VISUAL MEDIA ANALYSIS Spring / Summer 2002 P 4002 Credit weighting: 36 Assessment weighting: 15% Convenor: Thomas Austin (EH 226; tel (87)2549; email: t.r.austin@sussex.ac.uk) Tutors: Thomas Austin, Iman Hamam, Ewan Kirkland, Kate Lacey Production tutors: Lee Gooding, Ken Whittington, Lon Wright Group e-mail address: vma@central.susx.ac.uk

2

The course at a glance WEEK 1 (Jan 9, 10,11) Lecture: Introduction to course (TA) / Formal analysis of film (EK) Screenings: Narrative Space; E.T. (1982) Seminar: introductory session. WEEK 2 (Jan 16, 17,18) Lecture: Sound and image (TA) Screening: The Piano (1993) Seminar: Formal analysis of 'dominant' narrative film. WEEK 3 (Jan 23, 24,25) Lecture: Film style and authorship debates (TA) Screening: Citizen Kane (1941) Seminar: Close analysis of the production of meaning via the interaction of sound and image. WEEK 4 (Jan 30, 31, Feb 1) Lecture: French New Wave(TA) Screenings: Tirez sur le pianiste (1960); A Bout de Souffle (1959) Seminar: Close analysis of Citizen Kane ; authorship debates. WEEK 5 (Feb 6, 7, 8) Lecture: Alternative film form: Godard (TA) Screening: Weekend (1967) Seminar: Tracing the textual conventions of art cinema and the viewing strategies it invites. WEEK 6 (Feb 13, 14, 15) Lecture: Film genres 1: the musical (TA) Screening: Top Hat (1935) Seminar: Analysing Godardian 'counter-cinema' WEEK 7 READING WEEK

3

WEEK 8 (Feb 27, 28 Mar 1) Lecture: Film Genres 2: theories of genre (KL) Screening: Mildred Pierce (1945) Seminar: Close analysis of generic conventions of the musical. * Essay due * WEEK 9 (Mar 6, 7, 8) Lecture: 'Race', representation and Eurocentrism (TA) Screening: Once Were Warriors (1994) Seminar: Debating theories of genre. WEEK 10 (March 13, 14, 15) Lecture: 'Screen theory' and spectatorship (KL) Screening: Selected film extracts Seminar: Debating representation and Eurocentrism MID-COURSE REVIEW EASTER BREAK WEEK 11 (April 24,25,26) Lecture: 'The implied audience' (TA) Screening: Deep Impact (1998) Seminar: Debating psychoanalytically-informed theories of spectatorship. WEEK 12 (May 1, 2, 3) Lecture: Texts in Context (TA) Screening: The Son of the Sheik (1926) Seminar: 'Implied audience' analysis WEEK 13 (May 8, 9,10) * GROUP VIDEO DEADLINE: Mon May 6 * MOCK EXAM Seminar: Contexts of reception WEEK 14 (May 15, 16, 17) MOCK EXAM FEEDBACK; COURSE REVIEW

4

Aims of the course: Visual Media Analysis consists of two parallel strands: theory and critical method; and the video production workshop. These are designed to be mutually informing, and to give you a set of skills in the critical investigation of how meanings are produced via film techniques and styles. (Such skills will be developed through both close film analysis, and through working on and thinking about your own video production). For details of the production workshop, see pp.24 onwards below. * NB: Please note that the submission deadline for the video project has changed from previous years -- see details at pp. 24-25 below * Information from here on to p.23 relates to the theoretical-critical strand. The emphasis of the course is primarily textual. It aims to develop your ability to view critically, describe, and analyse examples of the different uses to which audio-visual language has been put. The course therefore examines not only the conventions of dominant forms of film-making, but also examples of alternative and oppositional styles, and films from different times and places. While the main emphasis throughout will be on the development of your skills in textual analysis, the course will set these analytical practices in their academic contexts, so introducing you to a range of critical approaches and to past and ongoing debates over the purpose, methods and use value of different theoretical paradigms in film studies.

Objectives of the course: By the end of the course you should be able to undertake close analysis of the production of meaning in film texts. You will have: * practised detailed description and analysis in relation to a variety of audio-visual texts; * developed your knowledge of the institution of cinema; * increased your grasp of film history; * understood the formal conventions of 'dominant' cinema; * looked closely at alternative and avant-garde styles; * engaged with theoretical accounts of film-making and spectatorship; * thought about these theoretical and analytical considerations and the strategies you will be using in your practical video projects.

5

Methods of teaching and learning: Your involvement in the course will take a number of forms: * attendance at weekly screenings * attendance at weekly lectures * participation in weekly seminars -- which on at least one occasion you will be asked to introduce and lead (usually with a partner) * individual tutorials * self-managed individual study * participation in workshops leading to production of your group video

Essay During the spring term, you will be required to write an essay of between 2,000 and 3,000 words, selected from the list of questions below. You should hand in your essay at the seminar in week 8. 1: Critically assess the uses and limitations of David Bordwell's conception of film spectatorship as a process of cognition. Illustrate your answer with one or more examples. 2: "Weekend is constructed not as a representation of reality but as the 'reality of a representation'." (Thomas Elsaesser) Consider the significance and effectiveness of the idea of self-reflexivity for alternative or oppositional film-making. 3: "Added value is what gives the (patently incorrect) impression that sound is unnecessary, that sound merely duplicates a meaning which in reality it brings about." (Michel Chion) Consider how sound and image work together to produce meaning in film. You should use at least two examples. 4: What are the uses and limitations of approaching films via a notion of authorship? 5: What are the formal differences and continuities between classical 'dominant' film and art cinema? Do you agree with arguments that distinguish between the consequences each mode has for its viewers? 6: "The aesthetic dimension of a film never exists apart from its history and culture. Equally, cultural study of film must always understand that it is studying film, which has its own specificity, its own pleasures, its own way of doing things." (Richard Dyer) Choose one critical approach to the study of film, and assess whether or not it achieves the balance between aesthetic and social-cultural understandings that Dyer proposes.

