It's about a week or so after these postings, but I just felt I had to respond to this discussion...even if it is out of order of discussion. I grew up in the Bay Area, specifically, San Jose about 15 minutes South of San Francisco. I grew up with a lot of gay and bisexual friends, and in that area, homophobia can actually get you more damaged than than actually being gay or lesbian. That being said, many of my friends over the last few years have had official same-sex wedding ceremonies, and I find it puzzling that Prop. 8 will actually allow the weddings prior to the election valid, but make them illegal after the ban. I think that might be the most absurd bit of information I have ever heard, and it might be perfect example of why Prop 8 should be illegal in the first place. On another note, I don't think weddings are really capitalistic, but do agree with Jessica's comment that divorces are, especially marriages founded on prenuptual agreements of high class society. Kinda reminds me of that flick with George Clooney and Catherine Zeta Jones, "Intolerable Cruelty". It's quite amusing because it satires how common most marriages are used in American society as stepping stones for riches and wealth, regardless of the emotion involved in a marriage. This could also be seen with actors/actresses and media symbols, ironically marrying their costars and fellow colleagues as PR and more profit. Once again, I don't think marriages are exactly capitalistic, but marriages within a capitalistic society pretty much make the sanctity of marriage
irrelevant.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
FWD from Week 9 discussion and Response to Heidi's post
I don't quite agree with Heidi on this one. I found 40 year Old Virgin to be a bit on the traditional side in comparison to some of the other radical examples given by McDonald and especially in contrast to Annie Hall, BUT I do think there are a few radical elements involved that might be overlooked. For example, although Carell's character does fit the stereotypical guy meets girl scenario, it's the different characters around him that help Andy go through a character development. Rudd's character, the nastalgic, damaged (two souls intertwined) seems to be the typical heartbroken character; what Woody Allen would be like after Annie Hall's climax. He gives Andy a big box of porn to try and help him because that is probably what he uses to get over his love malfunction. Malco's character tells Andy he needs to better his image, and to attract women with looks, thus forcing him to wax portions of his hamburger meat off, ironically making a huge smiley face on his stomach. Rogen's character, being the silent poetic type, tells Andy to plant a seed (marijuana reference) and ask questions to women, and once again Andy attempts, but doesn't really get anywhere except a confusing, mislead conversation. All three characters, including the others in the workplace, help develop Andy's character in comparison to the real world around him. They reinforce the stereotypes of sexually active adults to contrast the rarity of a virgin adult. Since the film purposely recognizes the "boy meets girl" scenario, and at the same time develops the theme with radical supporting characters, I would consider this film within the radical romance sub-genre.
I feel I must also mention, since this film really doesn't ever show any sexual activity (minus some pornography, failed attempt flashbacks and wet dreams), and becomes the central conflict of Andy's character, the theme of the film and the fable taboo in the workplace, this film might
be considered a sex comedy as well. Yes, he does finally have intercourse in the end with someone he loves, but that's the big pay off for beating around the bush for two hours (by bush I mean false love or just sex, the object of what Andy is not trying to achieve based on his friends recommendations). If Andy would have taken the drunk girl, the book store girl, the weird bath tub freak or any others besides Keener's character, the same message would not be well received. Andy would only fall into the trap that his friends put him into. Through Andy's trial
and error, patience and experimentation he gains a valuable lesson in love and not just the overused term: SEX.
I feel I must also mention, since this film really doesn't ever show any sexual activity (minus some pornography, failed attempt flashbacks and wet dreams), and becomes the central conflict of Andy's character, the theme of the film and the fable taboo in the workplace, this film might
be considered a sex comedy as well. Yes, he does finally have intercourse in the end with someone he loves, but that's the big pay off for beating around the bush for two hours (by bush I mean false love or just sex, the object of what Andy is not trying to achieve based on his friends recommendations). If Andy would have taken the drunk girl, the book store girl, the weird bath tub freak or any others besides Keener's character, the same message would not be well received. Andy would only fall into the trap that his friends put him into. Through Andy's trial
and error, patience and experimentation he gains a valuable lesson in love and not just the overused term: SEX.
FWD from Week 8 discussion
Yes, this discussion will be in the form of a film student's perspective, but that's what I do and why I'm taking this course... so shoot me.
