywood cinema) and offers differing perspectives of the world. Because of this, digital storytelling can educate and open up a dialogue on topics not previously discussed nor even seen in mainstream media.

Project Components Include:

- voiceover (reading of my poem "La Gente del Fuego"- written while in Mexico)

- drum track (response to poem)

- photos of my trip

My visit to Mexico has both inspired me and changed my preconceptions of Mexico that I gathered from Hollywood cinema. I hope my story will open up a conversation about the issues of representations of Mexico in Hollywood films. In addition, I hope to combat the dominating stereotypes of a nation that is consistently oppressed and marginalized by Hollywood filmmakers.

Sources:

- Couldry, Nick. “Mediatization or Mediation? Alternative Understandings of the Emergent Space of Digital Storytelling.�

- Greenfield, Gerard Michael and Carlos E. Cortés. “Harmony and Conflict of Intercultural Images: The Treatment of Mexico in U.S. Feature Films and K-12 Textbooks.�

- Kaplan, Ann E. “Feminist Theoretical Models.�

- Morales, Ed. “Domestic Plight.�

- Vasey, Ruth. “Foreign Parts: Hollywood's Global Distribution and the Representation of Ethnicity.�

- Williams, Linda. “Type and Stereotype: Chicano Images in Film.�

My story:

Download file

Posted by Radical Dreamer at 12:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

In my short film I hope to highlight that my gender is a construction. By showing the transformations, which I have gone through in my life so far, and the female gender identity construction placed on me, I hope to do this. Although Judith Butler’s views on performativity and gender construction are complex I have taken what she says in Gender Trouble as a partial explanation of what I am doing in my film. In the introduction to Gender Trouble she argues that, “gender is performative: no identity exists behind the acts that supposedly "express" gender, and these acts constitute—rather than express—the illusion of the stable gender identity. Furthermore, if the appearance of “being� a gender is thus an effect of culturally influenced acts, then there exists no solid, universal gender: constituted through the practice of performance, the gender "woman" (like the gender "man") remains contingent and open to interpretation and "resignification."

By showing the preparation of myself in different ways, I highlight the reality of how indoctrinated stereotypes and binaries of gender have been for me. Through visual transformation of myself and the exposure of constructing visual cues, which in hegemonic society identify bodies in a binary male or female manner, I break down the boundaries placed on me and show my individual examination of binary gender views.
Using digital storytelling I turn the camera on myself and address face on the way in which I perform and re-construct my gender. Nick Couldry argues that digital storytelling, “provides the means to distribute more widely the capacity to tell important stories about oneself – to represent oneself as a social, and therefore potentially political, agent – in a way that is registered in the public domain� (386). This is what I have tried to do.

Posted by Abby Newberg at 12:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I am doing my final project on female representation in slasher films. I specifically want to address why women are the first to be killed in slasher movies/and or the last to survive in slasher films. To support my argument/thesis, I watched two Hollywood slasher films: Psycho (1960), directed by auteur Alfred Hitchcock, and A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), directed by Wes Craven. I also did scholarly research and found sources by Carol Clover (“Her Body, Himself: Gender in the Slasher Film� and Men, Women, and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film); and Laura Mulvey (“Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema�).

Slasher films are a sub-genre of horror films, typically involving a psychopathic killer (who sometimes wears a mask or a disguise). The victims tend to be young, female, attractive and often nude. They are usually high school, or college-aged adolescents who engage in vice-ridden activities such as sex, alcohol, drugs, and crime. These films typically begin with the murder of a young woman and sometimes end with a lone female survivor who manages to subdue the killer. In a slasher film, the killer almost always uses unconventional weapons, such as blades, chainsaws, cleavers, and blunt objects. The killer rarely, if ever, uses guns. There is often a story that explains how the killer developed his violent mental state, and why he focuses primarily on a particular type of victim or a specific location.

Scholary Sources:

One of the big contributions of Clover’s work is her Final Girl Theory. A Nightmare on Elm Street is a good example of this when the main character, Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) is the lone survivor of the killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund). Clover notes that the Final Girl is usually smarter, more conscientious, and more morally pure than her cohorts. The Final Girl tends not to have sex or use drugs, and is often the first of her group to sense danger. The killer is often a man who is feminized in some way (for example, Norman Bates character in Psycho), and there is often a relationship or history of some kind with the person who turns out to be the killer. Over the course of the film, the Final Girl tends to become more and more masculine and phallic, as she becomes more active and aggressive, turning from hiding and cowering from the killer to fighting back or in fact hunting him down.