6

Essay marking criteria: * Please refer to hard copy of course document *

7

Final Assessment: The assessment of this course has three elements: * Unseen examination (worth 50%); * Group video (worth 40%); * Production critique (worth 10%). For details of the last two modes of assessment, including deadlines (which are new for 2002) see pp.16-22 below, in the section on the Video Workshop. The theoretical course is assessed by an unseen examination in early June. (The exact date will be set at the end of March.) The exam will assess your skills of textual analysis, and your ability to put such analysis to use within wider critical frameworks. A film will be screened on two separate occasions. A number of days later, you will be set an unseen three-hour examination. The exam paper will be in two sections. You will be required to answer three questions: the compulsory question from section one, then two chosen from a range of questions in section two. The compulsory first question will be based upon prior screenings of the film. The second section will consist of a broad range of questions, covering topics raised during the course. A one-hour mock exam (focusing on section one) will be conducted in week 13. Past exam papers can be accessed online at: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/USIS/pastexams

8

Reading: Key and supplementary readings are listed for each week below. It is important that you read as many of these as possible. Many of the key readings have been collected in the course reader -- as indicated by this sign: ®. The reader is available for collection from EH 145, for those who have pre-ordered a copy. In addition to the course reader, the following books offer a range of useful approaches to the field: Branston, Gill (2000) Cinema and Cultural Modernity, Open University Press * Bordwell, David and Kristin Thompson (various editions) Film Art: An

Introduction, New York: McGraw-Hill (A useful and widely used textbook on film technique and close textual analysis, but now grotesquely overpriced at £32. Try picking up a second hand copy, or reading copies from the main library. No extracts of Film Art are included in the course reader -- see most useful sections listed at weekly breakdown below) Bordwell, David, Janet Staiger, and Kristin Thompson, (1985) The Classical Hollywood Cinema: Film Style and Mode of Production to 1960 London: Routledge Bordwell, David (1985) Narration in the Fiction Film, London: Methuen * Cook, Pam and Mieke Bernink (1999) (eds) The Cinema Book 2nd edition, London: BFI Hill, John and Pamela Church Gibson (1998) (eds) The Oxford Guide to Film

Studies Oxford: Oxford University Press * Hollows, Joanne and Jancovich, Mark (eds) (1995) Approaches to Popular Film Manchester: Manchester University Press (Useful collection of overview essays. Some overlap with course reader) * Hollows, Joanne, Hutchings, Peter and Jancovich, Mark (eds) (2000)

Approaches to Popular Film London: Arnold (Collection of important original essays in film studies. In effect a companion to Approaches to Popular Film. Some overlap with course reader) Lapsley, Robert and Michael Westlake (1988) Film Theory: An Introduction Manchester: MUP

9

* Maltby, Richard (1995) Hollywood Cinema: An Introduction, Oxford: Basil Blackwell (No overlap with reader. An excellent book that covers a broader range than Film Art, and consequently assumes rather more knowledge on the part of the reader. Particularly worth reading if you're planning to take the third year option on Hollywood.) Nelmes, Jill (ed) (1999) An Introduction to Film Studies 2nd edition London: Routledge (Less sophisticated than Maltby, but a useful entry-level book) Nichols, Bill (ed) (1985) Movies and Methods (Two volumes) Berkeley:

University of California Press (Another collection of important essays in film studies) Stam, Robert, Robert Burgoyne and Sandy Flitterman-Lewis (1992) New Vocabularies in Film Semiotics London: Routledge You should also consult periodicals in the library such as Camera Obscura; Film Quarterly; Journal of Film and Video; Screen; Sight and Sound, The Velvet Light Trap, and Wide Angle. A useful database for information about academic publications on film and media: http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Functions/mcs.html

THE PATTERN OF TEACHING Lectures: Wednesdays at 9.15 am in A2. Commence 9 January. Lectures introduce an area of analytical inquiry, a methodological tradition, or a particular mode of film-making and critical investigations of it, by drawing on appropriate examples. Set readings combine work on these issues with case studies focused more closely on the set films. Screenings: Wednesdays at 2pm in A1. Commence 9 January. All films will be shown on a video projection system. In some weeks, two films will be shown, with a short interval. Attendance at screenings is compulsory, and will be monitored. (If you have sporting commitments at this time, please see your tutor.) To facilitate the further study of film texts, the Media Studies Library (Essex House 145) holds some relevant videos for overnight loan.