I found McDonald's chapter on "Radical Romance" the most insightful so far in this course, especially since we are now getting into films and relevance in pop culture. The Graduate and Annie Hall, two of my most cherished films of this genre, strike me on a personal level because of their brutal honesty and depiction of love and individuality. This is a
pet peeve of mine because, as McDonald states, the two previous sub-genres of sex comedy and screwball are complete opposites and mere foundations for what filmmaking can really achieve once production codes are diminished, thus allowing the filmmaker to portray the romance on a much more personal and controversial level. I especially liked how McDonald breaks down Annie Hall to demonstrate the power of a Director/Actor in a form that can define its own genre. Woody Allen uses the film as a "therapeutic activity" to attempt to dissect the human condition. He uses filmmaking techniques such as jump cuts, flashbacks, sub titles, split-screen, cartoon, third and first person narration to acknowledge the conventions of the traditional romance, European films and false ideology as well as his own flaws as a human being. As McDonald states, these techniques aren't used to dazzle us or ignore the morals Allen is trying to project, but they are used to accentuate how one might reflect on the theme of romance, through bits and pieces of awareness through the subconscious. I love this film because it does play out like a dream, or a confession to an analyst, but instead of words being used, we see images. Sometimes the images are actually contradicting Allen's narration, which allows the audience to take a major part in deconstruction Alvy, even though he deliberately talks to the camera/audience to break the illusion of wholeness in a film. We are reminded constantly that this is not a story, made up of over-used and cliche characters, themes and conversation, but a modern perspective
(and a narcissistic one at that) on society, sexual frustration, paranoia and the reality of romance. Woody Allen is concentrating on the individual and all the flaws that come with it, which is radicalism and subversive when compared to the obvious boy meets and loses girl/ happy ending structure of its predecessors. I feel the best characteristic of films such as The Graduate and Annie Hall are the fact that they don't incorporate happy endings. I mean because, 'cmon...let's face it, life isn't as perfect as the films from the 30's up to the end of the 60's made it out to be. Life isn't exactly divided into the "miserable and the horrible" as Alvy states half-way through the film, but it definitely doesn't always end "Happily Ever After" either. I guess call me a pessimist too, but this is actually one theme I can relate with on a personal level to these films.
Though they are about two decades before my time, I still feel that the films of the 70's, as innovative as they were, are still relevant today and hold their ground as the most honest and analytical depictions of romance... redefining the genre forever.
I found McDonald's chapter on "Radical Romance" the most insightful so far in this course, especially since we are now getting into films and relevance in pop culture. The Graduate and Annie Hall, two of my most cherished films of this genre, strike me on a personal level because of their brutal honesty and depiction of love and individuality. This is a
pet peeve of mine because, as McDonald states, the two previous sub-genres of sex comedy and screwball are complete opposites and mere foundations for what filmmaking can really achieve once production codes are diminished, thus allowing the filmmaker to portray the romance on a much more personal and controversial level. I especially liked how McDonald breaks down Annie Hall to demonstrate the power of a Director/Actor in a form that can define its own genre. Woody Allen uses the film as a "therapeutic activity" to attempt to dissect the human condition. He uses filmmaking techniques such as jump cuts, flashbacks, sub titles, split-screen, cartoon, third and first person narration to acknowledge the conventions of the traditional romance, European films and false ideology as well as his own flaws as a human being. As McDonald states, these techniques aren't used to dazzle us or ignore the morals Allen is trying to project, but they are used to accentuate how one might reflect on the theme of romance, through bits and pieces of awareness through the subconscious. I love this film because it does play out like a dream, or a confession to an analyst, but instead of words being used, we see images. Sometimes the images are actually contradicting Allen's narration, which allows the audience to take a major part in deconstruction Alvy, even though he deliberately talks to the camera/audience to break the illusion of wholeness in a film. We are reminded constantly that this is not a story, made up of over-used and cliche characters, themes and conversation, but a modern perspective
(and a narcissistic one at that) on society, sexual frustration, paranoia and the reality of romance. Woody Allen is concentrating on the individual and all the flaws that come with it, which is radicalism and subversive when compared to the obvious boy meets and loses girl/ happy ending structure of its predecessors. I feel the best characteristic of films such as The Graduate and Annie Hall are the fact that they don't incorporate happy endings. I mean because, 'cmon...let's face it, life isn't as perfect as the films from the 30's up to the end of the 60's made it out to be. Life isn't exactly divided into the "miserable and the horrible" as Alvy states half-way through the film, but it definitely doesn't always end "Happily Ever After" either. I guess call me a pessimist too, but this is actually one theme I can relate with on a personal level to these films.
Though they are about two decades before my time, I still feel that the films of the 70's, as innovative as they were, are still relevant today and hold their ground as the most honest and analytical depictions of romance... redefining the genre forever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