Laura Mulvey uses psychoanalysis to understand the fascination of Hollywood cinema. This fascination can be explained through the notion of scopophilia, the desire to see. Classical cinema, adds Mulvey, stimulates the desire to look by integrating structures of voyeurism and narcissism into the story and the image. Voyeuristic visual pleasure is produced by looking at another (character, figure, situation) as our object, whereas narcissistic visual pleasure can be derived from self-identification with the (figure in the) image. Mulvey has analyzed scopophilia in classical cinema as a structure that functions on the axis of activity and passivity. This binary opposition is gendered. The narrative structure of traditional cinema establishes the male character as active and powerful: he is the agent around whom the dramatic action unfolds and the look gets organized. The female character is seen as passive and powerless: she is the object of desire for the male character(s).

Posted by smiles79 at 11:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I am doing my final project on fat positive feminism. I explore this through a personal documentary I made about my life as a fat girl growing up in a weight obsessed society. I use news clips, personal stories, pictures and music to show the many different ways prejudice can take shape when aimed at fat people. Sometimes unwittingly, sometimes with incredible purpose. By exploring these issues, I hope to open up your eyes to the constant attack that goes on at fat people all day everyday. It is the last truly acceptable discrimination in this country and by examining why, I hope to inspire action in others to change their attitudes towards the dreaded fat people.

Posted by gagui001 at 11:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Many Science Fiction films have a clear predecessor in the realm of Science Fiction literature. Because of this, Science Fiction offers an uncommonly visible lineage from paper to screen. The same extent is not apparent in, for example, slasher films. As a literary genre, Science Fiction is known for its forward thinking. Authors like Mary Shelley, George Orwell, and Arthur C. Clarke pushed boundaries of contemporary feminist issues like social justice, gender, and sexuality. Hollywood movies, as a rule, are more susceptible to the vision damaging consequences of mass consumption. Science Fiction movies generally are not pushing our conceptions of these feminist issues outside of hetero-male norms; However, there are instances worthy of further analysis. I feel Ridley Scott's Alien is representative of main stream science fiction cinema. While pushing some boundaries, Science Fiction film largely fails the rigors of my feminist critique.

Tomorrow I will talk about the context, content, and form of Alien. I'll bring some images and clips from the film to illustrate my arguments. I'd also like to talk about how I personally view science fiction film versus literature.

Sources include:
Carol Clover,(1992). Men, Women and Chain Saws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film. Princeton
Mulvey's Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema

Posted by Michael Kirk at 3:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In my paper I discuss the representation of black females bodies in hip-hop music videos, specifically Nelly's "Tip Drill." I start my paper talking about how black females bodies have been objectified. I discuss Hottentot Venus and Josephine Baker in this section. While both of these women's were treated differently, both exhibit bodily exploitation as well as the male gaze.

From there, I begin to talk about music videos today. I analyze "Tip Drill" which was not a treat, let me tell you. I argue how these images/representations are harmful toward women with support from the three videos we watched in class ("Dreamworlds 3," "Beyond Beats & Rhymes," and "No!").

Even though I did the "long" paper, I included still images of "Tip Drill" to show my reader exactly what I am talking about in my analysis of the video.

Posted by baker473 at 10:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In my PowerPoint (and also in my paper) I will be discussing Steven Shainberg’s two films Secretary and Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus. Although I am critiquing his films, I hope to critique Steven Shainberg as a director, and to question his thought process and the reasons behind his decisions.

I intend to argue that Shainberg should be praised for making films that feature strong female protagonists and that expose controversial aspects of sex and relationships. I will be discussing female agency and male/female gazes in Shainberg’s films, and how his protagonists’ gazes often do not objectify the female body, contrary to many Hollywood narratives.