10

Seminars: Thurs / Fridays. Commence 10/ 11 Jan. Check which group you are in on the noticeboard outside EH145. Seminars debate and evaluate relevant theories and methodologies, in part though applying them to (i) set films and to (ii) further examples. (The exact balance between (i) and (ii) will vary from week to week.) In most weeks one or two students will make a presentation. The purpose of this exercise is to initiate a debate on the week's set topic, by drawing both on the set film(s) and on one or more examples of your own choice. To achieve this aim, you will be asked to combine a presentation based on your own research and reading, with a number of carefully selected points raised for your audience to discuss. In other words, do not simply regurgitate your reading. Note that you can pause to ask questions during your presentation. Wherever your questions are placed, they should not be simply tagged on as an afterthought. The key is to involve your audience and encourage them to work with you in the application, evaluation and critique of relevant readings. You should use video clips to illustrate your points, and to ask questions of the seminar group. You should provide a handout listing salient points and questions. Try to make your presentation audience-friendly by making eye contact and speaking from brief notes or bullet points, rather than reading out a closely written text. Your presentation will be judged according to the following criteria: = content and understanding = structure = presentational skills (including use of equipment where appropriate) = steps taken to stimulate debate All seminar members, (not just the presenter(s)!) will be expected to be able to critique, evaluate and test out reading against both set films and other examples. You will be able to talk with your tutor in advance about preparations for your presentation.

11

THE COURSE, WEEK BY WEEK: * NB: The course components are staggered, so that each seminar takes up and develops the concepts and issues raised in the preceding week's lecture. Readings are listed under the appropriate seminar heading.

WEEK 1 (Jan 9,10,11) Lecture: Introduction to the course (TA) / The formal analysis of 'dominant' film (EK) Screenings: Narrative Space video; E.T. (1982) Questions to think about before and after watching the film: Narrative and narration in ET as an example of Classical Hollywood Cinema: 1: What is the narrative trajectory of ET? How well does it fit the structure of: initial equilibrium -- disruption -- resolution and new equilibrium? 2: What are the goals and traits of the various characters? How is this information given to the spectator, and when? Can you find any deadlines which organise the action? 3: What mysteries or enigmas are constructed in the film? How? What hypotheses do you form while watching the film? Are these confirmed or disproved? 4: Can you locate any examples of parallelism in ET ? (continuities, repetitions, or analogies between different scenes, settings, situations, characters, or props) 5: Can you locate any examples of redundancy (the repetition of important story information)? 6: Can you locate any moments which you think are narratively unnecessary? If so, how would you describe them? 7: How is verisimilitude achieved in the film? (try to think of specific examples) Can you locate examples of the following in ET: 8: restricted narration (eg producing surprise or mystery) 9: omniscient narration (eg producing suspense)

12

10: analytical editing (breaking down space to ensure clarity of character interaction) 11: the motivation of camera movements or editing by character interaction 12: moments of overt or selfconscious narration 13: Can you explain the difference between story and plot, as applied to ET? Seminar: introductory session: mapping the shape of the course. Key reading: * Dyer, Richard (1998) "Introduction to film studies" in John Hill and Pamela Church Gibson (eds) The Oxford Guide to Film Studies Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3-10. (set as holiday reading) * Smith, Greg (1997) "It's only a movie" manuscript by permission of the author ® * preparation for week 2 seminar -- in conjunction with set reading (below): 1) Work through the questions about ET on the previous page 2) Maltese Falcon exercise: Before reading the Film Art section on editing, use the handout of the novel's opening scene to draw your own storyboards for the scene (ie drawings of what is shown on screen, including editing and camera movement, indicating how the image track is matched with dialogue and sound effects). Then compare your paper version with that analysed in Film Art. Bring your storyboards along to the seminar in week 2, and be prepared to talk about how you constructed the spatial location in which action takes place, and about any notable differences between your version and that outlined in Film Art.

13

WEEK 2 (Jan 16,17, 18) Lecture: Sound and image (TA) Screening: The Piano (1993) Seminar: Formal analysis of 'dominant' narrative film. This session asks you to begin deploying tools of close formal analysis to examine how film texts produce meaning. It focuses on cinematic codes, and the norms and conventions of classical Hollywood (aka. 'dominant') narrative cinema. See preparatory tasks listed above. Key reading: * Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristin (various editions) Film Art: An introduction McGraw-Hill: chapters on "Narrative as a formal system", "The Shot: Mise en scene" "The Shot: Cinematographic Properties" and "The Relation of Shot to Shot: Editing". * Bordwell, David (1986) "Classical Hollywood Cinema: Narrational Procedures and Principles", in Philip Rosen (ed) Narrative, Apparatus, Ideology New York: Columbia University Press , pp. 17-34. Supplementary reading: Cook, Pam (ed) (1985, 1999) The Cinema Book, sections on "The history of narrative codes" and "The classic narrative system", (pp. 208, 212-215 in

1st edition; pp. 40-41 in 2nd edition) Bordwell, David (1985) Narration in the Fiction Film chs. 3, 4 and 9 Bordwell, David, Janet Staiger, and Kristin Thompson, (1985) The Classical Hollywood Cinema: Film Style and Mode of Production to 1960 London: Routledge, chs 1-5.

14

WEEK 3 (Jan 23,24,25) Lecture: Film style and authorship debates (TA) Screening: Citizen Kane (1941) Seminar: Formal analyses of film have often privileged the image over the soundtrack. By contrast, this session investigates the production of meaning via the interaction of sound and image. Key reading: * Altman, Rick (1980) "Moving Lips: Cinema as Ventriloquism" Yale French

Studies (Cinema/Sound) 60, pp. 67-79. ® * Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristin (various editions) Film Art: An introduction McGraw-Hill, chapters on "Sound in the Cinema". Supplementary reading: Altman, Rick (1992) (ed) Sound Theory / Sound Practice London: Routledge Altman, Rick (1986) "Television / Sound" in Modleski (ed) Studies in Entertainment Chion, M (1994) Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen New York: CUP Doane, Mary Ann (1980) "The Voice in the Cinema: The Articulation of Body and Space", Yale French Studies 60; reprinted in Rosen (1986) (ed) Narrative,

Apparatus, Ideology. Gorbman, Claudia (1987) "Why Music? The sound film and its spectator" and "Afterword" in Unheard Melodies: Narrative Film Music Bloomington:

Indiana University Press

Gorbman, Claudia (1993) "Chion's Audio-Vision", Wide Angle 15:1 Sergi, Gianluca (1998) "A cry in the dark: the role of post-classical film sound" in Steve Neale and Murray Smith (eds) Contemporary Hollywood Cinema

London and New York: Routledge Smith, Jeff (1996) " 'Unheard melodies'?: A critique of psychoanalytic theories of film music' in David Bordwell and Noel Carroll (eds) Post-Theory:

Reconstructing Film Studies Madison: University of Wisconsin Press * on The Piano: see the range of articles in Screen, 36:3 (1995)

15

WEEK 4 (Jan 30,31, Feb 1) Lecture: The French New Wave (TA) Screenings: Tirez sur le pianiste (Shoot the Pianist ) (1960); A Bout de Souffle (Breathless) (1959) Seminar: Close analysis of how Citizen Kane both adheres to and deviates from conventions of classical cinema. (Including considerations of narrative form; how the spectator is cued to infer and anticipate events; the celebrated use of staging in depth and deep focus.) The session will also consider debates over the study of authorship in cinema, including the uses and limitations of this approach. In pairs, choose a film of your own and trace (i) discourses of authorship in advertising, reviews, etc, and (ii) evidence of a 'stylistic signature' in the film text. Key reading: * Bordwell and Thompson, Film Art, sections on "narrative form in Citizen Kane" and "Style in Citizen Kane" * Stoddart, Helen (1985) "Auteurism and film authorship" in Joanne Hollows and Mark Jancovich (eds) Approaches to Popular Film Manchester: MUP, pp.

37-57 ® Supplementary reading: Bazin, Andre (1979) Orson Welles: A Critical View Bordwell, David (1976) "Citizen Kane" in Bill Nichols (ed) Movies and Methods Vol. 1, Berkeley: University of California Press Bordwell, David (1997) On the History of Film Style Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, chapter 3 Carringer, Robert L (1985) The Making of Citizen Kane Berkeley: University of California Press The Citizen Kane Book (1984) (includes Pauline Kael, "Raising Kane" and

original shooting script) New York: Limelight Editions Cook, Pam and Mieke Bernink (1999) (eds) The Cinema Book 2nd edition, London: BFI, part 6, "Authorship and cinema"

16

Crofts, Stephen (1998) "Authorship and Hollywood" in John Hill and Pamela Church Gibson (eds) The Oxford Guide to Film Studies Oxford: Oxford University Press

Lapsley, Robert and Michael Westlake (1988) Film Theory: An Introduction Manchester: MUP, ch. 5 Mulvey, Laura (1992) Citizen Kane London: BFI Film Classics Ogle, Patrick (1985) "Technological and aesthetic influences on the development

of deep focus cinematography in the United States" in Bill Nichols (ed) Movies and Methods Vol. 2, Berkeley: University of California Press Wollen, Peter (1982) "Citizen Kane" in Readings and Writings London: Verso

WEEK 5 (Feb 6,7,8) Lecture: Alternative film form: Godard (TA) Investigates theories of how a "counter-cinema" could challenge dominant cinema's forms, pleasures and attendant politics. Centres on the work of Jean-Luc Godard. Screening: Weekend (1967) Seminar: Art cinema Tracing the textual conventions of art cinema and the viewing strategies it invites, with attention not just to the French New Wave, but to more recent filmic examples. Key reading: * Bordwell, David (1979) "The art cinema as a mode of film practice" Film Criticism 4:1, pp. 56-64 * Monaco, James (1976) The New Wave New York: Oxford University Press, chapters 1, 2 and 6 Supplementary reading: Andrew, Dudley (1987) (ed) Breathless New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press Forbes, Jill (1998) "The French Nouvelle Vague" in Hill and Church Gibson (eds) The Oxford Guide to Film Studies, pp. 461-5

17

Gillain, Anne (1990) "The script of delinquency: Francois Truffaut's Les 400 Coups (1959)" in Susan Hayward and Ginette Vincendeau (eds) French Film: Texts and Contexts London / New York: Routledge

Marie, Michel (1990) " 'It really makes you sick!' Jean-Luc Godard's A bout de

souffle (1959)" in Susan Hayward and Ginette Vincendeau (eds) French Film: Texts and Contexts London / New York: Routledge