However, despite their progressive elements, Shainberg’s films reinforce patriarchy and heteronormativity in our society as well as in the Hollywood cinema because of his problematic plot choices. As such, his films fail to challenge conventional modes of cinema, which would otherwise be possible if Shainberg put forethought into his films and resisted what are considered “normal� events within the plot, such as closure (according to Kuhn). My sources include: Kuhn’s article “Passionate Detachment,� Mulvey’s article “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,� an interview with Shainberg about Secretary (courtesy of Lions Gate Films), and an interview with Shainberg about Fur by Peter Sanchez.

Format of PowerPoint:

Background on Steven Shainberg

Context of Secretary

Context of Fur

Interviews with Shainberg, demonstrating his good intentions for his films

Good Aspects of his films: Female Agency

Male/Female Gazes—Objectification of the male

Problematic Plot Choices in both films that compromise their potential

Posted by Samantha B at 8:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I am curious to know if anyone went to the 10 second film festival at The Soap Factory on the 4th. I had plans to attend it up they fell through. I would be interested to hear anyone's opinions of it...that is if anyone went.

Posted by baker473 at 11:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

U students can borrow cameras for 3 days from Wilson library:
http://www.lib.umn.edu/smart/wilson/hardware-a.phtml

If you are a CLA student, you can borrow a camera for free from CLA OIT:
http://www.claoit.umn.edu/loaners/default.php

Posted by Rae at 1:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

An actor looking for work, Ã?ngel, seeks a job with his long lost childhood friend, and lover, Enrique. (Un)fortunately, the uninspired director Enrique currently has no work to give. Hoping to inspire, Ã?ngel offers Enrique a script he'd written. The story in the script is of their shared youth in a Catholic school. It speaks of their blossoming love as well as the sexual abuse suffered together.

Bad Education, was written and directed by Pedro Almodóvar. Almodóvar has directed many internationally popular movies, including 2006's Volver.

The opening shot of the scene is a downward midshot. We are outside, at foot level. Allowing you to see very clearly there are two types of people here.

Here we see Ã?ngel, known in his childhood as Ignacio, and Enrique centered in the shot. We see there's something special about Enrique in blue. We see Padre Manola reaching for, choosing, Ignacio.

This beautiful frame within a frame shot, captures the game as a televised event. Either the goal posts are curved, or
a special lens is giving this shot a bubbled, "television screen" look.

This shot is in slow motion, and actually freeze-frames as Padre Manola goes for the save. Exagerating the dramatic efforts he must go through to maintain control.

This downward shot keeps us in the action, while panning to the other goal keeper. We watch Ignacio dribble the ball to challenge Padre Manola's counterpart.

Here Ignacio confronts Enrique, Padre Manola's competitor for Ignacio's affection. He's ready for a showdown.

Ignacio returns the gaze, and we see everyone in the background is out of focus.

This over the shoulder shot completes the classic shot/reverse shot sequence between Ignacio and Enrique, solidifying that this film is about them, and their view of each other.

Finally, Ignacio decides to deliberately miss his shot, saving Enrique the exertion Padre Manola had to go through.

Posted by Michael Kirk at 8:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Gattaca is the story of a society which has perfected discrimination to a science. No longer is one judged with such arbitrary qualities as race or gender, but one’s abilities. A seemingly utopian ideal, one our society ostensibly works for, where the qualified person always gets the nod. The society in the film ultimately suffers from the same fallacy which has plagued all societies to date however, including our own: that a person’s worth comes from ‘good breeding,’ and completely disregards that intangible element 'human spirit.' While the understanding of the constitution of ‘good breeding’ has been dynamic over culture and time as convenient, relentless is this notion of natural hierarchy. ‘Ethical’ societies, though, such as our own perhaps, seek to make this inequality at least a fair one. The world of Gattaca is no different, but it has things correct; it conjures its caste system from that infallible bastion of our time: science.

The main character of the film, Vincent Freeman, is not one of ‘good breeding.’ Vincent, a member of the minority lower class was born “a child of god.� Unlike the privileged class, Vincent’s parents decided not to have Vincent genetically altered to meet the demands of the day, a move which would otherwise set his spot in the natural hierarchy with scientific clarity. Vincent’s dreams were infeasible and absurd to everyone but himself, with no hope of even beginning his goals while he bears the discrimination that his parent’s choice lays upon him. Determined, however, Vincent finds a back door into his dreams.

Not even a glance back

Posted by Douglas Young at 7:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)