Neale, Steve (1981) "Art cinema as an institution" Screen 22:1

WEEK 6 (Feb 13, 14, 15) Lecture: Film genres 1: the musical (TA) Screening: Top Hat (1935) Seminar: Analysing Godardian 'counter-cinema' and its salient differences from norms of dominant film form. Key reading: * Bordwell, David (1985) Narration in the Fiction Film, London: Methuen, ch. 13 * Elsaesser, Thomas (1970) review of Weekend in Brighton Film Review (March) * Monaco, James (1976) The New Wave New York: Oxford University Press, ch. 7 and 8 * Wollen, Peter (1972) "Godard and Counter-cinema: Vent d'est", Afterimage 4, reprinted in Rosen (1986) (ed) Narrative, Apparatus, Ideology New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 120-129. Supplementary reading: Harvey, Sylvia (1980) "Modernist cinema and the materialist approach to film", in May 1968 and Film Culture Henderson, Brian (1970) "Towards a non-bourgeois camera style" in Bill Nichols (ed) (1985) Movies and Methods Vol 2, Berkeley: University of California Press Lapsley, Robert and Michael Westlake (1988) Film Theory: An Introduction

Manchester: MUP, ch. 7: "The avant-garde" MacCabe, Colin (1980) Godard: Images, Sound, Politics, London: Macmillan / BFI

18

Polan, Dana (1977) "A Brechtian Cinema? Towards a Politics of Self-Reflexive

Film", in Bill Nichols (ed) (1985) Movies and Methods Vol 2, Berkeley: University of California Press

Screen 40:3 (Autumn 1999) special issue on Godard Thompson, Kristin Breaking the Glass Armor: neoformalist film analysis,

Princeton University Press Wollen, Peter (1982) "The Two Avant-Gardes"; "'Ontology' and 'Materialism' in

Film" reprinted in Readings and Writings London: Verso

WEEK 7 READING WEEK

WEEK 8 (Feb 27, 28, March 1) Lecture: Film genres 2: genre theory (KL) Screening: Mildred Pierce (1945) * Essay due * Seminar: Undertaking close analysis of the generic conventions of the musical, in both the set film and examples of your own choice. Key reading: * Dyer, Richard (1995) "The Colour of Entertainment" Sight and Sound (NS) 5:11 (November) ® * Feuer, Jane (1977) "The self-reflexive musical and the myth of entertainment"

Quarterly Review of Film Studies 2: 3, reprinted in Mast, Cohen and Braudy (eds) Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings pp. 486-497 ®

Supplementary reading: Altman, Rick (1987) The American Film Musical Bloomington: Indiana University Cook, Pam and Mieke Bernink (1999) (eds) The Cinema Book 2nd edition, London: BFI, section on "the musical" Dyer, Richard (1977) "Entertainment and Utopia" Movie 24, reprinted in Rick

Altman (ed) (1981) Genre: The Musical London: RKP / BFI; and in Simon During (ed) (1993) The Cultural Studies Reader London: Routledge

Neale, Steve (2000) Genre and Hollywood London: Routledge, esp. pp. 104-112.

19

WEEK 9 (March 6,7,8) Lecture: 'Race' and the politics of representation (TA) Screening: Once Were Warriors (1994) Seminar: Building on the preceding session, this seminar and the associated lecture explore and attempt to apply a number of theorisations of film genres, -- as aesthetically-grounded, as based in socio-cultural models such as that of ritual, or as always in process (this last area of investigation includes Rick Altman's important new work on "genrification"). Key reading: * Altman, Rick (1999) Film / Genre London: British Film Institute, ch 5 ® * Cook, Pam (1980) “Duplicity in Mildred Pierce” in E Ann Kaplan (ed) Women in Film Noir (British Film Institute), pp. 68-82. ® * Hutchings, Peter (1995) "Genre Theory and Criticism", in Hollows and Jancovich (eds.) Approaches to Popular Film, pp. 60-77 ® Supplementary reading: Altman, Rick (1984,1986,1999) "A semantic / syntactic approach to film genre" reprinted in Film / Genre as an appendix, and also in B.K. Grant (ed)

(1986) Film Genre Reader Austin: University of Texas Press Dyer, Richard (1993) "Is Car Wash a musical?" in Manthia Diawara (ed) Black American Cinema New York and London: Routledge, pp. 93-106 Naremore, James (1995/6) "American Film Noir: the history of an idea", Film Quarterly 49:2 Neale, Steve (2000) Genre and Hollywood London: Routledge, esp. chs 6 and 7. Neale, Steve (1990) "Questions of Genre" Screen 31:1

20

WEEK 10 (March 13,14,15) Lecture: 'Screen theory' and spectatorship (KL) Screening: Selected film extracts Seminar: Examining the politics of representation, in particular the construction of ethnicities in film. Key reading: Dyson, Linda (1995) “The return of the repressed? Whiteness, femininity and colonialism in The Piano” Screen, 36:3 (Autumn), pp. 267-276 ® Shohat, Ella and Stam, Robert (1994) Unthinking Eurocentrism: Multiculturalism

and the Media, London Routledge: introduction, pp. 1-12, and extracts from chapter 5, pp. 182-184, 198-219 ®

Simons, Rochelle (1996) “Driving force: Narrative in Lee Tamahori’s television

adverts and Once Were Warriors” Media International Australia, 80, (May) pp. 27-31. ®

Supplementary reading: Branston, Gill (2000) Cinema and Cultural Modernity, Open University Press, ch. 7: "Identifying a critical politics of representation" Dyer, Richard (1997) White, London: Routledge Sklar, Robert (1995) “Social realism with style: an interview with Lee Tamahori” Cineaste, 21:3, pp. 25-27 Woodward, Kathryn, ed, (1997) Identity and Difference, London: Sage / OU

EASTER BREAK

21

WEEK 11 (April 24,25,26) Lecture: The 'implied audience' (TA) Screening: Deep Impact (1998) Seminar: Exploring psychoanalytically-informed theories of spectatorship. Note the important differences between conceptions of the film spectator within this tradition and that offered by the Bordwellian focus on cognition. Includes mid-course review. Key reading: * Mulvey, Laura (1975) "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" Screen 16: 3, reprinted in her Visual and Other Pleasures; and in Philip Rosen (1986)

(ed) Narrative / Apparatus / Ideology, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 198-209.

* Stacey, Jackie (1994) Star Gazing: Hollywood Cinema and Female

Spectatorship, London: Routledge, ch 2: "From the Male Gaze to the Female Spectator" (pp. 19-48) ®

(see also Stacey's "Textual obsessions: methodology, history and researching female spectatorship", Screen, 34:3 (Autumn 1993), pp.260-74.)

Supplementary reading: Branston, Gill (2000) Cinema and Cultural Modernity, Open University Press, ch6 Creed, Barbara (1998) "Film and Psychoanalysis" in John Hill and Pamela

Church Gibson (eds) The Oxford Guide to Film Studies Oxford: OUP Jancovich, Mark (1995) "Screen Theory" in Joanne Hollows and Mark Jancovich (eds) Approaches to Popular Film Manchester: MUP Mayne, Judith (1993)Cinema and Spectatorship, London: Routledge, ch 2: "Spectatorship as Institution"; ch 3: "Spectatorship Reconsidered". (A retrospective account which is largely sympathetic to the concerns of Screen theory. Contrast Moores below.) Moores, Shaun (1993) Interpreting Audiences: the ethnography of media

consumption, London: Sage, pp. 12-16

22

WEEK 12 (May 1, 2,3) Lecture: Texts in Context: film theory and cinema history (TA) Screening: The Son of the Sheik (1926) Seminar: 'Implied audience' analysis. Trying out a third model of spectatorship which attempts to account for both cognitive processes and emotional responses to films. Key reading: * Barker, Martin (2000) From Antz to Titanic: Reinventing Film Analysis, London: Pluto Press, ch. 2 ® * Bordwell, David (1985) Narration in the Fiction Film, London: Methuen, section

on "Believing and seeing", pp. 40-47 ® Supplementary reading: Altman, Rick (1999) Film / Genre, London: British Film Institute, ch 9: section on "the generic crossroads" Bordwell, David (1989) Making Meaning, Harvard University Press, ch 1 Thompson, Kristin Breaking the Glass Armor: neoformalist film analysis, ch 5, "Duplicitous narration in Stage Fright" Princeton University Press

WEEK 13 (May 8,9,10) * Video project due, Mon May 6 (see below, pp. 24-25) No screening or lecture MOCK EXAM (one hour) Seminar: Examining how historically specific studies of the contexts of film reception can complicate some assumptions and implications of text-centred film theory. Paying particular attention to1920s matinee idol Rudolph Valentino. Key reading: * Hansen, Miriam (1991) Babel and Babylon: Spectatorship in American Silent

Film, Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press, chs. 11-12 ® (A version of ch. 12 also appears as "Pleasure, Ambivalence, Identification: Valentino and Female Spectatorship", in Gledhill, Christine (ed.) (1992) Stardom: Industry of Desire, London: Routledge)

23

* Klinger, Barbara (1997) "Film history terminable and interminable: recovering

the past in reception studies", Screen, 38:2 (Summer), pp. 107-28. ® * Studlar, Gaylyn (1993) "Valentino, 'Optic Intoxication' and Dance Madness", in Cohan, Steven and Hark, Ina Rae (eds.) Screening the Male, pp. 23-45 Supplementary reading: Branston, Gill (2000) Cinema and Cultural Modernity, Open University Press, ch6 Klinger, Barbara (1989) "Digressions at the Cinema: Reception and Mass

Culture", Cinema Journal, 28:4 (Summer), 3-19. Klinger, Barbara (1994) Melodrama and Meaning: History, Culture and the Films

of Douglas Sirk, Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Stacey, Jackie (1994) Star Gazing: Hollywood Cinema and Female

Spectatorship, London: Routledge ch. 6 Staiger, Janet (199) Interpreting Films: studies in the historical reception of American cinema Princeton: PUP 1992.

WEEK 14 (May 16,17,18) MOCK EXAM FEEDBACK; COURSE REVIEW

24

VMA PRODUCTION WORKSHOP: Fictional narrative Tutors: Lee Gooding; Ken Whittington; Lon Wright * NB * The workshop runs for a longer period than on previous versions of this course. Consequently, the submission deadline for completed videos has been changed for 2002. Videos are to be submitted by Monday May 6th (week 13). Aims of the Video Workshop The purpose of the workshop is to give you an opportunity to develop skills in the planning and production of a fictional narrative on video; to provide a practice-based perspective on issues raised in the theoretical-analytical strand of the course; and to stimulate and facilitate your creative self-expression. The aims of the workshop include: * to build on the techniques of scripting, shooting, sound recording, lighting and editing necessary for video production learned in the first year; * to encourage the development of skills in working as a member of a team, willing to allocate tasks and take responsibility; * to give you the skills to produce a completed video project, working to a set brief and deadline; * to inform and deepen your understanding of analytical work on film form by providing practical experience of storytelling and the production of meaning through editing, camerawork, mise en scene, lighting, and the interrelation of sound and image; * to require you to consider the aesthetic, stylistic and ethical decisions involved in video production; * to bring to your attention the health and safety issues involved in media production; * to stimulate and facilitate your creative self-expression

25

Objectives By the end of the course, you will * have learned to be familiar with the necessary technical skills and processes involved in preparation for, and execution of, the group video project, including: -- planning, research, scripting and story-boarding; -- editing, camerawork, mise en scene, lighting, and the interrelation of sound and image; -- team management and organisational skills. * have deepened your understanding of: -- the inter-relation of theoretical and practical perspectives on films' formal construction; -- a range of audio-visual styles, modes of address and ways of producing meaning (via the implementation of particular film styles in your video). The Production Brief To produce on video a fictional narrative -- or section thereof -- with running time of no longer than 5 minutes. (You will consult with your tutor over the exact running time of your video.) * You should think of your narrative as either an entire story, or as a self-contained section of an implied larger narrative. * Each of you should return from the holiday break with a proposal which can then be debated among your production group at the start of term. (See holiday preparation brief, circulated on hard copy and by email) Please note: * Soundscaping …. * This is an exercise designed to develop and test creativity and imagination along with organisational and technical skills. Quality of acting is not an issue, and will not be a criterion for the evaluation of your video. Nevertheless, it is too distracting for students taking VMA to act in their own video, or that of another group. Any such appearances are prohibited.

26

Your cast should be drawn from students not taking VMA, and / or from the pool of local professionals available. See your production tutor to discuss this.

Assessment of video and production critique The video project counts for 40% of your assessment for this course. All members of a group will normally be awarded the same mark. (* see further notes below) Assessment of the video takes place at an examination event attended by the whole production group and examiners (usually in early June, exact date to be confirmed). The examiners will watch the video with you. They will then discuss with you how the video was produced, how you confronted and solved problems, and how effectively you worked as a team. The mark awarded for the video will reflect three things: 1: the quality of the finished product, judged in terms of the selection of a subject, and the imagination, creativity and technical skill displayed in presenting that subject. 2: the organisation and effectiveness of the collaboration that went into the process of production. 3: the ability of group members to make connections between their own practical work and the critical context of academic film analysis. * The exam thus focuses not just upon the end product, but also on the process of production, including the critical context (shaped by reading and viewing) in which the production took shape and can now be re-viewed. It asks students to be self-reflexive and self-critical about both product and process. * Examiners will set a provisional mark for each video prior to the exam event. This mark may be adjusted by up to + or - 5 percentage points after the viva examination. * Members of the production group who do not attend the examination event will be graded at zero for the video and production critique element.

27

You are required to write your own individually-authored production critique, which accounts for 10% of the assessment. This is to be submitted at the coursework deadline in mid-May (exact date to be confirmed). Production critiques will be marked individually. The production critique should be between 2,000 and 2,500 words. It should focus primarily upon: * A commentary upon how your production work was informed by insights from, and added to your understanding of, the theoretical-analytical strand of the course. (This will in effect be a retrospective critique, looking back on your video and its production having completed the course.) * A frank and self-critical assessment of how successful you think the project was in achieving its aims; what mistakes were made? what did you contribute and learn in the process? In retrospect, were there aspects of the video which you would like to change now? * Storyboards (which may be group-authored) should be submitted along with your critique. The production critique should also include: * The title of your project and your name * A list of all the members of the group * A clear and concise summary of how and why the group decided on its project * Some indication of how different production tasks were allocated, with particular emphasis on your responsibilities * A very brief indication of how the various phases and elements of the project were managed * An account of the problems encountered collectively by the group and individually by you. How were these resolved (or not)? * A note on the audience reaction to your video. Did the audience react as you expected it would? * A summary of the skills you learned in the process -- not only technical skills, but also skills of planning and executing a project, and of working in a team.

28

Working in Groups We know that people have understandable concerns about their own mark being brought down if one member of their group fails to contribute. There is also justifiable anxiety that someone who fails to contribute might be awarded the same mark as others who put a great deal of time and effort into the project. These problems should not arise if each member of your group is allocated a clearly specified role and set of tasks appropriate to their interests and skills. There are, however, sanctions available if needed. The procedure is as follows: 1: If either a group collectively -- or the group's production tutor -- decides that one or more members are not contributing properly -- either not turning up to agreed meetings or failing to take an active part in the project -- then this should immediately be brought to the attention of the course convenor (Thomas Austin). 2: If the convenor and production tutors conclude that the complaint is justified, the offending student will be warned that their individual mark will be the group mark minus 30%. 3: If the student thereafter makes an outstanding contribution to the project, that sanction may be removed. 4: If they make a reasonable contribution, the reduced mark will be awarded. 5: If they fail to make a satisfactory contribution, they will be awarded a zero mark for the collective element of the assessment. Remember: * A zero mark cannot be retrieved. You cannot resit or resubmit a group project. * Groups must act as soon as problems arise. * Anyone who has to miss any part of the workshop must inform tutors and colleagues in advance and produce documentary evidence to justify their absence. There is an art to being a successful member of a group. It can be quite a different process from the individual study which takes up most of your time at University. In Media Studies, the ability to work well as part of a team is essential. * You need a team to produce video projects.

29

* Being a part of a team enables you to acquire inter-personal skills such as speaking and listening. * It also helps you learn the team skills of leadership, managing a project, working with and motivating other students. * These skills are important to prospective employers. * You will learn more about your own strengths and weaknesses: arbitrating, being too dominant, being too reserved, etc. 1: Do you need ground rules? * You should attend all meetings. Let someone else know if you cannot. * The work should be shared fairly between team members. * Members should encourage everyone to contribute. * Individual tasks should be completed by the agreed deadline. * Responsibility for chairing meetings and taking notes should be rotated. 2: Allocating tasks Some groups may be resistant to the idea of identifying different functional roles and allocating them to specific people. However, your group is likely to be much more effective if you do so. * Pre-production Here the key tasks include selecting a subject, which clearly needs to accord with the brief set out on p. 17. Your choice should also be informed by a group discussion of individually generated ideas. After that, you can identify a number of tasks. Do you want to have a named producer and / or director? That may smack of hierarchy, but having someone who retains an overall vision of the project, and thinks how to enable everyone to contribute most creatively, can be a great benefit. You will need researchers to scout out locations (if necessary), to check on the logistics of the shoot in advance, to select suitable soundtrack music, etc. Will someone be preparing a shooting script at this stage, or story boarding possible sequences? If you can clear any necessary permissions at this stage, it will avoid difficulties later. You will need someone to prepare the schedule for your work.

30

* Production Here the tasks are more obviously differentiated. Who will be camera operator? Who will be sound recordist? Who will be production manager? Who will be responsible for lighting? Who will be responsible for transport (if necessary)? Are you going to have a stills photographer (this can sometimes provide valuable cover if filming goes wrong)? Again, who will take the responsibility for overall direction? * Post-production Editing can often be the point of greatest friction with a group. Allowing everyone to have a go is obviously fair, but it is not necessarily the most effective or productive way of working. How are you going to organise the process of transforming your footage into a finished video? Do you have a shared vision of how it should look, and would it be most effective to have a small team of editors to achieve that? There are other important tasks: selecting music; preparing the credit sequences. 3: How effectively are you planning and reviewing your project? Proper planning in advance is one of the major keys to success. * Allocate responsibility for different tasks to that you do not waste time. * Use your time effectively by making an overall timetable for the work, and planning how often the group will meet. * Have a structured approach to meetings so that there is a sense of purpose, but maintain a degree of flexibility so that any 'matters arising' can be addressed. * Before the end of each meeting, arrange the time and place of the next meeting. 4: Am pulling my weight in the group? Being part of a team makes you responsible to all the other members of the team. It will not work -- or it will not be as successful as it could be -- if some people fail to show the necessary effort and consideration. If you are going to miss a meeting or if you are having difficulty completing your tasks because of other commitments, let the other people know. They will probably be quite understanding and find a way to work around your problem. * Groups often experience problems. Some are practical or technical. Others involve the maintenance of the team. The problems may not be easy to identify or sort out, but they should be tackled rather than ignored. Ask for help if you need it, but remember that learning to solve the problems which inevitably arise is one of the major purposes of this type of work.

31

Task-based problems Lack of clarity about goal Lack of time Lack of resources Lack of skills for the task Difficulty with organising meetings Not reviewing the work Problems in maintenance of the group Members are too dominant Members do not contribute Members are excluded Conflict between members Members will not compromise

SUGGESTED VIEWING / READING You may want to consult a number of practical guides on production: Boyce, Ed and Mike Crisp, Editing Film and Video Tape London: BBC Dimbleby, Nicholas, Richard Dimbleby and Ken Whittington, Practical Media: A Guide to Production Techniques London: Hodder Headline Jarvis, Peter, Shooting On Location, London: BBC Millerson, Gerald, Techniques of TV Production, London: Focal Press Rabiger, Michael …. "Watching" (BBC2) various short films available on video… (dupes? F4?) available from …. * Information sheets will be provided to all students covering a range of help topics Your production tutor may recommend further reading and viewing. ?? pool of tutors ??

32

Production course, week by week * inc production lectures…? Week 2 Presentation of synopses / outlines of project plans, based on holiday preparation. After group discussion with the tutor, one or two ideas will be chosen for further development. Camera and sound exercise. (Practice / theory discussion of the screened film -- ET / The Piano (check - screen Weds) -- will inform this exercise.) Select possible shooting day/s, based on projected commitments. Week 3 Presentation of detailed story outline with scene breakdown. You should begin location hunting and casting. Lighting and grip exercise. (Practice / theory discussion of the screened film -- The Piano / Citizen Kane (check - screen Weds) -- will inform this exercise.) Week 4 Presentation of first draft and elemental shooting schedule. Editing and post sound / sfx exercise (Practice / theory discussion of the screened film -- Citizen Kane / Tirez sur le pianiste / A bout de souffle (check - screen Weds) -- will inform this exercise.) Week 5 Presentation of second draft and finalising location and cast. Group-specific exercise, according to production needs.

33

Weeks 6,7,8 Final production meeting, presentation of final shooting script and shot list, production of call sheet. Rehearsals and further recce or practice if needed. * Full day shoot with tutor (8 hrs) (any additional footage would be independently acquired) Transfer rushes with time code on to standard VHS for each student Group viewing and discussion Weeks 9,10 Produce rough edit / off-line At end of week 10, all VMA tutors will view videos (4 at a time) with the students involved and feedback will be given. EASTER BREAK = NO ACCESS TO EDIT SUITES Weeks 11, 12 Students can block-book 3 x 4-hour slots to on-line edit * Video submission deadline: Monday May 6 (week 13) ???